# Canadian Federal Election 44 - Sep 2021



## PuckChaser (15 Aug 2021)

Welcome to the Election 44 mega thread, Canadians go to the polls on 20 Sep 2021.

Trudeau calls federal election, voters to go to the polls Sept. 20

Election time can get particularly heated, so I'll take this opportunity to remind everyone on the Milnet.ca Political Threads guidance located here: How to engage in political discourse on Army.ca

-Milnet.ca staff


----------



## OldTanker (15 Aug 2021)

This election provides a real voting dilemma for me. A long time small-c conservative, I frankly don't see much appealing in the current Conservative platform, or more especially its leadership. So the question for me is, what is preferable? A Liberal minority or majority? If a minority, will the Liberals be in thrall to the NDP and BQ who will hold the balance of power and demand continuing tribute (BQ) or twist the national agenda even more to the left (NDP), or if a majority will the Liberals be enabled to inflict their agenda on the country with abandon? I will probably take the coward's way out and vote for Elizabeth May. She's going to get re-elected here anyways. What a mess.


----------



## MilEME09 (15 Aug 2021)

A lot of liberals seem to be put off by the PM and the liberal party. It us entirely possible they could flock to the NDP, split the left leading to another liberal minority or even a conservative minority.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Aug 2021)

OldTanker said:


> This election provides a real voting dilemma for me. A long time small-c conservative, I frankly don't see much appealing in the current Conservative platform, or more especially its leadership. So the question for me is, what is preferable? A Liberal minority or majority? If a minority, will the Liberals be in thrall to the NDP and BQ who will hold the balance of power and demand continuing tribute (BQ) or twist the national agenda even more to the left (NDP), or if a majority will the Liberals be enabled to inflict their agenda on the country with abandon? I will probably take the coward's way out and vote for Elizabeth May. She's going to get re-elected here anyways. What a mess.


The Elizabeth May effect is mystifying to me.  She is deified in some circles. I have met her in person on a number of occasions and have come away…underwhelmed.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Aug 2021)

Great article, written by the husband of a cabinet minister who chose not to run again.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1426938929643667461


----------



## mariomike (15 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> The Elizabeth May effect is mystifying to me.  She is deified in some circles. I have met her in person on a number of occasions and have come away…underwhelmed.


Never met her. But, read a discussion about her in another thread.


> "Welcome back, Omar Khadr. It matters to say it. Welcome back, Omar Khadr. You're home,"  . . . "Omar Khadr, you've got more class than the whole fucking cabinet,"  Elizabeth May, the federal Green Party leader at the Parliamentary Press Gallery's dinner on Saturday.


----------



## ModlrMike (15 Aug 2021)

That single event is enough for me to never, ever even consider casting a vote for the Green Party regardless of how mainstream they become.


----------



## kratz (15 Aug 2021)

At this point, I do 't see why an election call was required. I'm not impressed by having one.


----------



## Remius (15 Aug 2021)

OldTanker said:


> This election provides a real voting dilemma for me. A long time small-c conservative, I frankly don't see much appealing in the current Conservative platform, or more especially its leadership. So the question for me is, what is preferable? A Liberal minority or majority? If a minority, will the Liberals be in thrall to the NDP and BQ who will hold the balance of power and demand continuing tribute (BQ) or twist the national agenda even more to the left (NDP), or if a majority will the Liberals be enabled to inflict their agenda on the country with abandon? I will probably take the coward's way out and vote for Elizabeth May. She's going to get re-elected here anyways. What a mess.


I hear you.  I’m not fan of what the CPC is offering right now but we’ll see as the campaign progresses.  I’m tired of Trudeau and would have preferred if someone else took over the LPC.  My riding will likely go CPC.  Best case for me would be another LPC minority.  Maybe even a seat drop.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Great article, written by the husband of a cabinet minister who chose not to run again.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1426938929643667461


Ouch.


----------



## YZT580 (15 Aug 2021)

He has given O'toole his first weapon by abandoning the Gurkha guards in Kabul


----------



## RedFive (15 Aug 2021)




----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Aug 2021)

RedFive said:


> View attachment 66042


Well, that makes sense…

Does he have a random answer generator that just spits out a stock phrase, regardless of the question?


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Aug 2021)

Trudeau hasn't answered a single question from the press directly in the 6 years since he was elected, why start now?


----------



## Altair (15 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Trudeau hasn't answered a single question from the press directly in the 6 years since he was elected, why start now?


I watched O'Tooles presser after Trudeaus.

He refused to answer questions as well.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Trudeau hasn't answered a single question from the press directly in the 6 years since he was elected, why start now?


You have a point.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Aug 2021)

I have assembled a helpful "Who should I vote for" decision tree.

Canadian Electoral Support Selection tool

1. Are you batshit crazy?
If yes, vote PPC.
If no,

2. Do you want a virtue-signalling power-hungry party willing to overlook obvious moral flaws that will turn and attack anyone who calls them out on their shallow, sallow leader?
If yes, vote Liberal.
If no,

3. Do you want a party that desperately tries to simultaneously pander to right-wing Christian extremists and to educated suburbanites, but manages instead to piss off both, along with all other voters?
If yes, vote Conservative.
If no,

4. Do you want a party with no understanding of how Canadian government works, which is illiterate in history and innumerate in economics?
If yes, vote NDP.
If no,

5. Do you want a party founded as an ego trip, with its former leader actively working to undermine and attack its current leader?
If yes, vote Green.
If no,

Congratulations, and welcome to the Rhino party.


----------



## MilEME09 (15 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> I have assembled a helpful "Who should I vote for" decision tree.
> 
> Canadian Electoral Support Selection tool
> 
> ...


I'll take my chances with the libertarian party


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> He has given O'toole his first weapon by abandoning the Gurkha guards in Kabul


Just so there's an actual source for the statement:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1426881292738744321


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Aug 2021)

*moving forums


----------



## Altair (15 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> I have assembled a helpful "Who should I vote for" decision tree.
> 
> Canadian Electoral Support Selection tool
> 
> ...


This is why I voted bloc once.


----------



## Quirky (15 Aug 2021)

When you have the two largest ridings by population in Alberta, which are greater than all of PEIs population, we will never see proportional representation in Ottawa. PEI has 4 ridings for 150k people, that’s only one seat in those two ridings in Edmonton and Calgary. Confederation was deliberately set up this way, where central Canada has control over western provinces, it’s hilarious Canadians think there is a solution to this in our democracy. Equal representation will never happen and Canadians deserve another woke party to further destroy this country.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Aug 2021)

If your definition of "Central Canada" includes PEI, there's not much anyone can do to help you.

Of the ten ridings with the largest population in Canada (2011 census), nine are in Ontario, one is in BC; in other words, central Canada is under-represented on a per capita basis.  (Of the 30 largest, 28 are in Ontario and 2 in BC.  You hit #36 in terms of population before you reach an Alberta riding.)









						Population of Canadian federal ridings - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## mariomike (15 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> < snip > we will never see proportional representation in Ottawa.


Interesting point.









						One person, one vote? In Canada, it’s not even close
					

Some ridings have fewer than 40,000 people. Others are closer to 160,000. Can anything be done to make them more equal?




					www.thestar.com


----------



## Quirky (15 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> If your definition of "Central Canada" includes PEI, there's not much anyone can do to help you.
> 
> Of the ten ridings with the largest population in Canada (2011 census), nine are in Ontario, one is in BC; in other words, central Canada is under-represented on a per capita basis.  (Of the 30 largest, 28 are in Ontario and 2 in BC.  You hit #36 in terms of population before you reach an Alberta riding.)
> 
> ...



yes PEI is central Canada. 


I’m hoping for a trudeau majority, it might actually give western canada the kick it needs.


----------



## Altair (15 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> yes PEI is central Canada.


So this is you realizing your premise was incorrect?

Redistribution is happening next year, so a lot of these ridings, minus PEI and the territories will be adjusted.


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> Interesting point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For reference: Electoral Reform (Senate, Commons, & Gov Gen)

53 pages and locked from further replies.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Canadians deserve another woke party to further destroy this country.


Yup, they do.


----------



## Altair (15 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Yup, they do.


I really do love the destroy the country hyperbole.

Canada survived the boer war.

WW1.

The Spanish flu.

The great depression.

WW2.

The Korean War.

Quebec referendum 1

Quebec referendum 2.

The war on terror.

Covid 19

But left leaning or left wing political parties will be the end of it?

Either you all have a really low opinion of

A) Democracy

B) Fellow Canadians

C) Canada itself.

D)All of the above.

I have a really high opinion of those three.

I believe Canada survives nobody who is at the helm. Even a CPC government.


----------



## Altair (15 Aug 2021)

Erin O’Toole’s Tories launch bid to regain power after Trudeau calls snap election
					

Erin O’Toole touted a national mental-health plan and balancing the budget as part of a more moderate approach




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				






> Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole kicked off his election campaign Sunday with a speech that argued Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is putting Canadians’ health at risk with an unnecessary vote.
> 
> But at the same time, the Tory leader wouldn’t say whether he will make his own candidates get vaccinated against COVID-19 as they get ready to knock on doors and hold campaign events.



A good first day for O'Toole.


----------



## Quirky (15 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Redistribution is happening next year, so a lot of these ridings, minus PEI and the territories will be adjusted.


The irrelevant PEI, who’s economic output is essentially negative, needs four ridings over much larger populated areas of canada. Okay. Welfare atlantic canada does not need the amount of ridings they have. Gutting their representation in ottawa is a good start.

The only reason trudeau called an election now is to avoid this exact adjustment of districts that was suppose to begin in late September. He is looking for 4 years as a majority because he knows western canada will get more seats.


----------



## suffolkowner (15 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> The irrelevant PEI, who’s economic output is essentially negative, needs four ridings over much larger populated areas of canada. Okay. Welfare atlantic canada does not need the amount of ridings they have. Gutting their representation in ottawa is a good start.
> 
> The only reason trudeau called an election now is to avoid this exact adjustment of districts that was suppose to begin in late September. He is looking for 4 years as a majority because he knows western canada will get more seats.


There's essentially no mechanism for reducing the original colonies ridings. The seats in the HofC and Senate are pretty much an iron clad guarantee minus constitutional ammendment. Are we going to take seats away from Saskatchewan and Manitoba too?


----------



## OldSolduer (15 Aug 2021)

Completely unnecessary and I hope he gets his ass handed to him.


----------



## Mills Bomb (16 Aug 2021)

So while our embassy in Kabul is basically being overrun, and our efforts in that country are heavily questioned, there's rumours that even some of our Gurkha guards were left behind, the PM is at Rideau Hall announcing an election? Wouldn't this be a good time to be in the Ops Room co-ordinating the best evacuation effort possible?

Seems pretty messed up to me. I vote won't be voting for the Liberal's as honestly I think they've done enough damage at this point, but it's equally upsetting that other candidates claim were "at a major crossroads" and yet their campaigns thus far has been less than impressive.

I'm hoping for change in this election but I guess we'll see what happens. The last few years have been so unpredictable it's hard to believe any predictions at this point.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Aug 2021)

Mills Bomb said:


> there's rumours that even some of our Gurkha guards were left behind, the PM is at Rideau Hall announcing an election?


Perhaps if Gurkha's had a larger eligible voting demographic in Canada we would have brought them with us.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Perhaps if Gurkha's had a larger eligible voting demographic in Canada we would have brought them with us.


Not to minimise anything but these are contractors correct?   I wonder what the contract might actually detail in regards to getting them out or is that up to the company that employs them?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (16 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Trudeau hasn't answered a single question from the press directly in the 6 years since he was elected, why start now?


Or in parliament or in speeches or.....or.....
He is fully incapable of answering a question on point. If he does, on the very rare occasion answer to the point, it is typically, overblown, demeaning to the subject or just plain, patently false. The rule of thumb I use, is whatever he says, I'll look 180° from that for the truth.
I have no problem figuring out who gets my vote. So far as I'm concerned, the four socialist parties will receive zero consideration from me.


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

So I stand corrected, the CPC would try to scrap the 10 dollar a day daycare plan.

Replaced by a tax credit that covers 75 percent of the costs. At tax time.

Well, if that didn't just hand the LPC every parents vote.

I thought the CPC would have learned, with people living paycheck to paycheck, they do not have money to put up front, to be reimbursed later at tax time.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Just reading the CPC platform now.

create a million jobs.   Good.
various loans and tax incentives for small businesses. Depends.
GST free month. Bad idea
Defund CBC.  Expect media backlash
Balance the budget in 10 years.  Light on details, especially if creating a GST free month.
Pay parents directly instead of sub sized day care.  Not as appealing.
Ban foreign home buyers for two years.

looks like a lot of spending…


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Aug 2021)

Million jobs creates taxable income to offset loans and tax incentives for small business.
GST free month could boom spending and help create the jobs needed for above.
Balancing the budget being light on details is better than the budget will balance itself.
Pay parents for day care is a great idea, we don't need more albatross government institutions. The private sector will create the spaces if there's a glut of individuals looking for them with free money.


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Just reading the CPC platform now.
> 
> create a million jobs.   Good.
> various loans and tax incentives for small businesses. Depends.
> ...


That's what I understand anyways.


----------



## SupersonicMax (16 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Balancing the budget being light on details is better than the budget will balance itself.


No, it is the same.  Without a concrete plan, it is just wishful thinking, to the same level as saying that the budget will balance itself.



PuckChaser said:


> Pay parents for day care is a great idea, we don't need more albatross government institutions. The private sector will create the spaces if there's a glut of individuals looking for them with free money.



There have been tons of parents looking to give money to put kids in daycare for just a little leas than a year in Quebec and the private sector did not create the spaces.


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Aug 2021)

I feel like there was some sort of government decision for the last 18 months that limited space availability. Some sort of lock down...


----------



## SupersonicMax (16 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> I feel like there was some sort of government decision for the last 18 months that limited space availability. Some sort of lock down...


Even when the conditions were eased, last summer, daycare spaces did not meet the demand.


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/16102359/f8279981721e07a.pdf
		


"Canada’s Conservatives will convert the Child Care Expense Deduction into a refundable tax credit covering up to 75% of the cost of child care for lower income families. This will massively increase the support that lower income families receive and provide more assistance to almost all families. We will also pay out the deduction over the course of the year so that families do not have to pay the cost of child care and then get the money back later"

"OUR CHILD CARE PLAN UNDER OUR PLAN, ALL FAMILIES WITH INCOME UNDER $150,000 WILL BE BETTER OFF, WITH THE MOST SIGNIFICANT BENEFIT GOING TO FAMILIES WITH INCOME UNDER $50,000. THE BIGGEST BOOST WILL BE TO LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES - MAKING CHILD CARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE AFFORDABLE. FOR EXAMPLE,
 • A FAMILY WITH AN INCOME OF $30,000 CAN TODAY CLAIM A MAXIMUM OF $1,200. UNDER OUR PLAN THEY WILL RECEIVE UP TO $6,000.
 • A FAMILY WITH AN INCOME OF $50,000 CAN TODAY CLAIM A MAXIMUM OF $1,200. UNDER OUR PLAN THEY WILL RECEIVE UP TO $5,200.
 • A FAMILY WITH AN INCOME OF $80,000 CAN TODAY CLAIM A MAXIMUM OF $1,200. UNDER OUR PLAN THEY WILL RECEIVE UP TO $4,800.
 • A FAMILY WITH AN INCOME OF $120,000 CAN TODAY CLAIM A MAXIMUM OF $1,640. UNDER OUR PLAN THEY WILL RECEIVE UP TO $4,560"

Sorry for the all caps, copy pasted from the CPC platform.

So when childcare can cost upwards of 1500-2000 a month, 18000-24000 a year, I do not see how it this will cover 75 percent.

And 75 percent of 24000 is still 6000, or half what the LPC is offering to cover. The LPC plan would cost families around 200 per month per child, this would cost 400-500 per month for childcare, and I am unaware is this tax credit is for all kids that someone would have in daycare. If it is, then for each kid a person needs to put into daycare, the less this plan would do for them.

If childcare is what people are voting on, I don't see this CPC plan as the one people will go for.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

> create a million jobs.



Hogwash.  Governments don't "create jobs", except for the people hired to work in public service.

If they mean, "remove government-mandated impediments and disincentives to job creation", they might have a useful idea.


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Aug 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Even when the conditions were eased, last summer, daycare spaces did not meet the demand.


Good, so you're saying Quebec's taxpayer subsidized model doesn't work to create enough spaces for child care?


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Good, so you're saying Quebec's taxpayer subsidized model doesn't work to create enough spaces for child care?


The quebec model plans to cover 76 percent of all childcare spaces, with the private sector providing the rest.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (16 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Not to minimise anything but these are contractors correct?   I wonder what the contract might actually detail in regards to getting them out *or is that up to the company that employs them*?



The contract probably so states, but Canada's experience with the company that employed the embassy guards at the time of the 2016 bombing that killed 15 of them should have been a cautionary tale that contract details mean nothing.

Some of that tale








						A Security Company Cashed In on America’s Wars—And Then Disappeared
					

Sabre International Security employed guards for the Canadian embassy in Kabul. When a bombing left many of them dead or wounded, the company vanished.




					www.theatlantic.com
				




And the Nepali view of current events with regard to their nationals in Afghanistan.








						Who will rescue Nepalis from Afghanistan?
					

Ex-Nepal Army soldier Dhan Singh Dhami worked for a US defence contractor guarding the American Embassy in Kabul and assisted NATO forces in Helmand Province from 2004-2015. As the Taliban advances in Kabul, many other Nepalis in Afghanistan are at risk. Photo: NEPALI TIMES ARCHIVE s the Taliban...




					www.nepalitimes.com


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Defund the CBC. So...Radio Canada would be effected as well?

Yeah, I think that dumping on Quebec, taking away the money for Childcare and anything targeted at Radio Canada, is a recipe for disaster in that province. 

So clearly they don't want to be competitive in Quebec, and I guess I'm curious as what their plan really is here with this platform. Who are they targeting? Conservative voters probably like this, but they were voting for this party anyways.


----------



## Navy_Pete (16 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Hogwash.  Governments don't "create jobs", except for the people hired to work in public service.
> 
> If they mean, "remove government-mandated impediments and disincentives to job creation", they might have a useful idea.


They did have a note in there about offsetting up to 50% of a new employees wages once CEWS ends to help get people hired again. That idea generally makes sense, and seems to be a pretty good way to help get people working again, with a relatively low amount of paperwork/oversight. We already have all kinds of policies to 'Buy/build in Canada' tied to our procurements, which is a pretty good indirect way to 'create jobs' in Canada (via a private sector subcontract) but there are usually programs like this for summer student work that offset the hiring costs that seem to work well.

They do have talk about creating a 'Minister of Red Tape'; they could do that internally and save a lot of public service LOE on a whack of policy/oversight. Usually the approval/auditing process costs more in HR time then the actual trip itself.


----------



## dapaterson (16 Aug 2021)

"To reduce bureaucracy, we'll create a new bureaucracy."


----------



## Navy_Pete (16 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> "To reduce bureaucracy, we'll create a new bureaucracy."


Just like DPS; streamline defence procurement, by adding another centralized decision point with no single point of accountability/decision maker!


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

If a job is viable it doesn't need subsidy.  If it isn't viable, money available to subsidize it should be put to better use.  Paying employers to pay employees to do jobs that can't pay for themselves makes us all a little poorer.  There is no shortage of places government has put its fat little fingers in efforts to solve some problem someone agitated for solving.  The low-hanging fruit is to take those fat fingers out.  Most of these programs only amount to being transfers, and transfers just shift money from one place to another - destroy here, in order to create there, but only talk about the creation.  Actually, a net loss, once the transaction costs of having people do stuff to make it happen are accounted.

Collectively, we've known this for over 100 years.


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If a job is viable it doesn't need subsidy.  If it isn't viable, money available to subsidize it should be put to better use.  Paying employers to pay employees to do jobs that can't pay for themselves makes us all a little poorer.  There is no shortage of places government has put its fat little fingers in efforts to solve some problem someone agitated for solving.  The low-hanging fruit is to take those fat fingers out.  Most of these programs only amount to being transfers, and transfers just shift money from one place to another - destroy here, in order to create there, but only talk about the creation.  Actually, a net loss, once the transaction costs of having people do stuff to make it happen are accounted.
> 
> Collectively, we've known this for over 100 years.


Wonder if we should end all oil subsidies then.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

Yes.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

So a few points.  

1.  Getting rid of the LPC childcare plan.  They better communicate this better.  Their plan to directly give parents money is actually a pretty good thing.  It mean, if I read that right, that the CHOICE, is really mine.  I can go with whatever daycare I want or even keep the kids at home.  But…

Ottawa just signed a bunch of deals.  Quebec is getting a good chunk.  So the CPC has already damaged its chances there.  I suspect this may hurt the CPC long term if the campaign becomes about childcare.
unless they have a plan to front end the money this isn’t as appealing. 

2.  Getting an actual platform out first with actual POLICY was a good move.  It’s a short campaign, defines the CPC before the LPC can.   “introduces” O’toole.  All good things strategically.  Doesn’t matter if you agree or not they are trying to take the initiative.  A good opening move in my mind.  Allows them to attack what comes out of the LPC now and keep the initiative.

we’ll see how this goes.


----------



## kratz (16 Aug 2021)

I'm glad to see a pkatform already, from one of the parties. We can begin to look at options and compare.


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

kratz said:


> I'm glad to see a pkatform already, from one of the parties. We can begin to look at options and compare.





Remius said:


> 2.  Getting an actual platform out first with actual POLICY was a good move.  It’s a short campaign, defines the CPC before the LPC can.   “introduces” O’toole.  All good things strategically.  Doesn’t matter if you agree or not they are trying to take the initiative.  A good opening move in my mind.  Allows them to attack what comes out of the LPC now and keep the initiative.


Didn't the NDP come out with a platform a few days ago?


----------



## Navy_Pete (16 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If a job is viable it doesn't need subsidy.  If it isn't viable, money available to subsidize it should be put to better use.  Paying employers to pay employees to do jobs that can't pay for themselves makes us all a little poorer.  There is no shortage of places government has put its fat little fingers in efforts to solve some problem someone agitated for solving.  The low-hanging fruit is to take those fat fingers out.  Most of these programs only amount to being transfers, and transfers just shift money from one place to another - destroy here, in order to create there, but only talk about the creation.  Actually, a net loss, once the transaction costs of having people do stuff to make it happen are accounted.
> 
> Collectively, we've known this for over 100 years.


Sure, in normal times, subsidies aren't required, but think it makes some sense when we are talking about during a kick-start post a global pandemic; if the government is taking some of the salary liabilities for a short term timeline, that reduces the risk/overhead to companies who aren't sure if they are going to re-hire until the economy starts rolling again.

The platform has it for a six month time period, which I think is reasonable. If, after six months, business levels dont' support it, then we're just back to paying unemployment benefits. If work has picked up, then the job is still viable and they'll keep the person there. People not working has a direct cost to the GoC (federally or provincially) so would rather spend money on programs to keep people working than to be unemployed.

There were similar temporary programs for some of the industries that were getting battered around by some of the random tariff wars with the US; instead of laying people off they were able to get partial unemployment for some of the plant workers. That let the plants slow down production (to 4 days a week) but the workers kept a pretty steady salary. Way cheaper than paying full unemployment, and when production picked back up it was done, without the efficiency loss of needing to hire new workers.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Didn't the NDP come out with a platform a few days ago?


Did they?  Yes.  Are people paying attention to the NDP?  More importantly are the right people paying attention to the NDP?  Those blue liberals or red Tories?


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Did they?  Yes.  Are people paying attention to the NDP?  More importantly are the right people paying attention to the NDP?  Those blue liberals or red Tories?


oh, you meant one of the big two.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Macleans has a platform guide.  Defence is thin in all parties.









						2021 federal election platform guide: Where the parties stand on everything
					

A list of promises made by the Liberals, Conservatives, NDP and Greens to this point, updating as the information becomes available.




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

> Sure, in normal times, subsidies aren't required, but think it makes some sense when we are talking about during a kick-start post a global pandemic



I doubt a kick-start is needed.  Many people are sitting on top of accumulated savings and looking for things to do after a long period of restrictions.  More money thrown in unnecessarily distorts the behaviour of the "marketplace" and aggravates price inflation. It's a really good time for governments to hit the bench and let people figure out for themselves what they want to pay for, and what they want to work for.


----------



## OldSolduer (16 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Macleans has a platform guide.  Defence is thin in all parties.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Of course its thin. The average Canadian voter has very little knowledge about the CAF or interest in defence matters.


----------



## Fabius (16 Aug 2021)

Most of, if not all of the Platform guide points from all parties are in my opinion mere efforts to buy votes of specific demographics, industries etc.  What I want and am confident I will not get is a articulation and debate of various options for the following large issues ( note these are Federal issues not provincial issues that the Federal Government of all flavors keeps attempting to take for itself).  I want to have a debate about what the various parties goals are with regards to the below large  items:


China Policy
National Unity vs Regional bickering
National Infrastructure / Industrial Independence ( This spans from pipelines, to ports, to vaccine manufacture, to ship yards, aircraft industries)
Indian Act modernization/amendment/abolition
Financial State of the Nation, expenditures / taxation / inflation and how they impact economic growth and competitiveness and how to achieve balanced budgets vs growing debit ( Note this is not arguments over whose bespoke taxation ideas are better)
Various Federal policies and the importance of individual agency, sovereignty, freedom and choice versus centralized management and mandate of behavior and actions ( I see lots of items included in this, everything from childcare policy, firearms policy, social media policies to vaccination policy)


----------



## Quirky (16 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> I thought the CPC would have learned, with people living paycheck to paycheck, they do not have money to put up front, to be reimbursed later at tax time.


Canadians are financially illiterate and the type to buy a $50k vehicle for $60k because they can afford the payments. Just like the LPC, they believe their banking accounts will balance themselves.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Canadians are financially illiterate and the type to buy a $50k vehicle for $60k because they can afford the payments. Just like the LPC, they believe their banking accounts will balance themselves.


Who do you hang out with exactly?  No one I know thinks that at all.


----------



## Quirky (16 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Who do you hang out with exactly?  No one I know thinks that at all.


So that means it doesn’t happen, right? Having you been living under a rock? People have been living outside their means for a long time just to keep up with the joneses. Big houses and new cars every few years. Look up the % of Canadians one paycheque away from insolvency.


----------



## Kilted (16 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Trudeau hasn't answered a single question from the press directly in the 6 years since he was elected, why start now?


Did he ever speak to the ethics commissioner?


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> So that means it doesn’t happen, right? Having you been living under a rock? People have been living outside their means for a long time just to keep up with the joneses. Big houses and new cars every few years. Look up the % of Canadians one paycheque away from insolvency.


That does not mean that Canadians are financially illiterate.  You make a lot of blanket statements and rarely back it up.  









						Posthaste: Canadians built a $2 trillion 'wall of wealth' during the pandemic — and it's not just a housing story
					

The average Canadian household now has more than $1 million in total assets




					financialpost.com
				




Here.  I’m backing up my statement.


----------



## Remius (16 Aug 2021)

I’ll also add this 






						Canadians and their Money:  Key Findings from the 2019 Canadian Financial Capability Survey - Canada.ca
					

This report provides the latest insights on Canadians’ knowledge, abilities and behaviours related to financial decision-making.




					www.canada.ca


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> So that means it doesn’t happen, right? Having you been living under a rock? People have been living outside their means for a long time just to keep up with the joneses. Big houses and new cars every few years. Look up the % of Canadians one paycheque away from insolvency.


Some Canadians do live this way.

And there are the unwashed masses, the plebs, the lower class and those in financial distress.

These folks are not buying houses, they cannot afford them.

These folks are not buying 50k cars, they don't have the credit.

These people are single moms, people in more precautions jobs, gigs work, entry level.

These folks cannot afford 30, 60, 90 dollars a day in daycare per child. Have twins? Screwed. Want children close in age? Screwed. Single woman who ends up pregnant and didn't get an abortion? Screwed. Family that requires dual income to survive? Screwed.

This CPC plan doesn't help them much. 10 dollars a day would work a lot better.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

> ends up pregnant



Single parents usually merit support, but it'd be nice to stop talking about pregnancy as something that just "happens" to people.

You might think it unbelievable, but there are high rollers who also manage to live only one paycheque from insolvency.  Just have to scale up the spending.  But the few of those aside, I find myself wondering how it is that I've managed to - across my years - "hang out" with so many people who spend a lot of time living with maxed out credit.

People have managed to live their lives, including with children, for millennia without government support; some as recently as in the past few years!


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Single parents usually merit support, but it'd be nice to stop talking about pregnancy as something that just "happens" to people.


Do I need to explain how babies happen?


Brad Sallows said:


> You might think it unbelievable, but there are high rollers who also manage to live only one paycheque from insolvency.  Just have to scale up the spending.  But the few of those aside, I find myself wondering how it is that I've managed to - across my years - "hang out" with so many people who spend a lot of time living with maxed out credit.


Some people do, and others are simply not in financially able to do things.

it's best if we don't let the former ruin things for the latter.


Brad Sallows said:


> People have managed to live their lives, including with children, for millennia without government support; some as recently as in the past few years!


Just because they did doesn't mean they should.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Aug 2021)

> Just because they did doesn't mean they should.



Works the other way, too.  Why shouldn't they?  (That actually has an answer: resources are finite, and there are more pressing needs.)


----------



## Altair (16 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Works the other way, too.  Why shouldn't they?  (That actually has an answer: resources are finite, and there are more pressing needs.)


We have been over this before.

Gets more people, usually women, in the workplace, leading to more productivity, income taxes, GDP growth.

It leads to a higher birth rate, which helps stave off a demographic crunch in the future.

It helps those who generally couldn't afford childcare and thus stayed at home, so lower income individuals by in large.

Leads to more women feeling they can afford to have a child and thus when they engage in sexual relations with the opposite sex which has the possibility of bodily fluids  released from the male reproductive organ reaching the uterus in which lies the egg which can be fertilized under the proper circumstances,  which, if viable, can lead to a pregnancy, they choose to keep said fetus instead of aborting it.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Aug 2021)

I know we've been over that.  Why is it someone else's responsibility to pay for that, instead of, say, more money for health care to deal with the backlog of treatments delayed by COVID restrictions?

A demographic crunch would one of the best ways of mitigating various kinds of damage.  Fewer people, less impact.  (There is a good reason for increasing population, but I'll wait and see whether you stumble across it.)

We know what causes pregnancy, and there are cheaper ways of dealing with it.  Those who want pregnancy without consequences are SOL; the consequences are huge.  Most unplanned pregnancies involve people who just don't give a sh!t; where their welfare is concerned, I am perilously close to being equally indifferent.

Things that might be helpful aren't mandatory.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Who do you hang out with exactly?  No one I know thinks that at all.


I have met a lot of people like that. Some people are sitting on a lot of wealth as i see houses bought all around me for 4-5 times what i paid and then doing 60-100 thou in reno's. But there are a lot of decent people out there that live paycheck to paycheck as inflation has stripped away their buying power.


----------



## Altair (17 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I know we've been over that.  Why is it someone else's responsibility to pay for that, instead of, say, more money for health care to deal with the backlog of treatments delayed by COVID restrictions?


We've been over this as well, society decides what services it provides.

Unless you want to be personally responsible to fighting your own house fire, or personally responsible for paying for your health care, or paying for private security instead of police.

And it's not like the CPC isn't offering money for childcare, they are, just in a different way.

So society, if the two biggest parties are any indication, seem to think this is enough of a priority. 


Brad Sallows said:


> A demographic crunch would one of the best ways of mitigating various kinds of damage.  Fewer people, less impact.  (There is a good reason for increasing population, but I'll wait and see whether you stumble across it.)


There is  there is just the awkward part where 20 percent of the population needs to pay for the needs of 30 percent of the population.


Brad Sallows said:


> We know what causes pregnancy, and there are cheaper ways of dealing with it.  Those who want pregnancy without consequences are SOL; the consequences are huge.  Most unplanned pregnancies involve people who just don't give a sh!t; where their welfare is concerned, I am perilously close to being equally indifferent.


You don't need to care. Nobody is forcing you to care. But so long as society cares? _Shrugs_


Brad Sallows said:


> Things that might be helpful aren't mandatory.


Sure.


----------



## Altair (17 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I have met a lot of people like that. Some people are sitting on a lot of wealth as i see houses bought all around me for 4-5 times what i paid and then doing 60-100 thou in reno's. But there are a lot of decent people out there that live paycheck to paycheck as inflation has stripped away their buying power.


Most people my around my age, 25-35, wish they could buy one house. Never mind multiple houses.

And it's not inflation, it's outright speculation and lack of supply.

I hope that the parties address this someday soon.


----------



## brihard (17 Aug 2021)

Housing is utterly fucking bananas. Anyone who’s already had their house for more than ten years should probably sit down. My wife and I are double professional income, no kids as of yet. With the assistance of an inheritance borne of some awful circumstances, we were fortunate to get into the market young. Many of my friends are priced out of that (including a number of serving CAF NCMs, incidentally). The absurd increase in housing costs in markets such as Ottawa, Halifax etc is leaving a lot of people behind. Townhouses here are going for $650k plus. Think of what it takes in income to qualify for that mortgage.

So people struggling with shelter costs are also having to look at the costs of childcare, and in a lot of cases can’t really take the hit. They’re caught in the rent trap on two modest incomes, hoping that years from now they may be able to buy a small starter condo. Hardly any room for kids there, of course.

We have a fertility rate crisis. It’s not yet desperate here, but it’s also a very slow ship to reverse course on. Against that we have a large aging population with pensions and social benefits to keep solvent. The only solution to that is more labour force growth. There are options of course.


----------



## MilEME09 (17 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Most people my around my age, 25-35, wish they could buy one house. Never mind multiple houses.
> 
> And it's not inflation, it's outright speculation and lack of supply.
> 
> I hope that the parties address this someday soon.


Inflation is a huge factor, both inside and out of the housing market. Outside the market food prices have jumped 30% in the past couple years, feeding a family of 4 on a single income is near impossible these days.

Inside the housing market prices have steadily increased over the past 60 years. Over the course of the past 16 years my mothets home has increased in value 60k without any major work being put into it.

You combine this with the stress test people have to do now and a lot of people are out of the market.


----------



## Quirky (17 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Housing is utterly fucking bananas. Anyone who’s already had their house for more than ten years should probably sit down. My wife and I are double professional income, no kids as of yet. With the assistance of an inheritance borne of some awful circumstances, we were fortunate to get into the market young. Many of my friends are priced out of that (including a number of serving CAF NCMs, incidentally). The absurd increase in housing costs in markets such as Ottawa, Halifax etc is leaving a lot of people behind. Townhouses here are going for $650k plus. Think of what it takes in income to qualify for that mortgage.



There are still places in Canada where you can afford a nice house, however those places have little well paying jobs. Wife and I are in same boat, two very well paying jobs but no kids. People like us are essentially paying for social programs for the flood of immigrants or lower-income families with 3-5 kids. It pays to be poor in Canada under NDP/Liberal governments. Can’t wait until it all comes crashing down.

Why don’t you just have rich parents with an inheritance?


----------



## brihard (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> There are still places in Canada where you can afford a nice house, however those places have little well paying jobs. Wife and I are in same boat, two very well paying jobs but no kids. People like us are essentially paying for social programs for the flood of immigrants or lower-income families with 3-5 kids. It pays to be poor in Canada under NDP/Liberal governments. Can’t wait until it all comes crashing down.
> 
> Why don’t you just have rich parents with an inheritance?


Those immigrants’ 3-5 kids will be getting educated, finding jobs, and ultimately keeping our CPP and pensions solvent.


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Aug 2021)

Nailed it


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Aug 2021)

Ponzi social programs are best fixed by applying the third choice: reform (remove) the underlying ponzi structure.

More people means more accommodation needed.  More energy needed.  More natural resources.  More pressure on the species inhabiting popular recreational lands and waters.  More pressure on species in our food chain.  More new kinds of jobs (not just new jobs) needed, because the resource / finishing / service economy period inverted over the past century and only a few of those "more people" will be needed in the bottom two tiers, leaving the rest to have to figure out what else people want in addition to a gourmet coffee bar on every corner.  (They'll be fighting the eco-conscious crowd every step of the way, because consumption habits are at the root of most problems greens want to fix.)

Provinces must have the power to gut local zoning restrictions that block increased housing density; the feds I doubt have any.  The feds do have the power to relocate facilities into the fringes of suburbia, and see whether they have to do it again in another 50 years.  Maybe not if they fix the ponzi programs to remove the excuse for higher birth and immigration rates.  Feds and provinces do have the power to legislate to remove/reduce obstructionism against new infrastructure.

If you want both population increase and more affordable housing, you're SOL until someone comes along willing to break a lot of the models for where people live and work.


----------



## RedFive (17 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Housing is utterly fucking bananas. Anyone who’s already had their house for more than ten years should probably sit down. My wife and I are double professional income, no kids as of yet. With the assistance of an inheritance borne of some awful circumstances, we were fortunate to get into the market young. Many of my friends are priced out of that (including a number of serving CAF NCMs, incidentally). The absurd increase in housing costs in markets such as Ottawa, Halifax etc is leaving a lot of people behind. Townhouses here are going for $650k plus. Think of what it takes in income to qualify for that mortgage.
> 
> So people struggling with shelter costs are also having to look at the costs of childcare, and in a lot of cases can’t really take the hit. They’re caught in the rent trap on two modest incomes, hoping that years from now they may be able to buy a small starter condo. Hardly any room for kids there, of course.
> 
> We have a fertility rate crisis. It’s not yet desperate here, but it’s also a very slow ship to reverse course on. Against that we have a large aging population with pensions and social benefits to keep solvent. The only solution to that is more labour force growth. There are options of course.



Same here. Two income household, no kids. Four years into our careers where the RCMP sent us (both members), the townhouse we rent was assessed at $850k but the last one of this floorplan to sell in the complex we're in went for $925k despite being five years old. Despite saving every cent we've been able to, as well as removing debts we brought into the relationship a home is beyond our means. We can't even afford the down payment on the place we're renting...

The raise we got should help a little, but we're still highly paid professionals and home ownership is outside of our reach for now, how is everybody else making do?


----------



## Altair (17 Aug 2021)

RedFive said:


> Same here. Two income household, no kids. Four years into our careers where the RCMP sent us (both members), the townhouse we rent was assessed at $850k but the last one of this floorplan to sell in the complex we're in went for $925k despite being five years old. Despite saving every cent we've been able to, as well as removing debts we brought into the relationship a home is beyond our means. We can't even afford the down payment on the place we're renting...
> 
> The raise we got should help a little, but we're still highly paid professionals and home ownership is outside of our reach for now, how is everybody else making do?


I'm a single income family, imagine how that works...

Like ive said previously, I had some good investments, without that I would be nowhere close.


----------



## RedFive (17 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm a single income family, imagine how that works...
> 
> Like ive said previously, I had some good investments, without that I would be nowhere close.


I can't, which I suppose is really my point. Not even ten years ago I'd have the house, two vehicles, a wedding paid for, two newer vehicles for us to drive and be thinking about popping out some kids. Right now? I'm still paying student debt and a car loan, my better half is fortunately debt free, but we just cant save fast enough to make the down payment. A wedding that's more than a civil ceremony, a single family house, kids to put in that house or even a toy or two to put into the garage is so far out of our grasp right now it's frustrating and depressing.

On the other hand, my parent's house is the only hope they have of a retirement thanks to awful or non-existent pensions. Lots of savings, but as inflation goes up and value goes down, their life savings are worth less and less. I don't have a solution, I'm just frustrated and angry with the situation.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Aug 2021)

There are many answers to "how do others do it".  But for the first problem, accumulating a down payment, it all comes down to gross savings rate.  What is the guideline for mortgage payments in Canada now - maximum 28% of gross income?  Serious home seekers have to be hitting that number at least and I suppose should be targeting more if working on a down payment.  Minimizing rent cost in the meantime is the challenge.

Car ownership can be a real sink.  I've owned 8 vehicles over my 40 adult years; including the ex's contributions, the total purchases prices sum up to somewhere between $50K and $60K (one was purchased new).  I'm sure I managed to not spend a lot on cars; I know people who drop almost that much on one car.

Part of the problem is how homes are built now.  There are some places where the underlying land is so expensive that the construction cost is fractionally less important, but no question that a rectangular 1600 sq ft box with one roofline, an unfinished basement, and a carport is cheaper than 2400 sq ft with bay windows, fake gables, well-appointed interior trim and finishings, and a two- or even three-bay enclosed garage.

The chief problem is simple: more people, same amount of land.  Pick any major city, find old skyline pictures and compare to now.


----------



## Quirky (17 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Those immigrants’ 3-5 kids will be getting educated, finding jobs, and ultimately keeping our CPP and pensions solvent.


Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.


You are missing the point. Those people keep other people in business, too. They work hard and do jobs that people born in Canada won’t do anymore. It is a canard that immigrants steal jobs. They contribute as much or more to Canadian society than most others.

I am conservative by nature, but I am foursquare in favour of immigration.


----------



## Altair (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.








						The Canadian Immigrant Labour Market: Recent Trends from 2006 to 2017
					

This report uses immigrant data series from the Labour Force Survey to provide a description of immigrants' labour-market outcomes, from 2006 to 2017.




					www150.statcan.gc.ca
				




You ever get tired of looking dumb and uneducated or are you the captain america of ignorance, and can do this all day?



> The lion’s share (66%) of national employment gains between 2016 and 2017 was accounted for by immigrants of core working-age (25 to 54 years) and Canadian-born workers aged 55 and older.
> The unemployment rate for core-aged immigrants edged down to 6.4% in 2017, the lowest rate since the start of the LFS immigrant series in 2006. At the same time, their employment rate rose to 78.9%, the highest rate recorded during the 12-year period. In comparison, the employment rate for the Canadian-born was 84.0% in 2017, up 0.8 percentage points from the previous year, and their unemployment rate was 5.0%, down 0.5 points.
> The employment-rate gap between immigrants and the Canadian-born narrowed for three consecutive years, after increasing in 2014. The gap in 2017 was the lowest since 2006 (start of the series). At the same time, the unemployment-rate gap was stable in 2017, but narrower than it was in 2014.
> The largest share of the immigrant employment increase from 2016 to 2017 was accounted for by those who had been in the country for more than 10 years (established immigrants). However, over one-third (35%) of this increase was attributable to very recent immigrants (in Canada for 5 years or less).
> ...


----------



## brihard (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.



Thing is, when you uber between shifts as a sandwich artist, and your wife works as a hotel maid when not pulling shifts as a PSW, and between the two of you you hammer solid work ethic into the four kids and send them off to school, Canada ends up gaining a nurse, a computer scientist, a daycare owner-operator, and an electrician out of the equation. Your shallow, petty, and casual racism aside, Canada’s experience with immigrants has overall been a pretty positive one. They end up making really good Canadians. More to the point, as I said, we need them. Your inability or unwillingness to look past the immediate few years at a time doesn’t change that truth.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.





Altair said:


> The Canadian Immigrant Labour Market: Recent Trends from 2006 to 2017
> 
> 
> This report uses immigrant data series from the Labour Force Survey to provide a description of immigrants' labour-market outcomes, from 2006 to 2017.
> ...



That'll be enough from you two between the racism and the personal attacks.   There are lots of scummy forums out there for this kife, we are not one of them.
Thank you,
Bruce


----------



## YZT580 (17 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> We've been over this as well, society decides what services it provides.


You have been over it, not we.  Just because you write it doesn't etch it in stone.  Try listening (to be grammatically correct, try reading) what other people are patiently trying to explain to you as their take on things and accept the truth that yours is not the only opinion.  Sarcasm and caustic comments discourage others from participating in the discussion 'cause they feel it isn't worth the effort corresponding with a brick wall.


----------



## RangerRay (17 Aug 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Nailed it
> 
> View attachment 66075


This. 

Between a fourth COVID wave, BC on fire and a FUBAR situation in getting our allies out of Afghanistan, and this “minority” government being a de facto majority, this is the most unnecessary election ever


----------



## brihard (17 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> This.
> 
> Between a fourth COVID wave, BC on fire and a FUBAR situation in getting our allies out of Afghanistan, and this “minority” government being a de facto majority, this is the most unnecessary election ever


Yup. I’ve voted Liberal before. Sure as hell not this time.


----------



## Altair (17 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> You have been over it, not we.


He asked a question, I answered it.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Now much taxes could the government possibly collect from Uber drivers, sandwich artists and hotel maids? Better off on welfare.


Pretty much about as ignorant statement as you can get.

My neighbours are (ex-)Kosovar refugees from 1999.  22 years later she’s a doctor and he’s a software engineer and their son wants to be an engineer.  Contributing heartily to Canada’s taxation regime.  On the whole, that and others will balance with the Uber drivers and baristas and whatever other lot in life you wish to denigrate.  My experience with positively-minded hard working Afghans is that we are more than likely to benefit from their contributions to Canadian society.

$0.02


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (18 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup.  It isn’t a coincidence.  That said, the original 2001 premise no longer exists, so from their POV, one could easily consider that collateral value to Afghans in the interceding period was a bonus, but not critical to American Interests.


My uncle is a General Contractor and builds homes for a living. The general trend in the trades is he can't find Canadian under the age of 45 to do work for him.  Young Canadians don't want to do that work. He can get lots of foreigners though and they all work very hard and don't complain.


----------



## Remius (18 Aug 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> My uncle is a General Contractor and builds homes for a living. The general trend in the trades is he can't find Canadian under the age of 45 to do work for him.  Young Canadians don't want to do that work. He can get lots of foreigners though and they all work very hard and don't complain.


My brother in law is in construction.  Under 45.  Refuses to work residential construction.  Would rather be in EI despite the availability of work.  And he’s the first to complain that immigrants are stealing jobs.  Right…


----------



## Mills Bomb (18 Aug 2021)

It's interesting to look at Nova Scotia today where the Liberal's tried to win a majority, and they just got blown out by the PC's. It seems the polls in this provincial election were wrong in predicting this outcome, as from what I've read not many people saw this coming. 

I've noticed a trend amongst Conservative types that the PM and the Liberal's "Can't be beat" but if a strong hold Liberal province like Nova Scotia can prove the polls wrong and fall to a PC majority there's no reason to think that they can't also beat the Liberal's at the federal level and blow them out there also.


----------



## dapaterson (18 Aug 2021)

The NS PC party ran to the left of the Liberals.


----------



## Remius (18 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> The NS PC party ran to the left of the Liberals.


Yep.  They went very much left of center.


----------



## Infanteer (18 Aug 2021)

I'll restate my point here.



Infanteer said:


> The point isn't the political leanings of the NS electorate, the point is that this may be a bellwether election indicating  that voters are looking for a change after the pandemic.
> 
> ...or it may not be.  Interesting all the same.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (18 Aug 2021)

It is only a data point, but an interesting one.

If the Provincial results bleed thru into the federal results, the Liberals are looking at a wholesale asskicking in Atlantic Canada. Which does not lose them the election, exactly, but it makes life harder.


----------



## Mills Bomb (18 Aug 2021)

From the looks of it as an outsider, it seems the NS PC's went hard on mental health. This is also one of the main priorities in the federal PC's "Canada Recovery Plan".

For those planning on voting PC I think there may be a strong chance they can win, possibly even a majority. NS has proven it, the tide can be flipped even in Liberal strongholds, these are very unpredictable times and there's no reason to think the PC's can't beat them this round. Of course the PC's still need to run a strong campaign and avoid the mistakes that Andrew Scheer made. They are entering this campaign with way more money than any other party to throw at it as well. I read the Canada Recovery Plan which is basically a full-out manual and honestly I kind of like it, I don't trust the Liberal's to really get the job done anymore and recent years have been less than spectacular. Calling this election while so many events are unfolding may turn out to be one of the Liberal's biggest mistakes yet - however I think it was the right thing to do morally because now Canadians and everyone who has been complaining will have a chance to turn things around if enough of them get out and vote for someone else.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Aug 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> My uncle is a General Contractor and builds homes for a living. The general trend in the trades is he can't find Canadian under the age of 45 to do work for him.  Young Canadians don't want to do that work. He can get lots of foreigners though and they all work very hard and don't complain.


Out here my wife and I joked that the white Canadian kids will all end up working for the immigrants and non-whites that work 2-3 times as hard and now we are seeing that. Another problem in Vancouver is no one can pay enough in service jobs to allow employees to live here, particularity in the North Shore where housing is out of reach completely and traffic precludes people travelling. I know many businesses that have either moved or given up. The remaining ones struggle to find employees and the owners work themselves to the bone to keep the doors open.


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Aug 2021)

How do you spell egotistical?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (18 Aug 2021)

Mills Bomb said:


> . . . the *federal PC's* "Canada Recovery Plan".
> 
> For those planning on voting PC . . . the PC's can't beat them this round. . . .  Of course the PC's still need  . . .



Semantics.  There is no "federal" PC party.  Anything that could be judged as a progressive wing of the conservative movement has been greatly overshadowed by a western based, ideological right of centre base that is usually accompanied by Reform baggage.  There are still some remnants of Progressive Conservatives in provincial politics, NS being one.


----------



## Haggis (18 Aug 2021)

Rifleman62 said:


> How do you spell egotistical?
> View attachment 66092


So, Trudeau has a bigger plane to whip out when he campaigns.  That's nice.


----------



## MilEME09 (18 Aug 2021)

Can't whip out our F18s, but he sure can whip out a campaign plane pretty fast


----------



## Rifleman62 (18 Aug 2021)

> So, Trudeau has a bigger plane to whip out when he campaigns. That's nice.



No, it is name emblazoned on the fuselage in huge font.


----------



## lenaitch (18 Aug 2021)

Mills Bomb said:


> It's interesting to look at Nova Scotia today where the Liberal's tried to win a majority, and they just got blown out by the PC's. It seems the polls in this provincial election were wrong in predicting this outcome, as from what I've read not many people saw this coming.
> 
> I've noticed a trend amongst Conservative types that the PM and the Liberal's "Can't be beat" but if a strong hold Liberal province like Nova Scotia can prove the polls wrong and fall to a PC majority there's no reason to think that they can't also beat the Liberal's at the federal level and blow them out there also.


If this Wiki summary is accurate, I would hardly call Nova Scotia a "stronghold Liberal province".






						Politics of Nova Scotia - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Remius (18 Aug 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Remember, anyone can edit wiki to whatever they want it to say. Like the CBC, CTV and Global, they can't  be used as a source of truthful commentary or fact. Their reports are always suspect. YMMV.


A lot wikis are properly sourced.  A lot of people don’t look at them so YMMV indeed.


----------



## mariomike (18 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> A lot wikis are properly sourced.  A lot of people don’t look at them so YMMV indeed.


Right. Check the source references listed at the bottom of the page.

eg: Canada








						Canada - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## PMedMoe (19 Aug 2021)

Well, isn't that nice.  Who's next?  Police?  Firefighters?  Teachers?   

Tories vow to protect rights of doctors with moral objections to abortion, MAID

"Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole is promising to protect the right of health care professionals to refuse to provide or even refer patients for medical services to which they have moral or religious objections.

The promise to protect conscience rights -- a measure championed by social conservatives who maintain doctors and nurses should not have to refer patients for services like abortion, medical assistance in dying or gender re-assignment surgery -- is included in the Conservatives' election platform.

The platform was released this week by O'Toole even as he tries to differentiate himself from his predecessor, Andrew Scheer, whose socially conservative views on abortion and LGBTQ rights arguably cost the Conservatives the 2019 election."


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Well, isn't that nice.  Who's next?  Police?  Firefighters?  Teachers?
> 
> Tories vow to protect rights of doctors with moral objections to abortion, MAID
> 
> ...


How can this be, I thought that the Conservatives don't touch the abortion issue?


----------



## PMedMoe (19 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> How can this be, I thought that the Conservatives don't touch the abortion issue?


They're not; read the article. Guess this is as close as they can get.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Well, isn't that nice.  Who's next?  Police?  Firefighters?  Teachers?
> 
> Tories vow to protect rights of doctors with moral objections to abortion, MAID
> 
> ...


Teachers, police and firefighters provide medical care?


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> They're not; read the article. Guess this is as close as they can get.


Optics are bad.

I'm sure in a general sense it won't be that troublesome, but you just know that there will be women's groups saying that this will limit access to abortion for women in small towns, with them needing to travel far away from home to get one.


----------



## Remius (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> They're not; read the article. Guess this is as close as they can get.


The CPC just keeps on giving…


----------



## PMedMoe (19 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Teachers, police and firefighters provide medical care?


No.  But they're paid to provide a service, regardless of their beliefs.  Imagine if a firefighter refuses to put out a fire in a house flying a Pride flag because they don't like homosexuals.  Or a teacher refusing to teach a trans student.  It might be a bad analogy, but allowing medical parsonnel to refuse treatment *and* refuse to refer patients based on their beliefs is just wrong. It has the potential of ostracizing groups of already vulnerable people.


----------



## TheHead (19 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Teachers, police and firefighters provide medical care?




Yes,  some provide medical first response.  Technically, it's patient care if we want to argue semantics but the point still stands.  Should you be able to turn a patient down due to personal beliefs?  No.

It's also not a bad analogy.  When you stop allowing professions like doctors to practice because of their personal beliefs you start going down a slippery slope.  When you put your uniform on everyday put your personal biases behind you and you do your job regardless of who you are serving.


_Fixed for clarity_


----------



## mariomike (19 Aug 2021)

TheHead said:


> When you put your uniform on everyday put your personal biases behind you and you do your job regardless of who you are serving.


Nothing new about that.


> You come to us from a society with many prejudices. We won't try to change your beliefs. But, if you treat anyone with disrespect, we will change your employment.


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

The part I like is where people say it's only the LPC bringing up abortion to smear the CPC.

The CPC put this in their platform.


----------



## Kilted (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> No.  But they're paid to provide a service, regardless of their beliefs.  Imagine if a firefighter refuses to put out a fire in a house flying a Pride flag because they don't like homosexuals.  Or a teacher refusing to teach a trans student.  It might be a bad analogy, but allowing medical parsonnel to refuse treatment *and* refuse to refer patients based on their beliefs is just wrong. It has the potential of ostracizing groups of already vulnerable people.


That's a bit of an exaggeration.  This is simply allowing doctors et al to not take any part in medical procedures that they see to be harmful.  Which part of their professional responsibility is to do no harm.


----------



## dapaterson (19 Aug 2021)

Medical professionals already have that protection.

This would permit them to refuse referrals as well, denying patients legal medical care.


----------



## PMedMoe (19 Aug 2021)

Kilted said:


> That's a bit of an exaggeration.  This is simply allowing doctors et al to not take any part in medical procedures that they see to be harmful.  Which part of their professional responsibility is to do no harm.


Bullshit.  This is allowing doctors to refuse treatment based on their _*moral*_ beliefs. This has nothing to do with doing no harm. You think it won't harm a rape victim to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term? And not only to refuse treatment but to refuse referrals for said treatment.

The article I linked has already changed.  Guess someone at CTV News didn't like it.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> .... This would permit them to refuse referrals as well, denying patients legal medical care.


Good catch -- anyone spot any mention of Team Blue saying they'll be following court direction saying, "if you can't do it, you must refer to someone who will"? Can't find anything indicating an appeal of this 2019 decision, so it looks like it's still in place for the moment.

Interesting how fits in with this from Team Blue's platform document (page 68 - only mention of that "a" word in the whole document) - no separate news release on the latest @ the Team Blue site yet:


----------



## Kilted (19 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Bullshit.  This is allowing doctors to refuse treatment based on their _*moral*_ beliefs. This has nothing to do with doing no harm. You think it won't harm a rape victim to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term? And not only to refuse treatment but to refuse referrals for said treatment.
> 
> The article I linked has already changed.  Guess someone at CTV News didn't like it.


Well that depends on who you consider to be a person. At this time in history unborn babies are not legally considered to be a person/people. However, a doctor will often take the well-being of an unborn child into consideration regardless of the fact that it isn't legally considered to be a person. And frankly the method of conception would have no legal merit if unborn children are ever recognized as persons.


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

Darn liberals bringing up abortion yet again.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Aug 2021)

Looks like the LPC should be recovering their recent drop in the polls back to Star Chamber levels, with the CPC’s latest hill to die on… 🤦🏻


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Looks like the LPC should be recovering their recent drop in the polls back to Star Chamber levels, with the CPC’s latest hill to die on… 🤦🏻


While it was not smart to put it in the platform, kudos to O'Toole for coming out as openly personally pro choice.

Nice change from the last guy.


----------



## lenaitch (19 Aug 2021)

With certain exceptions, the provision of health care is a provincial responsibility and the providers are provincially regulated.  Perhaps someone could explain how a federal government could legislatively protect their conscience rights. 

A clash of rights; those of the patient vs. those of the practitioner, sounds like a matter for the courts.  The only court case I am aware of was at the Ontario Court of Appeal.  In many rural and remote areas, a denial of referral could equal a denial of care.


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

lenaitch said:


> With certain exceptions, the provision of health care is a provincial responsibility and the providers are provincially regulated.  Perhaps someone could explain how a federal government could legislatively protect their conscience rights.
> 
> A clash of rights; those of the patient vs. those of the practitioner, sounds like a matter for the courts.  The only court case I am aware of was at the Ontario Court of Appeal.  In many rural and remote areas, a denial of referral could equal a denial of care.


Probably the point.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Aug 2021)

Kathryn Marshall: Liberals panic and resort to abortion-conspiracy theories about O'Toole​








						Kathryn Marshall: Liberals panic and resort to abortion-conspiracy theories about O'Toole
					

The Liberal war room simply isn’t equipped to run a campaign against the Conservatives without driving wedges on hot-button issues




					nationalpost.com
				






> The Liberal war room simply isn’t equipped to run a campaign against the Conservatives without driving wedges on hot-button issues


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Aug 2021)

The wedges work, look at this thread. It should not be ridiculous that someone can both be pro-choice, but also be willing to stand up for someone's freedom not to be.


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> The wedges work, look at this thread. It should not be ridiculous that someone can both be pro-choice, but also be willing to stand up for someone's freedom not to be.


Once you allow a professional the freedom to deny services,  you run into the situation where in places where there are not a lot of choices you have effectively banned it.


----------



## brihard (19 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Once you allow a professional the freedom to deny services,  you run into the situation where in places where there are not a lot of choices you have effectively banned it.


This, 100%


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> This, 100%


Yeah, and it's a 100 percent a own goal by the CPC.

If I can easily articulate that in one long sentence, or one short paragraph,  then the LPC war room is going to have a field day with it.


----------



## mariomike (19 Aug 2021)

lenaitch said:


> In many rural and remote areas, a denial of referral could equal a denial of care.


Which might not go over well with rural voters.


> For being rural who have to deal with shitty conditions, dispersed residents and long drives to essential facilities, as you stated, these folks will ALWAYS cost more per person and be far less "monetarily efficient"





> I vote those who consider an entire province and balance those requirements vice catering to the TO populace at the expense of all others.



That's for Ontario elections. But, may also apply to federal, if rural voters feel threatened with the possibilbity of "a denial of care."


----------



## Haggis (19 Aug 2021)

At the rate they are going, and with the PPC likely to split the vote yet again, O'Toole should just call Trudeau and concede the election and save $500 M which Blair can now put towards his compensated gun confiscation.  It'll be interesting to see how much real "opposition" the NDP bring to the House.


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Aug 2021)

PPC are polling below 2% nationally, they're not splitting the vote. They were irrelevant in 2019 and their votes to CPC wouldn't have turned any seats Blue. A strong NDP is more of a threat to the LPC, however. Expect Trudeau to start trying to outflank the hard left again soon.


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> PPC are polling below 2% nationally, they're not splitting the vote. They were irrelevant in 2019 and their votes to CPC wouldn't have turned any seats Blue. A strong NDP is more of a threat to the LPC, however. Expect Trudeau to start trying to outflank the hard left again soon.


Poll tracker has the PPC at 3.4 nationally and 338 has them at 2.6

Numbers, if accurate, the CPC would love to have.


----------



## brihard (19 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> PPC are polling below 2% nationally, they're not splitting the vote. They were irrelevant in 2019 and their votes to CPC wouldn't have turned any seats Blue. A strong NDP is more of a threat to the LPC, however. Expect Trudeau to start trying to outflank the hard left again soon.


Not accurate. I got curious and dumped the 2019 numbers into a spreadsheet. If recollection serves, there were six seats won by the Liberals where the margin between LPC and CPC was smaller than PPC’s total votes; ie, had most PPC votes gone CPC (a logical supposition), CPC would have taken the seats. This wouldn’t have impacted the parliamentary balance of power at all.

That said, a real possibility this time around is that Bernier’s tantrum may well split just enough on the right to have a profound impact on Parliament. Or it could mean nothing at all. I obviously hope the latter- parliamentary irrelevance is, IMHO, what Bernier deserves. It would be quite the own goal if they won no seats but sealed the deal for the LPC.


----------



## MilEME09 (19 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Poll tracker has the PPC at 3.4 nationally and 338 has them at 2.6
> 
> Numbers, if accurate, the CPC would love to have.


Liberals should be more worried about 28% bloc support.

2.6% nationally isn't a huge threat, divided up across the country, those numbers aren't enough to swing any ridings.


----------



## brihard (19 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Liberals should be more worried about 28% bloc support.
> 
> 2.6% nationally isn't a huge threat, divided up across the country, those numbers aren't enough to swing any ridings.


Oh, I don’t imagine the LPC are worried about PPC at all. If anything, they’re very quietly rooting for them.


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Not accurate. I got curious and dumped the 2019 numbers into a spreadsheet. If recollection serves, there were six seats won by the Liberals where the margin between LPC and CPC was smaller than PPC’s total votes; ie, had most PPC votes gone CPC (a logical supposition), CPC would have taken the seats. This wouldn’t have impacted the parliamentary balance of power at all.
> 
> That said, a real possibility this time around is that Bernier’s tantrum may well split just enough on the right to have a profound impact on Parliament. Or it could mean nothing at all. I obviously hope the latter- parliamentary irrelevance is, IMHO, what Bernier deserves. It would be quite the own goal if they won no seats but sealed the deal for the LPC.


You're assuming every PPC vote is taken from CPC, where some of those folks are Libertarians seeing a more viable Federal Party. I use viable in the loosest possible context, considering their candidates are photoshopping themselves into photos to use as their official election photo:

PPC Candidate, Vahid Seyfaie, Photoshopped His Head On To Prince William's Body For His Official Election Photos And I Can't Stop Laughing — Dean Blundell's Sports, News, Podcast Network


----------



## Altair (19 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Liberals should be more worried about 28% bloc support.
> 
> 2.6% nationally isn't a huge threat, divided up across the country, those numbers aren't enough to swing any ridings.


28 percent is less than what the bloc got in 2019. The LPC, according to poll tracker, is at 36 percent.

The LPC need to win 15 more seats to get to 170, and if they can sneak a few off the bloc and few in Ontario, and anything
 more than the zero they got in Saskatchewan and Alberta they are well on their way.



brihard said:


> Oh, I don’t imagine the LPC are worried about PPC at all. If anything, they’re very quietly rooting for them.


I did vote for them last election, and likely will this election as well.


----------



## brihard (19 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> You're assuming every PPC vote is taken from CPC, where some of those folks are Libertarians seeing a more viable Federal Party. I use viable in the loosest possible context, considering their candidates are photoshopping themselves into photos to use as their official election photo:
> 
> PPC Candidate, Vahid Seyfaie, Photoshopped His Head On To Prince William's Body For His Official Election Photos And I Can't Stop Laughing — Dean Blundell's Sports, News, Podcast Network


No I’m not. I already said “most”. And I didn’t keep the spreadsheet, but I recall there being a couple seats where it was very close and it only took a fraction of PPC’s vote count to deny the CPC a seat.

Yeah, checking it again:

LPC won Miramichi by under 400 votes. PPC took over 1100.
LPC won Richmond Hill by 212 votes. PPC got 507
LPC won Kitchener-Conestoga by 365. PPC got 790
NDP won South Okanagan by 796, PPC got 1838.
LPC won Coquitlam by 390, PPC got 703
LPC took Yukon by 153, PPC got 284.

I think it’s fair to guess that PPC gained few votes from the LPC or NDP. CPC lost up to six seats, and I think in all six cases it’s reasonable to think enough of the PPC votes would probably have gone CPC to make the difference.

As I said, it made no difference in the parliamentary balance of power… Last time. The election resulted in a freakishly stable and easily maintained minority. This time around they could potentially be a major spoiler, or at least fundamentally alter the math on which party is the kingmaker for a LPC minority.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Aug 2021)

In a campaign about nothing, Liberals struggle to find a wedge issue​








						Opinion: In a campaign about nothing, Liberals struggle to find a wedge issue
					

Vaccine mandates looked like it might be it – but that lasted a day. And so the party that triggered the election will continue to look for a reason to have called it




					www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## YZT580 (20 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Ponzi social programs are best fixed by applying the third choice: reform (remove) the underlying ponzi structure.
> 
> More people means more accommodation needed.  More energy needed.  More natural resources.  More pressure on the species inhabiting popular recreational lands and waters.  More pressure on species in our food chain.  More new kinds of jobs (not just new jobs) needed, because the resource / finishing / service economy period inverted over the past century and only a few of those "more people" will be needed in the bottom two tiers, leaving the rest to have to figure out what else people want in addition to a gourmet coffee bar on every corner.  (They'll be fighting the eco-conscious crowd every step of the way, because consumption habits are at the root of most problems greens want to fix.)
> 
> Provinces must have the power to gut local zoning restrictions that block increased housing density; the feds I doubt have any.  The feds do have the power to relocate facilities into the fringes of suburbia, and see whether they have to do it again in another 50 years.  Maybe not if





Kilted said:


> Well that depends on who you consider to be a person. At this time in history unborn babies are not legally considered to be a person/people. However, a doctor will often take the well-being of an unborn child into consideration regardless of the fact that it isn't legally considered to be a person. And frankly the method of conception would have no legal merit if unborn children are ever recognized as persons.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Aug 2021)

There are people who believe that an unborn child is a person regardless of what the law may say.  For those abortion is tantamount to murder.  Likewise with regards to euthanasia.  Personally, I would far rather have a medical team working on this old carcass who believe that every life is of value rather than it being composed of individuals who equate old with useless and pre-born as not human.  Science does not support our current assessment of when life begins, our stance is one of convenience only.


----------



## Altair (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> There are people who believe that an unborn child is a person regardless of what the law may say.  For those abortion is tantamount to murder.  Likewise with regards to euthanasia.  Personally, I would far rather have a medical team working on this old carcass who believe that every life is of value rather than it being composed of individuals who equate old with useless and pre-born as not human.  Science does not support our current assessment of when life begins, our stance is one of convenience only.


darn liberals bringing up abortion again.


----------



## mariomike (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> For those abortion is tantamount to murder.



For those old enough to remember the late Chief Coroner of Ontario Morton Shulman,


> In the Sixties, abortion could be legally performed only to save the life of the woman, so there were practically no legal abortions. He stated that the pregnant daughters of the rich were sent to reliable physicians who did abortions for cash. He estimated that these physicians did twenty to thirty abortions per week. Women who were not rich were left to perform an abortion on themselves or go to what he called a "nurse" abortionist. Their method was commonly pumping Lysol into the woman's womb. The mortality rate was high and the infection rate over 50%. He added, "By the time I became Chief Coroner, I had had the unpleasant experience of seeing the bodies of some dozens of young women who had died as a result of these amateur abortions."
> Chief Coroner Morton Shulman decided to publicize deaths from illegal abortions. He instructed his coroners to call a public inquest into each abortion death. He describes one case that he believes was the turning point, that of 34-year-old Lottie Leanne Clarke, a mother of three children, who died of a massive infection in 1964 after an illegal abortion in spite of medical treatment and antibiotics. At the inquest into her death, the jury recommended that the laws about therapeutic abortion be revised. Dr. Shulman added that a federal government committee should review the question of abortion and the law. Newspapers published editorials recommending the reform of the abortion law. In 1965, the Minister of Justice, Guy Favreau, wrote to Dr. Shulman that the recommendation would be considered in the program to amend the Criminal Code. The eventual amendment closely followed the recommendations of the coroners' juries.





> Likewise with regards to euthanasia.



See also,









						Assisted Dying.
					

WRT the post above that there are people in NL that are being euthanized against their will  - what is the hard, verifiable and reliable proof of this?   The post above is about Colorado. If you quote the post, we can answer your question.    Re: DNR, why not a secure NFC medallion that...




					www.milnet.ca
				












						Mercy Killing? Euthanasia?  Split From Capt. Semrau Thread
					

No offense to those involved but this is NOT a thread about abortion.  That's a whole different ball game with its own thread somewhere.  Bruce   Mea culpa.  I brought it up because there are definitely some points in common to the two issues, and religion plays a big part of those points.  It...




					www.milnet.ca


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Aug 2021)

Trudeau kicks off his campaign in a BC elder care facility. I guess this will be the last we see of him 

Jack Knox: Political bloodlines show in Trudeau's Saanich stop​Justin Trudeau used to take his grandmother for joyrides in the halls of her Saanich care home.

“He and my other nephew pushed her in her wheelchair as fast they could, up and down the corridor,” says his Aunt Heather. “Mum was so thrilled.”

Victoria’s Heather Walker is the sister of Trudeau’s mother, Margaret. She and another sister, Betsy Dening, were on hand with a clutch of younger local relatives Thursday as the Liberal leader used the Veterans Memorial Lodge in Broadmead, where his grandmother spent the four years prior to her death in 2012, as the backdrop while launching a raft of election promises related to seniors.

After deploring the weaknesses in the long-term care system that were exposed by COVID (“We had to send the armed forces into retirement homes, in Canada”) Trudeau spoke of $9 billion in new spending. A $25-an-hour minimum wage for personal support workers. Training for up to 50,000 more of them. A doubling of the Home Accessibility Tax Credit.

Arrayed behind him were three local Liberal candidates — Nikki Macdonald of Victoria, Sherri Moore-Arbour of Saanich-Gulf Islands and Doug Kobayashi of Esquimalt-Saanich-Sooke — doing their best to pretend that they weren’t being harassed by wasps. Trudeau, in a crisp white shirt, sleeves rolled up, no jacket, narrow tie, looked remarkably similar to the way he looked when he made Victoria the first stop of his 2019 campaign (though, happily, the media bus didn’t drive into the Liberals’ plane at the Victoria airport this time).










						Jack Knox: Political bloodlines show in Trudeau's Saanich stop
					

Justin Trudeau used to take his grandmother for joyrides in the halls of her Saanich care home. “He and my other nephew pushed her in her wheelchair as fast they could, up and down the corridor,” says his Aunt Heather. “Mum was so thrilled.




					www.timescolonist.com
				






​


----------



## YZT580 (20 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> For those old enough to remember the late Chief Coroner of Ontario Morton Shulman,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what?  The statement made referred to a doctor's belief that a) abortion was the murder of an unborn child and b) euthanasia was the pre-mature termination of a human life.  Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  Referral is a strawman argument.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  Run a search through Google and you will locate a facility in every province and territory.  It might not be in your neighbourhood but it is there.  And for those who say it should be readily available in the neighbourhood, why?  My heart specialist is a 2 hour drive.  Want a baby delivered in Trenton, go down the highway to Belleville.  If surgery is critical, try Oshawa or Kingston.  Why should an abortion clinic be any more available?


----------



## PMedMoe (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So what?  The statement made referred to a doctor's belief that a) abortion was the murder of an unborn child and b) euthanasia was the pre-mature termination of a human life.  Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  Referral is a strawman argument.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  Run a search through Google and you will locate a facility in every province and territory.  It might not be in your neighbourhood but it is there.  And for those who say it should be readily available in the neighbourhood, why?  My heart specialist is a 2 hour drive.  Want a baby delivered in Trenton, go down the highway to Belleville.  If surgery is critical, try Oshawa or Kingston.  Why should an abortion clinic be any more available?


Really?  What about in very remote areas where they're lucky to have a nurse practitioner or a PA and have to be flown out for medical procedures?

If health care professionals don't want to handle certain cases, maybe they should go into private practice.


----------



## Altair (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So what?  The statement made referred to a doctor's belief that a) abortion was the murder of an unborn child and b) euthanasia was the pre-mature termination of a human life.  Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  Referral is a strawman argument.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  Run a search through Google and you will locate a facility in every province and territory.  It might not be in your neighbourhood but it is there.  And for those who say it should be readily available in the neighbourhood, why?  My heart specialist is a 2 hour drive.  Want a baby delivered in Trenton, go down the highway to Belleville.  If surgery is critical, try Oshawa or Kingston.  Why should an abortion clinic be any more available?


Erin O'Toole disagrees.









						Chris Selley: A refreshing change on the campaign trail — crystal clear answers from a politician
					

Erin O'Toole is selling a plan he seems to understand back to front. And that is distressingly rare in Canadian politics




					nationalpost.com
				






> On Friday in a very wet Winnipeg, though, he was asked directly whether a doctor with a conscientious objection to abortion would have to refer a woman to someone else willing to consult or perform it. “Yes,” O’Toole said, “they will have to refer, because the right to those services exists across the country.”


----------



## mariomike (20 Aug 2021)

I'm not a lawyer, or a doctor, or a woman, for that matter. But, for anyone wishing to take a deep dive,









						Canadian Doctors Can Still Deny Access To Abortion - Chatelaine
					

The practice of conscientious objection means doctors can refuse or deflect requests for many healthcare services, often without providing a referral.




					www.chatelaine.com
				




Presumably, politicians notice the opinion polls at election time.








						Abortion in Canada - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Aug 2021)

So a doctor that refuse to do an abortion is bad, what if the same doctor refuses to do FGM or believe the requested abortion is due to the fact that the fetus is female?

Way better to allow some ability to refuse than none at all.


----------



## brihard (20 Aug 2021)

Female genital mutilation is already provided for under subsection (3) of Section 268 of the Criminal Code, “aggravated assault”.


----------



## Altair (20 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> So a doctor that refuse to do an abortion is bad, what if the same doctor refuses to do FGM or believe the requested abortion is due to the fact that the fetus is female?
> 
> Way better to allow some ability to refuse than none at all.


naturally doctors do not need to preform procedures that are illegal.

Abortion isn't illegal. 

Not going to lie, pleasantly surprised to see O'Tooles stance on this. Its like he actually wants to win  this election and not get dragged down by SOCONs


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Way better to allow *some* ability to refuse than none at all.


As always, the tricky part is where to draw the line.


----------



## lenaitch (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So what?  The statement made referred to a doctor's belief that a) abortion was the murder of an unborn child and b) euthanasia was the pre-mature termination of a human life.  Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  Referral is a strawman argument.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  Run a search through Google and you will locate a facility in every province and territory.  It might not be in your neighbourhood but it is there.  And for those who say it should be readily available in the neighbourhood, why?  My heart specialist is a 2 hour drive.  Want a baby delivered in Trenton, go down the highway to Belleville.  If surgery is critical, try Oshawa or Kingston.  Why should an abortion clinic be any more available?



If you have been able to simply Google and cold call a non-emergent medical provider and get ready access in Canada without a referral you're experience with our medical system is quite a bit different than mine.

In some areas, abortion access is limited, and if you check the 'rural provider' column in the attached, there are a significant number of zeros.





__





						Access at a Glance: Abortion Services in Canada | Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights
					






					www.actioncanadashr.org
				




Folks are focusing on abortion, but a pharmacist is also a medical professional.  The big chains don't do small towns, so a single mom-and-pop pharmacy might want to refuse to sell birth control devices, or some other product or advice that offends them.  It might be several hours to the next one.

Off topic, but both the missus and I have chronic pain issues.  Our family doctor doesn't like NSAIDs.  Once you are on a doctor's roster, you have to de-roster before you can go hunting for another.  Although not a prescription item, when we mentioned CBD looking for advice, he wouldn't even discuss it.  He's a peach.

When I was in law enforcement, I had to deal with everyone that came through the door regardless of whether I agreed with the lifestyle or morals.  I expect anyone in a regulated profession, particularly one that is funded out of public funds, to do the same.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Aug 2021)

Simple, a refusal of service requires a notification to the relevant health authority stating the patient name and service declined and possibly the reason but that may be later. I think that will lessen the number of refusals and allow a method to track how big an issue it is and what is exactly are the issues. If a whole bunch of doctors in one area are refusing to do FGM's, then the health authority knows there is a need to educate immigrants (and which ones) on women rights in Canada. they may also be able to track down who is doing them as well.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> . . .   Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  *Referral is a strawman argument*.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  . . .



No, referral is not a strawman argument.  It is one of the professional obligations for the practice of medicine regardless of the patient complaint/request.  To exclude that requirement because of a regulated health professional's conscientious objection would be the same as saying that a doctor could adjust the quality of his care based on his personal prejudices.

Two examples of provincial College policies are;
Alberta, a short, succinct declaration





						Conscientious Objection - College of Physicians & Surgeons of Alberta | CPSA
					






					cpsa.ca
				




and Ontario, a much longer discussion of a physician's obligation including an explanation of what an "effective referral" entails.
CPSO - Advice to the Profession: Professional Obligations and Human Rights

When 14% of Canadians don't have a primary care physician (family doctor), it's not that easy to "quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures".  And some physicians of my acquaintance would not confirm in response to a phone inquiry that they provide such a service for the simple reason that they don't want to paint a target on their back.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Aug 2021)

Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.


----------



## brihard (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.


And yet I’m not. Have a great night.


----------



## Altair (20 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.


Damn, you are really going off on O'Toole here. 

 You okay?


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Aug 2021)

Adam Zivo: Conservative push to explore legalizing 'poppers' is unexpected and practical
					

The Tories growing embrace of the LGBTQ community is good for everyone, especially as the Liberals break promise after promise




					nationalpost.com
				




Here is a surprisingly interesting thing coming out of the CPC camp


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Aug 2021)

Just throwing this resource out there in case you want to bookmark it:  *"Where you can see all the election ads running on media websites"*


> In 2018, parliament passed an amendment to the _Canadian Elections Act_ that requires large online platforms, including media outlets, to publish a registry of the ads purchased by political parties for display on their sites over the course of an election. This applies to English-language sites that get at least three million monthly visits, French-language sites that get at least one million, and sites in other languages that get at least 100,000.
> 
> While the sites have to publish certain kinds of information about the ads that have been purchased, the legislation doesn’t require that the registries themselves take a standard form. Each platform therefore appears to have come up with its own solution and its own place to put the registry on its site. Sometimes, a link is buried in a footer menu. Other times, finding it is more of a journey.
> 
> So we thought we’d do our best to offer a one-stop-shop for all the election ad registries we can find, with a particular focus on the country’s media outlets. We’ll continue to add more as they come to our attention ...


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.





brihard said:


> And yet I’m not. Have a great night.


Me either.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Simple, a refusal of service requires a notification to the relevant health authority stating the patient name and service declined and possibly the reason but that may be later. I think that will lessen the number of refusals and allow a method to track how big an issue it is and what is exactly are the issues. If a whole bunch of doctors in one area are refusing to do FGM's, then the health authority knows there is a need to educate immigrants (and which ones) on women rights in Canada. they may also be able to track down who is doing them as well.


Again, we're talking about _*legal*_ medical procedures here. You seem to have some fixation on immigrants.


----------



## dimsum (21 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.


But did the dog "ask for it" because of the way they were dressed?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Again, we're talking about _*legal*_ medical procedures here. You seem to have some fixation on immigrants.


I am using it as an example of what can go wrong if you don't give some room for people's morality to come into play. Immigrants and cultural frictions are a everyday part of my life here. some funny, some harmless and some not.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I am using it as an example of what can go wrong if you don't give some room for people's morality to come into play.


And I think it's a poor example as FGM is not a *legal* medical service.  The sex-selective abortion, I can understand.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Aug 2021)

It would still justify as a refusal of service and a notification to the board of the request would be helpful as immigrants who want that stuff tend to send their daughters out of country to get it done.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> immigrants who want that stuff tend to send their daughters out of country to get it done.


Then there's no issue of a Canadian doctor refusing this illegal medical procedure then, is there?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Then there's no issue of a Canadian doctor refusing this illegal medical procedure then, is there?


Doesn’t really solve the problem, does it?

I am not saying this is a big problem, or that it is anywhere close to Canada’s most pressing problem, but it cannot be wished away either.


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Doesn’t really solve the problem, does it?
> 
> I am not saying this is a big problem, or that it is anywhere close to Canada’s most pressing problem, but it cannot be wished away either.



I don't want to derail the thread/topic.  My point was that we were referring to legal medical procedures.  If people are, indeed, requesting FGM from doctors, then yes, those requests *should* be reported.  As should any request for an _*illegal*_ medical procedure.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> Is there really so many requests to doctors for FGM?
> 
> I don't want to derail the thread/topic.  My point was that we were referring to legal medical procedures.  If people are, indeed, requesting FGM from doctors, then yes, those requests *should* be reported.  As should any request for an _*illegal*_ medical procedure.


Fair point and I wasn’t accusing you of supporting or condoning it.


----------



## Infanteer (21 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Sad.  Tie a firecracker to a dog's tail and there will be unanimous condemnation.  Kill a child while it is in the womb and everyone screams woman's rights to choose and condemn those who think differently.  You all should be ashamed of yourselves.  Good night.



There is debating an issue, and there is being a jerk.  You've fallen on the latter side.  

Strike 1.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

I'm a liberal party supporter, having voted for them since 2015, and 4 of the 6 last elections.(2011 was the Bloc and 2019 was a throwaway vote for the PPC in a safe LPC riding)

And I will say this, this is a bad a campaign as I've seen since 2011, at least off the bat. When the writ was dropped, I expected the LPC to run on all the vaccines they got. I expected the LPC to hammer home that we are one of the most highly vaccinated countries on the planet. I expected them to remind Canadians that O'Toole said Canada would be vaccinated in 2030, and show that we are mostly fully vaccinated in 2021, before the September deadline. I expected them to come up with a real plan to show how they were going to deal with the housing crisis, a real problem for millennials that voted for him in 2015.

Instead, mandatory vaccines as a campaign wedge issue? Vaccines were nicely unpolitical for all parties, and now he's making them into a political issue. Its gross. It reeks of what is going on in the states.

He is making abortion a campaign issue? This isn't 2019, and O'Toole, for all his faults, is not Andrew Sheer. He isn't making the daily awkward statements on abortion that can be construed as encroaching on a woman's right to an abortion.

The LPC is making the same mistakes that the CPC did in 2015, running a negative campaign on issues that the public frankly doesn't care about. This is not sunny ways, this is not forward facing, this is a campaign that is banking on people being afraid of a Harper rerun, which is not nearly as relevant 6 years removed from Harpers last term, and definitely irrelevant in a world grappling with covid19 and its fallout.

He said he wanted to have this campaign in the middle of a pandemic to allow Canadians a choice on how to move forward. Fine. Show me something, anything on how the LPC would lead Canada into the future. Focusing on abortion like its 2019 and largely ignoring things like housing is an amazing failure. Making vaccines political is a bad look.

I hope that they adjust and do better, otherwise a minority parliament with the NDP forcing through real progressive legislation via a minority Parliament is far better than this so far aimless campaign being given a majority.


----------



## Haggis (21 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> And I will say this, this is a bad a campaign as I've seen since 2011, at least off the bat.


At least the LPC are still consistent in their persecution of lawful gun owners.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> At least the LPC are still consistent in their persecution of lawful gun owners.


One can have a good campaign and clamp down on guns. 

2015 for example.


----------



## Haggis (21 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> One can have a good campaign and clamp down on guns.
> 
> 2015 for example.


So why, then, has gun violence soared since then, as claimed by the LPC themselves, despite new regulations the lawful use of firearms?  No need to reply here.  There's a whole other thread for this topic.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (21 Aug 2021)

Well, Altair, at least count yourself lucky that  ... this will be the last election ran using First-Past-the-Post. 

/SARC OFF

And Haggis, you may find this refreshing: There has been a rise in gun violence in Montreal lately, so what did the Montreal Police and the local/provincial governments do? They announced that they are boosting up the Gangs/Org. crime units and teaming with the Sureté du Québec Gun Smuggling team. Already they have made a couple of seizures, which would normally classify as small (50 to 70 guns each). Yet, the message they harp on to the press is "These are important seizures. The important point is not the number of guns seized, it's whose hands your seizing them from, and these were seized from the East-end gangs, where most of the current rash of shooting comes from."

Like I said: it is refreshing to see policing and public message going in the direction of the gun violence primary source instead of the law abiding owners.


----------



## brihard (21 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Well, Altair, at least count yourself lucky that  ... this will be the last election ran using First-Past-the-Post.
> 
> /SARC OFF
> 
> ...


The hamstringing of police in effectively investigating and hammering on the violent street level organized crime is another thing entirely… But yes, intelligence led efforts, supported by vigorous street level proactive policing, can help pluck a lot of low hanging fruit, get crime guns off the street, and get offenders back into the system. Unfortunately, initiatives aimed at reducing remand custody have cranked up the speed on the revolving door. There is real room for the federal government to play a major role here.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Well, Altair, at least count yourself lucky that  ... this will be the last election ran using First-Past-the-Post.
> 
> /SARC OFF


I never saw the benefit of it, but I guess permanently hamstringing the CPC would be a nice side benefit.


----------



## YZT580 (21 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> There is debating an issue, and there is being a jerk.  You've fallen on the latter side.
> 
> Strike 1.


my apologies, it was not my intention. I am more than a little saddened at the universal acceptance of convenience over life.  This will be my last response (thank goodness you say) as I don't wish to de-rail the main topic any further.
  With few exceptions, rape being the one, a woman becomes pregnant as a result of an activity in which she voluntarily participated without taking reasonable precautions.  The death of a child shouldn't be the end result of an life-style choice.  Don't you think it just a little bit hypocritical that abortion to eliminate an unwanted boy/girl causes people to criticize but abortion resulting from a fun night out is quite ok?  After all, it is a totally equal opportunity termination: don't know if it is male or female.  So it becomes ok for a doctor to balk at that but not because he believes that the fetus is indeed a human being.


----------



## Haggis (21 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> And Haggis, you may find this refreshing: There has been a rise in gun violence in Montreal lately, so what did the Montreal Police and the local/provincial governments do? They announced that they are boosting up the Gangs/Org. crime units and teaming with the Sureté du Québec Gun Smuggling team. Already they have made a couple of seizures, which would normally classify as small (50 to 70 guns each). Yet, the message they harp on to the press is "These are important seizures. The important point is not the number of guns seized, it's whose hands your seizing them from, and these were seized from the East-end gangs, where most of the current rash of shooting comes from."
> 
> Like I said: it is refreshing to see policing and public message going in the direction of the gun violence primary source instead of the law abiding owners.


It is refreshing, but an isolated example which runs counter to the LPC messaging regarding the source of gun violence in Canada.  The LPC have yet to release their firearms policy for this election. They may have been waiting to see what the other parties come out with. I expect it will make Bill C-21 look pretty benign.


----------



## mariomike (21 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> I don't wish to de-rail the main topic any further.


We had a mega-thread,








						Abortion Issues - Mega Thread [MERGED]
					

And that is their choice.  That's the trick.  Our bodies - Our choice.  I've never had to make that choice, but I am damn thankful it's mine to make.  That personal choice bears no political stripe.    Imagine if women put into law that all 'ye men shall have vasectomies to ensure no abortions...




					army.ca
				



It says,


> Not open for further replies.


Hope it stays that way.

But, you may find it intersting reading.  In case you have not already.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (21 Aug 2021)

Isolated example perhaps Haggis, but at least, because it is recent and ongoing, it makes it difficult for the LPC to come in Montreal, or the province generally, and try to turn gun policy of "going after legal owners even more" into an electoral issue when their local/provincial government just told them that the problem lies with gang/organized crime gun violence, not the law-abiding owners.



Altair said:


> I never saw the benefit of it, but I guess permanently hamstringing the CPC would be a nice side benefit.



It would permanently hamstring the LPC also, Altair. Think of the last election, if a full proportional had been in place, the results would have been: CPC (yes, CPC with the most seats): 116, LPC: 112, NDP: 54, BQ: 26, Green: 22, People's Party: 6 and other: 2. Nobody would have been able to do anything unless they could get the NDP and either of the BQ or Green on side. Or in the case of the CPC, they could do something without the NDP if and only if they brought every other third party on their side.

Personally, in a Westminster setting, I think FPTP is the better way to go.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> my apologies, it was not my intention. I am more than a little saddened at the universal acceptance of convenience over life.  This will be my last response (thank goodness you say) as I don't wish to de-rail the main topic any further.
> With few exceptions, rape being the one, a woman becomes pregnant as a result of an activity in which she voluntarily participated without taking reasonable precautions.  The death of a child shouldn't be the end result of an life-style choice.  Don't you think it just a little bit hypocritical that abortion to eliminate an unwanted boy/girl causes people to criticize but abortion resulting from a fun night out is quite ok?  After all, it is a totally equal opportunity termination: don't know if it is male or female.  So it becomes ok for a doctor to balk at that but not because he believes that the fetus is indeed a human being.


The only thing I find hypocritical is people who want so badly that a woman have a baby instead of choosing an abortion, but when it comes to things like subsidized daycare for said baby that was not aborted, there are complaints about affordability and who's responsibility it is to raise that child.

Want a woman to choose life, make it so she can get back to work, have a career, and not need to stay home until that child is in school and maybe she would want to keep it.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> It would permanently hamstring the LPC also, Altair. Think of the last election, if a full proportional had been in place, the results would have been: CPC (yes, CPC with the most seats): 116, LPC: 112, NDP: 54, BQ: 26, Green: 22, People's Party: 6 and other: 2. Nobody would have been able to do anything unless they could get the NDP and either of the BQ or Green on side. Or in the case of the CPC, they could do something without the NDP if and only if they brought every other third party on their side.


The LPC have natural partners they could work with, the CPC less so.

They could try to get things done, but would need to be giving out goodies to the progressive parties to get it done, so progressive legislation gets passed either way.


Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Personally, in a Westminster setting, I think FPTP is the better way to go.


I like majorities as they are more stable and don't dole out power to those on the fringes, so I am more partial to FPTP, but I am not blind to the advantageous position it would give to the 6-7 out of 10 Canadians who vote for a left leaning party.


----------



## ballz (21 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Personally, in a Westminster setting, I think FPTP is the better way to go.



The real weakness of P.R. is that there is no accountability for individual MPs, they become slaves to the party.

Given that we are already suffering from that in our current FPTP system, then I would argue we should either fix it by making MPs relevant again (which we seem incapable of), or we have to acknowledge that MPs don't represent people in their riding, they represent the party, and so we might as well adopt P.R. and get the benefits (proper representation for voters) since we're already accepting the drawbacks.

I'm okay with hamstringing the government. As COVID has shown, when it matters, they can make things work as they do fear the wrath of the ballot, but when they try to take advantage (like the Liberals did at the outset of COVID by trying to pass legislation that would essentially make them our new overlords), the ability to hamstring them is pretty important.

FPTP only works when individual legislators are empowered, it relies on that. We don't have that right now.


----------



## ballz (21 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> It is refreshing, but an isolated example which runs counter to the LPC messaging regarding the source of gun violence in Canada.  The LPC have yet to release their firearms policy for this election. They may have been waiting to see what the other parties come out with. I expect it will make Bill C-21 look pretty benign.



I fear with the way this is going for the Liberals, firearm owners are about to get a serious beatdown.


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

ballz said:


> The real weakness of P.R. is that there is no accountability for individual MPs, they become slaves to the party.
> 
> Given that we are already suffering from that in our current FPTP system, then I would argue we should either fix it by making MPs relevant again (which we seem incapable of), or we have to acknowledge that MPs don't represent people in their riding, they represent the party, and so we might as well adopt P.R. and get the benefits (proper representation for voters) since we're already accepting the drawbacks.
> 
> ...


MPs arealready slaves to their party, so much so that I don't think individual ridings or any connection to them matters worth a damn.

But FPTP does always for stable majority governments.

Minority governments are nice some of the time, but sometimes you end up like Israel,with so much constant ally searching, horse trading, and irreconcilable differences between parties that you have 2 elections a year.

Maybe do like Greece and give the party with the highest percentage of the popular vote a extra 50 mps.

Edit:Greece got rid of this system.


----------



## YZT580 (21 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> The only thing I find hypocritical is people who want so badly that a woman have a baby instead of choosing an abortion, but when it comes to things like subsidized daycare for said baby that was not aborted, there are complaints about affordability and who's responsibility it is to raise that child.
> 
> Want a woman to choose life, make it so she can get back to work, have a career, and not need to stay home until that child is in school and maybe she would want to keep it.


VALID ARGUMENT


----------



## Haggis (21 Aug 2021)

ballz said:


> I fear with the way this is going for the Liberals, firearm owners are about to get a serious beatdown.


Agreed. I expect a full ban on semi-auto long guns and all handguns with no compensation as the worst case. However, they will likely come up with something far more complicated and unworkable.


----------



## ballz (21 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> MPs arealready slaves to their party, so much so that I don't think individual ridings or any connection to them matters worth a damn.



That was literally what I said...



ballz said:


> The real weakness of P.R. is that there is no accountability for individual MPs, they become slaves to the party.
> 
> Given that we are already suffering from that in our current FPTP system, then I would argue...





Altair said:


> Maybe do like Greece and give the party with the highest percentage of the popular vote a extra 50 mps.
> 
> Edit:Greece got rid of this system.



In most cases that's going to wind up being the exact same as FPTP... admittedly it would have been a very strong CPC minority in 2019 if they did that, but historically in most cases whoever wins popular vote wins the most seats, and are overrepresented in Parliament... if you give them 50 more seats, you just overrepresent whoever won the popular vote.


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Aug 2021)

ballz said:


> I fear with the way this is going for the Liberals, firearm owners are about to get a serious beatdown.



Hopefully not









						Daily Tracking: August 21, 2021
					

Click here for the latest poll results from August 17-20, 2021.



					www.ekospolitics.com


----------



## Altair (21 Aug 2021)

ballz said:


> That was literally what I said...


I was agreeing with you.


----------



## PuckChaser (22 Aug 2021)

EKOS traditionally polls the LPC a bit lower so its more likely a statistical tie than CPC ahead. 

So the question is, if Trudeau manages to turn a fairly stable minority government into an election loss, does the LPC dump him immediately? What kind of chaos would that bring about for them when they have no one competent waiting in the wings?


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Aug 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> ... if Trudeau manages to turn a fairly stable minority government into an election loss, does the LPC dump him immediately? ...


If that happens (and there's a lot of campaign left between now & the vote), I'd bet a loonie he'd be gone pretty quick.


----------



## Good2Golf (22 Aug 2021)

Maybe the Laurentians exploited his arrogance to be able to apply _Darwinipolitik_?


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Aug 2021)

I would laugh so hard all day if the Liberals lost this election. But to truly lose the Conservatives would need to get a majority which I just dont see happening


----------



## dapaterson (22 Aug 2021)

Tory minority, Trudeau steps down, Tories miscount support in the house, lose a vote of confidence, Trudeau changes his mind, comes back, and wins a majority...


----------



## mariomike (22 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Daily Tracking: August 21, 2021
> 
> 
> Click here for the latest poll results from August 17-20, 2021.
> ...


Bit of a gender gap in the link posted.



> If a federal election were held tomorrow, which party would you vote for?



Women:
Team Red: 37%
Team Blue: 25%



			https://www.ekospolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/20210821slide03.png


----------



## cavalryman (22 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Tory minority, Trudeau steps down, Tories miscount support in the house, lose a vote of confidence, Trudeau changes his mind, comes back, and wins a majority...


That scenario sounds vaguely familiar...


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Aug 2021)

Cons seem to be gaining ground over a number of issues, O'tooles promise of a 6% escalator to health transfers, and his opioid, that will speak to a lot of Canadians.


----------



## brihard (22 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Cons seem to be gaining ground over a number of issues, O'tooles promise of a 6% escalator to health transfers, and his opioid, that will speak to a lot of Canadians.


I lost a family member to an opioid overdose. It speaks to me.

Trudeau’s blatant lie about O’Toole wanting privatized healthcare is pissing me off at the moment.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> I lost a family member to an opioid overdose. It speaks to me.
> 
> Trudeau’s blatant lie about O’Toole wanting privatized healthcare is pissing me off at the moment.


Another great demon card to play, I lost a coworker a few years ago to opioid abuse,  on the health care front he is offering real policies that can speak to Canadians. Dating for fiscal policy, while many Canadians don't understand economics, understanding the housing and food prices are sky rocketing people do get and are demanding something be done.


----------



## Altair (22 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> I lost a family member to an opioid overdose. It speaks to me.
> 
> Trudeau’s blatant lie about O’Toole wanting privatized healthcare is pissing me off at the moment.


I wish we would move to a two tiered healthcare system.

Some of the top healthcare systems exist in Europe and they are mostly two tiered.

The outliers in the west are the USA with little public option and Canada with little private option, both countries with subpar healthcare systems.


----------



## MilEME09 (23 Aug 2021)

Twitter flags Liberal campaign video featuring O’Toole as ‘manipulated media’ - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Twitter's policy states they would need reason to believe that the video, or the context in which its presented, "are significantly and deceptively altered or manipulated."




					globalnews.ca
				




Well this won't play well for the liberals


----------



## Altair (23 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Twitter flags Liberal campaign video featuring O’Toole as ‘manipulated media’ - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> Twitter's policy states they would need reason to believe that the video, or the context in which its presented, "are significantly and deceptively altered or manipulated."
> ...


Absolute train wreck of a first week.

If I had to guess, I think Trudeau is missing Gerald Butts.


----------



## Infanteer (23 Aug 2021)

Lol...it was usually the Trump team that was dinged with Twitter violations.  Way to go LPC!


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Absolute train wreck of a first week.
> 
> If I had to guess, I think Trudeau is missing Gerald Butts.


It hasn’t been a good start to the LPC campaign.  I think O’toole had the best start.  We’ll see if he maintains.  I wonder though if the liberals had bad campaigns under Butts but guys like Scheer ran worse ones.


----------



## mariomike (23 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Daily Tracking: August 21, 2021
> 
> 
> Click here for the latest poll results from August 17-20, 2021.
> ...


I also found the age demographic interesting.  

Team Blue ahead in the 18 - 49 age group.

Team Red ahead in the 50 - 65+ age group.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> It hasn’t been a good start to the LPC campaign.


Probably because the Liberal campaign is built on hubris and arrogance.


----------



## QV (23 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Twitter flags Liberal campaign video featuring O’Toole as ‘manipulated media’ - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> Twitter's policy states they would need reason to believe that the video, or the context in which its presented, "are significantly and deceptively altered or manipulated."
> ...



This was probably an internal mistake by Twitter staff. Watch for the course correction shortly. I know...tinfoil hat.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> Lol...it was usually the Trump team that was dinged with Twitter violations.  Way to go LPC!


Team Trudeau is literally the mirror image of Trump. An underqualified, lightweight celebrity, drunk on his own inflated sense of self.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (23 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> I also found the age demographic interesting.
> 
> Team Blue ahead in the 18 - 49 age group.
> 
> Team Red ahead in the 50 - 65+ age group.



But if you look carefully, you'll see that it is because in that age group (18-49), they are a lot more "progressive" and have a marked tendency towards the NDP. Those are votes taken away from the Libs, splitting the left vote about 50/50, which explains the then leading appearance of the CPC.

What I do find interesting, however, is that the CPC vote percentage appears to be the same in all age categories. That would tend to dispel the notion that people get more conservatives as they age, unless you look at the LIB/NDP dynamics, which seems to be that as people age, they become less and less "progressive" (i.e. support the NDP) and more and more "centrist" (i.e. they support the Libs). 

This also explains the Lib style: Campaign on the left, govern from the centre. The older crowd knows the Libs will govern from the centre, while any NDP vote the lib attracts from the younger crowd - who will be deceived at a later time - is a gain in "un-splitting" the "left". This also does not bode well for the CPC, which doesn't have a similar secondary well of voters to bring in. The only exception could be times (such as now) when the governing Libs go too far left in their decisions for their older voters and are punished by a certain percentage of them who decide to vote in the CPC in order to "refresh" the Lib leadership.


----------



## MilEME09 (23 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> I also found the age demographic interesting.
> 
> Team Blue ahead in the 18 - 49 age group.
> 
> Team Red ahead in the 50 - 65+ age group.


The question then is, can team blue convince more younger voters to get out and vote


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2021)

OBGD, you touch on it, but I think there are more “Blue Liberal/Martinites/Right-edge-of-Laurentians” than just a few.  1.5 terms of Trudeau/Butts/Telford et Cie. may be enough to dislodge a few.  That and the NDP aren’t bleeding out would tend to indicate where the Liberals are losing votes.

338canada.com shows a slow but steady close between the LPC and CPC.

As of 22 Aug, they’re inside of 3 points apart.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Probably because the Liberal campaign is built on hubris and arrogance.


Agreed but I think there is more to it.

this is only speculation on my part:  I think the LPC decided to find a wedge issue and it isn’t working.  Maybe it’s a first week attempt, see how it goes.  It isn’t going well so maybe they will change tactics early on.  Again, only speculation.

the CPC is doing it right in my mind.  They’ve moved to center ( on most platforms they are almost identical or similar to the Lkberal).   I think they are risk managing the SoCons.  This platform should also worry fiscal conservatives as it is promising to spend as much or close enough to what the LPC platform promises.  The CPC is banking on those folks to still vote Blue regardless of their policies and promises.   More Important though is they seem to have moved away from the childish attack adds about Trudeau’s hair or whatever idiotic type ads they were doing.  They are campaigning on their platform.  And as such,  not turning middle of the road voters like me off.


----------



## MilEME09 (23 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> OBGD, you touch on it, but I think there are more “Blue Liberal/Martinites/Right-edge-of-Laurentians” than just a few.  1.5 terms of Trudeau/Butts/Telford et Cie. may be enough to dislodge a few.  That and the NDP aren’t bleeding out would tend to indicate where the Liberals are losing votes.
> 
> 338canada.com shows a slow but steady close between the LPC and CPC.
> 
> ...


That margin for error Essentially puts them in a dead tie after 1 week, and if the liberal train keeps going down hill, I do see the hope of a CPC minority developing.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> The question then is, can team blue convince more younger voters to get out and vote


As long as O’Toole can show that they are not anti-climate change and leave social issues alone and show that they can be alternate choice to the LPC then yes.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> As long as O’Toole can show that they are not anti-climate change and leave social issues alone and show that they can be alternate choice to the LPC then yes.



And this prescient bit from the team at The Line:


> The best shot the CPC has in this election is to spend the next four weeks smiling and showing everyone how non-threatening and cheerful they are while letting the left-wing parties viciously savage each other. The greatest hatred in Canadian partisan politics isn’t between the Libs and the Tories. It’s on the left, between Liberals and the NDP. That vote split* might just work for the Tories if they shut up and stay out of the way.*


Wasn’t it Napolean who said, “Never interfere with an enemy in the process of destroying themselves!”


----------



## mariomike (23 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> More Important though is they seem to have moved away from the childish attack adds about Trudeau’s hair or whatever idiotic type ads they were doing.


They might not admit it, but maybe Team Blue took his advice?








						Ten things that would guarantee the new CPC leader is a winner - Macleans.ca
					

Scott Gilmore: So you want to be the next prime minister? Just follow my simple list—or you're a doomed fool.




					www.macleans.ca
				






> And as such,  not turning middle of the road voters like me off.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Aug 2021)

> ... The greatest hatred in Canadian partisan politics isn’t between the Libs and the Tories. It’s on the left, between Liberals and the NDP ...


I've heard the same thing from federal officials who've had dealings with political staff, too - Team Blue & Team Red'ites, at least in the past, have been way more likely to chat each other up in the middle than Team Red & Team Orange'ites.


----------



## Altair (23 Aug 2021)

Not sure whether it is to be believe or not, but PPC is surging to 7 percent in the polls, and vote PPC is trending on twitter.


----------



## Haggis (23 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Not sure whether it is to be believe or not, but PPC is surging to 7 percent in the polls, and vote PPC is trending on twitter.


----------



## Quirky (23 Aug 2021)

This would be fantastic if they get more votes than the otherwise useless greens.


----------



## brihard (23 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> This would be fantastic if they get more votes than the otherwise useless greens.


I didn’t figure you for the sort who’d cheer on a Liberal majority.


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Team Trudeau is literally the mirror image of Trump. An underqualified, lightweight celebrity, drunk on his own inflated sense of self.


I've seen O'Toole on the TV spots and he has acquitted himself quite well thus far.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Aug 2021)

Ben Woodfinden: Freeland's 'manipulated' video on Twitter shows Liberals' desperation​_The Liberals have already cycled through all their favourite wedge issues, abortion, guns, and privatized health care_









						Ben Woodfinden: Freeland's 'manipulated' video on Twitter shows Liberals' desperation
					

The Liberals have already cycled through all their favourite wedge issues, abortion, guns, and privatized health care




					nationalpost.com


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Ben Woodfinden: Freeland's 'manipulated' video on Twitter shows Liberals' desperation​_The Liberals have already cycled through all their favourite wedge issues, abortion, guns, and privatized health care_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Similar to the faux pas pulled by the Conservatives when they mocked Chretien for his droopy mouth.


----------



## RangerRay (23 Aug 2021)

I have been saying this since 2015.









						My latest: Justin Trump
					

Musings




					warrenkinsella.com
				




TruAnon = QAnon


----------



## ModlrMike (23 Aug 2021)

Deliciously ironic that the party that wants to control what we see on the internet, in the guise of protecting us from fake infomation,  are the first ones to make stuff up.


----------



## brihard (23 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Sockboy majority is exactly the kick in the teeth this country deserves. Canada needs to be rebuilt from the rubble that a LPC majority will create.


Well, that’s… certainly an opinion.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-opioids-addiction-mental-health-1.6149408
		


This I like.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

Tom Mulcair writes a good piece here.









						Tom Mulcair: O'Toole has knocked Trudeau off his stride and it's starting to show
					

As the second week of the campaign begins, Liberals are asking: 'where’s Trudeau?' writes former NDP leader Tom Mulcair in an exclusive column for CTVNews.ca. He criticizes Trudeau for choosing to take most of the weekend off while Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole trudged ahead.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				




The fact that Trudeau is shopping for “wow” ideas after he called this election should be cause for concern for liberals.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Tom Mulcair writes a good piece here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, they finally got around to a housing plan.

It's not half bad.

It's a week late though.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> The fact that Trudeau is shopping for “wow” ideas after he called this election should be cause for concern for liberals.



I think Trudeau believed his own rhetoric: He honestly thought that "people" saw last Parliament as "dysfunctional" and it would ride him in on a red wave. Problem is the opposition questioning government policy and exploring missteps of the government, while exacting changes or improvements (as seen by the party exacting them) in minority Parliament is exactly how it is supposed to work. So, the expert who follow politics basically said "that's not true, it is working fine" and the people who don't follow politics except by quickly glancing at the papers or TV/on line articles reacted by saying "What the heck is he talking about? I've not seen anything like that anywhere".

So now he is fishing for the next big idea he can claim as the reason for the election. Problem is, while unusual, the other parties have released their platform right off the bat and as a result people know they have one and roughly what's in them, while the Libs will now release theirs right when the main concern of half the population will be dealing with a very uncertain back to school in the middle of the fourth wave and getting the kids back into school routine. People may well come out of this missing it and thinking the Libs never had a platform they ran on. That would not be surprising.

P.S.: Anybody noticed one little point deep in the CPC platform: O'Toole promised to start the subs replacement process in his first term. The naval aviator comes through.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (24 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> I think Trudeau believed his own rhetoric: He honestly thought that "people" saw last Parliament as "dysfunctional" and it would ride him in on a red wave. Problem is the opposition questioning government policy and exploring missteps of the government, while exacting changes or improvements (as seen by the party exacting them) in minority Parliament is exactly how it is supposed to work. So, the expert who follow politics basically said "that's not true, it is working fine" and the people who don't follow politics except by quickly glancing at the papers or TV/on line articles reacted by saying "What the heck is he talking about? I've not seen anything like that anywhere".
> 
> So now he is fishing for the next big idea he can claim as the reason for the election. Problem is, while unusual, the other parties have released their platform right off the bat and as a result people know they have one and roughly what's in them, while the Libs will now release theirs right when the main concern of half the population will be dealing with a very uncertain back to school in the middle of the fourth wave and getting the kids back into school routine. People may well come out of this missing it and thinking the Libs never had a platform they ran on. That would not be surprising.
> 
> P.S.: Anybody noticed one little point deep in the CPC platform: O'Toole promised to start the subs replacement process in his first term. The naval aviator comes through.


Once a TACCO, always a TACCO!


----------



## brihard (24 Aug 2021)

Jeeeesus. The CPC must have scared the Liberals on housing. Trudeau is throwing everything at this one. Some good ideas in here actually.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-housing-plan-1.6151154


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Jeeeesus. The CPC must have scared the Liberals on housing. Trudeau is throwing everything at this one. Some good ideas in here actually.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-housing-plan-1.6151154


Step 1 Call an election

Step 2 Ignore hot button issues

Step 3 watch your numbers drop and CPC numbers rise

Step 4 Panic at the disco

Step 5 Canvas candidates for good ideas

Step 6 Have those candidates tell leadership that they are being yelled at about not having a plan for those locked out of the overheated housing market

Step 7 Actually come up with a plan

Step 8.....Profit?

Now if it were me, my plan would have been

Step 1 Don't call an election, but if I did

Step 2 Immediately address hot button issues and not try to win via wedge issues

Step 3 Profit.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (24 Aug 2021)

Just one small problem, though: 90% of what he proposes is Provincially regulated, not Federal at all, so watch for Quebec, Alberta and Ontario to tell him to go take a flying leap. 

On to top that, one of the main problems with building new houses or renovating them these days is a compound of two matters (I know, because I work for BMR, one of Quebec's major Hardware/builder's yard): First, the contractors have a hard time hiring enough trades; second: the Covid crisis around the world ( and particularly in China) means that the prices of building materials have shot up by more than 100% over the last year, and shortages will remain for a few years yet (I work in receiving. Before Covid, I used to have about 10% back-orders on most of my orders at delivery time. It has gone all the way up to near 60%, and now I am getting back to about 40%). We have client contractors right now who are taking 3 to 6 months pauses because their clients refuse to let them continue on a contract that would see the house delivered at 50 to 60  % higher price than the one evaluated a year ago when they contracted.

Also, and Trudeau seems to ignore that fact: House flippers are not the cause of house prices inflation running rampant. They are, in fact, one of the main source of renovated house and gentrification of dilapidated buildings. I can't even comprehend how a government run program could do the same. Flippers just know by experience what renovation make economic sense and sell. Similarly, they know which buildings can be so renovated as opposed to demolished. I am not convinced any government run program can figure that out ... unless they use flippers.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Just one small problem, though: 90% of what he proposes is Provincially regulated, not Federal at all, so watch for Quebec, Alberta and Ontario to tell him to go take a flying leap.
> 
> On to top that, one of the main problems with building new houses or renovating them these days is a compound of two matters (I know, because I work for BMR, one of Quebec's major Hardware/builder's yard): First, the contractors have a hard time hiring enough trades; second: the Covid crisis around the world ( and particularly in China) means that the prices of building materials have shot up by more than 100% over the last year, and shortages will remain for a few years yet (I work in receiving. Before Covid, I used to have about 10% back-orders on most of my orders at delivery time. It has gone all the way up to near 60%, and now I am getting back to about 40%). We have client contractors right now who are taking 3 to 6 months pauses because their clients refuse to let them continue on a contract that would see the house delivered at 50 to 60  % higher price than the one evaluated a year ago when they contracted.
> 
> Also, and Trudeau seems to ignore that fact: House flippers are not the cause of house prices inflation running rampant. They are, in fact, one of the main source of renovated house and gentrification of dilapidated buildings. I can't even comprehend how a government run program could do the same. Flippers just know by experience what renovation make economic sense and sell. Similarly, they know which buildings can be so renovated as opposed to demolished. I am not convinced any government run program can figure that out ... unless they use flippers.


So this is the plan as far as I can gather.



new savings account for under 40s to buy their first home - they can save up to $40k and withdraw it tax free to buy
double first time home owners tax credit from $5k to $10k
force CMHM to slash mortgage insurance rates by 25%
rent-to-own program with $1 billion to create a pathway for renters to own in 5 years or less
build or repair (?) 1.4 million homes in four years by giving cities "new tools" to speed up constructions
$4 billion fund cities can use if they build "middle class homes"
$2.7 billion over 4 years to build or repair more affordable homes
money to convert empty office space to housing
some tax credit so people can add a 2nd unit to their home
more money for indigenous housing (no $ figure in article)
ban blind bidding, establish a legal right to "home inspection", demand banks give mortgage deferrals of up to 6 years if someone loses their job
2 year ban on foreign buyers
expand the upcoming tax on vacant housing owned by non-resident and non-Canadians to include foreign-owned vacant land in large urban areas
anti flipping tax that requires properties to be held for at least 12 months

The savings plan needs more details.

Double first time home owners tax credit is decent, but we are working around the margins right now.

Slash mortgage insurance rates is decent, but so far these are all demand side issues, and if the under 40s start rushing the market, this will only drive up the prices more, throwing gasoline on the fire.

Rent to own worked in the UK, surprised to see them lift it from there.

If flippers go corporate and work with the cities, the major source of holding up rezoning and holding up development, this would be huge. 

4 billion to fund cities might get cities on board, again, one of the chief architects of this crisis.

Convert office space to housing might be a good idea going forward with office spaces hollowing out due to the pandemic.

Ban blind bidding is provincial, but I think if the PM gets on the bully pulpit and blames provinces for the issue ( which is it) then that may force the provinces to budge.

2 year ban on foreign buying is stealing straight from the CPC, but a good optics policy. Might not help much, but its a big visible sign that they are trying to do something.

Taxing vacant housing is a no brainer right now.

Anti flipping is questionable. Not sure how this works, but again, if flippers go corporate then the effect might be mitigated.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2021)

Push in more money, and hope that this is the one that defies all easily predictable outcomes for demand-side injections and somehow pushes prices down...


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Push in more money, and hope that this is the one that defies all easily predictable outcomes for demand-side injections and somehow pushes prices down...


There are some supply side commitments. 

Working with cities, repurposing office space, banning foreign purchases, building 1.4 million homes.

Lets pray its enough to combat upping the demand side of things that would happen if this plan were implemented.


----------



## Infanteer (24 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Just one small problem, though: 90% of what he proposes is Provincially regulated, not Federal at all, so watch for Quebec, Alberta and Ontario to tell him to go take a flying leap.


That seems to be an issue - no focus on national issues, much focus on things that the Provinces are supposed to handle.









						Sean Speer: Trudeau, Singh seem more interested in running for premier than head of a national government
					

Federal government must be more than a revenue collector for the provinces




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2021)

new savings account for under 40s to buy their first home - they can save up to $40k and withdraw it tax free to buy
Demand-side, prices up.  Wonder who has money they're not already putting into other tax-sheltered savings.

double first time home owners tax credit from $5k to $10k
Demand-side, prices up.

force CMHM to slash mortgage insurance rates by 25%
Demand-side, prices up.  Canada (ultimately, taxpayers) on the hook for higher risks.

rent-to-own program with $1 billion to create a pathway for renters to own in 5 years or less
Demand-side, prices up.

build or repair (?) 1.4 million homes in four years by giving cities "new tools" to speed up constructions
Supply-side, prices down.  But wishful thinking.  New construction out in the Fraser Valley, for example, is a lot of row houses and 5/6 story condos.  Who repairs homes, and in what time frame do they expect to repair and sell?

$4 billion fund cities can use if they build "middle class homes"
Demand-side, prices up.  What masses of urban land are available that are within the price range of "middle class homes" rather than high-rise?

$2.7 billion over 4 years to build or repair more affordable homes
Demand-side, prices up.

money to convert empty office space to housing
If it already made financial sense and were permitted by zoning, it would already be done.

some tax credit so people can add a 2nd unit to their home
Rental suites are a good idea.  Cities are officially hostile to unofficial suites, but only slighly intolerant.  Also hostile to large homes with large families in them.

more money for indigenous housing (no $ figure in article)
Needed, but will not really affect market prices.

ban blind bidding, establish a legal right to "home inspection", demand banks give mortgage deferrals of up to 6 years if someone loses their job
Open process good idea.  "Home inspection" worthless if "home inspectors" aren't bonded against mistakes.  Mortgage deferrals is basically temporary expropriation and should be compensated.

2 year ban on foreign buyers
Nice gesture, a very little pressure off, but not very effective.

expand the upcoming tax on vacant housing owned by non-resident and non-Canadians to include foreign-owned vacant land in large urban areas
If the point is to get people into vacant properties, the penalties should apply to everyone.  This is mob appeasement.

anti flipping tax that requires properties to be held for at least 12 months
Works in opposition to policies designed to "repair homes".


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

So Otoole is promising to give Unions a seat at corporate boards.  And pass legislation to ensure pensions are protected before bonuses and creditors get their share if a company goes bankrupt.  

i like that a lot.

The CPC is bordering on left of centre.   I get that the LPC is worried but true dyed in the wool Conservatives must be wondering what the heck is going on.  Maybe this why the PPC is seeing an uptick?


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> new savings account for under 40s to buy their first home - they can save up to $40k and withdraw it tax free to buy
> Demand-side, prices up.  Wonder who has money they're not already putting into other tax-sheltered savings.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> double first time home owners tax credit from $5k to $10k
> Demand-side, prices up.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> force CMHM to slash mortgage insurance rates by 25%
> Demand-side, prices up.  Canada (ultimately, taxpayers) on the hook for higher risks.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> rent-to-own program with $1 billion to create a pathway for renters to own in 5 years or less
> Demand-side, prices up.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> build or repair (?) 1.4 million homes in four years by giving cities "new tools" to speed up constructions
> Supply-side, prices down.  But wishful thinking.  New construction out in the Fraser Valley, for example, is a lot of row houses and 5/6 story condos.  Who repairs homes, and in what time frame do they expect to repair and sell?


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> $4 billion fund cities can use if they build "middle class homes"
> Demand-side, prices up.  What masses of urban land are available that are within the price range of "middle class homes" rather than high-rise?


Disagree. Building new homes is supply side, prices down. Might lead to urban sprawl, but if the suburbs want it, they have the land, at least in places like Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Greater Toronto, Greater Montreal.


Brad Sallows said:


> $2.7 billion over 4 years to build or repair more affordable homes
> Demand-side, prices up.


Disagree, building or repair housing stock is supply side, prices down.


Brad Sallows said:


> money to convert empty office space to housing
> If it already made financial sense and were permitted by zoning, it would already be done.


It would also require rezoning, so again, might be something the feds start to pressure cities into, either way, supply side, prices down.


Brad Sallows said:


> some tax credit so people can add a 2nd unit to their home
> Rental suites are a good idea.  Cities are officially hostile to unofficial suites, but only slighly intolerant.  Also hostile to large homes with large families in them.


Agreed, supply side, prices down.


Brad Sallows said:


> more money for indigenous housing (no $ figure in article)
> Needed, but will not really affect market prices.


Agreed, and it wont


Brad Sallows said:


> ban blind bidding, establish a legal right to "home inspection", demand banks give mortgage deferrals of up to 6 years if someone loses their job
> Open process good idea.  "Home inspection" worthless if "home inspectors" aren't bonded against mistakes.  Mortgage deferrals is basically temporary expropriation and should be compensated.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> 2 year ban on foreign buyers
> Nice gesture, a very little pressure off, but not very effective.


Agreed.


Brad Sallows said:


> expand the upcoming tax on vacant housing owned by non-resident and non-Canadians to include foreign-owned vacant land in large urban areas
> If the point is to get people into vacant properties, the penalties should apply to everyone.  This is mob appeasement.


Agreed. Low hanging populist fruit.


Brad Sallows said:


> anti flipping tax that requires properties to be held for at least 12 months
> Works in opposition to policies designed to "repair homes".


Agreed.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> So Otoole is promising to give Unions a seat at corporate boards.  And pass legislation to ensure pensions are protected before bonuses and creditors get their share if a company goes bankrupt.
> 
> i like that a lot.
> 
> The CPC is bordering on left of centre.   I get that the LPC is worried but true dyed in the wool Conservatives must be wondering what the heck is going on.  Maybe this why the PPC is seeing an uptick?


Looking at PPC boards online, and a LOT of pissed off CPC voters are showing up there. 

Carbon tax, union appeasement, pro choice, the fringe of the CPC that scare off the moderates are not happy.


----------



## dimsum (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> I get that the LPC is worried but true dyed in the wool Conservatives must be wondering what the heck is going on.


Hell, I'm not a dyed-in-the-wool anything, and I'm scratching my head at the left-ish lean of the CPC platform.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

dimsum said:


> Hell, I'm not a dyed-in-the-wool anything, and I'm scratching my head at the left-ish lean of the CPC platform.


Take a quick glance at the polls, and you have your answer.

The interesting part is if the CPC moves left, does the LPC move more left, and then the NDP move even more left  leading to a a constant and ever more rapid attempt by the parties to outflank their opponents on the left?


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Looking at PPC boards online, and a LOT of pissed off CPC voters are showing up there.
> 
> Carbon tax, union appeasement, pro choice,* the fringe of the CPC that scare off the moderates are not happy.*



First a quibble: "the fringe ... *is* not happy." 🤔

But that is precisely O'Toole's tactic. That fringe has nowhere to go and it knows it, and so does O'Toole ~ the PPC and the Christian Heritage Parties are electoral bad jokes and the fringe has damned few Libertarians in it ... if any. The aim is to woo the moderates, especially those in the suburbs in the Greater Toronto and Vancouver areas; if they are bothered by the _so-cons_ then it is good politics to make the _so-cons_ unhappy and to make sure that everyone, especially the moderates, knows it.


----------



## Kilted (24 Aug 2021)

I have to say that I am a bit disappointed in O'Toole. As a True-Blue Social Conservative the PPC is starting to look good on some points. They do however, have no choice of winning, and will at best split the vote in a couple ridings. The best thing for both parties would be a merger, so that the PPC members can still pull the party to the right. I don't think that the Conservative Party as a whole supports many of these new measures, or at the least might see them as a necessary evil.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

Edward Campbell said:


> First a quibble: "the fringe ... *is* not happy." 🤔
> 
> But that is precisely O'Toole's tactic. That fringe has nowhere to go and it knows it, and so does O'Toole ~ the PPC and the Christian Heritage Parties are electoral bad jokes and the fringe has damned few Libertarians in it ... if any. The aim is to woo the moderates, especially those in the suburbs in the Greater Toronto and Vancouver areas; if they are bothered by the _so-cons_ then it is good politics to make the _so-cons_ unhappy and to make sure that everyone, especially the moderates, knows it.


I agree.  I think he sees more value in getting more moderates than try to appease the socons.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Edward Campbell said:


> But that is precisely O'Toole's tactic. That fringe has nowhere to go and it knows it, and so does O'Toole ~ the PPC and the Christian Heritage Parties are electoral bad jokes and the fringe has damned few Libertarians in it ... if any. The aim is to woo the moderates, especially those in the suburbs in the Greater Toronto and Vancouver areas; if they are bothered by the _so-cons_ then it is good politics to make the _so-cons_ unhappy and to make sure that everyone, especially the moderates, knows it.


It's a brave strategy, I give him credit for that.

Because O'Toole used the so-cons to win the leadership over the more moderate Mackay, and now he's abandoning them in order to win the election. If he wins, he's good, nobody is going to boot the guy that beat Justin Trudeau, if he gets the CPC closer, he's good. But if he fails to keep the LPC to a minority or the seat count is relatively unchanged after all is said and done, I think he faces a revolt from the membership.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

I think a CPC minority would be problematic internally for Otoole.  The elected socons would flex what muscle they have to get their agenda pushed forward and would be willing to torpedo a minority government or at least threaten to unless they get what they want.  A strong minority might be doable but then they’d have to work with the Bloc and NDP.  Lol.  Strange times.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Aug 2021)

Kilted said:


> I have to say that I am a bit disappointed in O'Toole. As a True-Blue Social Conservative the PPC is starting to look good on some points. They do however, have no choice of winning, and will at best split the vote in a couple ridings. The best thing for both parties would be a merger, so that the PPC members can still pull the party to the right. I don't think that the Conservative Party as a whole supports many of these new measures, or at the least might see them as a necessary evil.



By ‘disappointed’ do you mean ‘closing the gap with the Liberals’? 🤔


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> By ‘disappointed’ do you mean ‘closing the gap with the Liberals’? 🤔


It is possible that there are some voters that actually vote based on the values and platform a party has and not just mindlessly vote the same over and over because either they hate the other side so much or will be a card carrying member regardless of leader or what they have to offer.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> It is possible that there are some voters that actually vote based on the values and platform a party has and not just mindlessly vote the same over and over because either they hate the other side so much or will be a card carrying member regardless of leader or what they have to offer.


Agree, hence why it seems that the CPC is not for Kilted.


----------



## brihard (24 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Agree, hence why it seems that the CPC is not for Kilted.


They’re probably figuring that every one of him they court comes at the cost of three or four of me- centrists disgusted with the LPC.


----------



## Remius (24 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> They’re probably figuring that every one of him they court comes at the cost of three or four of me- centrists disgusted with the LPC.


Exactly.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> They’re probably figuring that every one of him they court comes at the cost of three or four of me- centrists disgusted with the LPC.



Exactly! Canada is NOT a "conservative" place. (It's not very liberal ~ in the proper sense of that word ~ either. It leans towards the European "social-democratic" (i.e. soft left) position). My guess is that nearly 70% of Canadians could fit under the "moderate" umbrella ~ the middle of the bell curve ~ while less than 5% are real, dyed-in-the-wool social conservatives. I'm sure Erin O'Toole will happily disregard the <5% for the >65%.


----------



## QV (24 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> So Otoole is promising to give Unions a seat at corporate boards.  And pass legislation to ensure pensions are protected before bonuses and creditors get their share if a company goes bankrupt.
> 
> i like that a lot.
> 
> The CPC is bordering on left of centre.   I get that the LPC is worried but true dyed in the wool Conservatives must be wondering what the heck is going on.  Maybe this why the PPC is seeing an uptick?


I’d guess PPC uptick is directly related to the pandemic measures for now.

If the CPC can hold the centre then a relevant PPC makes sense. The PPC‘s platform does look attractive and I’m surprised more people here aren’t swaying that way.


----------



## Kilted (24 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Agree, hence why it seems that the CPC is not for Kilted.


I'll tow the party line, I don't have to agree with everything.  I'm sure that it will all come around again.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Aug 2021)

Kilted said:


> I'll tow the party line, I don't have to agree with everything.  I'm sure that it will all come around again.


There are some who think it’s as far right as it’ll go, otherwise it’ll fracture back into Reform and PC.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2021)

> Disagree. Building new homes is supply side, prices down.



All of the "money for supply" has to pass through government filters at two levels (fed, prov), and three if municipalities are involved (and they will be).  That means beak-wetting, so the cost per house goes up due to that friction.


----------



## brihard (24 Aug 2021)

Edward Campbell said:


> Exactly! Canada is NOT a "conservative" place. (It's not very liberal ~ in the proper sense of that word ~ either. It leans towards the European "social-democratic" (i.e. soft left) position). My guess is that nearly 70% of Canadians could fit under the "moderate" umbrella ~ the middle of the bell curve ~ while less than 5% are real, dyed-in-the-wool social conservatives. I'm sure Erin O'Toole will happily disregard the <5% for the >65%.
> 
> View attachment 66178


Huh. I never thought about it from a normal distribution standpoint, but standard deviations can fit some of our political dynamics almost uncannily well. It’s a nice visualization of the respective merits of fighting over the centre versus fighting over the flanks. You can situate both Green and PPC towards the wings, fighting for relevance. NDP solidly occupy a ‘mid blue’ on the left, and LPC have found success in dislodging CPC from the centre and pushing them to a diminishing rate or returns farther out. O’Toole is trying to reverse that- which will open up a bit of a vacuum in that much smaller, but still present chunk on the right. That’s the turf that PPC and maybe the Mavericks will fight over.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> They’re probably figuring that every one of him they court comes at the cost of three or four of me- centrists disgusted with the LPC



O'Toole had better win, because so-cons won't fall for the bait and switch candidate next time.

I see them going hard for a Leslie or Sloan like figure next time, someone who's social conservatives views go back a long way and are not their simply to curry their favor.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2021)

The two major parties typically hit majority territory around 38% of popular vote.  The "5%" is the difference between majority and either minority or second place.  O'Toole doesn't need to pull out policies that play well to the NDP's base; he's not getting those people regardless what he does.


----------



## mariomike (24 Aug 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> But if you look carefully, you'll see that it is because in that age group (18-49), they are a lot more "progressive" and have a marked tendency towards the NDP. Those are votes taken away from the Libs, splitting the left vote about 50/50, which explains the then leading appearance of the CPC.
> 
> What I do find interesting, however, is that the CPC vote percentage appears to be the same in all age categories. That would tend to dispel the notion that people get more conservatives as they age, unless you look at the LIB/NDP dynamics, which seems to be that as people age, they become less and less "progressive" (i.e. support the NDP) and more and more "centrist" (i.e. they support the Libs).
> 
> This also explains the Lib style: Campaign on the left, govern from the centre. The older crowd knows the Libs will govern from the centre, while any NDP vote the lib attracts from the younger crowd - who will be deceived at a later time - is a gain in "un-splitting" the "left". This also does not bode well for the CPC, which doesn't have a similar secondary well of voters to bring in. The only exception could be times (such as now) when the governing Libs go too far left in their decisions for their older voters and are punished by a certain percentage of them who decide to vote in the CPC in order to "refresh" the Lib leadership.


That makes sense, OGBD.

Saw this on 338 today regarding the 55+ demographic,


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1430291955733471234


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> All of the "money for supply" has to pass through government filters at two levels (fed, prov), and three if municipalities are involved (and they will be).  That means beak-wetting, so the cost per house goes up due to that friction.


but increased supply drives prices down, more than any beak wetting tack on would rise it.


----------



## RangerRay (24 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> That seems to be an issue - no focus on national issues, much focus on things that the Provinces are supposed to handle.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This 👆

Something that has been grinding my gears for a long time are all the federal parties putting forth policy proposals that are properly left to the lower levels of government. The reason why we have nation-states is for “defence of the realm”.   The pandemic has proved we don’t do “defence of the realm” very well.  While the feds kicked money out the door very well, they ignored things like pandemic surveillance (in favour of promoting healthy lifestyles), borders and national PPE stocks (to be clear, I am criticizing both parties who have held power in the last 10 years). The provinces joined together into Confederation not for social welfare or resource development, but for mutual defence and international trade and diplomacy.  It would be nice if the federal parties remembered their lanes according to the Constitution.


----------



## kev994 (24 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> This 👆
> 
> Something that has been grinding my gears for a long time are all the federal parties putting forth policy proposals that are properly left to the lower levels of government. The reason why we have nation-states is for “defence of the realm”.   The pandemic has proved we don’t do “defence of the realm” very well.  While the feds kicked money out the door very well, they ignored things like pandemic surveillance (in favour of promoting healthy lifestyles), borders and national PPE stocks (to be clear, I am criticizing both parties who have held power in the last 10 years). The provinces joined together into Confederation not for social welfare or resource development, but for mutual defence and international trade and diplomacy.  It would be nice if the federal parties remembered their lanes according to the Constitution.


I suspect they know what their lanes are, they’re just scrambling to buy some votes knowing they’ll have to back out after. It’s not like parties routinely follow through on election promises anyway.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> This 👆
> 
> Something that has been grinding my gears for a long time are all the federal parties putting forth policy proposals that are properly left to the lower levels of government. The reason why we have nation-states is for “defence of the realm”.   The pandemic has proved we don’t do “defence of the realm” very well.  While the feds kicked money out the door very well, they ignored things like pandemic surveillance (in favour of promoting healthy lifestyles), borders and national PPE stocks (to be clear, I am criticizing both parties who have held power in the last 10 years). The provinces joined together into Confederation not for social welfare or resource development, but for mutual defence and international trade and diplomacy.  It would be nice if the federal parties remembered their lanes according to the Constitution.


When Canadians are mad about things like housing prices pricing them out of the market, they don't tend to blame the municipal government or the provincial government, they blame the feds. Well, if the feds are going to take the heat, they are going to come in and try to be the solution. 

When emotions are riding high, nobody wants to hear about jurisdiction. 

So the blame lies with the voters as well, who do not clearly know about the separations of powers between the different levels of government.


----------



## RangerRay (24 Aug 2021)

Municipalities hold the the keys to things like zoning that would truly increase housing stocks. They are also the most fearful of NIMBYism.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Municipalities hold the the keys to things like zoning that would truly increase housing stocks. They are also the most fearful of NIMBYism.


Yes, municipalities are the key to this. But nobody really cares about what city council or mayors are doing. Low turnout for municipal elections is evidence of that.

So when these issues pop up, and reach regional levels, the blame shifts to the provinces, like when housing prices were rising in BC and Ontario. Now that its gone Canada wide, and all can see it, they are associating the crisis with the feds, and they are getting burned by it. No federal party is going to dare utter jurisdiction right now.

Its the municipal level making the mess, but now the federal government (whomever is elected) will feel the need to swoop in and clean it up.


----------



## FSTO (24 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> When Canadians are mad about things like housing prices pricing them out of the market, they don't tend to blame the municipal government or the provincial government, they blame the feds. Well, if the feds are going to take the heat, they are going to come in and try to be the solution.
> 
> When emotions are riding high, nobody wants to hear about jurisdiction.
> 
> So the blame lies with the voters as well, who do not clearly know about the separations of powers between the different levels of government.


I've been listening to a focus group that David Herle has assembled for this election. The lack of knowledge by some of the participants of our governmental system and divisions of power is breathtaking. Foreign Affairs is even worse.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Aug 2021)

oopsie (did I spell that right?)


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

FSTO said:


> I've been listening to a focus group that David Herle has assembled for this election. The lack of knowledge by some of the participants of our governmental system and divisions of power is breathtaking. Foreign Affairs is even worse.


Canadians have finite time. 

Work.

Kids.

Family.

Friends.

Entertainment.

Sports.

Shopping.

Finances.

They do not have the time, energy, or frankly, interest in keeping tabs on all 3 levels of government. They barely pay attention to the feds between elections, provincial less so, and municipal are an afterthought. 

So when issues arise, its easiest to blame the feds.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Aug 2021)

> but increased supply drives prices down



If you wish to believe that "Government" is going to wave a magic wand and create more houses without taking away the tradesmen and materials from the houses they would have built (more cheaply) anyways, go ahead.


----------



## RangerRay (24 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, municipalities are the key to this. But nobody really cares about what city council or mayors are doing. Low turnout for municipal elections is evidence of that.
> 
> So when these issues pop up, and reach regional levels, the blame shifts to the provinces, like when housing prices were rising in BC and Ontario. Now that its gone Canada wide, and all can see it, they are associating the crisis with the feds, and they are getting burned by it. No federal party is going to dare utter jurisdiction right now.
> 
> Its the municipal level making the mess, but now the federal government (whomever is elected) will feel the need to swoop in and clean it up.


Then the feds should say “Not my problem. Talk to your MLA/councillor“ instead of indulging everyone whingeing about local issues in a federal election. Then maybe people will take an interest in local politics, which has the most effect on your day-to-day life.


----------



## RangerRay (24 Aug 2021)

Where the feds can do something on the housing front is change the laws and give resources to the RCMP to go after the international money launderers who are driving real estate prices through the roof in places like Vancouver and Toronto. Our current laws and policing on money laundering is a complete joke.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Aug 2021)

Other G7 countries are frustrated that Canada is the only country amongst the 7 that allows numbered companies to buy real estate without confirmation of company ownership. This leads to significant issues with international money laundering via Canadian real estate.  No wonder ‘middle class’ Canadians (and everyone else, too) have problems buying affordable housing.

How do we follow the money? Canadian real estate gets ‘abysmal’ anti-money laundering grades  | Globalnews.ca


----------



## brihard (24 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, municipalities are the key to this. But nobody really cares about what city council or mayors are doing. Low turnout for municipal elections is evidence of that.
> 
> So when these issues pop up, and reach regional levels, the blame shifts to the provinces, like when housing prices were rising in BC and Ontario. Now that its gone Canada wide, and all can see it, they are associating the crisis with the feds, and they are getting burned by it. No federal party is going to dare utter jurisdiction right now.
> 
> Its the municipal level making the mess, but now the federal government (whomever is elected) will feel the need to swoop in and clean it up.


The feds kick out a lot of money to assist with infrastructure projects. If they wanted to play hardball they could probably link federal infrastructure assistance (mass transit and transportation infrastructure are big ones) to municipal cooperation with efforts to improve housing supply.

On the municipal side, one thing that’s happening on a patchwork basis is bylaws targeting short term rentals such as Airbnb that lock down a lot of what would be entry level condo housing/rental apartments.

Interesting anecdote- my wife and I have been considering an investment property, likely a condo. The way purchase prices have spiked in the past year make the return on investment much more marginal, and rent would no longer service the mortgage, condo fees, and property tax. We were still on the fence, but the noise from both sides in this election makes it seem really likely that the return on investment versus carrying costs will no longer be worth the hassle.


----------



## Altair (24 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Then the feds should say “Not my problem. Talk to your MLA/councillor“ instead of indulging everyone whingeing about local issues in a federal election. Then maybe people will take an interest in local politics, which has the most effect on your day-to-day life.


I think there is one federal party that would say this. 

So are you joining me in voting PPC?


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Then maybe people will take an interest in local politics, which has the most effect on your day-to-day life.


Most of my neighbours take an interest in education, emergency services and law enforcement, health, parks and recreation, transportation, waste management, water and wastewater etc.

Federal politics is a team sport. Each with their loyal fan base cheering them on to a majority, or at least a minority.

Party politics may be more exciting than local, but there's no Team Red or Team Blue way to fix a pothole.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Municipalities hold the the keys to things like zoning that would truly increase housing stocks. They are also the most fearful of NIMBYism.


That's true, but since municipalities tend to be "creatures of the province", provincial governments can do a lot to paint municipal governments into a corner re:  what's wanted.  At the province's peril, of course, but the tools are there.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2021)

FSTO said:


> ... The lack of knowledge by some of the participants of our governmental system and divisions of power is breathtaking ...


In one of my previous lives 30 years ago, covering city hall as a reporter, that was also true then, so it's sad (but not entirely surprising) to see things haven't changed much for the very reasons Altair gave.  Another reason, I think, is that while it sounds like there's some education in the schools about how the national level of government works, not so much about how municipal governments work.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Aug 2021)

Municipal politicians like federal (and provincial) money, but not so much that they are willing to be voted out of office by locals who like their zoning the way it is.

If You're Paying, I'll Have Top Sirloin (aka Diner's Dilemma).  Lots of suckers for their own money.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Aug 2021)

Now the Liberals want to levy extra taxes on banks, in large part for reporting as profit (this year) the money they set aside (last year) to cover anticipated losses.  Also, they plan to put upward pressure on insurance premiums by squeezing insurance profits (ditto extra taxes).  Be a shame if people's savings and pension fund investments were allowed to grow.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Municipal politicians like federal (and provincial) money, but not so much that they are willing to be voted out of office by locals who like their zoning the way it is.


People don't understand municipal affairs until the rendering plant is being built right next to them, indeed.


----------



## RangerRay (25 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> People don't understand municipal affairs until the rendering plant is being built right next to them, indeed.


Or the multi-family housing unit going up in their single-home neighbourhood.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Aug 2021)

Many people move in next to the rendering plant (which has been there for decades) and then complain it should be removed.

This is a fiscal/economic "Short Bus" election.  All three major parties are riding it, making promises showing where money will be going into pockets ("seen") without anyone accounting for where it comes out ("unseen").  Most people are probably ignorant enough, as is customary, to allow their votes to be swayed by it.


----------



## RangerRay (25 Aug 2021)

Trudeau government: the Taliban are “our brothers”
					

Musings




					warrenkinsella.com
				




What the shit!?


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Trudeau government: the Taliban are “our brothers”
> 
> 
> Musings
> ...


More on that - and let the memes just create themselves 🤦‍♀️


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> People don't understand municipal affairs until the rendering plant is being built right next to them, indeed.


Or, until they go on strike.

No garbage collection.
Arenas, pools and recreation facilities shut down. No summer programmes for kids. No grass cutting in parks. Island ferries shut down.
Daycare facilities shut down.
Licencing Commission shut down. No building permits, signage permits, taxi cab or "burlesque" licences.
No Department of Public Health inspects of restaurants, pools, beaches, city run health clinics and dental offices.
Water supply and treatment workers on the picket line.
No animal services.
etc....



> Many people move in next to the rendering plant (which has been there for decades) and then complain it should be removed.











						Slaughterhouse smell repels Toronto condo dwellers
					

An abattoir in Toronto's King and Bathurst area smells awful in the summer, but those who’d like it closed have no recourse.




					www.thestar.com
				





> Quality Meat Packers Ltd., and some sympathetic neighbours, argue that the company has been in the area for over 80 years and people should get used to its porcine odour.


----------



## Altair (25 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> In one of my previous lives 30 years ago, covering city hall as a reporter, that was also true then, so it's sad (but not entirely surprising) to see things haven't changed much for the very reasons Altair gave.  Another reason, I think, is that while it sounds like there's some education in the schools about how the national level of government works, not so much about how municipal governments work.


How many people think they are voting for Trudeau, O'Toole or Singh as opposed to their local MP?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Aug 2021)

"...our Brothers, the Taliban...."









						Speechless GIF - Speechless - Discover & Share GIFs
					

Click to view the GIF




					tenor.com
				




EDIT: so much for my first attempt ever at a GIF


----------



## Altair (25 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> "...our Brothers, the Taliban...."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (25 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Trudeau government: the Taliban are “our brothers”
> 
> 
> Musings
> ...


Ok, so at first glance that doesn’t look good.  At second glance it still does not look good. She’s Afghan though right?  Is that a term they use to address each other over there?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Ok, so at first glance that doesn’t look good.  At second glance it still does not look good. She’s Afghan though right?  Is that a term they use to address each other over there?


I've already seen a few posts from Muslim folk saying "nyet".


----------



## lenaitch (25 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Many people move in next to the rendering plant (which has been there for decades) and then complain it should be removed.


[/QUOTE]

Then complain about the lack of employment or residential taxes going because the commercial base is shrinking.  That's why some provinces had to pass 'right to farm' legislation because urban folks were moving out to the country then complaining about the smells, etc.  They still often whine about slow vehicles and combines operating at night and scaring the children.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> People don't understand municipal affairs until the rendering plant is being built right next to them, indeed.



Buy a cheap house at the end of the runway, complain about the noise of aircraft.

(Or buy harbourfront property and complain about the island airport that has been there nearly a century...)


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2021)

Then complain about the lack of employment or residential taxes going because the commercial base is shrinking.  That's why some provinces had to pass 'right to farm' legislation because urban folks were moving out to the country then complaining about the smells, etc.  They still often whine about slow vehicles and combines operating at night and scaring the children.
[/QUOTE]

My grandfather bought a farm when he retired. 

But, he didn't know what he was doing. It was like Green Acres ( for those old enough to remember. )


----------



## lenaitch (25 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> Then complain about the lack of employment or residential taxes going because the commercial base is shrinking.  That's why some provinces had to pass 'right to farm' legislation because urban folks were moving out to the country then complaining about the smells, etc.  They still often whine about slow vehicles and combines operating at night and scaring the children.



My grandfather bought a farm when he retired.

But, he didn't know what he was doing. It was like Green Acres ( for those old enough to remember. )  
[/QUOTE]
We bought a horse farm a year before I retired.  Some days it wasn't far off it either.


----------



## MilEME09 (25 Aug 2021)

Liberal Minister for Women and Gender Equality refers to the Taliban as “our brothers”
					

News for all




					westphaliantimes.com
				












						Federal minister Monsef says her mention of Taliban as 'our brothers' is a 'cultural reference'
					

Canada's minister of women and gender equality says her mention of the Taliban as 'our brothers' during a press conference Wednesday is a 'cultural reference,' after receiving criticism for her choice of language.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				





Oh boy, hope this spreads


----------



## QV (25 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> How many people think they are voting for Trudeau, O'Toole or Singh as opposed to their local MP?


How many think their local MP has any freedom to vote independently? In actuality the voters are voting for the party platform (the declared and undeclared platforms that is).


----------



## mariomike (25 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> They do not have the time, energy, or frankly, interest in keeping tabs on all 3 levels of government. They barely pay attention to the feds between elections, provincial less so, and municipal are an afterthought.


Many probably have more interest in their garbage getting picked up than in foreign affairs.

My guess is they are more likely to phone their local councillor with services complaints than their MP about how to run the country.


----------



## QV (25 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Liberal Minister for Women and Gender Equality refers to the Taliban as “our brothers”
> 
> 
> News for all
> ...


It spread like a wildfire.  Eyebrows have been raised south of the border already.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Aug 2021)

Talk about being disconnected from reality, but then she is running for the LPC and that seems to be a prerequisite for running with their current leader.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Talk about being disconnected from reality, but then she is running for the LPC and that seems to be a prerequisite for running with their current leader.


That, and being feckless…to wit Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister with about the most mealy-mouthed hollow spout of BS we’ve heard in…..we’ll…a few days, re: stabilizing the situation in Afghanistan.


> (Link: Article on Liberal Minister’s Respect for Taliban)
> 
> “*We are working together to develop the necessary approach that we will take towards this Taliban regime in the coming days and to put down in front of them very important markers with respect to how they have to treat Afghans who want to leave the country*,” Garneau explained.



What of any meaning did Garneau actually say?!? 🧐


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (25 Aug 2021)

What he meant is: "I've asked my officials what the f*^$ we should do and they drew a blank. At this time, they are trying to come up with something I can then present in public. So far, no luck. A soon as I know, I'll let you know too."


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Aug 2021)

They are planning in order to produce a plan to issue a wish-list to people over whom they have no leverage.


----------



## Weinie (25 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Buy a cheap house at the end of the runway, complain about the noise of aircraft.
> 
> (Or buy harbourfront property and complain about the island airport that has been there nearly a century...)


Or build a "rest and tranquility haven" on the outskirts of the Gagetown impact area, and then rage at base officials daily.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Aug 2021)

To be fair, if whisky battery is stoned and firing...


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> To be fair, if whisky battery is stoned and firing...


If I'm working in food services on base I could guarantee every time they ordered box lunches there'd be cupcakes in them.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> That, and being feckless…to wit Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister with about the most mealy-mouthed hollow spout of BS we’ve heard in…..we’ll…a few days, re: stabilizing the situation in Afghanistan.
> 
> 
> What of any meaning did Garneau actually say?!? 🧐


and sadly he is one of the smartest one in the Cabinet, I think their constant stupidity has worn him down.


----------



## MilEME09 (25 Aug 2021)

KINSELLA: Trudeau's campaign in critical condition
					

The campaign isn't yet in the proverbial morgue. Yet.




					torontosun.com
				




Critical condition is putting it lightly, campaign keeps going like this, the 2011 results would even be out if reach for the liberals.


----------



## YZT580 (25 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> Or, until they go on strike.
> 
> No garbage collection.
> Arenas, pools and recreation facilities shut down. No summer programmes for kids. No grass cutting in parks. Island ferries shut down.
> ...


that's why they have restrictions on zoning.  They didn't change the zoning for altruistic purposes they changed it to collect more taxes on residential rather than run-down industrial and incidentally, give their supporters a huge profit on purchases of those industrial units that had been closed.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> KINSELLA: Trudeau's campaign in critical condition
> 
> 
> The campaign isn't yet in the proverbial morgue. Yet.
> ...


Maybe the Trudeau campaign can ask their brothers for some donations and campaign advice.


----------



## QV (25 Aug 2021)

It’s official—Canada’s finances are now unsustainable: op-ed
					

The PBO report should be a wakeup call for policymakers.




					www.fraserinstitute.org


----------



## Quirky (25 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Maybe the Trudeau campaign can ask their brothers for some donations and campaign advice.


All things aside, that is the most useless minister position I’ve ever seen.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Aug 2021)

Just setting up signs for our local CPC candidate, a lot of people honking in support, i have doubts our new candidate can beat Wilkinson, but the LPC guy may fall afoul of voter anger, just as the previous CPC MP did. 70% turnout in the last election.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Aug 2021)

Even the _Toronto Star_ says it's time to step up to the plate ....


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Even the _Toronto Star_ says it's time to step up to the plate ....



I’ve pointed out elsewhere Garneau’s vapid, feckless pandering to virtue-signaling sycophants, but this latest nugget is just….well….just stop already, Marc!



> We’re on the job, Garneau said, “even though there may be some election going on.”


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> All things aside, that is the most useless minister position I’ve ever seen.


She's a great fit for sure.


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Aug 2021)

More bought-and-paid-for _Toronto Star_ commentary 😉


> ... Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, on the hustings Wednesday: “We will continue to work with our partners on the ground, we will continue to work with our allies, we will continue to make sure we will get everyone out that we can in the coming days, and continue to engage in the coming months as we help get Afghans to safety in Canada.”
> 
> Rubbish soundbites, signifying nothing. Canada, nor the U.S. for that matter, has no leverage against the murderous Taliban ...


Edited to add the bought-and-paid-for Globe & Mail's editorial board take:  *"Ottawa bungled the Afghan rescue operation, and Afghans relying on Canada will die because of it"*

Text also attached, in case links don't work, IAW Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's Copyright Act.


----------



## KINGLAWRENCE (26 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I'll take my chances with the libertarian party


I am batshit crazy, Mad Max all the way


----------



## Haggis (26 Aug 2021)

The campaign is still young and Trudeau has yet to release most of his major campaign platform planks.  The problem with all of his continued arrogance and total lack of integrity, accountability and transparency, is that his supporters don't care.  Cult mentality - just like Leafs fans.


----------



## FSTO (26 Aug 2021)

I listen to a daily podcast called "Curse of Politics" with David Herle, Jenni Byrne and good ole Beer and Popcorn Scott Reid. They review the daily performance of the parties. Herle and Reid are hard core Chretien/Martin Libs and Byrne is a Harper Conservative. 








						Curse of Politics | AQM
					

Politics. It's a blessing and a curse.




					www.airquotesmedia.com
				




Its very interesting as these old backroom boys warhorses parse the performances. Today's episode concentrates on the "My Taliban Brothers" comment. The Libs are pissed at the performance of their proteges. Reid still has an unhealthy admiration of the Dauphin.


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Aug 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So what?  The statement made referred to a doctor's belief that a) abortion was the murder of an unborn child and b) euthanasia was the pre-mature termination of a human life.  Regardless of the law or in the case of abortion, the absence of one, those beliefs need to be respected and adjustments made to ensure that a doctor or any medical staff can work freely within his/her field and not fear repercussions.  Referral is a strawman argument.  Cellphones and internet access can quickly locate a competent medical team willing to undertake those procedures.  Run a search through Google and you will locate a facility in every province and territory.  It might not be in your neighbourhood but it is there.  And for those who say it should be readily available in the neighbourhood, why?  My heart specialist is a 2 hour drive.  Want a baby delivered in Trenton, go down the highway to Belleville.  If surgery is critical, try Oshawa or Kingston.  Why should an abortion clinic be any more available?


----------



## Journeyman (26 Aug 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> .... no support Trudeau but the fanatical few.


I leave him on 'Ignore'


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Aug 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> My observations so far. and I may be dead wrong, like when I decide to cut hay absolutely sure it won't rain and then 5 hours later, a down pour (thats my July this year).
> I think Canadians can only handle so much of any one person as a PM, even if they are doing ok. Or in Trudeau case, not at all. Trudeau is flailing badly in this one. I went to the Unifor and LPC FB pages and there is almost no support Trudeau but the fanatical few.
> 
> His optics to call an election now was terrible. I believe he has tried the patience of the Canadian people. When look at it, the trend seems to have been heading this way, 2015, he was golden boy Canada (majority government). In 2019, he was on "PRB" and given another kick at the can to use a military analogy (a minority government). Now, with ZERO improvement and his continued arrogance and total lack of integrity, accountability and transparency, he smugly thought he could pull another rabbit out of the hat. However, the "PRB" (election) is on and sock boys seems to be having a difficult time convincing the 36 million board members why he should stay.
> ...


ArmyRick I feel you on the hay, although this year was perfect for us as we had all June to do it. July would be your second cut? I don't usually bother with a second cut unless the stars align perfectly and just let the livestock graze it.

And I agree on the election as well, always risky to call an early election and I hope it blows up in their faces


----------



## Rifleman62 (26 Aug 2021)

"My Evolving Views on Justin Trudeau (THE SAAD TRUTH_1281)" on Youtube






Long Bio: Faculty

Gad Saad, PhD​Professor, Marketing
Concordia University Research Chair in Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences and Darwinian Consumption


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Aug 2021)

No worries, folks, bright shiny thing here to look at ....


> Canada is deeply concerned by the rapidly evolving situation in Afghanistan and its impact on the humanitarian needs of crisis-affected people as it continues to worsen.
> 
> Today, the Government of Canada is announcing an allocation of $50 million for the initial humanitarian response and will be ready to respond to further United Nations and Red Cross appeals. Based on identified needs, Canada will work through trusted humanitarian partners, such as the World Food Programme, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross, who have operational capacity on the ground both inside Afghanistan and in neighbouring countries.
> 
> This assistance will be provided in response to international humanitarian appeals, as coordinated and led by the United Nations. It will be delivered through UN and other established humanitarian partners with operational capacity to respond to these needs. Our partners will employ mitigation measures to ensure the assistance reaches the most vulnerable and is not diverted to other actors or for other purposes ...


----------



## OldSolduer (26 Aug 2021)

"our brothers the Taliban" is all I need to know right now. She should have been "deselected" to run for office. I'm sure if the Conservatives had said it there'd be pitchforks and torches out.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Aug 2021)

__ https://www.facebook.com/nationalcitizens/photos/a.1338562262851075/6460131687360748


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Aug 2021)

One should know, in politics, nothing is ever off the record


----------



## OldSolduer (26 Aug 2021)

The issue of the interpreters and their families needs to be at the top or very near the top of the list. 

FUCK!!!!


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Aug 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> The issue of the interpreters and their families needs to be at the top or very near the top of the list.
> 
> FUCK!!!!


I agree. Who did we get out? Who did we leave behind? What is the plan to get them out?


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Aug 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> I agree. Who did we get out? Who did we leave behind? What is the plan to get them out?


Can't find the article again but a few reports say 60% of who got out were already permanent residents or Canadian citizens. Other 30% are probably actually turns who helped us, frankly we should of prioritized turps over citizens of convenience


----------



## Remius (26 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Can't find the article again but a few reports say 60% of who got out were already permanent residents or Canadian citizens. Other 30% are probably actually turns who helped us, frankly we should of prioritized turps over citizens of convenience


Are they though?  Or could it be they were people that got out under various programs before and went back to continue working or to rebuild? I can imagine that maybe some interpreters from before may have been hired by NGOs and government agencies once established here?


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Are they though?  Or could it be they were people that got out under various programs before and went back to continue working or to rebuild? I can imagine that maybe some interpreters from before may have been hired by NGOs and government agencies once established here?


Fair point, after all this happened so quickly a timely evacuation was impossible


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Aug 2021)

Interesting watching the people currently holding the ball - and their media supporters - follow the usual script for managing an unfavourable news cycle, as if that's really all that's at stake.


----------



## dimsum (26 Aug 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> The issue of the interpreters and their families needs to be at the top or very near the top of the list.


To us, yes.

To the general public?  I'd be surprised if people remembered a day after they entered Kabul.  The issues of housing, healthcare, jobs, Covid, etc are going to be higher up.  

Call me cynical, but if the CPC was in power I don't think the govt's response to this would have been any different.  Something something "mile wide, inch deep"...


----------



## The Bread Guy (26 Aug 2021)

Aaaaaand for the record (highlights mine)....


> The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today issued the following statement on the deadly attacks that took place near the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan:
> 
> “I strongly condemn the terror attacks that took place earlier today near the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul, Afghanistan. These heinous attacks took the lives of many innocent people desperately seeking to leave the country and those supporting evacuation efforts, including U.S. service members and medical personnel. As one of its closest allies, Canada joins with the United States as they mourn their fallen.
> 
> ...


G2G - bit in yellow look cut of the same cloth as other recent statements?


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Aaaaaand for the record (highlights mine)....
> 
> G2G - bit in yellow look cut of the same cloth as other recent statements?


Yup, BG.

Hollow…meaningless…platitudes.




dimsum said:


> Call me cynical, but if the CPC was in power I don't think the govt's response to this would have been any different.  Something something "mile wide, inch deep"...


 
No, I think it would have been different, at least if O’Toole was PM…he has a solid record for supporting Terps years and years ago, not just at the last minute when it would be a few platitudes vacuously vomited out to sway polls…


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup, BG.
> 
> Hollow…meaningless…platitudes.
> 
> ...


It wouldn’t have been.  This didn’t become a front page issue until a crisis happened.  When was the last time O’toole mentioned it before all of this?  Not to mention the tighter restrictions the CPC had in place as to who could come to Canada.  



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/more-afghan-interpreters-settle-in-canada-1.1224633
		


this from 2012.  And take a close look at Kenney’s statement on Canada not having any obligation to anyone working with Canada after 2012.  

politicians are pretty much the same regardless of them being RED or BLUE.  I have no doubt we’d be in the same boat right now if team blue was in charge.  

So yes, I agree with Dimsum’s cynicism.


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> It wouldn’t have been.  This didn’t become a front page issue until a crisis happened.  When was the last time O’toole mentioned it before all of this?  Not to mention the tighter restrictions the CPC had in place as to who could come to Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice whatabout-ism…O’Toole wasn’t even an MP then.   Kenney is the Alberta premier, so if you have an issue with him or the Government before O’Toole, take it up with him, or Evil Harper.

For O’Toole, both as a cabinet minister and an opposition member, he demonstrably worked to bring Afghan interpreters to Canada, so that’s his record.  

So in the political world of splitting hairs, yes, that makes O’Toole fundamentally better than Trudeau.  O’Toole was pushing for Afghan terps early into the TB operations…quite the opposite from the laconic, dragging, dithering, poll-driven ways of Trudeau & Co.


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Nice whatabout-ism…O’Toole wasn’t even an MP then.   Kenney is the Alberta premier, so if you have an issue with him or the Government before O’Toole, take it up with him, or Evil Harper.
> 
> For O’Toole, both as a cabinet minister and an opposition member, he demonstrably worked to bring Afghan interpreters to Canada, so that’s his record.
> 
> So in the political world of splitting hairs, yes, that makes O’Toole fundamentally better than Trudeau.  O’Toole was pushing for Afghan terps early into the TB operations…quite the opposite from the laconic, dragging, dithering, poll-driven ways of Trudeau & Co.


It isn’t what aboutism.  It’s cynicism. Both parties could care less unless it suits them.  They both have that very Long record on those issues.  I don’t share your optimism about politicians of any stripe.

Edit to add:  Trudeau is the current PM.  He gets to wear this, and should.  But do t kid yourself that this would be any better under CPC leadership.


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Aug 2021)

I can be just as cynical as the next guy…I just prefer to go with the moniker “pragmatic realist.”  However, that doesn’t force me to paint all parties as identical.  You make it seam as though a CPC government would also have been a poll-driven responsive government like the Liberals.  I won’t my healthy cynicism actually buy that.  Heck, at the very least, it was the CPC government that bought the C-17s that extracted the….3,700 Canadians and Afghans from Kabul.


----------



## FSTO (27 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I can be just as cynical as the next guy…I just prefer to go with the moniker “pragmatic realist.”  However, that doesn’t force me to paint all parties as identical.  You make it seam as though a CPC government would also have been a poll-driven responsive government like the Liberals.  I won’t my healthy cynicism actually buy that.  Heck, at the very least, it was the CPC government that bought the C-17s that extracted the….3,700 Canadians and Afghans from Kabul.


I keep reminding people that the Luba called the C17 purchase, useless.


----------



## FSTO (27 Aug 2021)

FSTO said:


> I keep reminding people that the Luba called the C17 purchase, useless.


Liberals not Luba😂


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I can be just as cynical as the next guy…I just prefer to go with the moniker “pragmatic realist.”  However, that doesn’t force me to paint all parties as identical.  You make it seam as though a CPC government would also have been a poll-driven responsive government like the Liberals.  I won’t my healthy cynicism actually buy that.  Heck, at the very least, it was the CPC government that bought the C-17s that extracted the….3,700 Canadians and Afghans from Kabul.



No doubt.  They would certainly be poll driven if the issue became a crisis.  Like I said, the CPC laid the ground work for the bureaucratic process.  One that wasn’t changed until it became a political problem.  The CPC have a record on bringing interpreters and based on that record and position we can infer that we would be in the same situation right now regardless.  

If the CPC was currently in power it would be Harper or Scheer.  O’toole would not be the current leader anyway.  So while not poll driven they would be base driven and the base would have had other interests just like the rest of Canada does when it comes to Afghanistan.

  So back in June there would have been a scramble to change the rules the CPC created, a struggle to get enough assets on the ground, the opposition Liberals would be talking about how they wouldn’t have screwed this up just like the CPC opposition is doing now.  And we would only be able to get out what we have currently done. 


The only thing that changes is the window dressing and fluff.

The fact is, the *world* procrastinated on this, underestimated the Taliban and now people are paying for it with their lives. Having the CPC or LPC in power wouldn’t have changed that one bit.

the conservatives could have fixed this when they were in power, the liberals could have fixed this since but neither did because they didn’t really care to.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> It isn’t what aboutism.  It’s cynicism. Both parties could care less unless it suits them.  They both have that very Long record on those issues.  I don’t share your optimism about politicians of any stripe.
> 
> Edit to add:  Trudeau is the current PM.  He gets to wear this, and should.  But do t kid yourself that this would be any better under CPC leadership.


This will probably come as no surprise, based on my Army.ca name, but I actually know Erin O’Toole on a personal level.

He is actually the real deal. You are not seeing an act. He is a genuinely nice guy.

That is a data point of one, from some random internet guy. Sometimes, cynicism is not warranted.


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> This will probably come as no surprise, based on my Army.ca name, but I actually know Erin O’Toole on a personal level.
> 
> He is actually the real deal. You are not seeing an act. He is a genuinely nice guy.
> 
> That is a data point of one, from some random internet guy. Sometimes, cynicism is not warranted.


I have no reason to doubt you.  But that does not change the fact that we would likely be no further ahead under a CPC government at this time.  

so far i am pleasantly impressed by how O’toole is running his campaign.  But the cynicism in regards to politicians  is based on recorded facts and events.  Plenty of nice guys get into and are in politics.  That doesn’t mean the political system or the way it’s run adjusts to the nice guys.  

so when Dimsum posits that he doubts things would be any better in this situation is a well founded observation.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Aug 2021)

I'd take "likely" over zero.....


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I'd take "likely" over zero.....


Sure.  We can fantasize all we want.  Nothing changes the situation we are in.  Trudeau gets to wear this, he has to answer for it.  And so far it’s a mouth full of marbles coming from him.  Will Canadians make this an issue though?  I doubt it.  healthcare and housing seem to be the bigger issues for them.  And that’s for the ones that might actually care to show up at the polls.  

 Most people on this forum are invested in this issue.  I’m not sure it’s that important outside the circles we run in.


----------



## Journeyman (27 Aug 2021)

Waiting for this to become part of the political finger-pointing..... 🤨


> U.S. officials provided Taliban with names of Americans, Afghan allies to evacuate​“Basically, they just put all those Afghans on a kill list,” said one defense official.


----------



## dimsum (27 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> I have no reason to doubt you.  But that does not change the fact that we would likely be no further ahead under a CPC government at this time.
> 
> so far i am pleasantly impressed by how O’toole is running his campaign.  But the cynicism in regards to politicians  is based on recorded facts and events.  Plenty of nice guys get into and are in politics.  That doesn’t mean the political system or the way it’s run adjusts to the nice guys.
> 
> so when Dimsum posits that he doubts things would be any better in this situation is a well founded observation.


Basically like he said.

I don't know any of the candidates.  They may all be amazing people.  Unfortunately, what they are like as people is secondary to what the party platforms and policies are like.


----------



## QV (27 Aug 2021)

Rifleman62 said:


> "My Evolving Views on Justin Trudeau (THE SAAD TRUTH_1281)" on Youtube
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He consistently hits it out of the park and his book The Parasitic Mind is a good read.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Aug 2021)

Come on people,.....too far is too far, no need to be jerk-offs.   Nice that both the Tories and NDP put out messages of support for Mr. Trudeau.


			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-protests-campaign-ontario-1.6156324?fbclid=IwAR0TvaWkqcU2VgxUFbkxxwglQp-d0iuKmVan39W8C0eCMunfKARBFDcR7wA
		


A Liberal campaign rally scheduled for Friday evening in Bolton, Ont., was cancelled amid protests.
Leader Justin Trudeau was expected to address supporters, but the event was cancelled over security concerns.

Dozens of angry protesters, who outnumbered Liberal supporters, gathered near the Bolton rally and began chanting obscenities before Trudeau could make his address.
After a nearly two-hour delay, a man took to the loud speaker to announce that the event was cancelled, to which the crowd reacted with more shouting.

The OPP was called in to escort the campaign bus away from the site.   [MORE ON LINK}


----------



## Remius (27 Aug 2021)

We don’t need that kind of crap in Canada.


----------



## MilEME09 (27 Aug 2021)

I'm not surprised by this at all, I don't care what your views are on vaccines, vaccine passports, etc.... you start being a total ass in front of children, you are just a terrible person.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Aug 2021)

Journeyman said:


> Waiting for this to become part of the political finger-pointing..... 🤨


Who thought this was a good idea? Really????


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Come on people,.....too far is too far, no need to be jerk-offs.   Nice that both the Tories and NDP put out messages of support for Mr. Trudeau.



I bet the person the most happy about those protests is Trudeau.

He doesn't have to open his mouth and make a fool of himself.
He can save his desperate election promises for another day.
And he can (try to) play into the mean scary right wing boogymen being a threat; though awkwardly the demographics of the protestors don't appear to cater very well to the typical LPC right-wing white male racist mold.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I bet the person the most happy about those protests is Trudeau.
> 
> He doesn't have to open his mouth and make a fool of himself.
> He can save his desperate election promises for another day.
> And he can (try to) play into the mean scary right wing boogymen being a threat; though awkwardly the demographics of the protestors don't appear to cater very well to the typical LPC right-wing white male racist mold.


Nothing that a good lying, manipulated tweet can’t fix…


----------



## Altair (27 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I bet the person the most happy about those protests is Trudeau.
> 
> He doesn't have to open his mouth and make a fool of himself.
> He can save his desperate election promises for another day.
> And he can (try to) play into the mean scary right wing boogymen being a threat; though awkwardly the demographics of the protestors don't appear to cater very well to the typical LPC right-wing white male racist mold.


Wow.

I'm done. 

See you all after the election.


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Aug 2021)

Toodles.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Aug 2021)

It's getting kind of funny watching the faux pas's...









						Trudeau campaign event breaks Ontario’s COVID gathering restrictions
					

Justin Trudeau came to the Toronto area Friday and tried to pick a fight with Ontario Premier Doug Ford over following public health advice.




					torontosun.com


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> It's getting kind of funny watching the faux pas's...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's funny.



> *“Are you breaking the spirit if not the letter of the law* to hold a party event and lecture the premier of Ontario on vaccine passports?” Trudeau was asked by CBC reporter Raffy Boudjikanian.
> 
> *Trudeau didn’t even attempt to answer the question*, instead speaking about the important choice Canadians are facing and the work the Liberal government has undertaken during the pandemic.




Wonder how the Canadians who have been fined thousands of dollars for covid-related rules feel about that?


----------



## Quirky (28 Aug 2021)

Liberals are in trouble.









						Daily Tracking: August 27, 2021
					

Click here for the latest poll results from August 23-26, 2021.



					www.ekospolitics.com
				




I doubt the Afghan evac failure has yet to move the polls either. 

Blackface, Indian Trip disaster, WE scandal, Billions in debt, list goes on and on. Don't know how mindless Canadians can keep supporting sockboy after all this.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Wonder how the Canadians who have been fined thouysands of dollars for covid-related rules feel about that?


Never even thought of that.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (28 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> It's getting kind of funny watching the faux pas's...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The journalists completely missed the point: This is JT we are talking about, the man ... er! Sorry the person ... who lives by the motto "Virtue signalling trumps actual virtue any day."


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Wonder how the Canadians who have been fined thouysands of dollars for covid-related rules feel about that?


…he’s not worried, the Ethics Commissioner will give him a pass…


----------



## mariomike (28 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Come on people,.....too far is too far, no need to be jerk-offs.



The National Post put it this way,


> Reasonable Canadians will repudiate such tactics and look more sympathetically on Trudeau becasue they find the protests not only inexplicable but abhorent.
> The agitators should reflect that all their antics are likely to achieve is the return to power of their nemesis.


----------



## MilEME09 (28 Aug 2021)

It appears the liberals aren't the only ones being targeted by aggressive protesters. Michelle Garner posted this morning on Facebook about being targeted while having dinner with her husband.



> This morning a video of a man cornering me at a table in a restaurant last night while I was having dinner has been circulating on social media.
> 
> I have made it a policy not to comment on incidents like this so as not to give these individuals a platform. However, this video is unfortunately already public. So, here are my thoughts.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mills Bomb (28 Aug 2021)

Not only is his campaign breaking the indoor gathering COVID rules, but now it's coming out that some of the Liberal campaigning candidates are not vaccinated.

not-all-liberal-campaigning-candidates-are-vaccinated-trudeau

I've never been a fan of this political party, but this must is one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen from them. Last week they were virtue-signalling about how the oppositions candidates are not all vaccinated and forced vaccinations, and now this week it turns out their party has unvaccinated elements within it. They are breaking their own indoor gathering rules to aid their campaign, and the announcement about all federal workers requiring vaccination or facing "consequences" appears to have been all fluff. They threatened the entire federal workforce, but give their own candidates a free pass, that is messed up!

This is truly a terrible performance by a party that was touting COVID rules and vaccines. I don't think this is doing anyone any favours, not to mention the fact they may actually be contributing to the spread of this disease in Canada by breaking these rules that are enforced upon everyone else...


----------



## MilEME09 (28 Aug 2021)

This is spiraling down quickly and is become them snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.


----------



## Halifax Tar (28 Aug 2021)

Altair said:


> Wow.
> 
> I'm done.
> 
> See you all after the election.



Why ?  



MilEME09 said:


> This is spiraling down quickly and is become them snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.



I'm not convinced.  I have faith in the inability of Canadians to pay attention to politics. 

I hope you're right though.  Nothing would bring me more joy than reducing the Liberals less than the official opposition.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Aug 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I'm not convinced.


Me neither. A Conservative/NDP team would be nice but I'm still betting on a Liberal majority. Trudeau will pull out 11th hour promises to spend billions of Canadian's dollars on anything and everything he can think of.


----------



## brihard (28 Aug 2021)

Quirky said:


> Liberals are in trouble.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The Afghan evac likely won’t impact the polls much at all. Canadians, by and large, never gave a shit about Afghanistan. It’s already faded from the news cycle. You won’t find many people on the fence whose votes are swayed by that.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Me neither. A Conservative/NDP team would be nice but I'm still betting on a Liberal majority. Trudeau will pull out 11th hour promises to spend billions of Canadian's dollars on anything and everything he can think of.


I would have said that maybe a few weeks ago.  But my OPINION at this time is that Canadians didn’t want this election.  So turn out may be a factor,  many may just choose to stay home.  Trudeau and co. have not yet found their boogeyman.  They started on Ford now apparently since O’toole isn’t playing ball.   A lot of fumbles as well.  

Now, I agree that the whole Afghanistan issue won’t resonate as an issue with most Canadians but most Canadians are at least aware that it was screwed up under their watch which may add another cut.  

at this point it’s a toss up I think between a CPC minority vs an LPC minority.  I guess it may boil down to how many red Tories/blue libs are fed up with Trudeau vs how many true blue Cons are horrified at O’tooles push to the left.  

Anecdote: I’m middle of the road voter who could go either way but am leaning towards O’toole.  But I know a couple that are true fiscal conservatives that might actually stay home come election time because they aren’t seing anything they like from any party.  They aren’t SOCONS but I am curious if SOCONS stay home or go PPC, fiscal CONS that may do the same, is there enough undecided to bring it home for the CPC.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Me neither. A Conservative/NDP team would be nice but I'm still betting on a Liberal majority. Trudeau will pull out 11th hour promises to spend billions of Canadian's dollars on anything and everything he can think of.


And here is the thing,  the COC are promising to spend billions as well, so I’m not sure that will help.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

mariomike said:


> The National Post put it this way,


So it seems some CPC volunteers were in that agressive protest.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-candidate-trudeau-rally-1.6156959
		


O’toole, I think gave an appropriate response.  But yeah, this might get capitalized on by the LPC.


----------



## MilEME09 (28 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> So it seems some CPC volunteers were in that agressive protest.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Depends how the CPC responds, if true, if team blue comes out and removes then and makes a statement before team red can make a move they should be okay.

My hope for this election is results similar to 2011, by that I mean a CPC government, with an NDP opposition, and I do feel that the younger generation of voters is shifting to the NDP to make it happen. The ultimate just dessert would be if the liberal fell so hard they were kicked out of future leaders debates but I doubt that.


----------



## mariomike (28 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> So it seems some CPC volunteers were in that agressive  protest.


I don't remember people being so agressive about party politics when I was younger.

Sure, most people showed up to vote. Some neighbours had lawn signs.

Maybe social media has something to do with it?  🤷‍♂️


----------



## FJAG (28 Aug 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Depends how the CPC responds, if true, if team blue comes out and removes then and makes a statement before team red can make a move they should be okay.
> ...


Already done


> Conservative candidate banishes campaign volunteers who were at Trudeau rally​​Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole condemns harassing behaviour like what was on display Friday night​
> John Paul Tasker · CBC News · Posted: Aug 28, 2021





> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-candidate-trudeau-rally-1.6156959



🍻


----------



## dapaterson (28 Aug 2021)

Leadership lesson: Give people something to inspire them; don't assume they'll follow you just because you think you're great.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Leadership lesson: Give people something to inspire them; don't assume they'll follow you just because you think you're great.


Another lesson: the CPC can actually run a campaign on the issues without resorting to childish attacks and hair jokes. People will actually listen.  Good on O’toole for changing the volume.


----------



## lenaitch (28 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> So it seems some CPC volunteers were in that agressive protest.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I get the sense, but don't know for certain, that there is probably a core of faces following them around, at least regionally, likely organized or coordinated on social media.  If it becomes a regular thing, it might hurt the CPC even if they try to distance themselves from it.

I saw some media coverage on the Bolton incident.  Young kids showing the middle finger (probably mimicking) surrounded by 'adults; yelling profanities.  That's some good parenting there.


----------



## mariomike (28 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Another lesson: the CPC can actually run a campaign on the issues without resorting to childish attacks and hair jokes.


It takes more than nice hair to get in.   



> So long as you have two of the three qualifying criteria: _woke_; nice _hair_; nice _socks_, you’re in!


----------



## Quirky (28 Aug 2021)

brihard said:


> Canadians, by and large, never gave a shit about Afghanistan. It’s already faded from the news cycle.


Which begs the question, what do Canadians care about? Ethics? Nope. Black face? Not that. Insane debt? Absolutely not. Ummm ahhh ehhh? You get my vote!


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Aug 2021)

If the polling trend line continues (I doubt it will, past the long weekend- the Liberals, being the governing party, have consideable resources at their disposal), this could be a 1993 level beat down (on the Liberals, this time).

It has me wondering if even labour/unions are considering jumping ship from the NDP to CPC? Unionized labour has not exactly had their concerns taken seriously lately by the NDP, as they have moved ever environmental, woke and urban.

EOT is giving a master class right now on running a positive, substantive, serious  campaign. May it continue and may the other parties follow suit running positive campaigns, on the issues!


----------



## RangerRay (28 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> If the polling trend line continues (I doubt it will, past the long weekend- the Liberals, being the governing party, have consideable resources at their disposal), this could be a 1993 level beat down (on the Liberals, this time).
> 
> It has me wondering if even labour/unions are considering jumping ship from the NDP to CPC? Unionized labour has not exactly had their concerns taken seriously lately by the NDP, as they have moved ever environmental, woke and urban.
> 
> EOT is giving a master class right now on running a positive, substantive, serious  campaign. May it continue and may the other parties follow suit running positive campaigns, on the issues!


Everything I have heard is that organized labour still considers Mr O’Toole and the CPC as evil incarnate, but that O’Toole is working hard to appeal to blue-collar and union membership at large.


----------



## Haggis (28 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Everything I have heard is that organized labour still considers Mr O’Toole and the CPC as evil incarnate, but that O’Toole is working hard to appeal to blue-collar and union membership at large.


My union and it's parent union have already asked us not to vote CPC. That has generated a lot of pushback on social media.


----------



## MilEME09 (28 Aug 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Everything I have heard is that organized labour still considers Mr O’Toole and the CPC as evil incarnate, but that O’Toole is working hard to appeal to blue-collar and union membership at large.


If he could some how get auto and steel production I'm southern Ontario going again he wouldn't probably win a few over.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> If the polling trend line continues (I doubt it will, past the long weekend- the Liberals, being the governing party, have consideable resources at their disposal), this could be a 1993 level beat down (on the Liberals, this time).
> 
> It has me wondering if even labour/unions are considering jumping ship from the NDP to CPC? Unionized labour has not exactly had their concerns taken seriously lately by the NDP, as they have moved ever environmental, woke and urban.
> 
> EOT is giving a master class right now on running a positive, substantive, serious  campaign. May it continue and may the other parties follow suit running positive campaigns, on the issues!


Wishful thinking. The LPC won’t be reduced to two seats.

agreed,  I’m pleased with how he’s running things.  He needs to win or else he’ll be eaten by his own party.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Wishful thinking. The LPC won’t be reduced to two seats.
> 
> agreed,  I’m pleased with how he’s running things.  He needs to win or else he’ll be eaten by his own party.


2 seat? No, probably not. Behind the NDP? It has happened before.

Are you saying that if EOT  moves the seat count from 119 to 169 seats, the CPC will dump him?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> My union and it's parent union have already asked us not to vote CPC. That has generated a lot of pushback on social media.


This is what I am hearing- union rank & file are diverging from union leadership on various issues. That alone could get messy- for the union leadership.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> If the polling trend line continues (I doubt it will, past the long weekend- the Liberals, being the governing party, have consideable resources at their disposal), this could be a 1993 level beat down (on the Liberals, this time).
> 
> It has me wondering if even labour/unions are considering jumping ship from the NDP to CPC? Unionized labour has not exactly had their concerns taken seriously lately by the NDP, as they have moved ever environmental, woke and urban.
> 
> EOT is giving a master class right now on running a positive, substantive, serious  campaign. May it continue and may the other parties follow suit running positive campaigns, on the issues!


You can't use unionized labour as all encompassing. A large number of powerful unions do what they were designed to do. Take care of worker safety in the workplace and bargain fair wage and benefits for fair work, while refraining from spending millions to advertise for the NDP or Liberals. They stay clear and use members dues for members benefits and don't involve themselves in politics. Then you have UNIFOR, Public Service Unions, including Teachers Unions. Some of the richest, overstepping, we'll  dictate what the province does, egotistical pricks ever borne by nature. I know Ken Lewenza on a personal and professional  basis. He's a fucking communist. He designed UNIFOR to be the largest, most influential, union/political party in Canada. I sat at a table, in the canteen at Chrysler, Plant 3, almost 40 years ago when he was a shift steward espousing his communist crap. Be careful lumping unions as one. They are not. Unfortunately, the largest, most financially rich, and communist unions are not unions, but pseudo political parties only supporting elected parties that will bend to their dogma, spending member dues against union members political stance and approval. UNIFOR is huge. They want to ban guns. Thousands of members hunt, own guns, target shoot and pay dues. Where does their membership du3s go? To the anti gun lobby, with grants to dozens of anti gun groups working against their wishes and freedom. Not all unions are our enemy. UNIFOR is. And it is definitely and actively pursuing a socialist society instead of keeping workers safe and financially stable. UNIFOR is a political party, not a union.


----------



## Remius (28 Aug 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> 2 seat? No, probably not. Behind the NDP? It has happened before.
> 
> Are you saying that if EOT  moves the seat count from 119 to 169 seats, the CPC will dump him?


Anything short of a minority gvt and they will dump him yes.  So he has to win.  If he does then the CPC will move more to the center,  if he loses I expect the fringe elements to appear again.


----------



## Infanteer (28 Aug 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> UNIFOR is huge. They want to ban guns. Thousands of members hunt, own guns, target shoot and pay dues. Where does their membership du3s go? To the anti gun lobby, with grants to dozens of anti gun groups working against their wishes and freedom.


What the hell would gun laws have to do with a trade union?  Weird.


----------



## OldSolduer (28 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> What the hell would gun laws have to do with a trade union?  Weird.


Politics makes strange bedfellows.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> What the hell would gun laws have to do with a trade union?  Weird.


Ask UNIFOR. They are anti gun and send support money (members dues) to Cukier, et al. It's not just guns, but abortion, immigration, environmental policy and more.Did you miss the part that they aren't a trade union, but a political party? They were political when I was UAW at Ford in the 60's, even more so when I was CAW, at Chrysler in the 80's. Once Lewenza amalgamated the other big unions in Canada to become UNIFOR, they became, probably, the most politically influential block of political supporters in Canada. Whether the membership agrees with the executives views or not.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Aug 2021)

Infanteer said:


> What the hell would gun laws have to do with a trade union?  Weird.


Nothing,....but all those years I was a Steward I only went to one OPSEU convention, it was nothing but 3 days of NDP are God and capitalism is the antichrist.   The breaking point where I finally went home was a good 2 hour lecture on why Coca cola can no longer be sold in OPSEU places......


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Aug 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Nothing,....but all those years I was a Steward I only went to one OPSEU convention, it was nothing but 3 days of NDP are God and capitalism is the antichrist.   The breaking point where I finally went home was a good 2 hour lecture on why Coca cola can no longer be sold in OPSEU places......


Likely because Pepsi offered to pay for their next convention. Because that is exactly how fickle and shallow these assholes are. They have money, power and influence to toss around willy nilly. Members have dues automatically removed from their pay. Most only look at the net amount of the check and don't know how much they are paying in dues, let alone where it's going and who it's  supporting. That's the excutives job, members don't  need to know.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Aug 2021)

Sorry for the derail folks but it does explain  not to confuse what Unions say to what their members think.

[it was because they were using scabs in some South American country, meanwhile we were staring at a few more years of "zero's or 'spending neutral'......want a raise?...lose benefits.]


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Aug 2021)

Yup. My intention was to stay clear of this thread, but I couldn't let thousands of workers get slagged because of who they are forced to support. Right to Work is not ideal, but somewhere along the line, people who are having their money stolen by proxy and bad legislation should have a choice how their money is spent, who it is going to and who it is supporting. National Executives like Gerry Diaz, should not have the capability to demand of a federal government, let alone be their bagman to a bribed media of their members.


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Aug 2021)

Torn between putting this here or in one of the AFG threads, but since it's a political commitment, seemed to make more sense here for now.

O'Toole's alternatives in Afghanistan, via 3:46 video shared Thursday


> "Rededicate ourselves to work with our allies and Afghanistan's neighbours to help anyone able to flee the Taliban
> "Work with our allies, including India, to establish humanitarian and refugee corridors"
> "Provide political and material support to Afghans resisting the Taliban occupation"


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Torn between putting this here or in one of the AFG threads, but since it's a political commitment, seemed to make more sense here for now.
> 
> O'Toole's alternatives in Afghanistan, via 3:46 video shared Thursday


Well at least he’s proposing something with an actual action plan.


----------



## Haggis (29 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> It wouldn’t have been.  This didn’t become a front page issue until a crisis happened.  When was the last time O’Toole mentioned it before all of this?


July 22, 2021, actually.  He sent a letter to then-PM Trudeau asking/pleading for the Liberal government to step up.


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> July 22, 2021, actually.  He sent a letter to then-PM Trudeau asking/pleading for the Liberal government to step up.


That is still when all of this started. So yeah…I said before all of this.


----------



## MilEME09 (29 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> That is still when all of this started. So yeah…I said before all of this.


Indeed and while some have stated he has been pushing this issue for a couple years, 10 minutes on Google has yielded nothing older then a month.


----------



## RangerRay (29 Aug 2021)

I am sure I heard him talk about this on one of the national non-CBC talk radio programs more than a year ago. But I could be misremembering things


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Aug 2021)

Bearing in mind that most of what will turn up in Google is news-based and biased towards recent news, the question is whether anything before this "event" started was newsworthy.  If not, good luck finding anything.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Bearing in mind that most of what will turn up in Google is news-based and biased towards recent news, the question is whether anything before this "event" started was newsworthy.  If not, good luck finding anything.


This from the Toronto Sun back in 2017, detailing assistance that O'Toole has provided in the past as a cabinet minister, and later as a member of the opposition.



> *Afghan interpreter seeks safety in Canada*
> 
> “Disappointing” and “unacceptable.”
> That’s how federal Conservative leadership candidate Erin O’Toole describes the “terrible” response from Canadian Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen to an Afghan interpreter’s fear of assassination for serving Canada’s troops.
> ...


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Bearing in mind that most of what will turn up in Google is news-based and biased towards recent news, the question is whether anything before this "event" started was newsworthy.  If not, good luck finding anything.


Like I said originally this wasn’t on anyone’s plate until it became a crisis.   While I can appreciate O’toole’s efforts as an MP, the CPC would be pretty much in the same situation the LPC is right now if they were governing.  Both parties procrastinated on this file.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> But yeah, this might get capitalized on by the LPC.


I would be very suspicious if they didn't try to.

I mentioned the demographic of the protestors not being in line with the LPCs right-wing white male (probably racist) narrative. 

Check the videos and see for yourself. Seems less "conservative oriented" and more about _Canadians_ being pissed off and fed up with Trudeau.


Is aggressive protesting a right-wing conservative thing? Not necessarily. I believe this old couple was curious about the PPC last election.






Has Trudeau been held accoutable for violating Covid-19 restrictions yet?


----------



## Haggis (29 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Like I said originally this wasn’t on anyone’s plate until it became a crisis.   While I can appreciate O’toole’s efforts as an MP, the CPC would be pretty much in the same situation the LPC is right now if they were governing.  Both parties procrastinated on this file.


Maybe a CPC PM would have dealt with the international humanitarian crisis directly involving his nation instead of having been so vain as to call an unnecessary, unpopular and unwanted election just as the crisis was beginning to unfold.


----------



## Remius (29 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> Maybe a CPC PM would have dealt with the international humanitarian crisis directly involving his nation instead of having been so vain as to call an unnecessary, unpopular and unwanted election just as the crisis was beginning to unfold.


I’m pretty sure that if the LPC or the CPC (if they were in power) knew this was going to be in the news cycle the way it has they wouldn’t have called this election.  But I have no doubt that a CPC PM would have called an election if it advantaged him just like this one has.


----------



## Remius (30 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I would be very suspicious if they didn't try to.
> 
> I mentioned the demographic of the protestors not being in line with the LPCs right-wing white male (probably racist) narrative.
> 
> ...


Does not matter.  If these people keep protesting and using signs with nooses and yelling  racist comments at the protective detail like in the latest one then I think this will help Trudeau more than hinder him.  I would not be shocked if we see a bump in the LPCs polls as result of these sorts of things.  

Then there is Cheryl Gallant…









						Erin O’Toole won’t dismiss Conservative candidate’s anti-climate change comments
					

Conservative candidate raises concern about ‘climate emergency lockdown’ but party leader Erin O’Toole sidesteps comments




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				




O’toole is running a great campaign.  But these sorts of things make it harder for him and give the LPC plenty of gifts to capitalise on.


----------



## Good2Golf (30 Aug 2021)

I wonder if the Liberals are now desperate enough to use False Flag activities?


----------



## Haggis (30 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I wonder if the Liberals are now desperate enough to use False Flag activities?


Some believe that they already have.  He believes he's faced more vitriol than any other PM , which shows his poor grasp of Canadian political and Trudeau family history.


----------



## PMedMoe (30 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Then there is Cheryl Gallant…


She's a complete idiot.  I can't believe she keeps getting voted in.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Aug 2021)

Latest from Angus Reid (overview also attached in case link doesn't work) with the key info about the poll itself


> The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from August 27-29, 2021 among a representative randomized sample of 1,639 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI.


----------



## Navy_Pete (30 Aug 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> She's a complete idiot.  I can't believe she keeps getting voted in.


I agree, but shows that people vote for the party, not the candidate. Especially can't believe she keeps getting elected in Pet with all the dumb things she's said about PTSD either, but there you go.

I think I'm Team Thanos for this election; would be great to eliminate half the MP positions with a snap (not the individuals obviously, just the jobs). No point having two people act as filler when one will do. For the most part most MPs don't actually do anything, and we probably drop well over a billion a year on their salaries, staff, etc. When they can take 4 months off a year without people noticing...


----------



## daftandbarmy (31 Aug 2021)

Engage retro-rockets!

Conservatives on 'rocket ride' as seat projection shows close race: Nanos​
The Conservatives continue to run just ahead of the Liberals in ballot support, and have also all but erased the previous Liberal lead in projected seats, according to nightly tracking conducted by Nanos Research for CTV News and the Globe and Mail.

With just three weeks to go until the Sept. 20 vote, tracking data ending Sunday and released Monday morning shows the Liberals projected to win 111 seats versus 107 for the Conservatives, a sharp change from an Aug. 22 projection that had the Liberals ahead of the Conservatives 128 to 94. A projection from June had the Liberals at 171 seats versus 59 for the Conservatives.

“Check out the trendline, It’s basically a rocket for the Conservatives,” Nanos said on Friday's edition of CTV's Trend Line podcast. It's basically a tie for all intents and purposes.”











						Conservatives on 'rocket ride' as seat projection shows close race: Nanos
					

The Conservatives continue to run just ahead of the Liberals in ballot support, and have also all but erased the previous Liberal lead in projected seats, according to nightly tracking conducted by Nanos Research for CTV News and the Globe and Mail.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Haggis (31 Aug 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> *Conservatives on 'rocket ride' as seat projection shows close race: Nanos*


Rockets go up....
... and down.

There's still 21 days for the hard right SoCons and fringe parties to sink O'Toole's chances.

The Libs have yet to fire most of their platform's large-calibre silver bullets yet.


----------



## Quirky (31 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> Rockets go up....
> ... and down.
> 
> There's still 21 days for the hard right SoCons and fringe parties to sink O'Toole's chances.
> ...



They are waiting to print more money until they can make more spending promises. Machine must be broken.


----------



## QV (31 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> Rockets go up....
> ... and down.
> 
> There's still 21 days for the hard right SoCons and fringe parties to sink O'Toole's chances.
> ...


I imagine a couple of big silver bullets might be:

1. UBI (free money!)
2. Forgiveness of student debt (someone else pays your bills!)

That ought to capture a sizeable portion of the 18-32 crowd and the 65+ crowd.


----------



## The Bread Guy (31 Aug 2021)

Heh, heh, heh ....


> Two First Nations leaders from Manitoba endorsed a Liberal candidate running in the province's north while standing next to NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh at a campaign event.
> 
> Singh and two NDP candidates seeking re-election met with Manitoba First Nations leaders in Winnipeg last week to discuss some of the pressing issues facing Indigenous communities like housing and mental health.
> 
> While the chiefs said they were thankful Singh and his team organized this tête-à-tête during a busy election campaign — they said they would be backing Liberal candidate Shirley Robinson over NDP incumbent Niki Ashton in the Churchill–Keewatinook Aski race because they want more Indigenous voices in Canada's Parliament ...


----------



## RangerRay (31 Aug 2021)

Rishi Maharaj: Our housing problem isn't money. It's cities not wanting more houses.
					

Municipalities largely do not want new homes, at least not in the form that would be necessary to build them at significantly lower prices than our current stock of housing.




					theline.substack.com
				




More on how housing won’t get fixed until municipalities fundamentally change their ways, and why that won’t happen anytime soon (zoning, home-owners vote overwhelmingly in municipal elections, lack of federal leverage, etc.).


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Heh, heh, heh ....


Singh would have been on his game to ask how they’d feel when the same happens to their candidate as happened to another indigenous MP, nay a Minister of the Crown, Jody Wilson-Raybould? 🤔


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> Rockets go up....
> ... and down.
> 
> There's still 21 days for the hard right SoCons and fringe parties to sink O'Toole's chances.
> ...


This.  And post labour day is when most voters will start paying attention.
O’toole is running a great campaign but his underlings could spoil it.  Hopefully not.


----------



## ModlrMike (31 Aug 2021)

Speaking of own goals:

Liberal candidate allowed to run for re-election despite past claims of inappropriate behaviour​Vancouver Liberal candidate flipped dozens of homes for profit, records show​


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

None of which is illegal.  But it does look bad if housing is an issue the LPC wants to push.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> None of which is illegal.  But it does look bad if housing is an issue the LPC wants to push.


Sexual advances or inappropriate comments might look bad too.


----------



## blacktriangle (31 Aug 2021)

If you're a wealthy politician (especially a Liberal one) it's cool to own or have flipped multiple properties. It's just being business savvy. On the other hand, if you've worked your entire life just to buy (and perhaps one day, pay off) your principal residence, you're an oppressor and deserve to be demonized.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Speaking of own goals:
> 
> Liberal candidate allowed to run for re-election despite past claims of inappropriate behaviour​


Clearly the young female staffers experienced things differently than Saini…perhaps similarly to how the young then journalist Rose Knight back in August of 2000 experienced Justin Trudeau’s inappropriate behaviour…

Perhaps best to keep the indignation against questionable behaviour to non-Liberal candidates, shall we?


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Sexual advances or inappropriate comments might look bad too.


Yes, in regards to that.  But the house flipping guy is a nothing burger as far as I’m concerned.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

For anyone interested in the fiscal side of the CPC plans.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/otoole-balanced-budget-no-cuts-1.6159859
		


The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is not impressed and basically says O’Toole thinks the Budget will balance itself.

feels like bizarro world sometimes lol


----------



## Haggis (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> For anyone interested in the fiscal side of the CPC plans.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I wonder what the CTF think of the PPC's promise to balance the books within their first mandate?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Yes, in regards to that.  But the house flipping guy is a nothing burger as far as I’m concerned.


It won't fly well with people that have been priced out of the housing market by people like him.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> It won't fly well with people that have been priced out of the housing market by people like him.


Those people would be expecting more than he's able to give them.


----------



## The Bread Guy (31 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I wonder if the Liberals are now desperate enough to use False Flag activities?


Not according to this (full text also attached IAW the Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's Copyright Act) ....


> A loose network of COVID-19 vaccine and lockdown protesters is using digital tools to make the federal election campaign one of the most vitriolic in recent memory, congregating in encrypted chats to track Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau's whereabouts and organize disruptions of his public events.
> 
> The protesters are posting the schedule for Trudeau’s public events the night before, including the addresses and times of his campaign events. In one chat, a member suggested that they received the itineraries from “a media person.” Another well-known GTA anti-lockdown protester bragged that he’s been sharing Trudeau’s itinerary online.
> 
> ...


Also, this from The Canadian Press (text also attached)


> ... protesters appear to be mobilizing through social media, including Facebook groups such as “ Ontario Protests and Freedom to Assemble Information Page.”
> 
> The purported “administrator” of that page is a Barrie, Ont., woman who posted a message Friday detailing the time and location of Trudeau’s Bolton event and inquiring whether anyone was “going to heckle” him.
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Haggis said:


> I wonder what the CTF think of the PPC's promise to balance the books within their first mandate?


I don’t know.  To be honest with all their spending promises and not much to show for as to how they would achieve it i suspect the CTF isn’t buying it.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> It won't fly well with people that have been priced out of the housing market by people like him.


I said as much,  it doesn’t look good if housing is an LPC center piece.  Doesn’t change the fact that the guy did nothing wrong.

  There is also a lot of problems with the house flipping rule the liberals want to bring in.  A lot of people buy homes as a couple and split up before a year is up.  They would be penalized.  What about CAF members that might get posted within a year of them buying a home?  

probably a few more examples and not too many details on how that would work.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Well this is awkward…



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/first-nations-leader-endorse-liberal-candidate-1.6159401


----------



## Weinie (31 Aug 2021)

Not all kooks are on the right.

"As one might expect, a few Canadian progressives really are blowing out their mental gaskets trying to resolve this contradiction. That includes University of Toronto epidemiologist David Fisman, who made news on August 23 when he stepped down from Ontario’s independent volunteer science table, which he claimed was subject to improper political interference. *On Sunday, Fisman announced that he’d unearthed an even more diabolical plan: Noting that a Conservative election slogan is 14 words in length, he deduced this to be a “#dogwhistle” aimed at admirers of a white supremacist terrorist movement. He even provided a Wikipedia link, so we could all read about the Nazi hate carnival that awaits us if we vote for O’Toole."*


Jonathan Kay: Why the Canadian left believes kooky theories about coded messages to Nazis


----------



## Brad Sallows (31 Aug 2021)

Anyone who decides his vote based on "cheaper housing" policy - of any party - is doomed to be disappointed.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Yes, in regards to that.  But the house flipping guy is a nothing burger as far as I’m concerned.


Speaking of nothing burgers it seems like Trudeau isn't too concerned about those recent allegations against his candidate. 

_women who come forward with complaints of sexual assault and harassment must be supported and believed_ except in cases where the accused is a Liberal candidate I guess.



> Four female staffers reported to a senior Liberal staffer that Saini, along with his friend and mentee, Tabbara, were acting inappropriately with young female staffers at the holiday party, *including "touching" or being "handsy,"* according to multiple sources.



Naturally you know exactly what I'm thinking.

I'll just add this gem.



> “Mr. Saini has shared the processes, there have been rigorous processes undertaken that he has shared the details of,” Trudeau said. “*We know that it is extremely important to take any allegation seriously, which we certainly have, and we always will because everyone deserves a safe workplace.”*
> 
> 
> *On Monday, Trudeau appeared to take a different position when asked about Troy Myers, a Conservative candidate* in the Nova Scotia riding of Dartmouth-Cole Harbour who *stepped down when he was asked to withdraw by the Tories because of an allegation of sexual assault.*
> ...


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Speaking of nothing burgers it seems like Trudeau isn't too concerned about those recent allegations against his candidate.
> 
> _women who come forward with complaints of sexual assault and harassment must be supported and believed_ except in cases where the accused is a Liberal candidate I guess.
> 
> ...


That’s isn’t the same guy who was flipping houses just in case you were confusing the two. 

I agree.  It doesn’t look good.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> That’s isn’t the same guy who was flipping houses just in case you were confusing the two.


Of course it's not. Why would you assume I thought it was? I read both articles...


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Of course it's not. Why would you assume I thought it was? I read both articles...


Sorry, just wanted to confirm. To me it looked like you were.  Both quotes were lumping both in.  Hence the just in case.  My bad.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Sorry, just wanted to confirm. To me it looked like you were.  Both quotes were lumping both in.  Hence the just in case.  My bad.



Do you think it's massively hypocritical for Trudeau to say on a Monday that he would commit to removing a member with alligations like that against him and on a Tuesday make excuses why he's infact keeping one on his roster?


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Well this is awkward…
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/first-nations-leader-endorse-liberal-candidate-1.6159401


Especially awkward when their indigenous candidate, if elected, gets mistreated and kicked out of the caucus like Trudeau did to another indigenous member of parliament...heck, not just a member of parliament, but a key cabinet minister....


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Do you think it's massively hypocritical for Trudeau to say on a Monday that he would commit to removing a member with alligations like that against him and on a Tuesday make excuses why he's infact keeping one on his roster?


Absolutely.  Do you really think his track record on this indicates he would have done anything else? I thought I was clear when I said I agreed with you. twice.


----------



## Weinie (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Sorry, just wanted to confirm. To me it looked like you were.  Both quotes were lumping both in.  Hence the just in case.  My bad.


Altair must be panicking and trying to figure out how he can spin this.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Weinie said:


> Altair must be panicking and trying to figure out how he can spin this.


There is no spinning that.  It’s pretty black and white.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Weinie said:


> Altair must be panicking and trying to figure out how he can spin this.


Trudeau wouldn't want to deprive Saini of the opportunity to cry a little and "be better"...he's very considerate that way.

/s


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Absolutely.  Do you really think his track record on this indicates he would have done anything else? I thought I was clear when I said I agreed with you. twice.


But you're still considering voting in such a way to keep him at the helm?


----------



## PuckChaser (31 Aug 2021)

Weinie said:


> Altair must be panicking and trying to figure out how he can spin this.


No need to try to troll someone into an argument. I think we're all adult enough to debate policies but not attack individual posters.

-Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Especially awkward when their indigenous candidate, if elected, gets mistreated and kicked out of the caucus like Trudeau did to another indigenous member of parliament...heck, not just a member of parliament, but a key cabinet minister....


I would agree with you but her being indigenous had nothing to do with her being kicked out of caucus.


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But you're still considering voting in such a way to keep him at the helm?


What?


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> What?


I thought I saw you post you were on the fence whether you were voting LPC or not. Apologies if I'm mistaken of course.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> I would agree with you but her being indigenous had nothing to do with her being kicked out of caucus.


You're right...it was standing up for principles and following an ethical conduct path...her indigineity was merely another inconvenient element of the _Different Experience_*TM*.


----------



## Weinie (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> There is no spinning that.  It’s pretty black and white.


Never underestimate the propensity of folks to spin. You only have to look above at the posts re sexual misconduct.


----------



## Jarnhamar (31 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> You're right...it was standing up for principles and following an ethical conduct path...her indigineity was merely another inconvenient element of the _Different Experience_*TM*.


Didn't his father have a lot of disdain for indigenous people?

Lets not forget this one

_Thank you, thank you for being here, thank very much for your donation tonight I really appreciate your donation to the liberal party of Canada LOL_


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> What?





Jarnhamar said:


> I thought I saw you post you were on the fence whether you were voting LPC or not. Apologies if I'm mistaken of course.


No.  I tend to vote on the issues.  I am the type of voter that could go either way,  yes,  I don’t consider myself partisan or the type that will vote red or blue because I hate the other side so much that I will never change my vote regardless of who or what’s on the table.

I’ve stated here multiple times that I like what I am seeing with O’toole despite underestimating him and am leaning towards him,  the fiscal side of my politics though is not as impressed but the LPC isn’t offering much better on that front.  That does not mean I cannot be critical of one or the other on whatever issue they may bring up.  

for me campaigns matter.  This one is halfway through.  We’ll see what the other half brings. But my vote will be decided on the day I cast it.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Didn't his father have a lot of disdain for indigenous people?



...well...not ever put down on paper or anythings....oh, wait...

1969 White Paper on the Indian Act


----------



## Remius (31 Aug 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> You're right...it was standing up for principles and following an ethical conduct path...her indigineity was merely another inconvenient element of the _Different Experience_*TM*.


Her being an indeginous person is just a convenient prop argument used by his detractors in that case.  Her being a woman,  indigenous etc etc.  It’s because she didn’t do what he wanted her to do.  She could have been a man, handicapped, Muslim whatever.  The end result was going to be the same for anyone taking that stand.  

she stood up under principles and followed an ethical path,  agreed, and got dumped for it.  So yes ethics and the arrogance of a PM.  I would prefer people not use the indigenous woman thing as a prop.  There are plenty of real indigenous issues the LPC have failed on.


----------



## Weinie (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Her being an indeginous person is just a convenient prop argument used by his detractors in that case.  Her being a woman,  indigenous etc etc.  It’s because she didn’t do what he wanted her to do.  She could have been a man, handicapped, Muslim whatever.  The end result was going to be the same for anyone taking that stand.
> 
> she stood up under principles and followed an ethical path,  agreed, and got dumped for it.  So yes ethics and the arrogance of a PM.  I would prefer people not use the indigenous woman thing as a prop.  There are plenty of real indigenous issues the LPC have failed on.


Your experience may differ.

‘I believed that we were going to do what we promised’: Jody Wilson-Raybould talks about a toxic partisanship and why she won’t run again


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Aug 2021)

Remius said:


> Her being an indeginous person is just a convenient prop argument used by his detractors in that case.  Her being a woman,  indigenous etc etc.  It’s because she didn’t do what he wanted her to do.  She could have been a man, handicapped, Muslim whatever.  The end result was going to be the same for anyone taking that stand.
> 
> she stood up under principles and followed an ethical path,  agreed, and got dumped for it.  So yes ethics and the arrogance of a PM.  I would prefer people not use the indigenous woman thing as a prop.  There are plenty of real indigenous issues the LPC have failed on.


What it actually shows is that there is absolutely no limit to Trudeau's hypocrisy between his signalled virtue and his actual self-interested conduct.  So in that regard, I would say that the First Nations leaders who figuratively patted Jagmeet Singh on the head for coming out, but stating their support for a Liberal candidate because they want more indigenous members in parliament, should in no way be surprised if their potential candidate is thrown to the wolves because of Trudeau's own interests.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Her being an indeginous person is just a convenient prop argument used by his detractors in that case.  *Her being a woman,  indigenous etc etc.  It’s because she didn’t do what he wanted her to do.  She could have been a man, handicapped, Muslim whatever.  The end result was going to be the same for anyone taking that stand. *
> 
> she stood up under principles and followed an ethical path,  agreed, and got dumped for it.  So yes ethics and the arrogance of a PM.  I would prefer people not use the indigenous woman thing as a prop.  There are plenty of real indigenous issues the LPC have failed on.


Ummm, it was *unethical, and potentially illegal. *Good on her for standing up to him (and Gerald Butts)


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> for me campaigns matter.


Campaigns seem to me like they're based on desperate campaign promises, promises quickly discarded when politically convenient like electoral reform.

The Liberals in this case, because they are in power, could have helped Canadians a year ago (or more) with all these great plans but they waited until election time.

They waited because getting elected is more important than helping Canadians.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Campaigns seem to me like they're based on desperate campaign promises, promises quickly discarded when politically convenient like electoral reform.
> 
> The Liberals in this case, because they are in power, could have helped Canadians a year ago (or more) with all these great plans but they waited until election time.
> 
> They waited because getting elected is more important than helping Canadians.


Sure but we are seeing what the Parties are offering.  In particular the CPC.  O’Toole is being given the chance to show Canadians who he is.  Until now people in general had no clue.  He’s proving to be appealing and is looking prime ministerial.  Without the childish campaigning we’ve seen before that really hasn’t yielded results.

i hope we are seing a shift to the center on the CPCs part and that O’Toole doesn’t need the SOCONs to win.


----------



## QV (1 Sep 2021)

Curious to know what made anyone vote for Trudeau's party the last time.


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Curious to know what made anyone vote for Trudeau's party the last time.


Likely Scheer and the perception he was going to reopen abortion and was anti gay rights etc etc.  Enough to turn people off. They also didn’t offer much as far a platform is concerned.   


the CPC last time defeated themselves.  I mentioned previously that they beat themselves up with their own hands and the Liberals cheered them on. Even though Scheer increased his seat count and popular vote share.  The LPC also had more efficient vote distribution.   They shaped the campaign and the CPC had to react.   Not this time though.  

Trudeau called an election no one wanted and their old tricks aren’t working against O’Toole because O’Toole started day 1 when he took over to change whatever perception the Liberals might have in store for him come election time.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (1 Sep 2021)

100% Scheer.......I held my nose and went Conservative only because JT, but if it had been almost anyone else, it'd had been Liberal.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Curious to know what made anyone vote for Trudeau's party the last time.



I've always wanted to own a pipeline


----------



## cavalryman (1 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Curious to know what made anyone vote for Trudeau's party the last time.


In my riding, it's an intergenerational reflex. The LPC could run a retarded cocker spaniel and on September 21st, it would be merrily woofing its way into the HoC, marking every second seat for good measure.


----------



## blacktriangle (1 Sep 2021)

cavalryman said:


> In my riding, it's an intergenerational reflex. The LPC could run a retarded cocker spaniel and on September 21st, it would be merrily woofing its way into the HoC, marking every second seat for good measure.


Papineau?


----------



## brihard (1 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Curious to know what made anyone vote for Trudeau's party the last time.


I didn’t vote LPC, but I veered away from CPC pretty last minute. Way too much influence still held by the social conservatives. Too many people who matter to me don’t fall neatly into the brackets of what that fringe of the party consider equal human beings, and more importantly I lacked faith that Scheer would keep them in check.

While they’re still around, most of the worst have shifted elsewhere, and I have faith in O’Toole not to bend unduly to their stupidity, as evidenced by him ridding the party, where necessary, of those who would be that particular millstone around it’a neck.

At present I’m leaning strongly towards CPC. His announcements on housing, mental health, opioid addiction, and reducing barriers for domestic violence victims are all things that speak to me, and I like seeing some solid, pragmatic, reasonably progressive policy options coming from the CPC on them.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

Liberal platform is out.  Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.


----------



## Rifleman62 (1 Sep 2021)

National Post ePaper
					

National Post ePaper offers current issues of National Post ePaper.




					epaper.nationalpost.com
				


THIS RAGE IS SO INFURIATING.​WANT TO AVOID ELECTION PROTESTS, MR. TRUDEAU? STOP MAKING VOTERS ANGRY​
National Post (Latest Edition) - 1 Sep 2021 - JOHN ROBSON
A reader's comment, to add to Robson article:



> A more inclusive list of infuriating Trudeau actions:
> 
> TPP meeting - shows up late, shows socks to Ausie PM
> G23 meeting – taking selfies with staff and cleaning personnel while fate of ISIS is being decided by the other 22
> ...


----------



## cavalryman (1 Sep 2021)

blacktriangle said:


> Papineau?


Ottawa-Vanier, where every candidate other than the one standing for the LPC (or OLP for that matter) is a sacrificial goat.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Liberal platform is out.  Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.




So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift"   ...  after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?

And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift"   ...  after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?
> 
> And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.


Voters don't know the difference, nor do the LPC staffers that wrote the platform.

Hell I'm sure you could send in a picture of the Spruce Moose, and there would be a few serious considerations, until a SME steps in with reality.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

And yet more fodder

Kathryn Marshall: Trudeau's zero tolerance for sexual misconduct shamefully dissolves for Liberal candidate


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift"   ...  after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?
> 
> And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.



Strat airlift can include replacing the Polaris (long range) and possibly growing the Herc J fleet.


----------



## Haggis (1 Sep 2021)

Their cost of their legally owned gun ban from Bill C-21 just went from $200M to as much as $12.8B, all to be spent in 2022, if every province and territory buys into Trudeau's plan.  For sure QC and BC will be on board, so his startup costs are already at least $2.8B.


----------



## Haggis (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Strat airlift can include replacing the Polaris (long range) and possibly growing the Herc J fleet.


Or renting some Antonovs as required.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Sep 2021)

Comparing platforms on the veterans' front - Team Blue:


> "... Canada’s Conservatives will:
> •  End the mess of two benefit systems - Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and Veterans Affairs   Canada (VAC) - that do not work together and replace them with one streamlined system of benefits from enlistment through service and retirement.
> •  Ensure financial security & transition support for injured Veterans and their families.
> •  Streamline benefit adjudication & set performance targets to ensure that the benefits system is focused on helping our veterans rather than on outdated procedures.
> ...


Team Red:


> "... A re-elected Liberal government will:
> • Move forward on our plan to launch a pilot program next year that will provide rent supplements and wrap-around supports to homeless Veterans, so that they can get the housing and services they need.
> • Introduce a Veterans stream to the Rapid Housing Initiative which will see new affordable housing become available for Veterans.
> 
> ...


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Sep 2021)

One appears highly specific, the other not so much.


----------



## RedFive (1 Sep 2021)

I hear theres about to be a smokin' deal on some lightly used RAF J model Hercs...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> One appears highly specific, the other not so much.



I didn't realize that constantly referring to "women, LGBTQ2,  racializes and Indigenous" made a program "highly specific".


Oh! Wait! Just realized you meant it the other way. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## blacktriangle (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Liberal platform is out.  Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.


Does anyone else find the timing of this a bit suspicious? They've had almost six years to address the issue.


----------



## cavalryman (1 Sep 2021)

blacktriangle said:


> Does anyone else find the timing of this a bit suspicious? They've had almost six years to address the issue.


You mean right after we participated in a long-range humanitarian airlift that was a little short of lift (among other things)? Not suspicious at all.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Liberal platform is out.  Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.


Sigh. Would I be a cynic if I said that this was meant to be a spin-doctor attempt to respond to the shit show that was the Canadian evac for Afghanistan?

Just asking for a friend.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

That would be very un-Liberal, Weinie.

Why would they want to put something in their program at this point that would only serve to re-emphasize one of their recent debacle? They certainly could not use it to say" We didn't have enough strategic airlift to carry out our plan in Afghanistan" when they failed to make that claim at the time, and when they have been in power for six years before that and didn't see the need to say so four years ago (has it been that long?) in SSE or do anything about it during that time. 

Besides, this can't be a surprise. I have friends at Air Transport that keep telling me that they have been informing the higher ups for years that in Canada, it is not possible to make a coherent sentence that would include the words "we have enough" and "strategic airlift" in it.

P.S. Here's somethings else "strategic" we haven't enough of , but no one talks about: Sealift.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> That would be very un-Liberal, Weinie.
> 
> Why would they want to put something in their program at this point that would only serve to re-emphasize one of their recent debacle? They certainly could not use it to say" We didn't have enough strategic airlift to carry out our plan in Afghanistan" when they failed to make that claim at the time, and when they have been in power for six years before that and didn't see the need to say so four years ago (has it been that long?) in SSE or do anything about it during that time.
> 
> ...


And on the obverse, why would they emphasize/point out their failures/shortcomings, as you stated above, unless they have concocted a plan to defeat criticism of this very point?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

Short answer is nobody has criticized the GoC for  a lack of strategic airlifters at this time. And if they had, you don't respond by saying Ok, we'll buy more.

I would think it is because you are opening a can of worms. First, it would make it sound like you are complaining after the fact about something you didn't complain about at the time.

Second, even if you did have more strategic airlift assets available, would it have made any difference? I may be wrong, because I am not in the know, but got a strange feeling from what I read in the various papers that with the planes available, their location and with the time on hand for the evacuation, more flights could have been flown and more people could have been loaded on each, but that the American control of the air bridge limited the number of spots we could get for our flights (like every body else) in the first instance and our abiding by our "seat belt" regulations restricted the second. But I've not heard anyone mention we were short of planes. So why draw attention to the Canadian participation in the air bridge if all of these facts can be thrown in your leader's face during the debates?

At this point in time, we have no idea why this point has suddenly been put in the program, instead of making reference to SSE and connecting to it somehow (another scoring opportunity for the other parties at debate time: "You just put out your white paper and already you are changing your shopping list!!!" We'll have to wait and see their logic, but in my cynical view based on past performance of the Liberals, it's probably there with a view to making some sort of announcement at a staged event in an air industry setting to say "look at what we will do to support your industry".

But that's just cynical me talking here.


----------



## kev994 (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> So let's see here: The party that said the acquisition of C-17's was a waste of money now makes it part of its platform to "grow strategic airlift"   ...  after the line for C-17 has been closed and Canada missed its chance at snatching the last three or four? What is he going to acquire? Used C-5 parked in the desert and refurbished to current US Air Force standard?
> 
> And what on earth is a short range strategic airlifter? If you are going to go at the strategic airlifter level (as opposed to tactical airlifter) wouldn't you want them to have reasonable legs ... unless what you have in mind is the Airbus A400M or the Super Hercules.


I assume they’re talking about the tanker replacement, A330 MRTT for strategic airlift. Maybe the short range they’re talking about the Kingfishers that are half delivered?


----------



## QV (1 Sep 2021)

In keeping with the trend one could only assume the following rationale: Harper didn't buy enough at the time... the LPC aim to correct Harper's past mistake so don't vote for O'Toole because... Harper.


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Sep 2021)

Military discussed whether to ‘soften’ China travel ban in early days of COVID-19 - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Emails obtained by Global News show conversations with the defence minister's office following a military order banning travel to China in the early days of COVID-19.




					globalnews.ca
				




interesting optics here, government wanted softer language on travel ban


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2021)

Don Martin: It's all about him -- and that's why Trudeau is in trouble
					

Three weeks after Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau started the victory lap for his vaccination procurement success, the Liberal party is flirting with a future in the Official Opposition – and it’s very much all because of him, Don Martin writes in his exclusive column for CTVNews.ca.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Don Martin sums it up pretty well.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Liberal platform is out.  Commitment to grow the CAF's long and short range strategic airlift.


DAP 
Do you have a link?


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

Page  69.



			https://liberal.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/292/2021/09/Platform-Forward-For-Everyone.pdf


----------



## KevinB (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Page  69.
> 
> 
> 
> https://liberal.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/292/2021/09/Platform-Forward-For-Everyone.pdf



I see it took so long due to both a laundry list of unfillable promises, and a slew of JT headshots so you can't miss who's making empty promises.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

OK, On my way to p. 69, I stopped accidentally at page 52. You got to read that: Creating a right to repair household appliances. I kid you not. Talk about creating a document where anyone with a beef can find something.

All right, the very small section on SSE, which is where this is found contains very little, and even then some are new and never appeared in SSE (such such as leading international efforts to establish a global coalition to address forest fire (that's in the SSE section).

The strategic lift matter does not seem to refer to replacing the Polaris, which is the fourth priority in the actual RCAF section of SSE but at increasing capability of lift in general - not refuelling. Moreover, in the current SSE section, not a word is mentioned of the RCAF number one priority - the replacement of the fighter - or of the RCN's replacement of the frigates. You would think that would have been in there if they consider the Shipbuilding Strategy a success.

Here is the whole SSE section:


_Strong, Secure, Engaged, and Inclusive
Canada faces a host of global threats, including rapidly evolving risks posed by cyber attacks, foreign interference, and climate change. Canadians deserve a 21st century military that is equipped to respond to emerging threats to our national security and in which all members feel safe and included. Building on Strong, Secure, Engaged, the comprehensive, long-term defence policy we released in 2017, a re-elected government will ensure that our military has the equipment and resources needed to keep Canadians safe, secure our Arctic sovereignty, and respond to the full range of hostile, cyber, and environmental threats we face.
A re-elected Liberal government will:_
_Work with the United States to modernize NORAD, including by upgrading the North Warning System, deploying new technological solutions to improve surveillance and monitoring, improving command and control systems, and investing in the infrastructure and capabilities necessary to deter and defeat threats to North America. These investments will also support northern communitiesand further strengthen Canada’s sovereignty in theArctic, including with respect to the increasing navigation of Arctic waters_
_Expand Canada’s long and short-range strategicairlift capability in order to increase Canada’scontribution to NATO, coalition and allied military operations abroad, and improve support for domestic and international emergency response._

_• Expand cooperation and assistance to partners, allies and international organizations, such as the United Nations, NATO, and regional organizations, in humanitarian assistance and disaster recovery, including health and climate emergencies, and conflict response.
• Remain a leading contributor to NATO operations, including by extending Operation Reassurance inEastern Europe and maintaining Canada’s regular participation in NATO’s aerial and maritime patrol operations. We will also extend Canada’s support toUkraine and opposition to Russian aggression, through Operation Unifier.
• Work with international partners to establish a NATO Centre of Excellence on Climate and Security in Canada, to ensure that Canada and its allies are equipped to respond to threats posed by climate change.
• Lead international efforts to establish a global coalition to respond to wildfires and other climate emergencies._


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Sep 2021)

> Page vi.
> 
> • Action to confront systemic racism against Indigenous peoples, especially in the justice system and health care.


…except the racism against indigenous head of the justice system…by the PM himself…


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

Polaris are currently in the fleet performing two roles: strat lift and air to air refuelling.  Not all the CC-150s are AAR.

And when you aren't carrying tons of extra fuel in the wings, you can be used for pax or freight lift; it's not either/or.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (1 Sep 2021)

I understand that, Dap. But, if they refer to something already specified in SSE, such as the replacement of the Polaris, why not state it that way? They talk about expanding strat. airlift, not upgrading one of the existing capability.


----------



## Kirkhill (1 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Page  69.
> 
> 
> 
> https://liberal.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/292/2021/09/Platform-Forward-For-Everyone.pdf


Many thanks.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

I can't swear one way or another what is meant... but I am making assumptions that there's no promise so good that it can't be made multiple times.

Besides, buy a half dozen A330s, with one or two that can do AAR, and retire the Polaris fleet and you've got a larger strat transport fleet, so you've delivered!

Nothing quite like making a promise that you know is going to happen anyways so you can use it as proof that you're delivering on your promises.  See also: Every set of election promises ever.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Short answer is nobody has criticized the GoC for  a lack of strategic airlifters at this time. And if they had, you don't respond by saying Ok, we'll buy more.
> 
> I would think it is because you are opening a can of worms. First, it would make it sound like you are complaining after the fact about something you didn't complain about at the time.
> 
> ...


You may be right, I may be caught up in the fervor that is swirling around the partisanship supporting the election and unjustly painting the Libs with a wrong colour.

But that's just cynical me talking here., as well.


----------



## brihard (1 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Comparing platforms on the veterans' front - Team Blue:
> 
> Team Red:


Damn, that CPC veterans plan is fantastic. You can very clearly the the impact of feedback O’Toole was getting while MVA under Harper, and that he wasn’t in a position to have ‘platformed’. I recognize issues that were brought up with great specificity by veterans’ advocates during the last CPC government.


----------



## MilEME09 (1 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Damn, that CPC veterans plan is fantastic. You can very clearly the the impact of feedback O’Toole was getting while MVA under Harper, and that he wasn’t in a position to have ‘platformed’. I recognize issues that were brought up with great specificity by veterans’ advocates during the last CPC government.


Not just the veterans front, as a reservist the defense priorities are pretty awesome too.


----------



## lenaitch (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> OK, On my way to p. 69, I stopped accidentally at page 52. You got to read that: Creating a *right to repair household appliances*. I kid you not. Talk about creating a document where anyone with a beef can find something.


I wasn't aware that was a problem.  Certainly, 'they don't make 'em like they used to', but I wasn't aware of manufacturers blocking access to manuals and parts (at least for appliances).


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Sep 2021)




----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Sigh. Would I be a cynic if I said that this was meant to be a spin-doctor attempt to respond to the shit show that was the Canadian evac for Afghanistan?


So young to be so cynical ....   ... but far from alone, I suspect, on this talking point.


----------



## Weinie (1 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> I wasn't aware that was a problem.  Certainly, *'they don't make 'em like they used to'*, but I wasn't aware of manufacturers blocking access to manuals and parts (at least for appliances).


Tell me about it. I brought a fridge from Gagetown to Ottawa in 2005 that was 20 years old. It didn't meet the stainless steel criteria that my 9D wanted, and we had no room, so I gave it to a friend. 

5 Fridges at my new houses(s) later, my Gagetown fridge is still going strong.


----------



## dapaterson (1 Sep 2021)

Unlike many of your peers, though, you kept the same 9D, still going strong.


----------



## kev994 (1 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Moreover, in the current SSE section, not a word is mentioned of the RCAF number one priority - the replacement of the fighter


I’m willing to bet that the LPC does not want to touch that one with a 10-foot pole.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Sep 2021)

kev994 said:


> I’m willing to bet that the LPC does not want to touch that one with a 10-foot pole.


Be a great gotcha moment during the debate. CPC/NDP (trying to give NDP benefit of the doubt here) commit to signing a contract within their first mandate and watch Trudeau squirm.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Sep 2021)

Don’t forget, the Liberal Party is renaming the defence policy “Strong, Secure, Engaged*,  and Inclusive.*”   (Ref. p.69)


----------



## Haggis (1 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Be a great gotcha moment during the debate. CPC/NDP (trying to give NDP benefit of the doubt here) commit to signing a contract within their first mandate and watch Trudeau squirm.


The purchase of new American or European made fighters would be an extravagance Canada should not pursue when there are perfectly good used fighters to be had from China.


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Sep 2021)

Or we could buy them from Afghanistan...


----------



## kev994 (1 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Or we could buy them from Afghanistan...


Yeah, I hear our brothers have found themselves in possession of some surplus aircraft…


----------



## Remius (1 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Damn, that CPC veterans plan is fantastic. You can very clearly the the impact of feedback O’Toole was getting while MVA under Harper, and that he wasn’t in a position to have ‘platformed’. I recognize issues that were brought up with great specificity by veterans’ advocates during the last CPC government.


Did you read the part about redefining universality of service?  Making it job specific. And allowing injured people to be able to continue to serve.   Looks good so far.


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Did you read the part about redefining universality of service?  Making it job specific. And allowing injured people to be able to continue to serve.   Looks good so far.


Until you're one of the 3 clerks in the entire country that can deploy or go to the field, so you're driven into the ground until you end up on the same list as everyone else. Drastically changing UoS is just a way to play a shell game with the overall numbers in the CAF, by refusing to release anyone.

Rest of the policy looks fantastic, especially the MO being able to determine service disability numbers that VAC cannot overrule. Should be good to fix the current 24 month wait time the Liberals have instituted while they've been in charge of VAC.


----------



## MJP (2 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Until you're one of the 3 clerks in the entire country that can deploy or go to the field, so you're driven into the ground until you end up on the same list as everyone else. Drastically changing UoS is just a way to play a shell game with the overall numbers in the CAF, by refusing to release anyone.
> 
> Rest of the policy looks fantastic, especially the MO being able to determine service disability numbers that VAC cannot overrule. Should be good to fix the current 24 month wait time the Liberals have instituted while they've been in charge of VAC.


If they put hard limits on retention in terms of numbers this might work but you're  likely right all it's going to end up doing is making the fit people who are ready to a good amount of the work just do more of the work.


----------



## ModlrMike (2 Sep 2021)

There's likely to be a ceiling on the number of personnel in a given trade on restrictions., but your point has merit. Not every broken person has to be released if the net effect is no degradation in capability.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Sep 2021)

So then, if trade X isn't at their "broken limit", why not enrol already broken people?

Once the CAF abandons UofS the HR tribunal will hammer for that, and there's no valid response.


----------



## Edward Campbell (2 Sep 2021)

I like the idea behind the promise ~ think e.g. Lord Nelson or Georges Vanier ~ but I suspect our bureaucrats (uniformed and civil) can find an infinite number of ways to 🤬 it all up.


----------



## Remius (2 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Until you're one of the 3 clerks in the entire country that can deploy or go to the field, so you're driven into the ground until you end up on the same list as everyone else. Drastically changing UoS is just a way to play a shell game with the overall numbers in the CAF, by refusing to release anyone.
> 
> Rest of the policy looks fantastic, especially the MO being able to determine service disability numbers that VAC cannot overrule. Should be good to fix the current 24 month wait time the Liberals have instituted while they've been in charge of VAC.


Or maybe the broken infantry guy who still wants to serve can be remustered to a trade that can still employ him.   There is potential. I see your point but I also see how the intent could  work.


----------



## lenaitch (2 Sep 2021)

Does everybody have to be judged by infantry standards, even though they remain deployable?  Is the UofS baseline standard so rigid that the CF is losing, or risking, otherwise good members who, in all reality can perform their trade, and possibly a wide array of trades, anywhere on the globe?

Admittedly I'm on the outside looking in, but have a good friend who is being released due to diabetes.  Apparently (I don't know for certain) the issue is not the illness but, rather, the fact that the meds need refrigeration.  He's with the RCAF.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Damn, that CPC veterans plan is fantastic. You can very clearly the the impact of feedback O’Toole was getting while MVA under Harper, and that he wasn’t in a position to have ‘platformed’. I recognize issues that were brought up with great specificity by veterans’ advocates during the last CPC government.


Thanks for the insights.  Curious about this bit in the CPC plan:


> Implementing the Lifelong Disability Benefit for moderately to severely injured veterans.


I thought the original intent was to have everyone able to access the pension-for-life option - did I misunderstand, is this a tweak in the platform, or was this what was on the table back then?


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Does everybody have to be judged by infantry standards, even though they remain deployable?  Is the UofS baseline standard so rigid that the CF is losing, or risking, otherwise good members who, in all reality can perform their trade, and possibly a wide array of trades, anywhere on the globe?
> 
> Admittedly I'm on the outside looking in, but have a good friend who is being released due to diabetes.  Apparently (I don't know for certain) the issue is not the illness but, rather, the fact that the meds need refrigeration.  He's with the RCAF.



Easy now, that kind of logic is going to make the "every one is soldier first" crowd implode.


----------



## SupersonicMax (2 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Easy now, that kind of logic is going to make the "every one is soldier first" crowd implode.


A good friend of mine, pilot, was released for UoS. He received his medical decision after he landed from a combat mission in Irak…. Talk about a broken system.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> A good friend of mine, pilot, was released for UoS. He received his medical decision after he landed from a combat mission in Irak…. Talk about a broken system.



I met a guy like that a few years ago. 

A former SoF rotary wing pilot with about 10,000 hours, he was released because his knee wouldn't let him complete the 13km BFT (carrying 55lbs) without great pain.

I said "Dude, you exist so people like me don't HAVE to carry all that gear so far."

I helped steer him into some really well aligned civilian employment where, I'm happy to say, he's much more appreciated


----------



## Remius (2 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I met a guy like that a few years ago.
> 
> A former SoF rotary wing pilot with about 10,000 hours, he was released because his knee wouldn't let him complete the 13km BFT (carrying 55lbs) without great pain.
> 
> ...


Exactly why UoS needs fixing.  Releasing someone who will likely never need to hump 13kms in whatever time we decided back in WW1 to get to the front in a timely manner.    

it’s a good idea.  Bureaucrats may mess it up but I’d rather have something at least that can be fixed than have nothing at all.


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Sep 2021)

Think about it this way, we have a great many on the CSS side who get out due to UoS or retirement only to be hired as a civilian contractor. Why not just keep them in uniform? Sure Bloggins might not be able to deploy, but maybe he would make a damn good instructor at the vehicle school.


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Sep 2021)

Oh my, this is getting good now:

'Anaemic' Liberal brand fails to motivate Canadians to vote them into majority government, Maru poll finds​
Trudeau may find himself in real trouble on Sept. 20, after a new poll has found that majority of Canadians may vote for a political party other than the Liberals.

The Maru Public Opinion survey found that 73 per cent of Canadians polled are open to voting for a party to run the country other the Liberals led by Trudeau, while a mere 27 per cent have remained loyal to the prime minister.










						'Anaemic' Liberal brand fails to motivate Canadians to vote them into majority government, Maru poll finds
					

The Maru Public Opinion survey found that 73 per cent of Canadians polled are open to voting for a party other than the Trudeau Liberals




					ottawacitizen.com


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> A good friend of mine, pilot, was released for UoS. He received his medical decision after he landed from a combat mission in Irak…. Talk about a broken system.


That's ridiculous.


----------



## ModlrMike (2 Sep 2021)

I think the Conservatives have done a good job of seizing the narrative. They've thus far successfully denied the Liberals the opportunity to define them, and met every issue head on with clear and unambiguous language. However, there's still three long weeks to go.


----------



## Navy_Pete (2 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Think about it this way, we have a great many on the CSS side who get out due to UoS or retirement only to be hired as a civilian contractor. Why not just keep them in uniform? Sure Bloggins might not be able to deploy, but maybe he would make a damn good instructor at the vehicle school.


I thought this already existed; I know of a few people that ended up on a PCAT but stayed in uniform at a terminal rank and finished out their careers.

Needs some common sense to prevent MIR warriors clogging up the system, shifting the burden onto healthy people and burning them out, but for a fully trade qualified, experienced person that doesn't meet UoS as a direct result of injuries sustained in the CAF seems like a no brainer.

Wasn't there a few fairly public PA announcements on this with folks rehabing after IED related injuries continuing to work as instructors? The one that comes to mind was someone that had lost a leg, but don't recall the details.


----------



## Halifax Tar (2 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> I thought this already existed; I know of a few people that ended up on a PCAT but stayed in uniform at a terminal rank and finished out their careers.
> 
> Needs some common sense to prevent MIR warriors clogging up the system, shifting the burden onto healthy people and burning them out, but for a fully trade qualified, experienced person that doesn't meet UoS as a direct result of injuries sustained in the CAF seems like a no brainer.
> 
> Wasn't there a few fairly public PA announcements on this with folks rehabing after IED related injuries continuing to work as instructors? The one that comes to mind was someone that had lost a leg, but don't recall the details.


Are you taking about retention policies ?


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Don’t forget, the Liberal Party is renaming the defence policy “Strong, Secure, Engaged*,  and Inclusive.*”   (Ref. p.69)



So, does that mean they'll start paying proper attention to the Reserves?


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> So, does that mean they'll start paying proper attention to the Reserves?


You must be new here, or hit your head hard


----------



## dapaterson (2 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Or maybe the broken infantry guy who still wants to serve can be remustered to a trade that can still employ him.   There is potential. I see your point but I also see how the intent could  work.


Already done routinely.


----------



## Quirky (2 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Think about it this way, we have a great many on the CSS side who get out due to UoS or retirement only to be hired as a civilian contractor. Why not just keep them in uniform? Sure Bloggins might not be able to deploy, but maybe he would make a damn good instructor at the vehicle school.



Except you’ll eventually burn out the same people and you’ll run out of undeployable instructor positions. Then you’ll get people pissed off that they are always deploying because Bloggins is taking up the instructor spot. It’s why people release - burn out. I agree we need to amend UofS depending on your job, but there still needs to be a basic soldier and medical standard. We need to look at the pace of operations and why people release, not whittle down requirements to wear the uniform.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Think about it this way, we have a great many on the CSS side who get out due to UoS or retirement only to be hired as a civilian contractor. Why not just keep them in uniform? Sure Bloggins might not be able to deploy, but maybe he would make a damn good instructor at the vehicle school.


I know a few people who would have been great for the CAF if they stayed but got hit with the UOS breech and released.

On the other hand I have zero faith in the gov or CAF to handle something like this well. I would expect to see members filling positions who's MELs include 2x half-days a week; sedimentary duties no lifting more than 5lbs, no stressful environment.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Think about it this way, we have a great many on the CSS side who get out due to UoS or retirement only to be hired as a civilian contractor. Why not just keep them in uniform? Sure Bloggins might not be able to deploy, but maybe he would make a damn good instructor at the vehicle school.


There's a massive difference between "instruct in controlled environment" and "deployable at a moment's notice anywhere in the world with limited medical support".

We have limits on the number of uniformed personnel, and pay premiums for military personnel. Keeping non-deployable folks in because of the CAF's uncontrollable uniform fetish serves no one.


----------



## Quirky (2 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> A good friend of mine, pilot, was released for UoS. He received his medical decision after he landed from a combat mission in Irak…. Talk about a broken system.


Something about that doesn’t make sense. You need to be on a PCAT to be medically released and no way someone on PCAT is getting deployed. How do you even pass an aircrew medical for that matter.


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> So, does that mean they'll start paying proper attention to the Reserves?


Nah, Reservists are only 92.5% of real people.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Nah, Reservists are only 92.5% of real people.


Better than 85% they used to be…


----------



## MilEME09 (2 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Nah, Reservists are only 92.5% of real people.


We also have commitment issues....


----------



## SupersonicMax (2 Sep 2021)

Quirky said:


> Something about that doesn’t make sense. You need to be on a PCAT to be medically released and no way someone on PCAT is getting deployed. How do you even pass an aircrew medical for that matter.


It depends what the injury is. His didn’t prevent him from being fit to fly and I believe the medical dag may have been waived.


----------



## Haggis (2 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> We also have commitment issues....


There are many other websites that address commitment issues. Do we have to do that here?


----------



## MJP (2 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> I thought this already existed; I know of a few people that ended up on a PCAT but stayed in uniform at a terminal rank and finished out their careers.


It does but because it is pesky admin many folks do not understand it or how it applies to their people.

I know many know this but to recap, broadly speaking there are trade and U of S medical standards. If someone breaches those standards it is first dealt with within the medical system through TCATs. If it is an ongoing condition that won't be resolved it goes to D Med Pol for their determination. Note there is a bunch of stuff in the middle before it gets there but until it gets there it almost means nothing careerwise.

DMEDPOL will make a determination if the limitations will be permanent and assign MELs. The file then goes to DMCA 3 who will make a determination if the MELs are high or low risk. Both trigger an Administrative Review – Medical Employment Limitations (AR-MEL) with the difference between them is who actually conducts the AR-MEL

High Risk is DMCA 3 and almost always involve breach of UofS. I won’t detail the process but the outcomes can be retained w/o restriction, Compulsory Medical Occupational Transfer or release. With release depending on the severity of the condition and the mbr’s wishes retention up to 3 years is an option. My experience is that many/most DMCA 3 high risk AR-MELs result in release with lots of those mbr’s being retained for 3 years.

Low Risk AR-MELs are usually breach of trade standards and are conducted by a unit with the CO making the determination to either, retain w/o restriction (most common), retain with restriction, CMOT or release. The latter three determinations just escalate the file back to DMCA 3 who will then conduct their own AR-MEL on the file to ensure standardization across the CAF. So in essence the only thing a CO can do is *retain w/o restriction. *This is where people get confused and often equate it to retention from a high risk and act accordingly. It just means the member carries on with their career essentially and probably the ones with PCATs you saw finish out their careers!

Part of the problem with CO’s AR-MELs is that sometimes things slip through the cracks and people’s MELs are so restrictive they actually can’t operate in that trade. A unit should have probably sent that file back to DMCA 3 for them to run the AR-MEL but didn’t. So, we get folks that sit in spots for years occupying something that might have been a break for someone else. In many cases a unit thinks they have no recourse, but it can be reviewed by DMCA


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> There are many other websites that address commitment issues. Do we have to do that here?


Is reservist.ashleymadison.com taken as a domain name?


----------



## AmmoTech90 (2 Sep 2021)

In response to Quirky, you can deploy with a PCAT, did it three times.  Just need to see the doc before deploying, as everyone has to do (which I pointed out).


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Sep 2021)

More snapshots, these from Nanos here & here


----------



## Remius (3 Sep 2021)

Right now the CPC are on a good momentum ride.


----------



## PuckChaser (3 Sep 2021)

They just need to run a front-runner campaign by staying on message and make no more huge announcements. The LPC will self-immolate trying to catch up.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> They just need to run a front-runner campaign by staying on message and make no more huge announcements. The LPC will self-immolate trying to catch up.


…especially as Trudeau’s self-professed incredible COVID plan is taking a turn for 💩


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> I thought this already existed; I know of a few people that ended up on a PCAT but stayed in uniform at a terminal rank and finished out their careers.
> 
> Needs some common sense to prevent MIR warriors clogging up the system, shifting the burden onto healthy people and burning them out, but for a fully trade qualified, experienced person that doesn't meet UoS as a direct result of injuries sustained in the CAF seems like a no brainer.
> 
> Wasn't there a few fairly public PA announcements on this with folks rehabing after IED related injuries continuing to work as instructors? The one that comes to mind was someone that had lost a leg, but don't recall the details.



I agree with you, Max. I was one of them. Back in the mid 1980s I suffered from a fairly serious neurological problem ~ quite painful, suicide was a common outcome (Cluster Headache Variant). The Surgeon General wanted to PCAT me and release me; my boss (someone who, fortunately for me, had considerably more influence in high places than did the Surgeon General) and one quite senior Medical Officer disagreed. I was given a TCAT ~ I had it for over 10 years ~ and was "restricted" to Ottawa, although I spent long periods on duty all over the world because of my job, which I held for over eight straight years (that may have been a record for a uniformed officer to be a director in NDHQ, anyway, so someone said when I finally retired). The point was that I was responding to treatment, some of it was unorthodox but it was working and was, slowly but surely learning how to manage my ailment. (Treatment regimes are much different and much better 30 years later.) I was, by the UoS rules, unfit for service but I was, also, that "experienced person" who, the high-priced-help concluded, was needed for one specific job. Additionally, I was, emotionally, tied to the idea of being a productive member of the CF, of being able to do soothing useful. That senior MO and the CF neurologist and civilian specialists agreed that my "tie" to the military (dependence on it for my own sanity?) was an important factor in not giving up, in not sinking into deep, often fatal, depression. 

(Anyway, the good news is that when I retired my CF neurologist (who is still a friend 30+ years later) recommended a treatment that the Surgeon General of the day refused to allow and within 18 months I was about 99% "cured.")

I support the idea of Universality of Service, but I agree, 100% with Max that in a small force like the CF we need to exercise a little personalized common sense to make sure that the needs of the individual and the military are well served.


----------



## MilEME09 (4 Sep 2021)

What about treating UoS similar to how we do a retirement extension? Say if you are unfit via UoS but can still serve and no one can take your position due to lack of trained personal, etc we keep you until the another can be found to take the position. At such time we give you generous notification of say 6 months and begin the transition process.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Sep 2021)

We haven't hoisted in the reality of the impacts of an aging workforce on the CAF. As a result of our inflexible workforce participation policies, we'll likely doom ourselves to a continued 'running up the sandy hill' effect as we waste valuable resources.

For example, I'm 60 years old with over 40 years experience as an Infantry Officer (including a Masters Degree and several operational deployments) and have recently CRA'd. I can cover 30kms, and climb 7000 vertical feet, with a ruck on. I know that because I did it just last week during a solo mountaineering trip. However, I still don't 'make the grade', anywhere in the CAF due to my age.

An interesting article on the aging workforce thing:


Promoting the labour force participation of older Canadians​Like that of most industrialized countries, Canada's population is aging due to lower fertility rates and longer life expectancy. The combined effect of living longer and having fewer children is transforming population structures in Canada, although not all provinces are equally affected by population aging; it is more rapid in Eastern Canada.

With proportionally fewer young people moving into the workforce to replace the increasing number of older individuals retiring, population aging has had and will have direct implications on Canada's economy and labour market. And while widespread labour shortages are not expected over the next five to 10 years, skill shortages are expected to increase in certain occupations, sectors and regions. Consequently, there is a need to increase the labour force participation of older individuals, and of other groups of Canadians, to support businesses, economic growth and continued improvement in Canada's standard of living.

Overall, older Canadians fare relatively well in the labour market, with record-high labour force participation rates and a clear upward trend in retirement ages. However, there is still room for improvement, as Canada's participation rate of older individuals lags behind other countries. There are also many older adults who struggle when trying to stay in the labour market or re-enter the workforce because they face particular challenges, including:


ageism;
lack of education and access to training;
difficulty in finding and applying for jobs;
health issues, work-life balance issues and lack of workplace accommodations; and
disincentives or lack of incentives to work in the retirement income system.
Based on an extensive pan-Canadian and international scan, eight broad categories of initiatives that seek to promote labour force participation of older individuals have been identified (see Chapter 2 for more details): awareness initiatives; financial incentives; health and safety; employment legislation; the retirement income system; skills development; workplace accommodations; and employment services.

To address the specific workforce challenges facing many older Canadians and to promote their labour force participation, this report highlights the most promising initiatives; these include a multifaceted awareness campaign to address ageism while promoting the benefits of hiring older individuals, funding for targeted training for older individuals, and supporting initiatives that would lead to more flexible work (see Chapter 3 for the complete list). The initiatives, either in combination with one another or on their own, can have diverse impacts on the labour force participation of older people.





__





						Promoting the labour force participation of older Canadians  - Canada.ca
					

This page presents the challenges and the possibilities of an aging population et how can promote the labour force participation of older Canadians.




					www.canada.ca


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Sep 2021)

Good article in the National Post.
Rupa Subramanya: Diehard Justin Trudeau supporters will ignore any sin, however disgraceful​Link


Despite being a "feminist" and talking about our "feminist government"
Despite his "believe victims" speech and virtue signalling.
Despite Liberal party rules about candidates " should not be involved in a “dispute of any sort which is liable to bring controversy or disrepute” either upon themselves or the party."
Despite publicly stating he would absolutely do the same as the conservatives if one of their members faced sexual misconduct allegations (a day prior)

Trudeau chose to keep and support a candidate accused of sexual misconduct by multiple young women. One of which allegedly attempted to commit suicide in Subramanya's office.

Why would Trudeau do that? Because at the end of the day he cares more about winning a seat than all of his virtue signalling, feminist, woke, believe victims bullshit.

Anyone who votes Liberal owns a piece of that non-integrity pie.


----------



## Navy_Pete (4 Sep 2021)

Thanks for sharing E.R.; that sounds awful, glad you came out the other end.

I guess one big unanswered question as well is what do we do with people that got COVID and have lingering symptoms. I got sick last year and had issues with breathing and other follow on problems that only recently got cleared up. Fortunately no permanent damage, but I couldn't pass a FORCE test right now as my conditioning is shot.  Figure I'm pretty lucky, and can't believe how big of a relief it was to be able to jog a few kilometers again, but honestly delayed seeing the doc because I was worried about UoS when I was struggling to walk up the stairs without being badly out of breath and had to crash every few hours because of massive fatigue. In retrospect that was stupid, but wasn't necessarily thinking about it rationally.

Was still able to do my job, but if it wasn't for the work from home arrangements and some flexible schedule, I probably would have been off for 3-4 months, and figure it will take another year or so to get back into reasonable shape.

The funny thing about that is if I was to get released for not meeting UoS, there'd be a fairly specialized hole with a lot of things on the go and no one else qualified to fill the job, and could probably walk into a higher paying role as a contractor to do the exact same thing. Sure there are all kinds of similar situations across the CAF, and with the general retention issues we have, think it just makes sense to consider the general context on a case by case basis whether or not a medical release makes sense.


----------



## Remius (4 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Good article in the National Post.
> Rupa Subramanya: Diehard Justin Trudeau supporters will ignore any sin, however disgraceful​Link
> 
> 
> ...


I mentioned a story not long ago when speaking to a very anti trump friend of mine.  I mentioned that it was weird that someone should vote for someone accused of groping women, multiple possible illegal ethical violations,  firing members of his team for being ethical and not doing what he wanted, his family profiting from his position, displaying racist actions etc etc.  She agreed until I said I was talking about Trudeau.  It got awkward at that point.

the reverse can be said for anyone that forgives one for the same actions but only forgives because of what side they are on.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> What about treating UoS similar to how we do a retirement extension? Say if you are unfit via UoS but can still serve and no one can take your position due to lack of trained personal, etc we keep you until the another can be found to take the position. At such time we give you generous notification of say 6 months and begin the transition process.



We can give up to three years retention in advance of release.  Despite that, some folks refuse to prepare despite encouragement, support, and orders; then, a few days out, panic and start complaining.

Temporary medical conditions do not trigger UoS concerns.  Even certain conditions that preclude FORCE testing can permit alternative fitness evaluation.


----------



## mariomike (4 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> She agreed until I said I was talking about Trudeau.


According to Angus Reid - for those who trust polls - he may not be as popular with the ladies as he once was.

30 Aug., 2021








						Trudeau’s Troubles: Loss of traditional support among women boosts O’Toole; CPC lead Liberals in vote intent - Angus Reid Institute
					

Trudeau now the most unfavourably viewed major party leader in the country August 30, 2021 – Are Justin Trudeau’s days of enjoying unmatched political rock god status well and truly




					angusreid.org
				






> While the Liberals still enjoy a plurality of support from women 35 and over, the gap between Trudeau’s party and the CPC for women over the age of 55 — the country’s largest and most consistent voting bloc — is just six points. Meanwhile, among the second largest voting bloc, men over the age of 55, O’Toole and the CPC enjoy an 18-point lead





> the reverse can be said for anyone that forgives one for the same actions but only forgives because of what side they are on.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Sep 2021)

Buh-bye..... #SpendMoreTimeWithFamily


> Raj Saini, the Liberal candidate for the Kitchener Centre MP race, has ended his campaign, citing the health and safety of those around him following “false allegations” as the reason for his decision.  Saini, who is the incumbent Member of Parliament for the area, made the announcement via statement on Twitter Saturday afternoon.  In the statement, he continues to deny allegations that he engaged in inappropriate behaviour with female staff ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Sep 2021)

Its A Bold Strategy Cotton, Lets See If It Pays Off For Em ...


> Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole is the latest federal party leader to promise a national system for proving residents have been vaccinated against COVID-19. The move was among a number of pandemic-related campaign pledges O'Toole unveiled today during a stop in Coquitlam, B.C. O'Toole says he would work with provinces to devise a national proof-of-vaccination system, adding such a setup would help Canadians during international travel. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has called for a national system and criticized Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau for not implementing one sooner ...


----------



## Remius (4 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Its A Bold Strategy Cotton, Lets See If It Pays Off For Em ...


So all major parties are for a vaccine passport.  Takes that out of the equation unless one wants to vote for mad max.


----------



## PuckChaser (4 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> So all major parties are for a vaccine passport.  Takes that out of the equation unless one wants to vote for mad max.


Considering most countries are requiring vaccine passport for entry, it's only prudent to have a national system for them. Using them for domestic travel and services is a whole other ball of wax.


----------



## Remius (4 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Considering most countries are requiring vaccine passport for entry, it's only prudent to have a national system for them. Using them for domestic travel and services is a whole other ball of wax.


Sure but that’s at the provincial level.  Ford, Legault etc.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Sep 2021)

And the feds need provincial data, each from different computer systems, to build a federal one.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Buh-bye..... #SpendMoreTimeWithFamily



So, that's one seat lost for the Libs, because we are now past the point where they are allowed to replace candidates ... so vacant riding for  the Libs. on the voting bulletin.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Sep 2021)

Can he actually withdraw, or will he appear on the ballot regardless?

Not sure of the rules...


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Buh-bye..... #SpendMoreTimeWithFamily
> 
> View attachment 66331



Hilarious hashtag. I was happy to see he's stepping down. I've read that there was barely a blip on the support radar when this story broke, constituents didn't seem too bothered by a little sexual misconduct.

If his name remains on the ballot because the deadline to withdraw has gone by is it possible he can still get voted in?


----------



## PuckChaser (4 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> If his name remains on the ballot because the deadline to withdraw has one by is it possible he can still get voted in?


Knowing Liberal partisans? Yes. If so he'd likely just announce he's not taking the seat and they'd have to run another By-Election in the new year.


----------



## GK .Dundas (5 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Knowing Liberal partisans? Yes. If so he'd likely just announce he's not taking the seat and they'd have to run another By-Election in the new year.


I seem to recall a story many years ago that one  fellow died and somehow managed to still win the election. Can you imagine being any of the other candidates?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> So, that's one seat lost for the Libs, because we are now past the point where they are allowed to replace candidates ... so vacant riding for  the Libs. on the voting bulletin.


Monsef has totally tanked in Peterborough also. The CPC candidate is miles ahead.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Considering most countries are requiring vaccine passport for entry, it's only prudent to have a national system for them. Using them for domestic travel and services is a whole other ball of wax.


Which, if anyone had bothered to listen, is why he is going for it. To ensure Canadians can travel with a proper federal document. Not for restaurants, not for theaters, but to travel.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Knowing Liberal partisans? Yes. If so he'd *likely just announce he's not taking the seat* and they'd have to run another By-Election in the new year.



I know it's an ad nauseam cliche but he (or Trudeau) could also decide the victims experienced it differently and Canada has collectively moved on so he'll take the seat.


----------



## Weinie (5 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Knowing Liberal partisans? Yes. If so he'd likely just announce he's not taking the seat and they'd have to run another By-Election in the new year.


Or he could proclaim "the people have spoken. I will respect their will." and try to reclaim his seat.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Which, if anyone had bothered to listen, is why he is going for it. To ensure Canadians can travel with a proper federal document. Not for restaurants, not for theaters, but to travel.





Fishbone Jones said:


> Which, if anyone had bothered to listen, is why he is going for it. To ensure Canadians can travel with a proper federal document. Not for restaurants, not for theaters, but to travel.


I’m not sure anyone said otherwise.   All three parties are on the same page.  Anti vaxxers still won’t be happy but they really have nowhere to turn vote wise if this is their main issue.  Judging by some of the protests here and there it seems like it is for them.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Monsef has totally tanked in Peterborough also. The CPC candidate is miles ahead.


She totally tanked as a minister.  Not surprised to see that.  She’s been a liability to the LPC now for a while.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2021)

Seems like parties have a hard time properly vetting some candidates’ social media history.

LPC:  



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433849090085904385
CPC: N.S. Conservative candidate apologizes for sharing racist Facebook posts


----------



## brihard (5 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m not sure anyone said otherwise.   All three parties are on the same page.  Anti vaxxers still won’t be happy but they really have nowhere to turn vote wise if this is their main issue.  Judging by some of the protests here and there it seems like it is for them.


Gutsy move on O’Toole’s part, shunning the antivaxers. Another calculated move regarding fringe vs centre votes. He’ll bleed a bit to PPC over it, but I think it’s the right call.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Seems like parties have a hard time properly vetting some candidates’ social media history.
> 
> LPC:
> 
> ...


We should put them in a cage together and make them fight.


----------



## Remius (5 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> We should put them in a cage together and make them fight.


That would be the House of Commons.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (5 Sep 2021)

GK .Dundas said:


> I seem to recall a story many years ago that one  fellow died and somehow managed to still win the election. Can you imagine being any of the other candidates?



I don't know if that happened in a Canadian election or if it would be possible due to our election rules









						Chapter 5 –	Political parties and candidates  (08/2021) – Elections Canada
					





					www.elections.ca
				





> 5.7.4 Death of a candidate​If a candidate endorsed by a registered party dies after 2:00 p.m. on Day 26 and before the closing of the polls on polling day, the election for that ED is postponed.
> 
> Should this occur, contact Electoral Administration and Procedures (FSN).


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Seems like parties have a hard time properly vetting some candidates’ social media history.
> 
> LPC:
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (6 Sep 2021)

Looking at the polling numbers.

Eric Grenier’s aggregate polls show some stabilizing of the numbers.  Has the CPC ahead but the seat distribution favours the LPC.

Nanos has the LPC up almost a half point and CPC down about the same.  I wonder if the agressive protests are working in the LPCs favour.


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Looking at the polling numbers.
> 
> Eric Grenier’s aggregate polls show some stabilizing of the numbers.  Has the CPC ahead but the seat distribution favours the LPC.
> 
> Nanos has the LPC up almost a half point and CPC down about the same.  I wonder if the agressive protests are working in the LPCs favour.



The Liberals have proven that they're really good at shooting themselves in the foot at no notice. I'm waiting for the next big scandal to break....


----------



## Remius (6 Sep 2021)

They


daftandbarmy said:


> The Liberals have proven that they're really good at shooting themselves in the foot at no notice. I'm waiting for the next big scandal to break....


They’ve also proven good at defecting scandals though.  They went through some bad ones before the last election.  The efficiency of their vote may be their saviour again.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> at defecting scandals


First time in history spellcheck corrected both the spelling and the actual content.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I wonder if the agressive protests are working in the LPCs favour.


Hyprocracy about sexual misconduct and supporting victims certainly isn't hurting their favour.


----------



## Remius (6 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Hyprocracy about sexual misconduct and supporting victims certainly isn't hurting their favour.


It didn’t last time either


----------



## Quirky (6 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The Liberals have proven that they're really good at shooting themselves in the foot at no notice. I'm waiting for the next big scandal to break....


LPC supporters are really good at not caring about things like ethics, sexual harassment and racist blackfaces. History has shown us that JT can get away with anything and not lose support. He could’ve murdered someone and LPC voters would accept an apology and move on.


----------



## Remius (6 Sep 2021)

Quirky said:


> LPC supporters are really good at not caring about things like ethics, sexual harassment and racist blackfaces. History has shown us that JT can get away with anything and not lose support. He could’ve murdered someone and LPC voters would accept an apology and move on.


You find that on all sides.  Just go look at the trump threads here.

Die hards won’t change their position.  

some voters will vote on issues and policies.  I have some American friends who voted for Trump because they liked his policies but hated his ethics and personality

some voters have no clue or could care less as they aren’t following 

some voters vote the same as their parents and others their spouses 

it’s not always because they don’t care about ethics but they may care about other things more.


----------



## mariomike (6 Sep 2021)

For reference to the discussion,









						Highest percentage ever of female and gender-diverse candidates running in this election
					

The highest percentage of female candidates than ever before are running in the federal election this year with all five major parties either maintaining or increasing the percentage of women and gender-diverse candidates that ran for them in the 2019 federal election.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				






> Digging into the numbers, the NDP has the highest percentage of women or gender diverse candidates on its list with 52 per cent, or 175 candidates – a slight increase from 2019 when it had 49 per cent.





> The Bloc Quebecois has the second-highest percentage of women candidates with 47 per cent, or 37 of their 78 candidates, running in Quebec. That number is up from 45 per cent in 2019.





> The Liberals’ list includes 147, or 43 per cent, women candidates this year – an increase from 39 per cent in 2019.





> Finally, the Conservatives have also increased their number of female candidates this year with 111 nominees, or 33 per cent – up slightly from 32 per cent in 2019.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> it’s not always because they don’t care about ethics but they may care about other things more.


I'm probably naive but I feel that someone who cares for something more than ethics in a situation like this doesn't really "care" about ethics unless it's convenient.



mariomike said:


> For reference to the discussion,


Only 2 genders? Not very progressive there Canada.


----------



## Remius (6 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm probably naive but I feel that someone who cares for something more than ethics in a situation like this doesn't really "care" about ethics unless it's convenient.
> 
> 
> Only 2 genders? Not very progressive there Canada.


It depends on how some people’s personal ethics clash with how they perceive their politicians.  If you think all politicians are crooked it might not matter as much.  If one doesn’t understand or relate to the ethics breach that can also be an issue.  I surmised that when the SNC Lavalin issue arose that most Canadians would understand the nuance or the issue so didn’t care because it was just more politics.  Or that the PM had a spat with his attorney general.   It’s not black and white.  No pun intended.


----------



## Weinie (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> It depends on how some people’s personal ethics clash with how they perceive their politicians.  If you think all politicians are crooked it might not matter as much.  If one doesn’t understand or relate to the ethics breach that can also be an issue.  I surmised that when the SNC Lavalin issue arose that most Canadians would understand the nuance or the issue so didn’t care because it was just more politics.  Or that the PM had a spat with his attorney general.   It’s not black and white.  No pun intended.


Most Canadian folks could give a fat rats' ass about politics, unless it has an impact on them.(NIMBY) .Phuck with my EI benefits/environment/rights, then I hate you(or will raise my fat ass off the cushion to somewhat oppose you. )

 To ascribe any more insight into Canadian politics from the body politic is laughable, except for that less than 10% who actually track platforms.


----------



## QV (6 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> You find that on all sides.  Just go look at the trump threads here.
> 
> Die hards won’t change their position.
> 
> ...


Excuse me, show me the proof Trump did anything he was accused of. There was a full out media assault for 4+ years on that man. And in the case of Trudeau, he gets away with scandal after scandal because the media covers for him. I can’t believe you people still can’t see that.


----------



## Remius (7 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Excuse me, show me the proof Trump did anything he was accused of. There was a full out media assault for 4+ years on that man. And in the case of Trudeau, he gets away with scandal after scandal because the media covers for him. I can’t believe you people still can’t see that.


You are proving my point.  Thanks.


----------



## Remius (7 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Most Canadian folks could give a fat rats' ass about politics, unless it has an impact on them.(NIMBY) .Phuck with my EI benefits/environment/rights, then I hate you(or will raise my fat ass off the cushion to somewhat oppose you. )
> 
> To ascribe any more insight into Canadian politics from the body politic is laughable, except for that less than 10% who actually track platforms.


Should have been a “wouldn’t” instead of a “would” sorry for the typo. Which is why no one should be surprised when ethics gets a side glance from some voters.


----------



## Remius (7 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Looking at the polling numbers.
> 
> Eric Grenier’s aggregate polls show some stabilizing of the numbers.  Has the CPC ahead but the seat distribution favours the LPC.
> 
> Nanos has the LPC up almost a half point and CPC down about the same.  I wonder if the agressive protests are working in the LPCs favour.


Today Nanos has the LPC up significantly and leading.  He states that the CPC is slipping steadily since the debate.






						Nanos research | CTV News | Nanos polls
					

CTV News Nanos research top headlines, breaking Nanos polling, national poll results and Nanos Canada survey results




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Eric Grenier’s aggregate numbers still have the CPC ahead but the LPC closing in on them.



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
		


interestingly enough the PPC numbers are rising. 

I wonder if the confusing messaging on guns is doing more damage than I thought and if the the Trudeau protests are having a positive effect on the LPC.

2 weeks left in this unwanted and not needed election.


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Today Nanos has the LPC up significantly and leading.  He states that the CPC is slipping steadily since the debate.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can tell you firearm related social media and forums are rife with vitriol for O'Toole right now and I am seeing a ton of these people move towards the PPC.


----------



## Remius (7 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I can tell you firearm related social media and forums are rife with vitriol for O'Toole right now and I am seeing a ton of these people move towards the PPC.


Interesting.  Thanks for that.


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Interesting.  Thanks for that.


The sad thing is most of these people don't understand the politics behind his statements. And can't see it was a brilliant move to head the Libs off at the pass.  

All they heard is the OIC won't be repealed right away. 

Now they are going to throw our only chance away.  

But the PPC might get a seat or two...

SMH.....


----------



## MilEME09 (7 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> The sad thing is most of these people don't understand the politics behind his statements. And can't see it was a brilliant move to head the Libs off at the pass.
> 
> All they heard is the OIC won't be repealed right away.
> 
> ...


If they thought Sept 21 the OIC would disappear, they are dislusional anyway


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> If they thought Sept 21 the OIC would disappear, they are dislusional anyway



You'd be surprised what some people will believe.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Sep 2021)

From the party. Not the media, not the grits and not bernier' bunch.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> From the party. Not the media, not the grits and not bernier' bunch.


Also from the party's latest platform, edited this week - highlights mine (the bit that got added this week):


----------



## QV (7 Sep 2021)

Saw this poll the other day. Not sure how to take it, but I can't imagine a plurality of CTV viewers are all on one side of the political spectrum.


----------



## Remius (7 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Saw this poll the other day. Not sure how to take it, but I can't imagine a plurality of CTV viewers are all on one side of the political spectrum.


I suspect you are correct or rather a plurality of people that took the web poll.  Web polls require the users to go and take it themselves rather than an sampling of the population.  The methodology is fairly simple and is likely easily skewed.


----------



## OldSolduer (7 Sep 2021)

So our pretend PM got some gravel tossed at him. Not on BUT he kinda reminds me of Charlie Brown who always got a rock at Halloween.

I've just dated myself - again.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Sep 2021)

> Now they are going to throw our only chance away.



How dare the people who usually support the CPC election after election expect some payoff in line ahead of the people who only show up if everything is exactly to their taste?

"They", in the past couple of elections, were the people who got in a snit over social issues and "threw the chance away" then by not voting CPC.  There is always a "they", I suppose.  

Anyone inclined to prefer conservatives and frustrated that a chance is slipping away should remember this feeling next time they want to walk away.


----------



## The Bread Guy (8 Sep 2021)

More from the editorial board of some bought-and-paid-for media (text also attached in case link doesn't work for you) ....


> Ministers, government have failed those fleeing Afghanistan
> 
> (...)​... As Afghanistan fell, Justin Trudeau convinced himself that collapsing Parliament on a whim was both the right, and the best, thing to do. He was wrong.
> 
> Today, not tomorrow, we must rebuild our means to defend and support our citizens wherever they may be, as well as those who helped Canada in her hour of need. We will never find comfort in the Liberal Leader’s corrupted line that we will “get through this together.” He doesn’t mean it. Only certain people matter to Mr. Trudeau – the ones he uses to prosecute identity politics for the singular purpose of furthering his destiny ...


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I can tell you firearm related social media and forums are rife with vitriol for O'Toole right now and I am seeing a ton of these people move towards the PPC.


Great move. Vote PPC, which assures a LPC victory, which definitely gets your guns taken away.

Or vote CPC, which is more than likely going to work quietly to clean up the mess on this file, or at least not make things worse.


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Great move. Vote PPC, which assures a LPC victory, which definitely gets your guns taken away.
> 
> Or vote CPC, which is more than likely going to work quietly to clean up the mess on this file, or at least not make things worse.


Nanos is tracking another increase for the PPC.  They have have more support apparently than the greens right now.

I haven’t seen today’s aggregate yet.

Nanos seems to have corrected the LPC jump from yesterday but pretty much has the LPC and CPC about 1 point apart.

So maybe it’s a combination of some disgruntled gun owners and SoCons moving to the PPC and some moderate centrists not trusting the CPC message as much. 

keep in mind though this may be reactionary and come Election Day they may end up just voting CPC


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Sep 2021)

The next milestone is the english language debate on Sep 9th. If Mr O'Toole can continue to look steady and measured, he should do well. The real goal should be to have the Liberals and NDP go after each other, while pinging the Liberals on their weak points. Further, he needs to ensure that he firmly smacks down the Liberals every time they bring up the spectre of Mr Harper. He also needs to remind the voters that Mr Trudeau doesn't think about monetary policy, something every voter should be reminded of every time they open their wallets.


----------



## Maxman1 (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> The sad thing is most of these people don't understand the politics behind his statements. And can't see it was a brilliant move to head the Libs off at the pass.
> 
> All they heard is the OIC won't be repealed right away.
> 
> ...



Perhaps the next promise should be to open the "Erin O'Toole Centre for Gun Owners Who Can't Read Good and Who Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too."


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> The next milestone is the english language debate on Sep 9th. If Mr O'Toole can continue to look steady and measured, he should do well. The real goal should be to have the Liberals and NDP go after each other, while pinging the Liberals on their weak points. Further, he needs to ensure that he firmly smacks down the Liberals every time they bring up the spectre of Mr Harper. He also needs to remind the voters that Mr Trudeau doesn't think about monetary policy, something every voter should be reminded of every time they open their wallets.


I think he needs to stay on message.  Show that he is a safe alternative to the LPC.  While some think his flip flop on guns was some sort of strategic move I think it was a misstep and damage control.  He needs to avoid that.  The LPC and others will attack him on that.  They can frame it as a hidden agenda and if he changes that on a whim what else will he change?  When he ran for the party leadership he said a lot of things he’s no longer saying or promoting.  It could be viewed as just saying things to get elected and not actually do.

O’toole needs to be careful about the money policy side as the platform is very much similar to the Liberal one in that regard.  Lots of spending, very little fiscal restraint and to be honest is using the “budget will balance itself” approach the liberals use.

stay on message , frame the useless election decision as nothing but a power grab.  Explain why his housing plan is better and how his recovery plan is better.


----------



## brihard (8 Sep 2021)

It also remains to be seen whether the real story out of the leadership debates is inside the building or outside. Given events in southern Ontario, there could be enough stupidity these next two nights to matter…


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> It also remains to be seen whether the real story out of the leadership debates is inside the building or outside. Given events in southern Ontario, there could be enough stupidity these next two nights to matter…


And I suspect that could have an impact on some voters.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> It also remains to be seen whether the real story out of the leadership debates is inside the building or outside. Given events in southern Ontario, there could be enough stupidity these next two nights to matter…


Has their been a leader segments of our country hated more than JT ?  Besides his father ? 

These two are highly divisive personalities.


----------



## dimsum (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Has their been a leader segments of our country hated more than JT ? Besides his father ?


People left of centre hated Harper.


----------



## Remius (8 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> People left of centre hated Harper.


Harper was hated.  I remember Mulroney being the anti christ for a while with free trade and the GST.  So much so his party was wiped out.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Has their been a leader segments of our country hated more than JT ?  Besides his father ?



Context of time and place.

While not a leader on the national stage (the Canadian "national" vice the Newfie "national" - we were our own country once), Joey Smallwood, the Premier of Newfoundland from Confederation in 1949 to 1972, was either loved or reviled.  My grandfather (anti-Confederation) related one anecdote from the referendum campaign.  He used to say "we had a rope over the lamp post and nearly got the noose round that little bastard's neck before the police arrived and he got away".  Political hatred is nothing new, the only thing that's changed is the ease to spread the message.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Sep 2021)

The Courts have supported Rebel News Media being accredited for the debates


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> People left of centre hated Harper.


Perhaps.  Maybe that's my bias coming through.  Never understood the "hatred" for Harper.


----------



## OldSolduer (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Perhaps.  Maybe that's my bias coming through.  Never understood the "hatred" for Harper.


For a few reasons he was hated. First of all he wasn't given to melodramatics. He wasn't on his knees before the press giving free....you know.

Harper refused to engage with celebrities for the most part. For that very reason the "progressives" developed a distaste for him.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Sep 2021)

There were a lot of good reasons to disagree and even dislike Harper, but those were rarely the reasons, like Old Soldier said "He's not one of us"


----------



## dimsum (8 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Perhaps.  Maybe that's my bias coming through.  Never understood the "hatred" for Harper.


Most of the same reasons they don't like O'Toole.  

The big one I remember (because it was different) was that the scientific community hated him too, and they normally don't weigh in on these sorts of things.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Sep 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> For a few reasons he was hated. First of all he wasn't given to melodramatics. He wasn't on his knees before the press giving free....you know.
> 
> Harper refused to engage with celebrities for the most part. For that very reason the "progressives" developed a distaste for him.


Unless he could give them a Queen's Diamond Jubilee medal! 😁









						Stephen Harper awards Justin Bieber a Diamond Jubilee Medal
					

Justin Bieber now has a Diamond Jubilee Medal — presented by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper — to add to his accolades




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2021)

Today’s aggregate poll from Eric Grenier



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
		


LPC is up CPC is down making them pretty much in a dead heat.

of note is the PPC gaining more support and catching up to the Bloc.  I doubt this translates to seats but some pundits are predicting Bernier may win his riding.






						Nanos research | CTV News | Nanos polls
					

CTV News Nanos research top headlines, breaking Nanos polling, national poll results and Nanos Canada survey results




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Nanos has LPC down a point but the CPC stagnant.  But has the PPC and Bloc in line with the aggregate.

Last night’s French debate I think won’t move the needle much.  Nothing really shocking came from it from what I could see.  O’Toole did a good job staying on message and the attacks on Trudeau for a needless election were well placed.

We’ll see what tonight’s English debate brings as language won’t be as much of barrier and more of English Canada will be watching.


----------



## dimsum (9 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Today’s aggregate poll from Eric Grenier
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So I'm confused at the CBC site.  The CPC is holding a very slim lead to the LPC, but they project more LPC seats than CPC?  How does that work?


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> So I'm confused at the CBC site.  The CPC is holding a very slim lead to the LPC, but they project more LPC seats than CPC?  How does that work?



The fact is that the Liberal vote is very "efficient:" they win lots of seats with <40% of the vote. The CPC vote is "inefficient:" they win several seats with >50% of the vote. Thus, the Liberals and CPC can be tied in the popular vote or, as in 2019, the CPC can 'win' the popular vote but the Liberals will still win more seats and formed the government.   

There is an analog in the US system. Mrs Clinton won the popular vote in 2016 but Mr Trump won the electoral college.

Also, don't forget this:



That red area is where the LPC wins so many seats with <40% of the vote!


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> So I'm confused at the CBC site.  The CPC is holding a very slim lead to the LPC, but they project more LPC seats than CPC?  How does that work?


Seat distribution and voter efficiency in each.


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Sep 2021)

People could choose from a menu of reasons to dislike Harper.  He is conservative, which offends all the vehement anti-conservatives.  He is introverted and low-drama, which offends those who need Hollywood mood affiliation (style over substance).  He is competent and confident, which offends all the people who think their area of expertise should determine policy (eg. science, foreign affairs) or who think every voice needs to be heard before the decision maker decides.

Any low-key conservative-minded leader is going to push the first two buttons.  Anyone who doesn't follow the preferred CoAs of the expert communities - never mind what happens when the CoAs are in conflict - will push the third.


----------



## dimsum (9 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> People could choose from a menu of reasons to dislike Harper.  He is conservative, which offends all the vehement anti-conservatives.  He is introverted and low-drama, which offends those who need Hollywood mood affiliation (style over substance).  He is competent and confident, which offends all the people who think their area of expertise should determine policy (eg. science, foreign affairs) or who think every voice needs to be heard before the decision maker decides.
> 
> Any low-key conservative-minded leader is going to push the first two buttons.  Anyone who doesn't follow the preferred CoAs of the expert communities - never mind what happens when the CoAs are in conflict - will push the third.


I don't think that all anti-conservatives would hate a conservative candidate.  I would have been interested to know how Mackay would have done had he run.

As for the experts, isn't the whole point to listen to them since they are...well...the SMEs in their fields?  You may not agree with them, and they might come into conflict with other experts in different fields, but that's (IMO) when the leader makes the decision and then explains why.  Silence or "because I said so" doesn't really work with the public, but maybe "because X would cause Y, which we don't want, and would also negatively affect Z" might educate some of the populace on their decisions and maybe bring some trust.

To clarify, I voted for Harper when he ran.  But I also think that his style wasn't really the best either.


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Sep 2021)

I never go the whole "cold fish" thing. Both times I met Mr Harper in person he seemed quite warm and personable. Perhaps is was his perceived lack of excitablity which is a quality every leader should posses.


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> I don't think that all anti-conservatives would hate a conservative candidate.  I would have been interested to know how Mackay would have done had he run.
> 
> As for the experts, isn't the whole point to listen to them since they are...well...the SMEs in their fields?  You may not agree with them, and they might come into conflict with other experts in different fields, but that's (IMO) when the leader makes the decision and then explains why.  Silence or "because I said so" doesn't really work with the public, but maybe "because X would cause Y, which we don't want, and would also negatively affect Z" might educate some of the populace on their decisions and maybe bring some trust.
> 
> To clarify, I voted for Harper when he ran.  But I also think that his style wasn't really the best either.


The problem is the experts today are not giving advice, they're giving direction. Woe is he who doesn't act as they desire.


----------



## Halifax Tar (9 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> I don't think that all anti-conservatives would hate a conservative candidate.  I would have been interested to know how Mackay would have done had he run.
> 
> As for the experts, isn't the whole point to listen to them since they are...well...the SMEs in their fields?  You may not agree with them, and they might come into conflict with other experts in different fields, but that's (IMO) when the leader makes the decision and then explains why.  Silence or "because I said so" doesn't really work with the public, but maybe "because X would cause Y, which we don't want, and would also negatively affect Z" might educate some of the populace on their decisions and maybe bring some trust.
> 
> To clarify, I voted for Harper when he ran.  But I also think that his style wasn't really the best either.


Just like Snr NCOs we and they advise and provide information.  The elected officials decide how to employ that information, if at all.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (9 Sep 2021)

Mr. Harper's boy played both indoor and beach volleyball at a lot of the same Provincial Championship tournaments as my Daughter did.  He was always personable and would always set up time for teams, and there were lots, to have him sit in on a teams photo if they wished.    He was more then kind and personable  anytime he was there....


----------



## QV (9 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> How dare the people who usually support the CPC election after election expect some payoff in line ahead of the people who only show up if everything is exactly to their taste?
> 
> "They", in the past couple of elections, were the people who got in a snit over social issues and "threw the chance away" then by not voting CPC.  There is always a "they", I suppose.
> 
> Anyone inclined to prefer conservatives and frustrated that a chance is slipping away should remember this feeling next time they want to walk away.



The business of holding your nose, abstaining, voting "strategically", or voting for your local candidate because they are nice though you have reservations about the party might make you feel better but are all wastes of time.  

1. Review party platforms and pay attention to the campaign (if not politics altogether); 
2. Remember past behavior is the most reliable predictor of future behavior; and
3. Vote for the party you feel best suites your needs overall.

Voters will get the government they deserve.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Sep 2021)

OK, having watched the (not very good) debate last night my money's on a Conservative Minority government.

Anyone want a piece of that action?  


Is a Conservative minority government even possible?​








						Federal election 2021: Is a Conservative minority government even possible? - Macleans.ca
					

Paul Wells: It would hang on how the opposition parties vote, of course. And it's hard to imagine the NDP paving the way for Erin O'Toole to become prime minister.




					www.macleans.ca


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Sep 2021)

Without going over everything in the article, the most significant issue would be if the Liberals lose the popular vote, and win the second most number of seats. Convincing the public of their legitimacy would be difficult. Never underestimate the hubris of the current lot though.


----------



## Halifax Tar (9 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Without going over everything in the article, the most significant issue would be if the Liberals lose the popular vote, and win the second most number of seats. Convincing the public of their legitimacy would be difficult. Never underestimate the hubris of the current lot though.



I know it erks people but a redistribution of seats is required in this country.  

I think a Liberal loss of any type will trigger a leadership search for that party.  Trust me the party leaders aren't blind to his evolution (devolution ?)  from uniter to divider.


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Sep 2021)

> As for the experts, isn't the whole point to listen to them since they are...well...the SMEs in their fields?



Yes.  The same dynamic as commander and staff.  And then when the commander decides, the staff executes and tries to make it work.  In public service, they bitch to the media and obstruct implementation.


----------



## Remius (9 Sep 2021)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/people-s-party-of-canada-turfs-riding-president-over-trudeau-stone-throwing-incident-1.6169515
		


Not terribly surprising.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I think a Liberal loss of any type will trigger a leadership search for that party.  Trust me the party leaders aren't blind to his evolution (devolution ?)  from uniter to divider.


One can only hope Gerald Butts is tossed out with the fair haired pretend PM.


----------



## suffolkowner (9 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> OK, having watched the (not very good) debate last night my money's on a Conservative Minority government.
> 
> Anyone want a piece of that action?
> 
> ...


This is the question I've been asking myself too. As the sitting PM, Trudeau will have the opportunity to form a government and will be able to count on NDP support. I don't know if public opinion on minority governments will have an impact or whether it has evolved since Harper's term. O'Toole will undoubtably have a more difficult time operating as a minority than Trudeau or Harper did


----------



## MilEME09 (9 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> This is the question I've been asking myself too. As the sitting PM, Trudeau will have the opportunity to form a government and will be able to count on NDP support. I don't know if public opinion on minority governments will have an impact or whether it has evolved since Harper's term. O'Toole will undoubtably have a more difficult time operating as a minority than Trudeau or Harper did


I think that will heavily depend on who forms the official opposition.


----------



## OldSolduer (9 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I think that will heavily depend on who forms the official opposition.


IF the CPC wins enough seats to form a minority the Libs will be the second party. You can always count on the BQ to assist for the right price.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Sep 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> IF the CPC wins enough seats to form a minority the Libs will be the second party. *You can always count on the BQ to assist for the right price.*



That's the clincher.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I know it erks people but a redistribution of seats is required in this country.



So, fewer seats in Atlantic Canada and most rural areas to give the urban areas something closer to equal representation?


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Sep 2021)

Credit where due ...


> The People's Party of Canada says it has removed its president of the Elgin Middlesex London riding association after a handful of gravel was thrown at Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau during a campaign stop in London, Ont., earlier this week.
> 
> PPC spokesman Martin Masse says the party removed Shane Marshall from the post after it viewed clips of the small stones thrown at Trudeau posted to social media.
> 
> Masse says the party hasn't looked into the allegations itself and is leaving it up to police to investigate ...


----------



## Navy_Pete (9 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes.  The same dynamic as commander and staff.  And then when the commander decides, the staff executes and tries to make it work.  In public service, they bitch to the media and obstruct implementation.


Right, because there is no bitching and complaining if a commander decides  to override staff without explaining anything. Unless it's an emergency, that doesn't really work even in the military.

Generally there wasn't very much public complaints about Harper by the public service about policy considering the level of internal discontent; even when the head of StatsCan resigned over the government cancelling the mandatory census he specifically didn't comment. Cuts to staffing levels, wages, and benefits came through the union, which is exactly how it's supposed to work when it affects their jobs.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/statscan-head-quits-over-census-dispute-1.866937


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Sep 2021)

> Right, because there is no bitching and complaining if a commander decides  to override staff without explaining anything.



I'm sure some staff are more dysfunctional than others.


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Sep 2021)

I missed the debate.  How'd it go ?


----------



## ArmyRick (10 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I missed the debate.  How'd it go ?


Trudeau blamed Harper and accused him of throwing tomatoes at China. Paul is way better for the Greens than the Drunk tank SJW, Liz May. Singh and O'Toole pounded Trudeau hard. Trudeau tried to lecture Anime Paul about Feminism (too funny)


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (10 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I missed the debate.  How'd it go ?


Trudeau looked and sounded terrible.  He got skewered by the other leaders.  O'Toole was well prepared for the debate, he looked and sounded Prime Ministerial.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

The whole thing was a nothing burger.


----------



## MilEME09 (10 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Trudeau tried to lecture Anime Paul about Feminism (too funny)


So he mansplained on national TV?


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> So he mansplained on national TV?


Not exactly.  She basically called him on his self described feminism.  Pointed to him pushing out female members of his party.

his response was that he wouldn’t take caucus management lessons from her.

good points from her. Good retort from him. (paul is dealing with a small rebellion isn’t she?)


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

There was a missed opportunity I think to hammer Trudeau on the misshandling of sexual misconduct issues in the CAF by the MND, seems like something that could have been better exploited.


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I missed the debate.  How'd it go ?



Two adults (O'Toole and Paul) trying to make themselves heard over the kids fighting in the back seat.

Kind of like the rest of my life


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Sep 2021)

Fair observations here:


----------



## MilEME09 (10 Sep 2021)

Woke up to a lot of articles show O'toole I'm a positive light, this is looking like his election to win but the key is how he is resonating in Quebec and the 905. If he can't pick up the majority of those seats, he won't be able to form a government.


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Sep 2021)

This may come down to Conservatives + BQ vs Liberals + NDP.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (10 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I missed the debate.  How'd it go ?


Also missed it; to busy watching Leylah Fernandez storming her way into the US Open women's finals.

Back to regular programming.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (10 Sep 2021)

A remainder to those who may have already decided.

*Advance Polls are now open*​
From today 10 Sep through to Monday 13 Sep, 0900 hrs to 2100 hrs




__





						We couldn't find that web page (Error 404) / Nous ne pouvons trouver cette page web (Erreur 404)
					





					www.elections.ca


----------



## Colin Parkinson (10 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Woke up to a lot of articles show O'toole I'm a positive light, this is looking like his election to win but the key is how he is resonating in Quebec and the 905. If he can't pick up the majority of those seats, he won't be able to form a government.


He got an endorsement from the premier of Quebec, that will help nudge some to vote CPC.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (10 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> A remainder to those who may have already decided.
> 
> *Advance Polls are now open*​
> From today 10 Sep through to Monday 13 Sep, 0900 hrs to 2100 hrs
> ...


Voted early this morning, about 40 minute wait..


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2021)

Just spotted this at the Parliamentary Budget Officer's Election Proposal Costing page ...


> Starting on August 15, 2021, the PBO will respond to requests from political parties and independent members of the House of Commons, to estimate the financial cost of any campaign proposal they are considering making during the 44th federal election campaign.
> 
> In accordance with the Parliament of Canada Act, all election proposal cost estimates prepared by the PBO are published as they are announced by parties ...


Some titles of interest around these parts that have been analyzed ...

507846 —      Financial support for Canadian Armed Forces members
464997 —      Procuring the MV Obelix support ship
461347 —      Introducing a new non-taxable benefit for Veterans
Dig in!


----------



## Weinie (10 Sep 2021)

Retired AF Guy said:


> Voted *early* this morning, about 40 minute wait..


But did you vote often?


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Fair observations here:
> 
> View attachment 66400


Yeah, I though O’Toole was being cautious as well.  But I think that was the right move,


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

Latest aggregate polling.  I doubt the debate is reflected or that it will have an effect one way or another.



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
		


The PPC is polling higher than the Bloc now.

given that they played spoiler in 3 ridings when they won 1.9% of the popular vote, if their current polling numbers hold they could give the CPC problems in a few more spots


----------



## Retired AF Guy (10 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> But did you vote often?


Once was enough ...


----------



## MilEME09 (10 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Latest aggregate polling.  I doubt the debate is reflected or that it will have an effect one way or another.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thing is 5% for the bloc in Quebec can translate to seats, 5% nationally for the PPC might not.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Thing is 5% for the bloc in Quebec can translate to seats, 5% nationally for the PPC might not.


True.  But it could end up giving the LPC seats or rather deny the CPC.   At least three seats last time went LPC because the PPC played spoiler.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Trudeau tried to lecture Anime Paul about Feminism (too funny)


For real?


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> For real?


Not exactly.  She called him on his fake feminism though.


----------



## brihard (10 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Latest aggregate polling.  I doubt the debate is reflected or that it will have an effect one way or another.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They played spoiler in 6 actually- that is to say, in sic ridings, the CPC lost by fewer than the total PPC votes. And in five of them, the PPC had more than double the margin the CPC would have needed, if recollection serves.

It’ll be interesting to see how many of Bernier’s fanboys flinch on Election Day in the face of a potential narrow Trudeau victory. We may see a lot of them quietly vote CPC without polling that way.


----------



## Haggis (10 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Not exactly.  She called him on his fake feminism though.


Yeah, but he slapped her down pretty hard, though.

It seems this time around that all of the LPC's regular Conservative Boogeymen aren't having the desired effect.  When Trudeau tried to bring up guns last night, the moderator cut him off.


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> Yeah, but he slapped her down pretty hard, though.
> 
> It seems this time around that all of the LPC's regular Conservative Boogeymen aren't having the desired effect.  When Trudeau tried to bring up guns last night, the moderator cut him off.


His comeback was actually quite good all things considered.  But good to see him called on that.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Not exactly.  She called him on his fake feminism though.


Didn't watch/listen to the debate - is it true that she said the names of every woman who's accused JT of inappropriate behaviour?


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Didn't watch/listen to the debate - is it true that she said the names of every woman who's accused JT of inappropriate behaviour?


Can’t say I heard that.  She listed the women he pushed out of the party though.   WR, Philpot and Caesar Chavalez (not sure I have the last one named properly).


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> His comeback was actually quite good all things considered.


Did he accept the criticism for his flagrant identity politics and promise to do better or did he deflect?


----------



## Remius (10 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Did he accept the criticism for his flagrant identity politics and promise to do better or did he deflect?


Lol.  Really?   He told her he wasn’t going to take lessons from her on caucus management.  Her party is disintegrating internally and she is likely going to lose her seat.  So while a low blow it still hit.


----------



## Maxman1 (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> True.  But it could end up giving the LPC seats or rather deny the CPC.   At least three seats last time went LPC because the PPC played spoiler.



Last I checked there were 13 seats that went either Liberal or NDP by less than the number of votes that went PPC.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Lol.  Really?   He told her he wasn’t going to take lessons from her on caucus management.  Her party is disintegrating internally and she is likely going to lose her seat.  So while a low blow it still hit.



Deflection and a low blow. Perfect combination.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (11 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Deflection and a low blow. Perfect combination.


 Especially when aimed towards a woman by a feminist.  Very subtle.

Actually, I also thought it was a great demonstration of Trudeau's combined ignorance/contempt towards our Parliamentary system of government: In our system, it's not for the leader of a party to manage it's caucus, it's for the elected MP of the caucus to manage their leader (and remove if warranted).


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> Last I checked there were 13 seats that went either Liberal or NDP by less than the number of votes that went PPC.


You sure about that figure? I only counted six.


----------



## FSTO (11 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Especially when aimed towards a woman by a feminist.  Very subtle.
> 
> Actually, I also thought it was a great demonstration of Trudeau's combined ignorance/contempt towards our Parliamentary system of government: In our system, it's not for the leader of a party to manage it's caucus, it's for the elected MP of the caucus to manage their leader (and remove if warranted).


Into today’s Globe and Mail there is an excerpt from JWR’s book “Indian’ in the Cabinet: Speaking Truth to Power” in which she paints a very disturbing picture of the PM and group who surrounds him. The book drops on Monday.


‘In that moment, I knew he wanted me to lie.’ Jody Wilson-Raybould recalls a tension-filled meeting with Justin Trudeau’









						Opinion: ‘In that moment, I knew he wanted me to lie.’ Jody Wilson-Raybould recalls a tension-filled meeting with Justin Trudeau
					

In this exclusive excerpt from her memoir ‘Indian’ in the Cabinet, the former minister of justice recounts what happened in the days after the SNC-Lavalin scandal became front-page news




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				




Will this have an effect on the election? No idea. But when I brought up the whole JWR affair to a friend of mine who supports the Liberals, her defence of Trudeau and her venomous comments about JWR was shocking to me. Showed to me the depth that Truanon has taken ahold of the faithful.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

I wonder when this ego-driven election that most Canadians didn't want is over if Trudeau will decide Canadians experienced it differently and try to spin it in a positive light.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

Nanos research | CTV News | Nanos polls
					

CTV News Nanos research top headlines, breaking Nanos polling, national poll results and Nanos Canada survey results




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Nanos numbers this morning.  Grenier’s aggregate won’t be out until later.  

not sure what to make of this.  Debate?  Protests? Voters making up their mind and going with the devil they know?


----------



## ModlrMike (11 Sep 2021)

FSTO said:


> Into today’s Globe and Mail there is an excerpt from JWR’s book “Indian’ in the Cabinet: Speaking Truth to Power” in which she paints a very disturbing picture of the PM and group who surrounds him. The book drops on Monday.
> 
> 
> ‘In that moment, I knew he wanted me to lie.’ Jody Wilson-Raybould recalls a tension-filled meeting with Justin Trudeau’
> ...


It may depend on how much the media latches onto the juicy bits, and how long it stays in the news cycle. These revelations may not influence the die hards, but less enamoured Liberals may be convinced to vote elsewhere, or not at all. Both good outcomes for the Conservatives.


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> It may depend on how much the media latches onto the juicy bits, and how long it stays in the news cycle. These revelations may not influence the die hards, but less enamoured Liberals may be convinced to vote elsewhere, or not at all. Both good outcomes for the Conservatives.



I watched Thomas Mulcair comment on the campaign so far on CTV today. He did a great job.

He commented on the book as well. It could be a 'coffin nail' if used in the right way.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Nanos numbers this morning.  Grenier’s aggregate won’t be out until later.
> 
> not sure what to make of this.  Debate?  Protests? Voters making up their mind and going with the devil they know?


How do these polls actually work? Are people voting online or is Nanos et el calling people every 6 hours and asking them how they're voting?


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> How do these polls actually work? Are people voting online or is Nanos et el calling people every 6 hours and asking them how they're voting?


There is a small print where they explain their methodology.  It’s a sampling poll.  No one calls in.   Specifics are in there description.   The aggregate poll is likely more accurate but still…

the last jump the LPC stabilized the next day so it may be a blip.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> ... In our system, it's not for the leader of a party to manage it's caucus, it's for the elected MP of the caucus to manage their leader (and remove if warranted).


To be fair to the incumbent, he's not the first (or last) party leader/PM to exert some high-ish level of central control over caucus - including reining in the furthest-outlying outliers in some cases.


ModlrMike said:


> It may depend on how much the media latches onto the juicy bits, and how long it stays in the news cycle ...


... and I suspect there'll be *no* shortage of juicy bits to be latched onto, especially given the timing of the release of the book.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

Not sure if she had a chance in that riding or not but that tweet is pretty damning.  Good on the CPC for dropping her.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-dump-candidate-tweets-1.6172320


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

What did she tweet? I don't see it on the article


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

Aggregate poll is out.



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
		


polls narrow and the LPC is increasing it’s possible seat distribution.  

a week or so to go.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> What did she tweet? I don't see it on the article


Muslims go home if you don’t like it here, bring back the Lord’s Prayer in school and call it Christmas.  Back in 2018.  She claims it wasn’t her.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Sep 2021)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jody-wilson-raybould-trudeau-1.6172488
		


What a great book to drop during an election campaign


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Not sure if she had a chance in that riding or not but that tweet is pretty damning.  Good on the CPC for dropping her.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-dump-candidate-tweets-1.6172320



She was running a distant third behind the NDP in a very safe Liberal riding. If anything, this let's O'Toole show himself to be acting swiftly to dump candidates when views like that emerge. Still a bit of egg-on-face in terms of candidate vetting, but it'll be reassuring to moderates to see swift action taken.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> What did she tweet? I don't see it on the article


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> View attachment 66409


Plus retweeting some nice stuff about executing Imams in response to ISIS killing westerners.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

What a loser. You would think the party would be alerted to that and deal with it sooner.


----------



## dapaterson (11 Sep 2021)

The cynic in me wonders if they kept a no hope candidate for just this sort of public "oh, we're not like that at all" image buffing, mid campaign.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> The cynic in me wonders if they kept a no hope candidate for just this sort of public "oh, we're not like that at all" image buffing, mid campaign.


Why risk the bad press.  It was an easy drop though.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2021)

More on why the PPC canned the riding ass'n president after the throwing-gravel-at-Trudeau incident - highlights mine ...


> London, Ont. police have charged a man after gravel was thrown at Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau earlier this week.
> 
> 
> The incident happened during a campaign stop in London on Monday.
> ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Plus retweeting some nice stuff about executing Imams in response to ISIS killing westerners.


In for a penny, right?


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Sep 2021)

Trudeau says he did not want Wilson-Raybould to lie as SNC-Lavalin affair re-emerges
					

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is denying that he wanted Jody Wilson-Raybould to lie as he faced new questions about the SNC-Lavalin affair following the publication of an excerpt of the former justice minister's memoir.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				




And SNC is back, full book comes out Tuesday


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Trudeau says he did not want Wilson-Raybould to lie as SNC-Lavalin affair re-emerges
> 
> 
> Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is denying that he wanted Jody Wilson-Raybould to lie as he faced new questions about the SNC-Lavalin affair following the publication of an excerpt of the former justice minister's memoir.
> ...


A short preview.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jody-wilson-raybould-trudeau-1.6172488


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2021)

The petulant little man-child who threw gravel at the PM and his security detail has been arrested and charged with assault with a weapon.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/shane-marshall-people-s-party-gravel-trudeau-1.6172690


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> The petulant little man-child who threw gravel at the PM and his security detail has been arrested and charged with assault with a weapon.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/shane-marshall-people-s-party-gravel-trudeau-1.6172690


Play stupid games…


----------



## RedFive (11 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Trudeau says he did not want Wilson-Raybould to lie as SNC-Lavalin affair re-emerges
> 
> 
> Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is denying that he wanted Jody Wilson-Raybould to lie as he faced new questions about the SNC-Lavalin affair following the publication of an excerpt of the former justice minister's memoir.
> ...


The timing seems... fortuitous... for the release of such a book. At least for certain people.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Play stupid games…


I wonder if he'll get a heavier sentence than Calgary's Alexander Dunn's 30-day conditional sentence and 15 days of house arrest.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

RedFive said:


> The timing seems... fortuitous... for the release of such a book. At least for certain people.


I’m sure it’s been written and completed for a bit.  Just waiting for the right time to drop it.


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-platform-costing-1.6172629
		


Wow.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-platform-costing-1.6172629
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.


166 billion in New tax revenue, I'd believe that when I sew it


----------



## Remius (11 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> 166 billion in New tax revenue, I'd believe that when I sew it


It’s the 200billion in spending that got me lol


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> It’s the 200billion in spending that got me lol


Over 5 years, so 40 billion a year, vs 33.2 new revenue, so that's only a deficit of 6.8 billion per year. Not bad for a pipe dream


----------



## brihard (11 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-platform-costing-1.6172629
> 
> 
> 
> Wow.


I like the bit about throwing a lot of money at CRA to go after tax compliance and enforcement, particularly the bit about offshore tax havens. There’s a potentially huge rate of return on better enforcement efforts there.




Jarnhamar said:


> I wonder if he'll get a heavier sentence than Calgary's Alexander Dunn's 30-day conditional sentence and 15 days of house arrest.



I’ll be interested to see (if he’s convicted) how the court considers the aggravating factors in this one. Were you or I to throw a handgun of pea gravel at some random stranger getting on a city bus and end up charged for it, sanctions would likely be pretty minor. But there’s a significant interest in denouncing and deterring violence towards politicians on the campaign trail.

I wonder what kind of release conditions he’s on.


----------



## FJAG (11 Sep 2021)

Wilson-Raybould's book "Indian in the Cabinet is coming out on Tuesday. The Globe ran an excerpt today. (as usual, paywalled) A short article is at CBC.

The interesting portion from CBC is:


> The excerpt from the tell-all book "Indian in the Cabinet" — published in the Globe and Mail — revolves around Wilson-Raybould's recollections of two critical meetings with Trudeau in February 2019, days after the newspaper reported that Canada's first Indigenous justice minister had faced inappropriate pressure from top Liberals in a court case.
> 
> That case was the criminal prosecution of Quebec engineering giant SNC-Lavalin, which was facing bribery charges related to contracts in Libya. Wilson-Raybould would later testify that senior party leaders wanted her as attorney general to intervene for political reasons to stop the prosecution.
> 
> ...



Lovin' it!


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> But there’s a significant interest in denouncing and deterring violence towards politicians on the campaign trail.


Very true. But I would also imagine there is significant interest in denouncing and deterring violence against female POCs by white males in a position of authority too. Especially when the female is handcuffed.


----------



## MilEME09 (11 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Very true. But I would also imagine there is significant interest in denouncing and deterring violence against female POCs by white males in a position of authority too. Especially when the female is handcuffed.


But not if the white male is the prime minister trying to help out a rich corporate doner


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> Wilson-Raybould's book "Indian in the Cabinet is coming out on Tuesday. The Globe ran an excerpt today. (as usual, paywalled) ...


Text shared for research, private study or education under the Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's _Copyright Act_.

Available for pre-order now, coming out 14 Sept.


----------



## Maxman1 (11 Sep 2021)

RedFive said:


> The timing seems... fortuitous... for the release of such a book. At least for certain people.



Apparently the release was announced in July, when it was moved up from an October release.  So the timing is on Trudeau.


----------



## Maxman1 (11 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> You sure about that figure? I only counted six.



Yes. There were six seats that went Liberal, but another seven went NDP over Conservative by less than the margin of votes that went PPC.


----------



## PuckChaser (11 Sep 2021)

It's a guessing game that assumes every PPC vote would go to CPC, instead of Libertarian Party or not voting at all...


----------



## Maxman1 (11 Sep 2021)

Yeah, pretty much.


----------



## brihard (12 Sep 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> Yes. There were six seats that went Liberal, but another seven went NDP over Conservative by less than the margin of votes that went PPC.


I’ll have to take another look, I was reading on a cell phone screen last time I checked that out.



PuckChaser said:


> It's a guessing game that assumes every PPC vote would go to CPC, instead of Libertarian Party or not voting at all...



That’s why I noted the number where the margin of victory was half or less of the PPC votes. I think it’s reasonable to suspect that PPC draw disproportionately from the CPC.


----------



## Haggis (12 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> That’s why I noted the number where the margin of victory was half or less of the PPC votes. I think it’s reasonable to suspect that PPC draw disproportionately from the CPC.


For some reason, post 759 contains no text from me.  What I typed was:

My belief is that the goal of the PPC generally and Mad Max particularly is not to win an election but to deny the CPC a win.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> For some reason, post 759 contains no text from me.  What I typed was:
> 
> My belief is that the goal of the PPC generally and Mad Max particularly is not to win an election but to deny the CPC a win.


So a sort of dumping ground for disaffected conservatives, ruffians and right wing fringe types? Or just Mad Max being sour about losing the leadership race? Or both.


----------



## brihard (12 Sep 2021)

The latter, then became the former.


----------



## dimsum (12 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> So a sort of dumping ground for disaffected conservatives, ruffians and right wing fringe types? Or just Mad Max being sour about losing the leadership race? Or both.


Yes.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

With only about a week or so until this is decided I’m going to make a prediction.   Keep in mind this isn’t how I WANT it to go just how I THINK it will go.  

LPC minority.  Likely will lose 10 seats.  A CPC divided that might have a small civil war despite a seat increase.  But I suspect that could be avoided.  Singh increases his seat count so gets to stay, paul will lose her seat and step down.  Blanchet quits as well.   Lots of angry liberal party membership types questioning why they launched an election in the first place and had to lose their jobs.  And see you all in 18 months again.  

The only thing that could save O’toole if he loses despite increasing his seat count is the reduced appetite for a leadership run that would have to be done by next spring at the latest.   Assuming he won’t quit either.  His advantage would be that Canadians know him now.  But I anticipate resistance internally to keep moving to the center. 

The best thing for Trudeau would be to declare after that this will be his last term and ensure an orderly transition to a new leader.   This would make O’toole and Singh the most experienced party leaders next time round.


----------



## Haggis (12 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> LPC minority.  Likely will lose 10 seats.  A CPC divided that might have a small civil war despite a seat increase.  But I suspect that could be avoided.  Singh increases his seat count so gets to stay, Paul will lose her seat and step down.  Blanchet quits as well.   Lots of angry liberal party membership types questioning why they launched an election in the first place and had to lose their jobs.  And see you all in 18 months again.


Some friends I spoke to who I would consider "in the know" would say 18 months is generous if Trudeau is denied a majority or if the CPC forms the next government.


Remius said:


> The only thing that could save O’Toole if he loses despite increasing his seat count is the reduced appetite for a leadership run that would have to be done by next spring at the latest.   Assuming he won’t quit either.  His advantage would be that Canadians know him now.  But I anticipate resistance internally to keep moving to the center.


I think Trudeau is counting on this.  The last thing he wants for his next run at a majority is to contest it against someone the electorate recognizes and is more seasoned this time.


Remius said:


> The best thing for Trudeau would be to declare after that this will be his last term and ensure an orderly transition to a new leader.   This would make O’toole and Singh the most experienced party leaders next time round.


I don't think his ego would allow this. *Dapaterson* postulated a possible outcome back at post 212:



> Tory minority, Trudeau steps down, Tories miscount support in the house, lose a vote of confidence, Trudeau changes his mind, comes back, and wins a majority...



 Unless Trudeau were to lose his eat in the House....


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Nanos research | CTV News | Nanos polls
> 
> 
> CTV News Nanos research top headlines, breaking Nanos polling, national poll results and Nanos Canada survey results
> ...



I'm sure that the Liberals are pissed that the left is divided like that...


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> Some friends I spoke to who I would consider "in the know" would say 18 months is generous if Trudeau is denied a majority or if the CPC forms the next government.
> 
> I think Trudeau is counting on this.  The last thing he wants for his next run at a majority is to contest it against someone the electorate recognizes and is more seasoned this time.
> 
> ...


We’ll his ego is his own worst enemy.  I did say “the best thing”.  But I agree with you that his ego may prevent him from taking that COA.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I'm sure that the Liberals are pissed that the left is divided like that...


I’m sure they are.  But they may be able to afford the dividing more that the CPC can.  The CPC risk losing some of the base or some of the moderates and I suspect more CPC voters would rather just satay home if they don’t like what they see.   In the end, if the COC can’t win this time I don’t know what they could do different other than keep O’toole on and keep at it for the next one on the track they are on.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Sep 2021)

Trudeau has China's vote, if they could vote:

​Vancouver’s Beijing allies align with Trudeau’s Liberals​China-sanctioned Conservative MP Kenny Chiu calls out disinformation campaign against him​
The Conservatives have taken a critical approach against China in this election campaign, while the Liberal platform is silent on matters surrounding ChinaRichard Sharrocks/Getty Images

Vancouver residents supportive of the Chinese Communist Party are promoting the Liberals in Canada’s general election for the 44th Parliament on September 20.

Furthermore, Richmond Conservative MP Kenny Chiu — who was sanctioned by China in March — says there is a concerted effort to spread misinformation about him.

“I kind of anticipated some of the blowback and attacks because of my relatively strong and clear position on foreign interference and influence, and also speaking up for human rights and democracy around the world. But what I did not anticipate is some of the smears and the level of falsehood that's been circulated in WeChat and even now popping up on WhatsApp,” said Chiu, who, while in opposition since 2019, tabled a bill (C-282) to establish a national registry for foreigners engaged in political work. Chiu is also a staunch critic of the CCP’s human rights violations and supporter of Hong Kong’s democratic movement.

Messages on WeChat (China’s state-monitored social media platform), reviewed and translated by Glacier Media, generally show support for the Liberals, criticism levied against the Conservatives and indifference toward the New Democrats. They invoke racial unity and support for the Chinese government.

*“Please vote for the Liberals and use your power in the Chinese community so that we can have a chance to influence the future of Canada,” one message states.*

Another message circulating is addressed to “overseas Chinese.”

It reads, in part: “As long as we ethnic Chinese unite, resolutely do not vote for those crazy sinophobic Conservative candidates and cast your precious votes for the Liberal candidates in your ridings, we will surely defeat the Conservative Party.”

The message makes no mention of domestic issues and focuses on relations/issues with China, including excusing Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for not being able to “say much” about the detention of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou and stating how, under the Liberals, the “door to 5G has not yet closed for Huawei” (unlike with all of Canada’s national security allies who view Huawei hardware as a CCP-controlled cyberthreat).
The message speaks highly of the CCP’s “road to socialism with Chinese characteristics” and states that if Canada can maintain friendly relations and exchanges with China, its economy will improve.





__





						Vancouver’s Beijing allies align with Trudeau’s Liberals
					

China-sanctioned Conservative MP Kenny Chiu calls out disinformation campaign against him




					biv.com


----------



## Retired AF Guy (12 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Trudeau has China's vote, if they could vote:
> 
> ​Vancouver’s Beijing allies align with Trudeau’s Liberals​China-sanctioned Conservative MP Kenny Chiu calls out disinformation campaign against him​
> The Conservatives have taken a critical approach against China in this election campaign, while the Liberal platform is silent on matters surrounding ChinaRichard Sharrocks/Getty Images
> ...



Well isn't that just peachy..


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

Retired AF Guy said:


> Well isn't that just peachy..


Might explain why BC may stay the same seat wise.


----------



## MilEME09 (12 Sep 2021)

FIRST READING: The revenge of Jody Wilson-Raybould
					

Why 'The Joker' wants your vote in Eastern Ontario




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Retired AF Guy (12 Sep 2021)

If things couldn't get more weirder: 



> *Former Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes throws support behind Tory candidate in election*
> 
> By Rachel Gilmore  Global News
> 
> ...



Link


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Sep 2021)

Retired AF Guy said:


> If things couldn't get more weirder:
> 
> 
> 
> Link


It’s not really very weird at all.  Trudeau kicked Caesar-Chavannes to the curb once he finished using her as a black female prop to demonstrate his woke-feminist brand down in Washington back in 2015.  Another example of using people, woman or man, and throwing them away when he feels they have no more utility to his brand.  

The irony is how many women still believe he’s a valid feminist, vice the true power-driven misogynist hiding under feminist camouflage…


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Sep 2021)

I would think that not only being an experienced lawyer, but former Justice Minister, JWR has taken steps so as to not expose herself to claims of libel.


----------



## FJAG (12 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> FIRST READING: The revenge of Jody Wilson-Raybould
> 
> 
> Why 'The Joker' wants your vote in Eastern Ontario
> ...





> Remember the 1980s, when Brian Mulroney formed extremely centrist (and extremely electable) Progressive Conservative governments, but at the expense of ticking off Western Canada so much that they founded the Reform Party? Fast forward 30 years, and a more centrist Conservative Party is on the cusp of victory while supporters flock to Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada. The National Post’s Brian Platt did a deep dive into *the sudden rise of the PPC, and whether it represents a new perma-rift in the Canadian right*.


The problem, if it actually is a problem, is that there are more individuals who lean toward social policies over fiscal ones in this country. The Progressive Conservative Party was always the guardian of the later with a touch of the former while the Liberals and NDP split the former into two camps with the Libs hanging more towards the centre.

In the last few decades Canada's conservative movement has followed by developing the split that troubled the Republicans in the '80s with an ultra conservative wing espousing both social and fiscal conservatism and that element slowly took over the party. In Canada social conservatives and fiscal conservatives broke into a social conservative wing (Reform/Canadian Alliance) and a fiscal conservative centre (the PCs) which reunited in 2003 and resulted in the PCs dropping the word "Progressive" from their party's name. Its been an uneasy alliance ever since IMHO because of the example of what the Republicans were becoming in the US and thus encouraging and entrenching social conservative attitudes.

As long as the CPC can keep that smouldering alliance in check they have a chance to beat the divided left from time-to-time, but basically conservatives will probably never be a majority in Canada again and the best they can hope for is a plurality in an election which will give them a majority government.

My guess is that if social conservatism dominated Republicanism in the US ever collapses then maybe Canada will follow suit. I do not see that happening though. My guess is it will strengthen and as a result, will entrench it even more in Canada which means that eventually fiscal conservatives may flee their own party to the Liberals in the hope that at least there they may be able to influence better fiscal management.

Unfortunately that's what's been happening to my family. We've been strong PC supporter for decades and stuck with the CPC for quite a while but one-by-one have slipped left to the Liberals. I was the last holdout and even joined my local CPC EDA as a board member with the hope of influencing things. Two weeks ago I resigned. I didn't support O'Toole originally but think that he has grown into a good solid leader who is keeping the lid on a powder keg. Unfortunately no matter how well you sit on that powder keg, in the end it's still full of wingnuts and powder that's probably going to explode. There were a number of issues which came up over time which made me leave. Too many axes are being ground and unfortunately the CPC is having to kowtow to some really stupid axemen in order to hold the coalition together just a bit longer. It honestly makes one feel a bit dirty.

For the first time, after a half a century, I'm not sure how I'm going to vote. I can guarantee that it won't be Liberal though.

🍻


----------



## FSTO (12 Sep 2021)

^^
I actually voted NDP in Ottawa Centre to hopefully defeat the Liberal candidate. We shall see.


----------



## dapaterson (12 Sep 2021)

Based on lawn signs (not signs posted on public rights of way) I am not seeing much LPC enthusiasm in Ottawa Centre.  Very plausible it could flip back to Orange.

With house prices spiking and making paper millionaires in the area, I'm even seeing more Blue signs, possibly eroding votes from the LPC on the other side of the spectrum as well.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (12 Sep 2021)

The LPC has sharks on both sides of the spectrum, the CPC only had one shark until PPC started to gain ground and now is in a similar position, not quite to the same extent yet.


----------



## blacktriangle (12 Sep 2021)

I would not be surprised if there are online operatives trying to hype up the PPC on social media platforms. Essentially influencing people to throw their vote away, to the benefit of parties other than the CPC. 

I can't however discount the possibility that there are more far-right or Libertarian types than we perhaps realize, and that the events of the last 18 months have stirred them up enough to reject establishment parties entirely.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

blacktriangle said:


> I would not be surprised if there are online operatives trying to hype up the PPC on social media platforms. Essentially influencing people to throw their vote away, to the benefit of parties other than the CPC.
> 
> I can't however discount the possibility that there are more far-right or Libertarian types than we perhaps realize, and that the events of the last 18 months have stirred them up enough to reject establishment parties entirely.


Sure. But they either never voted or voted CPC.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Sep 2021)

blacktriangle said:


> I can't however discount the possibility that there are more far-right or Libertarian types than we perhaps realize, and that the events of the last 18 months have stirred them up enough to reject establishment parties entirely.


Libertarianism sounds pretty good to me. There's a huge effort to categorize Canadians into left or right wing with an emphasis on the negative connotations along with it.

I bet there's a lot of Canadians smack in the middle who would vote PPC if it wasn't for the fact they've both been vilified from the start AND some of it's deserved due to the people they've attracted.
Reminds me of something interesting I read once - "You can kill an idea if you make it popular with stupid people".

If Trudeau was kicked to the curb I could see myself leaning towards PPC if they clean up their image and combat the idiot spokespeople they have. However the direction O'Toole is leading the CPC is interesting. Either he's just trolling the LPC (and Canadians) just for votes, or he's really looking to bring the CPC closer to the center and if that's the case I'd stick around.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Sep 2021)

It would be foolish of O’Toole to effectively alienate the centrist/red Tory/progressive side of the conservatives in an attempt to capture the squirters on the far right.  To go hard ‘Reform/Alliance’ would be to hand a whole lot of the near-centre-right over to the liberals…who to recover (if ever) would take 2-3 ‘regular’ election cycles (or 5-6 of Trudeau’s 18-24 monthers).


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

Today’s aggregate poll.



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/
		


Has LPC ahead now in both polling and seats.


----------



## Halifax Tar (12 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Today’s aggregate poll.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The story to me is the PPC pushing passed the Bloc now too.  How far can they go ?  

The Libs and Cons are in a dead heat.  It's a minority Gov in our future.  Only the party is yet decided.


----------



## Remius (12 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> The story to me is the PPC pushing passed the Bloc now too.  How far can they go ?
> 
> The Libs and Cons are in a dead heat.  It's a minority Gov in our future.  Only the party is yet decided.


Winning one seat would be victory enough for the PPC.  I expect them to play spoiler more than last time.   Seat distribution still favours the LPC by a wide margin as far as a minority gvt goes.


----------



## MilEME09 (12 Sep 2021)

Wilson-Raybould says Trudeau should let RCMP probe possible obstruction of justice in SNC-Lavalin affair
					

Liberal Leader ducks questions on whether cabinet confidences had gotten in the way of the RCMP completing the inquiry




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				




Trudeau possibly blocked RCMP from investigating SNC, and obstruction allegations.  If what she says is true, our democracy is gone, cabinet monisters in Trudeau's government are faces for a department and thats it, sounds like the PMO runs the whole show.

This is something I find very concerning, and so showed Canadians


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Sep 2021)

> broke into a social conservative wing (Reform/Canadian Alliance) and a fiscal conservative centre (the PCs)



Reform/CA, and re-formed CPC with mostly Reform/CA influence, were/are not fiscally conservative?

Other plausible explanation: broke into a people-who-want-a-seat-at-the-table wing, and a central-Canadian-well-connected-establishment wing.

The evolution of the political left toward control by the well-off and well-educated continues in Canada, as it has in the US, with "the people" moving over toward the right-side parties.  For all the talk about the problems of hierarchy and devotion to authority and authoritarianism and class divides and keeping people in their place on the left, that's where those problems are coming to fruition.  Not a shoe to be proud of wearing.


----------



## Haggis (12 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Wilson-Raybould says Trudeau should let RCMP probe possible obstruction of justice in SNC-Lavalin affair
> 
> 
> Liberal Leader ducks questions on whether cabinet confidences had gotten in the way of the RCMP completing the inquiry
> ...


This wouldn't be the first or only time this PM/PMO influenced an RCMP investigation. Ask VAdm Norman.


----------



## FJAG (12 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Reform/CA, and re-formed CPC with mostly Reform/CA influence, were/are not fiscally conservative?
> 
> Other plausible explanation: broke into a people-who-want-a-seat-at-the-table wing, and a central-Canadian-well-connected-establishment wing.
> 
> The evolution of the political left toward control by the well-off and well-educated continues in Canada, as it has in the US, with "the people" moving over toward the right-side parties.  For all the talk about the problems of hierarchy and devotion to authority and authoritarianism and class divides and keeping people in their place on the left, that's where those problems are coming to fruition.  Not a shoe to be proud of wearing.


While the NDP may have a few too many self-proclaimed intellectuals, I tend to think they're made up primarily of "the people". 

Amongst "the people" there seems to me to be a generally geographic split with the more rural going to the right and the more urban to the left. There are also overtones of the self-employed labour to the right and the institutional or company employed labour to the left.

🤷‍♂️


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> While the NDP may have a few too many self-proclaimed intellectuals*, I tend to think they're made up primarily of "the people".*
> 
> Amongst "the people" there seems to me to be a generally geographic split with the more rural going to the right and the more urban to the left. There are also overtones of the self-employed labour to the right and the institutional or company employed labour to the left.
> 
> 🤷‍♂️



If 'the people' are champagne socialists then yes, he seems to be a man of the people 


"Jagmeet has a taste for dandy luxuries that don’t comport with the monkish minimalism of his party. He wears bespoke suits in the slim British style—his favourite is a brown tweed with cobalt-blue stripes, designed by a tailor in New Delhi, which he often pairs with a millennial-pink turban. He owns two Rolex watches, an Oyster Perpetual Datejust and a Submariner (both were gifts); a crimson BMW coupe; and six designer bicycles. “I have just an absurd number of bikes,” he says. “More than one person should have.” His kirpan, the ceremonial Sikh dagger he wears under his jacket, is a steel design by a metalworker outside Boston. Since joining Queen’s Park in 2011, Singh has become one of the city’s most devoted partygoers, a regular at King West nightspots and gala fundraisers, at fashion shows and Raptors games."









						Behind the scenes with Jagmeet Singh, the left’s greatest showman
					

The man with the catchy slogan, celebrity fans and flashy suits




					torontolife.com


----------



## FJAG (13 Sep 2021)

I think the term "primarily" leaves enough room for guys like Singh as well as most of the professors that I knew at Brandon University and the University of Manitoba (although a few of them were also covered by the term "self-proclaimed intellectuals")


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Nanos poll.






						Nanos research | CTV News | Nanos polls
					

CTV News Nanos research top headlines, breaking Nanos polling, national poll results and Nanos Canada survey results




					www.ctvnews.ca
				




Aggregate is out later today.  PPC pretty high right now.   LPC a seems to be rolling in consistently in the last few days for the finish.  We’ll see what the week brings.


----------



## Haggis (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> LPC a seems to be rolling in consistently in the last few days for the finish.  We’ll see what the week brings.


I think over the next few days, the polls will swing in favour of a LPC minority or slim majority, which many will see as an indication that the battle to unseat Trudeau is lost.  We all know that polls are like any other statistics.  "Cooks Law" can be applied to the results to acheive the desired outcome. This could be influenced by the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CCFR) flyer campaign being executed in vulnerable LPC ridings (which has several LPC incumbents on the defensive right now) and the release of JWRs book.


----------



## dimsum (13 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I think over the next few days, the polls will swing in favour of a LPC minority or slim majority, which many will see as an indication that rhe battle to unseat Trudeau is lost. This could be influenced by the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CCFR) flyer campaign being executed in vulnerable LPC ridings (which has several LPC incumbents on the defensive right now) and the release of JWRs book.


I can see a minority, but I think a slim majority seems a little farfetched now.


----------



## MilEME09 (13 Sep 2021)

Here's the thing though, look how wrong polls got things the last 3 federal elections, biggest factor? Who actually comes out to vote


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Here's the thing though, look how wrong polls got things the last 3 federal elections, biggest factor? Who actually comes out to vote


They really didn’t get it wrong last time though.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> I can see a minority, but I think a slim majority seems a little farfetched now.


Agreed.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I think over the next few days, the polls will swing in favour of a LPC minority or slim majority, which many will see as an indication that the battle to unseat Trudeau is lost.  We all know that polls are like any other statistics.  "Cooks Law" can be applied to the results to acheive the desired outcome. This could be influenced by the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights (CCFR) flyer campaign being executed in vulnerable LPC ridings (which has several LPC incumbents on the defensive right now) and the release of JWRs book.


I’m not sure how much of an effect JWR’s book will have.  Anyone who thought that whole issue was important likely switched their vote already.  Unless something really crazy comes out of it, I doubt anyone will treat that issue any different than they currently are.

I already voted.  So neither those revelations or the polls will change that now.  Or if someone gets caught on YouTube eating kittens.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Sep 2021)

So we can look forward to another election in 18 months?


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Sep 2021)

He's battling the Bloc for the 'Vital Ground' in the closing stages:


Trudeau on the offensive against Blanchet and O'Toole while campaigning in Quebec


Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau went on the offensive against Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole and Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet on Sunday, even as he continued to face questions regarding the treatment of two of his own former MPs.

Trudeau spent a second straight day targeting Bloc-held ridings on Montreal's South Shore, where his party hopes to regain some of the ground it lost in 2019.

Trudeau was in the La Prairie riding near Montreal on Sunday, a seat the Liberals lost to the Bloc's Alain Therrien in the last election. As he spoke at a park in Candiac overlooking the St. Lawrence River, he hammered home his commitment to Quebec and the fact that only his party, and not Blanchet's, can form government.









						Trudeau on the offensive against Blanchet and O'Toole while campaigning in Quebec
					

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau went on the offensive against Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole and Bloc Quebecois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet on Sunday, even as he continued to face questions regarding the treatment of two of his own former MPs.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> So we can look forward to another election in 18 months?


I have no doubt.  I voted CPC but I’m having doubts they will win.  What I can hope for is O’toole staying on as leader and keep pushing his message.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> He's battling the Bloc for the 'Vital Ground' in the closing stages:
> 
> 
> Trudeau on the offensive against Blanchet and O'Toole while campaigning in Quebec
> ...


I can see why.  It’s my Impression that the CPC and Bloc are fighting for the same vote share.  The LPC could come up the middle in a few.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Sep 2021)

Last election: LPC under Trudeau 33% for 157 seats, CPC under Scheer 34% for 121 seats.

LPC are going to do worse or better against O'Toole?


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Last election: LPC under Trudeau 33% for 157 seats, CPC under Scheer 34% for 121 seats.
> 
> LPC are going to do worse or better against O'Toole?


If I were to hazard a guess at this point I’d say 10 less seats overall for the LPC this time.


----------



## MilEME09 (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I have no doubt.  I voted CPC but I’m having doubts they will win.  What I can hope for is O’toole staying on as leader and keep pushing his message.


Even if they do not win, if they gain seats, and make in roads in say Quebec and the 905, they will keep him. 

I think it is going to be a very slim minority this time around, I can hope it will be the CPC just because they and the opposition parties are committed to no more elections till covid is over, where Trudeau has hinted he is a spoiled brat who would call another election in 18 months to try again for a majority.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (13 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Last election: LPC under Trudeau 33% for 157 seats, CPC under Scheer 34% for 121 seats.
> 
> LPC are going to do worse or better against O'Toole?



Interesting to see how the last week plays out. O'Toole was doing well but suddenly took a nosedive according to the CBC poll tracker. I don't think it's coincidental that O'Toole's numbers started plummeting and PPC numbers started surging right after O'Toole flip-flopped on firearms and said he'd keep the Liberal bans in place. I believe he came down more strongly in favour of a federal vaccine passport around the same time.

Whether any of that actually makes a difference remains to be seen.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Sep 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Interesting to see how the last week plays out. O'Toole was doing well but suddenly took a nosedive according to the CBC poll tracker. I don't think it's coincidental that O'Toole's numbers started plummeting and PPC numbers started surging right after O'Toole flip-flopped on firearms and said he'd keep the Liberal bans in place. I believe he came down more strongly in favour of a federal vaccine passport around the same time.
> 
> Whether any of that actually makes a difference remains to be seen.


Curious to see where the polling breaks out to; if the PPC is making gains in safe conservative seats, may have zero actual impact, but it's really in the tight swing seats that it it matters (similarly for the NDP and Lib seats). I think until they get a strong female leader for the CPC  though and be really clear about their stance on abortion, will continue to be the opposition as a lot of people don't trust them to not backslide into social conservativism.

A lot of things on the PPC fiscal side of the platform don't seem too bad, but the anti vaxx and other stances really make them pretty fringe. I think Mr. Singh as the leader of the Liberal party would do a lot better as well. He does the social side of things as well/better than Trudeau and is so far without the ethical lapses and accusations of sexual assault.

What I wouldn't give for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party; not even sure I want to bother voting as there are no real choices.


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Curious to see where the polling breaks out to; if the PPC is making gains in safe conservative seats, may have zero actual impact, but it's really in the tight swing seats that it it matters (similarly for the NDP and Lib seats). I think until they get a strong female leader for the CPC  though and be really clear about their stance on abortion, will continue to be the opposition as a lot of people don't trust them to not backslide into social conservativism. And why do people get that idea?
> 
> A lot of things on the PPC fiscal side of the platform don't seem too bad, but the anti vaxx and other stances really make them pretty fringe. I think Mr. Singh as the leader of the Liberal party would do a lot better as well. He does the social side of things as well/better than Trudeau and is so far without the ethical lapses and accusations of sexual assault. PPC are not "anti-vaxx". They are anti mandatory covid vaccines and anti vaccine passports. Having said, they also state they would largely stay out of provincial matters. So provinces can still make their own rules.
> 
> What I wouldn't give for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party; not even sure I want to bother voting as there are no real choices. That would be the PPC.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Sep 2021)

"What I wouldn't give for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party; not even sure I want to bother voting as there are no real choices. That would be the PPC."



What I learned at a People’s Party of Canada rally


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2021)

PMedMoe said:


> "What I wouldn't give for a fiscally conservative, socially liberal party; not even sure I want to bother voting as there are no real choices. That would be the PPC."
> 
> 
> 
> What I learned at a People’s Party of Canada rally


 That's a nice three year old hit piece.  

Here is the PPC platform today: Our Platform - People's Party of Canada


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> That's a nice three year old hit piece.
> 
> Here is the PPC platform today: Our Platform - People's Party of Canada


And yet still so relevant.


----------



## FJAG (13 Sep 2021)

Went to an advance poll today still not sure how I'll mark my ballot. Poll is in a tiny Lion's Club hall with a lineup standing outside in the pouring rain. Brilliant. Turned around and went home. More time to procrastinate I guess.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Sep 2021)

lol, libertarian does not equate to socially liberal, and sometimes you have to be intolerant of intolerance. Hence why we have hate speech and other reasonable restrictions on freedoms.

Also, regardless of what their platform says, they are behaving like a bunch of ignorant cavemen And you can't simultaneously claim you'll let provinces do what they want and then basically claim you'll overrule a lot of the provincial decisions on vaccine mandates, passports etc. The platform is not tracking with their actual messsaging, and I'd rather put a potted plant in Parliament (although, to be fair, I think that should be the default option; at least it would productively create oxygen).

Vaccine passports have been required for several centuries, and actively spreading straight up lies on things like the approval process, WHO guidelines etc means they have zero credibility. Honestly the PPC and their populist lies can get stuffed. I was vaguely optimistic when they started but they went right into the deep end, and may as well give out purple Al foil membership hats. 

Clearly they are a deep state ploy to leach votes off the CPC and keep the Libs in power. Or a double-reveresed ploy to make people think there is a ploy to keep the Libs in power and strengthen the CPC. Or both concurrently; the deep state is Machiavellian that way.


----------



## PMedMoe (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Here is the PPC platform today: Our Platform - People's Party of Canada


Yeah, don't care.   

I already voted and it _certainly_ wasn't for the PPC.


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> lol, libertarian does not equate to socially liberal, and sometimes you have to be intolerant of intolerance. Hence why we have hate speech and other reasonable restrictions on freedoms.
> 
> Also, regardless of what their platform says, they are behaving like a bunch of ignorant cavemen And you can't simultaneously claim you'll let provinces do what they want and then basically claim you'll overrule a lot of the provincial decisions on vaccine mandates, passports etc. The platform is not tracking with their actual messsaging, and I'd rather put a potted plant in Parliament (although, to be fair, I think that should be the default option; at least it would productively create oxygen).
> 
> ...


Those are quite the assertions. 

I have yet to read/hear a reasonable take down of any of the PPC's stated platforms. 

Just a lot of "tin foil, racist, misogynist, right wing wacko!". And much of that smear funded by the CPC (who hired Warren Kinsella) last election cycle, ironically, to take down the PPC. 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/project-cactus-maxime-bernier-1.5327555
		









						OPINION: Smear campaign against PPC by Warren Kinsella’s firm is the dirtiest election move yet
					

Opinion by Broderick Visser. Warren Kinsella’s Daisy Group consulting firm was behind a social media campaign which was to keep People’s Party of Canada leader, Maxime Bernier out of the federal le…




					spokeonline.com


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Those are quite the assertions.
> 
> I have yet to read/hear a reasonable take down of any of the PPC's stated platforms.
> 
> ...


They are obsessed with immigration and refugees.  Talking the right language to certain unfavourable groups that are attracted to them.  Not all of it is nuts though. But There is plenty to take down.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Sep 2021)

In response to the Liberal party's view of the Tory "big tent" approach, difference of opinion does not mean you can't all belong to the same party. If there's no room for different views, how does the party evolve? To quote General Patton:

"If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn't thinking."


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Sep 2021)

> libertarian does not equate to socially liberal



Yes it does, pretty much by definition.  A social illiberal who claims to be libertarian misunderstands the entire philosophy of libertarianism.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Sep 2021)

> sometimes you have to be intolerant of intolerance



How does such a person live with himself, I wonder?


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> They are obsessed with immigration and refugees.  Talking the right language to certain unfavourable groups that are attracted to them.  Not all of it is nuts though. But There is plenty to take down.


Their plan for refugees and immigration don't sound too crazy at all.









						Refugees - People's Party of Canada
					

PPC Platform: Refugees




					www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca
				












						Immigration - People's Party of Canada
					

PPC Platform: Immigration




					www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca
				




But you know what is crazy? Bringing in a record number of immigrants during a worldwide pandemic.  https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mendicino-immigration-pandemic-refugees-1.5782642


----------



## brihard (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Their plan for refugees and immigration don't sound too crazy at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hmm…



			
				PPC Platform said:
			
		

> The primary aim of Canada’s immigration policy should be to economically benefit Canadians and Canada as a whole. It should not be used to forcibly change the cultural character and social fabric of our country. And it should not put excessive financial burdens on the shoulders of Canadians in the pursuit of humanitarian goals.
> 
> Despite Canada already accepting more immigrants than almost any other country, both the Liberals and Conservatives support an unsustainable increase in the annual immigration intake, and are using mass immigration as a political tool to buy votes among immigrant communities.



If you can’t see the dog-whistles in this for what they are, we can’t help you.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Their plan for refugees and immigration don't sound too crazy at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This country wouldn’t be able to function with that sort of cut to immigration.  People don’t have to like it but it’s the truth.  They also blame the housing crisis on immigrants, they talk about muslims in their freedom of speech section, and they have a whole section on Canadian identity that I can only describe as lamenting immigrants.  Like I said, it’s an obsession.


----------



## QV (13 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Hmm…
> 
> 
> 
> If you can’t see the dog-whistles in this for what they are, we can’t help you.



What about the Financial Post, are they dog whistling too? 

Diane Francis: The Liberals' unsustainable immigration plan 
_Hardly anyone would disagree that Canada needs immigrants, but such a flood is not justifiable_

I think you're hearing things.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> But you know what is crazy? Bringing in a record number of immigrants during a worldwide pandemic.  https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mendicino-immigration-pandemic-refugees-1.5782642


No, not if they don’t have COVID.  

Until Canadians start making babies at an appreciable rate greater than they’re dying at, immigration is the only reasonable solution to increasing GDP and paying for all those benefits that we like so much.


----------



## brihard (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> What about the Financial Post, are they dog whistling too?
> 
> Diane Francis: The Liberals' unsustainable immigration plan
> _Hardly anyone would disagree that Canada needs immigrants, but such a flood is not justifiable_
> ...


I hear a federal political party trying to tell me that I should be afraid of people who don’t look or sound like me. And I think it’s gross.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Sep 2021)

What electoral districts are most immigrants to Canada initially taking up residence in these days?


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> What about the Financial Post, are they dog whistling too?
> 
> Diane Francis: The Liberals' unsustainable immigration plan
> _Hardly anyone would disagree that Canada needs immigrants, but such a flood is not justifiable_
> ...


Francis is off the plot on this one, especially blaming higher than AUS/NZ level unemployment in the immigrants. Who do you think will be happy to work and who would rather sit at home collecting CERB?  Hint: Immigrants aren’t sitting at home collecting CERB rather than accepting decent jobs.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> What electoral districts are most immigrants to Canada initially taking up residence in these days?


The same as any Immigrant in any country.  They go mostly to where they have opportunity and amenities.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> The same as any Immigrant in any country.  They go mostly to where they have opportunity and amenities.


…and can and DO work, taking many of the jobs that entitled unemployed Canadians turn their nose up at as being beneath them.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> The same as any Immigrant in any country.  They go mostly to where they have opportunity and amenities.


Can't fault that logic.
What electoral districts have the most opportunity and amenities these days?


----------



## daftandbarmy (13 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Can't fault that logic.
> What electoral districts have the most opportunity and amenities these days?



Well, for example, let's just say that in my recent trip to southern Alberta once I left Calgary, a big urban centre, it was snow white.... 

.... and it was summer.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Sep 2021)

The Liberals plan to use immigration to stack the electoral deck, has nothing to do with what's good for the country. The very corrupt government in Malaysia was doing the same, to shape the demographics in places that was beneficial to their staying in power.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> The Liberals plan to use immigration to stack the electoral deck, has nothing to do with what's good for the country. The very corrupt government in Malaysia was doing the same, to shape the demographics in places that was beneficial to their staying in power.


The CPC immigration plan doesn’t seem that different.  Just saying.

do you have a source for that statement? About the Liberal plan to stack the electoral deck?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> The CPC immigration plan doesn’t seem that different.  Just saying.
> 
> do you have a source for that statement? About the Liberal plan to stack the electoral deck?


Sadly Gerald Butts does not share his inner thoughts and strategies with me. However one can easily surmise how they intend to shape the electoral battlefield. The key to winning wars is to win before the battle is fought.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Sadly Gerald Butts does not share his inner thoughts and strategies with me. However one can easily surmise how they intend to shape the electoral battlefield. The key to winning wars is to win before the battle is fought.


He'd cite Cabinet Confidence anyways.

I suspect the reason we attempted to take on so many Syrian refugees while seemingly ignoring Afghans (who were actually in danger) is because the Afghans were a little too close with the conservatives and the LPC couldn't count on their votes.


----------



## Remius (13 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> He'd cite Cabinet Confidence anyways.
> 
> I suspect the reason we attempted to take on so many Syrian refugees while seemingly ignoring Afghans (who were actually in danger) is because the Afghans were a little too close with the conservatives and the LPC couldn't count on their votes.


Honestly, immigration policy hasn’t really changed that much in the last decade if not more.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> How does such a person live with himself, I wonder?


Quite easily; it's known as the paradox of tolerance and much smarter people then myself have explained it pretty well; but basically means you can be intolerant of things like racism (ie. intolerance) and that a certain amount of intolerance to people being jerks to others is required to live in a tolerant society. Perfect example is Canada's hate speech limits on free speech, where people aren't allowed to say anything they want without consequences. Pure tolerance sounds good on paper, but falls apart in practice because people can be jerks and will take advantage of that.

Paradox of tolerance - Wikipedia

Libertarianism is a pretty broad category, and and can include anarchism (ie total personal freedom), forms of socialism with no personal property on one end of the spectrum, and free market libertarianism on the other end. Same starting premise, but completely different logical endpoints.

It can get taken to a lot of harmful extremes, so not a big fan as a political concept. For example, extreme market deregulation in the US banking sector has led to multiple serious crashes with massive economic impacts.

So, social liberal (with a small l); basically think that government intervention is needed all over the place because people can't keep their stick on the ice, but don't really care what consenting adults do in their bedrooms. Fiscally conservative (again, small c), because I think government shouldn't mortgage our grandkids future by constant overspending, but also recognize that bankers can't keep their stick on the ice either, so all kinds of financial regulations are needed to ensure stability and that the system is sustainable, while paying people a living wage, and not wrecking the planet via predatory resource exploitation (both natural resources and people).  Very little of that is 'libertarian' in practice, and as a political theory it's so wide that I think calling yourself a 'libertarian' is a bit meaningless, and don't think the juice is worth the squeeze to run through the endless subdivisions.

Voting wise that doesn't align to anyone, and while there is a bunch of good stuff in the PPC platform, the party members and candidates continue to behave like rabid assclowns, and really can't get behind their COVID stance, so that's a hard no for me.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Sep 2021)

Over the last 5 years I have learned that I am mostly a liberal (opposite of illiberal) conservative (opposite of  “progressive”, a term I don’t like).  I do not see any truly liberal party, but the Tories are closest in that, for the most part for now, they are closer to the liberal values of the Enlightenment than the others. Having said that, I do see a troubling illiberal streak in that party that is influenced by the illiberalism of the modern US Republican Party.    

The Liberals are probably the closest thing to an illiberal cult of personality that the Republicans have become, but one day I fear the Tories will say “Hold my beer”.


----------



## medic5 (13 Sep 2021)

I've been a Conservative member for a few years, and I voted for O'Toole in the leadership race. (Weird that they allow people to vote at 14) Truthfully I feel a bit betrayed, he went against his word on guns and has broken a few other promises he made to his supporters. The Conservative party has also moved further from fiscal conservatism, and I don't see how they will keep all their promises and balance the budget without raising taxes.

I don't think O'Toole is a good leader, I value honesty and actually staying accountable to the promises you make to your supporters, instead of changing your mind on a whim to try to get more votes. 

For voters in my situation, what do you do? I would never support the NDP since I prefer to not spend every cent then raise taxes to the moon, I strongly dislike Justin Trudeau, the Greens are irrelevant, and the PPC sounds pretty crazy to me and some of their candidates are literally crazy. 

Good thing I can't vote, no way I could make a decision.


----------



## MilEME09 (13 Sep 2021)

medic5 said:


> I've been a Conservative member for a few years, and I voted for O'Toole in the leadership race. (Weird that they allow people to vote at 14) Truthfully I feel a bit betrayed, he went against his word on guns and has broken a few other promises he made to his supporters. The Conservative party has also moved further from fiscal conservatism, and I don't see how they will keep all their promises and balance the budget without raising taxes.
> 
> I don't think O'Toole is a good leader, I value honesty and actually staying accountable to the promises you make to your supporters, instead of changing your mind on a whim to try to get more votes.
> 
> ...


If you go back a few pages you can read our discussion about the gun statement and how he didn't actually change his mind at all. His platform has been costed to return to balance after 10 years, if he survives that long.


----------



## medic5 (13 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> If you go back a few pages you can read our discussion about the gun statement and how he didn't actually change his mind at all. His platform has been costed to return to balance after 10 years, if he survives that long.


Ah, that's my mistake for only reading headlines.

"O'Toole repeated that statement in the following days while remaining evasive about whether he was talking about the May 2020 cabinet order or 1977 bill that banned fully automatic weapons, saying on Saturday that voters could look in the party platform to "fill in the blanks.""

Jesus, that fooled me.


----------



## Weinie (14 Sep 2021)

medic5 said:


> I've been a Conservative member for a few years, and I voted for O'Toole in the leadership race. *(Weird that they allow people to vote at 14)* Truthfully I feel a bit betrayed, he went against his word on guns and has broken a few other promises he made to his supporters. The Conservative party has also moved further from fiscal conservatism, and I don't see how they will keep all their promises and balance the budget without raising taxes.
> 
> I don't think O'Toole is a good leader, I value honesty and actually staying accountable to the promises you make to your supporters, instead of changing your mind on a whim to try to get more votes.
> 
> ...


You didn't seem to find it weird, you joined and you voted for him. I find it weird that you, out of the blue, feel betrayed, and are expressing that feeling of betrayal with a week to go. Weird, eh.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> the paradox of tolerance



Such a sense of humour.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> Libertarianism is a pretty broad category



Within a narrow range of quibbling, it's maximal individual liberty.  Lack of property rights ain't in it, no matter how people wish to redefine the concept.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

I'm not impressed with O'Toole's slide left either, but I'll settle for the best combination of electable and conservative.  Lest anyone forget, promises made during campaigns don't get kept very much.

Hard to picture American conservative/Republicans as illiberal when the essence of their brand of conservativism is holding to what is probably the most liberal, pro-individual constitution extant.


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Within a narrow range of quibbling, it's maximal individual liberty.  Lack of property rights ain't in it, no matter how people wish to redefine the concept.


The issue with maximum liberty is that many will not accept the associated responsibilities.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

Sure, life has consequences.  But people should be free to go to hell in their own way, as much as possible.


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Sure, life has consequences.  But people should be free to go to hell in their own way, as much as possible.


Should they be allowed to kill?  Makes choices that put others at risk? If so, at what level?  Great idea in theory that doesn’t stand up to reality.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

The usual rule libertarians cite is the "fist ends where nose starts" principle.   People who think of themselves as libertarians have spent a lot of time thinking about where to draw the lines; some have even written about it.  (They spend more time debating ideology and principles than centrists do, probably because they never hold much power and so have a lot of time on their hands.)  Despite what some people think, one of the first things on a libertarian's plate is organized government to protect individual liberty and provide orderly rules for transactions and contracts.  Most of the "libertarian market failure" critiques I've read are really criticisms of crony capitalism, which is not supported by libertarians.

Most of the really big fuck-ups we endure are from people trying to use government to corner a bigger slice of something for themselves.


----------



## medic5 (14 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Should they be allowed to kill?  Makes choices that put others at risk? If so, at what level?  Great idea in theory that doesn’t stand up to reality.


I think a lot of libertarians just don't want the government to make these sorts of decisions, but to delegate it instead to companies to do what they'd like. For example with COVID, libertarians would be ok with Mcdonald's requiring masks, but not the government requiring them.


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Sep 2021)

medic5 said:


> I think a lot of libertarians just don't want the government to make these sorts of decisions, but to delegate it instead to companies to do what they'd like. For example with COVID, libertarians would be ok with Mcdonald's requiring masks, but not the government requiring them.


Great, so companies are allowed to make decisions on who to kill (that was my first question).  Winner.


----------



## medic5 (14 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Great, so companies are allowed to make decisions on who to kill.  Winner.


I think the logic is that you, as the consumer, make the decision since your money really determines what a company does.


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Sep 2021)

medic5 said:


> I think the logic is that you, as the consumer, make the decision since your money really determines what a company does.


So now, whoever has the most money can influence a company to decide who to kill.  This is getting better by the second!


----------



## medic5 (14 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> You didn't seem to find it weird, you joined and you voted for him. I find it weird that you, out of the blue, feel betrayed, and are expressing that feeling of betrayal with a week to go. Weird, eh.


I really don't understand what you're saying. If you're saying that I'm lying, would you like to see my membership card? Why would I even lie about something as meaningless as this? 

Yes, I voted for O'Toole. Yes, I am disappointed that he is sliding to the left. This election was literally called a month ago, he made his comments a week ago, I don't see how I could be disappointed earlier.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Sep 2021)

Becoming more centrist is both pragmatic and necessary for the Conservatives. Pragmatic, because as long as they're tied to the "Trump lite" label, they're completely unelectable. Necessary, because Canada writ large is essentially a centrist, somewhat left of center society. The Conservatives have to become more progressive (whatever that means), in order to appeal to a larger cohort of voters.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> Great, so companies are allowed to make decisions on who to kill (that was my first question).  Winner.



You two are arguing a complete dead-end, from the perspective of a libertarian.  No-one, acting individually or collectively through some kind of front, should be able to kill someone.


----------



## SupersonicMax (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You two are arguing a complete dead-end, from the perspective of a libertarian.  No-one, acting individually or collectively through some kind of front, should be able to kill someone.


So, where do liberties end?  Killing is the extreme but there is a spectrum of things that has effects on others, between killing someone amd not be allowed to have any effect on someone’s life.  Where is the line?


----------



## medic5 (14 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Becoming more centrist is both pragmatic and necessary for the Conservatives. Pragmatic, because as long as they're tied to the "Trump lite" label, they're completely unelectable. Necessary, because Canada writ large is essentially a centrist, somewhat left of center society. The Conservatives have to become more progressive (whatever that means), in order to appeal to a larger cohort of voters.


I think that moving to the center also alienates people on the right, which is why the PPC is gaining in popularity. The worst-case scenario would be that the Trump label is never forgotten, centrists never vote blue, and the right splinters, ruining any chances for the Conservatives to win.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (14 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> Great, so companies are allowed to make decisions on who to kill (that was my first question).  Winner.




The Assassination Bureau Limited: The Assassination Bureau - Wikipedia


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Sep 2021)

More proof, in case it was needed, that nurses are great organizers:


Trudeau lashes out at protester who made sexist slur about his wife​
Trudeau's responses to anti-vaccination protesters during the pandemic have ranged from dismissive to sympathetic. During repeated attempts to disrupt his campaign events, Trudeau has responded in his speeches by making a joke or telling them to get vaccinated.

At a campaign stop in Quebec earlier on Monday, Trudeau thanked a People's Party of Canada supporter for helping him make his point. As he was asked by a reporter if he was concerned that PPC Leader Maxime Bernier's rhetoric was inciting violence, the demonstrator started cheering.

"Thank you, sir, for making my point," Trudeau said.

*The demonstrations were organized by two Ontario nurses who have promoted conspiracy theories about COVID-19. The organizers also attended rallies in the U.S. for those who think the pandemic is a "fraud."*



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-lashes-out-protester-derogatory-remark-wife-1.6174623


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (14 Sep 2021)

The problem I have with Trudeau' latest announcement that he will render something criminal (blocking access to health facilities or harassing/threatening health workers) is that it shows (as usual) his complete ignorance of Canadian law: These acts already are illegal under tons of Criminal Code sections, ranging from Mischief (430(1)), Harassment (423(1)) at the low end up to Criminal Harassment (264(1) or Uttering Threat (264.1(1)) and to Unlawful Assembly (63(1)) or even Forcible Detainer (72(2)) at the upper hand.

Basically , he should have simply said that they would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law - the usual trite response from politicians who have no say over who gets prosecuted and for what in any event.


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> More proof, in case it was needed, that nurses are great organizers:
> 
> 
> Trudeau lashes out at protester who made sexist slur about his wife​
> ...



Ah yes, the nurses who were fired back in Jan.  Looks like they have a new job helping the LPC win this election with those shenanigans.


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> The problem I have with Trudeau' latest announcement that he will render something criminal (blocking access to health facilities or harassing/threatening health workers) is that it shows (as usual) his complete ignorance of Canadian law: These acts already are illegal under tons of Criminal Code sections, ranging from Mischief (430(1)), Harassment (423(1)) at the low end up to Criminal Harassment (264(1) or Uttering Threat (264.1(1)) and to Unlawful Assembly (63(1)) or even Forcible Detainer (72(2)) at the upper hand.
> 
> Basically , he should have simply said that they would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law - the usual trite response from politicians who have no say over who gets prosecuted and for what in any event.



but it gives him the opportunity to look like he’s being tough and decisive and taking these freaks on.  All they are doing  is helping his image.  Brilliant.


----------



## Haggis (14 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> but it gives him the opportunity to look like *he’s being tough and decisive *and taking these freaks on.  All they are doing  is helping his image.  Brilliant.


Just like his dad. "Just watch me." It's been 51 years since then. The separatist flame is dimmed but not extinguished because Trudeaus keeps it alive.


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Ah yes, the nurses who were fired back in Jan.  Looks like they have a new job helping the LPC win this election with those shenanigans.


Here's their web page.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Within a narrow range of quibbling, it's maximal individual liberty.  Lack of property rights ain't in it, no matter how people wish to redefine the concept.


Maybe in your personal definition; here's the wiki tracing about 200 years of evolution on the libertarian concept.  "Liberty" is a pretty nebulous concept and means a lot of different things to different people, so if you are calling yourself a libertarian people's understanding of that will vary pretty widely. For example, the French newspaper 'The Libertarian' was an anarchist publication.

Or you could look at the Nolan chart, created by Libertarian Mark Nolan, to show the split between personal/economic liberty to show some of the differences.

Libertarianism - Wikipedia

Lack of property rights springs from the idea that everything on Earth is collectively owned, so people claiming ownership on property infringes on other people's liberty to use that land. Again, doesn't make sense for most people, but kind of an example of why I don't specifically identify as a Libertarian; it's too broad of a philosophy so far too much room for misinterpretations.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (14 Sep 2021)

I think you are exaggerating the power of the Trudeau's.

There has been (and always shall be, to quote Spock) an independantist  (separatism can only refer to the current Canada) flame in what is now Quebec from about 40 years after the Plains of Abraham. At the beginning, the first few English governors were quite astute to the needs and wants of the Canadians (which only denoted the French settlers at that time) and they accepted the change of Crown quite wilfully. But then, the British hyper-capitalist merchants started to immigrate (The McGill's, Molson's , Ogilvy's of the world, etc.) in numbers to Montreal and basically took over the power of the governors by controlling him for their own purpose as opposed to the better needs of the community at large (in both Lower Canada - the Clique du palais, and in Upper Canada - where the Family Compact pissed off the recent American arrivals by thwarting their efforts to set things like providing for basic education for all ) which caused a call - in both provinces for independence from England: the Rebellion.

The sentiment that at some point it will have to occur so we (Quebecers now) will have full control of our destiny -whatever that may be - hasn't died yet and is unlikely to die no matter that the Trudeau's of this world exist or not.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> but it gives him the opportunity to look like he’s being tough and decisive and taking these freaks on.  All they are doing  is helping his image.  Brilliant.


Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas? 🤔 

#FalseFlag


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas? 🤔
> 
> #FalseFlag


I doubt it.  Crazies like those nurses or that PPC white nationalist or the CPC campaign staffers are all well known enough to discount that.


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> I hear a federal political party trying to tell me that I should be afraid of people who don’t look or sound like me. And I think it’s gross.


That’s an overzealous take and just not true or fair. A simple check of all the PPC candidates make it obvious this is a diverse group of people and nothing in their platform tells you to be afraid of people who don’t look like you, you draw that inference all on your own. It seems to me these are people not happy with the “establishment” party choices. It says something when they can go from zero to potentially double digit support (passing the Greens and maybe the Bloc) in this short of a span. Are there a few questionable candidates? Our PM has a history of mocking black people so show me which party doesn’t have some questionable characters.

The political discourse today is such that if you don’t agree with very high immigration targets or controlling your border (or any other ideology of the left) than you must be a racist, and for the progressive radical left that’s the kind of division they want.


----------



## brihard (14 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> That’s an overzealous take and just not true or fair. A simple check of all the PPC candidates make it obvious this is a diverse group of people and nothing in their platform tells you to be afraid of people who don’t look like you, you draw that inference all on your own. It seems to me these are people not happy with the “establishment” party choices. It says something when they can go from zero to potentially double digit support (passing the Greens and maybe the Bloc) in this short of a span. Are there a few questionable candidates? Our PM has a history of mocking black people so show me which party doesn’t have some questionable characters.
> 
> The political discourse today is such that if you don’t agree with very high immigration targets or controlling your border (or any other ideology of the left) than you must be a racist, and for the progressive radical left that’s the kind of division they want.


GTFO with that nonsense. Their anti-immigrant screed runs throughout their platform. Somehow they even make it part of their housing plan. They blatantly try to drum up the fear of ‘our’ culture being supplanted. It must have killed them having to exercise enough restraint to not use the term “great replacement”. The fact that some visible minorities are running as candidates doesn’t change the overall tone. A lot can also be gleaned from who flocks to the party, and who the party is fine welcoming.

They can be forgiven for being painfully dumb on demographics, as another poster alluded to above with regards to birth rates. That’s just ignorance and is hardly unique to the PPC, though they do revel in it. Their blatant opposition to multiculturalism and the clear racist dogwhistles, however, are as I said, “gross”.

You’ve consciously chosen to be wilfully blind to this, or perhaps even to embrace it. Fine, that’s your right if their adherents are the company you want to be seen keeping .


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2021)

There it is. “If you don’t agree with me you’re a racist.“. Well done champ.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> So, where do liberties end?



Not at whatever the most frightened among us deem necessary for security/safety.



> not be allowed to have any effect on someone’s life



If I don't drop a coin into the beggar's hat, I've had an adverse effect on his life.  The first place to draw a line is between active and passive.

We have behind and among us the long toll of people immiserated and killed by the ham-fisted actions of those adhering to the "centrist" political philosophies, but as soon as the spectre of libertarianism and increased individual liberty is raised, I find myself in discussions of a "what-if-people-sell-human-flesh-for-consumption" nature.


----------



## Remius (14 Sep 2021)

Not at whatever the most frightened among us deem necessary for security/safety.


Brad Sallows said:


> If I don't drop a coin into the beggar's hat, I've had an adverse effect on his life.  The first place to draw a line is between active and passive.
> 
> We have behind and among us the long toll of people immiserated and killed by the ham-fisted actions of those adhering to the "centrist" political philosophies, but as soon as the spectre of libertarianism and increased individual liberty is raised, I find myself in discussions of a "what-if-people-sell-human-flesh-for-consumption" nature.


the closest thing I can think of that comes to anything resembling a libertarian society is the early American west.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> the Nolan chart



The Nolan chart's axes are not very orthogonal, so it's next to useless - the axes have to be truly independent. Economic freedom is part of personal freedom.  Rights in property basically mean the power to decide what to do with property.

Jerry Pournelle did a better job with his axes (rationalism, statism).  

I understand where the left-libertarian idea originated and I've read some of the recent stuff pushed by people who want it to have legs.  But it's a dead-end hypothetical.  People can't do collectivism without pinching freedom, a lot.  The first thing two out of three people are going to agree on is things they don't like about the third, and how to impose limits on him.

I suppose when I refer to "libertarianism" I have to clarify that I mean practical, feasible libertarianism.


----------



## brihard (14 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> There it is. “If you don’t agree with me you’re a racist.“. Well done champ.


Your reading comprehension sucks. If I wanted to call you racist, I would do so and would show receipts. Nor does my opinion depend on whether I’m agreed with or not.

I’ve said you have chosen either to embrace or to be wilfully blind to racist platform points from a party that’s reeking of it. I’m not in a position to say which of those two options actually applies to you, so I won’t try to. Truth be told I don’t really care which it is. If you’re cool with supporting a party that wouldn’t fire an openly white supremacist riding president (Shane Marshall) until he literally got caught throwing gravel at the PM, that’s your call- but it reflects on your values and judgment. I’m not in a position to speak to your personal beliefs other than what you’ve chosen to disclose yourself.


----------



## Weinie (14 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Your reading comprehension sucks. If I wanted to call you racist, I would do so and would show receipts. Nor does my opinion depend on whether I’m agreed with or not.
> 
> I’ve said you have chosen either to embrace or to be wilfully blind to racist platform points from a party that’s reeking of it. I’m not in a position to say which of those two options actually applies to you, so I won’t try to. Truth be told I don’t really care which it is. If you’re cool with supporting a party that wouldn’t fire an openly white supremacist riding president (Shane Marshall) until he literally got caught throwing gravel at the PM, that’s your call- but it reflects on your values and judgment. I’m not in a position to speak to your personal beliefs other than what you’ve chosen to disclose yourself.


So by that logic stated above, Trudeau supporters embrace “blackface”


----------



## The Bread Guy (14 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Gotta wonder if they’re actually on the LPC payroll….maybe via a few numbered accounts in the Aga Khan’s Caribbean home Bahamas? 🤔
> 
> #FalseFlag


You mean like the PPC riding association president being on the LPC payroll?

Edited to add:  if there's even a _scintilla_ of evidence that this is the case, or any even tenuous link to the Liberals, we'd hear it from folks like Spencer Fernando or Ezra Levant.  Mind you, let's see what counsel for the defence pulls out during any trial - _if_ it goes to trial.


----------



## Navy_Pete (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose when I refer to "libertarianism" I have to clarify that I mean practical, feasible libertarianism.


Agree, I guess that's why I just stick to 'socially liberal' as it avoids the whole discussion on libertarian-ism, plus there is a lot I don't buy into in terms of the economic/free market portions, and some of the ideas on personal liberties to an extent.

Most political theories are pretty dead end hypotheticals when you get down to it and run it to extremes, and if you don't account for people being jerks, is pretty much doomed to fail. It's like the US theory of their democratic setup sounds okay on paper, but doesn't work in practice because of the people factor, with a lot of gerrymandering and voter suppression running unchecked to a large extent because of a lack of federal oversight and unified standard.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (14 Sep 2021)

A good turn-out for the advance polls despite some of the obstacles of the new normal.









						Around 5.8M Canadians voted in advanced polls — nearly 1M more than 2019 - National | Globalnews.ca
					

The polls were open from Friday to Monday.




					globalnews.ca
				





> Elections Canada estimates roughly 5.8 million Canadians cast their ballot at advanced polls for the federal election.
> 
> The polls were open from Friday to Monday.
> 
> ...



I


----------



## brihard (14 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> So by that logic stated above, Trudeau supporters embrace “blackface”


If they’re unwilling to acknowledge and denounce the actions in question then yes, that logic would be consistent. You would have to ask a Trudeau supporter though, I’m certainly not one.


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2021)

Jordan Peterson and Rex Murphy talk election and politics.

Peterson is planning to have Max Bernier on in a few days.


----------



## QV (14 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Your reading comprehension sucks. If I wanted to call you racist, I would do so and would show receipts. Nor does my opinion depend on whether I’m agreed with or not.
> 
> I’ve said you have chosen either to embrace or to be wilfully blind to racist platform points from a party that’s reeking of it. I’m not in a position to say which of those two options actually applies to you, so I won’t try to. Truth be told I don’t really care which it is. If you’re cool with supporting a party that wouldn’t fire an openly white supremacist riding president (Shane Marshall) until he literally got caught throwing gravel at the PM, that’s your call- but it reflects on your values and judgment. I’m not in a position to speak to your personal beliefs other than what you’ve chosen to disclose yourself.


“You disagree with me, so you are either a racist or you support known racists. I don’t which one, but you’re definitely one of those”. 

Your inferences suck.


----------



## Weinie (14 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> If they’re unwilling to acknowledge and denounce the actions in question then yes, that logic would be consistent. You would have to ask a Trudeau supporter though, I’m certainly not one.


You're skating away from this. Whether or not you are a Trudeau supporter, your argument decrees that a PPC supporter is all in, and in fact a racist. That is absolute bullshit.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2021)

Man elections and politics just brings out the best in people eh ?  I mean it's a real unifying experience.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

People aren't responsible for every flaw of everyone associated with them.

A person can despise a politician's misogyny, or racism, or incompetence, and still vote for the bastard.


----------



## RangerRay (14 Sep 2021)

There was a time when so-called conservatives said character matters. And I believed them.  Silly me.


----------



## Weinie (14 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> People aren't responsible for every flaw of everyone associated with them.
> 
> A person can despise a politician's *implied associations* with misogyny, or racism, or incompetence, and still vote for the *(seeming)* bastard.


FTFY.


----------



## Haggis (14 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Man elections and politics just brings out the best in people eh ?  I mean it's a real unifying experience.


I`ll be so glad when September 21st hits and we can get back to Reg/Res bashing, whining about buttons and bows and the incessant questions about CANSOFCOM.

At least DonaldH isn't here for this thread


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I`ll be so glad when September 21st hits and we can get back to Reg/Res bashing, whining about buttons and bows and the incessant questions about CANSOFCOM.
> 
> At least DonaldH isn't here for this thread








Touche lol


----------



## Weinie (14 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I`ll be so glad when September 21st hits and we can get back to Reg/Res bashing, whining about buttons and bows and the incessant questions about CANSOFCOM.
> 
> At least DonaldH isn't here for this thread


Sure, but you cannot escape the inevitable. The decisions rendered on 20 Sept will colour/influence all of the questions you raise above, and a multitude more. This will influence our discussions on this forum until the next time.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Sep 2021)

…and “next time” may be only 18 months from now…


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Sep 2021)

> There was a time when so-called conservatives said character matters.



So does everyone else.


----------



## brihard (14 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> You're skating away from this. Whether or not you are a Trudeau supporter, your argument decrees that a PPC supporter is all in, and in fact a racist. That is absolute bullshit.


I’m not skating away from a blessed thing. You made and stated an extrapolation based on my logic and I substantially agreed with you. You spoke directly and I replied directly. You tried to set me up for an argument to make a point and instead I basically said “yeah, that checks out”. If you want to challenge my opinion of the PPC then just go for it. I’ve made my opinion quite known and I’m comfortable repeating it or elaborating on it, subject to the time I have available to do so.

The party, in its written platform, has made a number of claims or statements and articulated several platform points that I believe show a mainstreamed racism within the party’s collective beliefs. Some of it is subtle, some of it isn’t. My observation is corroborated by the type of fringe that has flocked to the party, and it’s corroborated by them literally embracing known and public racists in party positions. That’s a choice the PPC has made to try to pull enough votes to be relevant, but they’re accountable for it.

Does this mean every PPC supporter is racist? Of course not. Are some? Certainly, and I’d say more than a few. Are a few fully ignorant of this? Yes, inevitably some will manage to be. Does that leave many others wilfully blind or passively accepting of it? Necessarily yes. That troubles me, and I have concerns about the values of people who would, in the balance, be ok with that. It also means that the PPC have, institutionally, accepted that they have and will continue to appeal to that fringe. We are not defined by our associations except for in the most extreme cases, but we’re certainly coloured by them, and in some cases tainted. The PPC chose a guy to be a riding president who’s openly white nationalist, and he’s not the only real winner they’ve had onboard. Anyone who knows these things and is ok enough with them to choose to support that party has made a choice about what values and ethics they’re communicating to others. And yes, some people will intensely dislike this view and will intensely dislike me for holding it. I’m completely comfortable with that.

I trust I’ve left nothing hanging here that you’ll still feel the need to accuse me of ‘skating’ from anything?


----------



## QV (15 Sep 2021)

Dr Jordan Peterson is hosting Max Bernier on his podcast very soon. Doubtful Peterson would associate with a leader of a party that holds “mainstreamed racism within its collective beliefs” unless Peterson plans to take him apart. But the interview will definitely give the listeners a chance to determine what Max and the PPC stand for, and get it on the record. 

At least Peterson is giving Max a chance to speak to a large audience, unlike our unbiased and fair media and electoral debate processes. Peterson has over 4 million subscribers, this could really help or really hurt Max. Let’s hear what he has to say, baseless accusations of racism and attempts to silence are illiberal.


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2021)

Who will have the longer 'neck' I wonder ....

'Gripped in a tie': Nanos ballot tracking reports front-running parties neck-and-neck​
The front running federal parties are "gripped in a tie" with the latest polling numbers showing the Liberals leading the Conservative Party with a little more than one per cent between them, according to pollster Nik Nanos.

According to Nanos Research's nightly tracking data conducted for CTV News and the Globe and Mail, the Liberal Party has 32.3 per cent support of Canadians surveyed, closely followed by the Conservatives at 31.2 per cent.

The latest polling data, which was released Tuesday, also shows the NDP at 18.9 per cent, an increase of 0.3 per cent from the night before.










						'Gripped in a tie': Nanos ballot tracking reports front-running parties neck-and-neck
					

The front-running federal parties are 'gripped in a tie' with the latest polling numbers showing the Liberals leading the Conservative Party with a little more than one per cent between them, according to pollster Nik Nanos.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## The Bread Guy (15 Sep 2021)

How one think tank (McGill & U of T) saw things between 27 Aug & 9 Sept in the media landscape ...


> ... Since Aug. 27 when Trudeau’s event in Bolton, Ont. was cancelled due to security concerns, headlines across news organizations in Canada have heavily featured information about the protests and protesters. We pulled all headlines from Canadian news organizations from Aug. 27 to Sept. 9 (totalling 8,709 headlines) and found 3.1 percent contained reference to the protests (representing 268 stories during that period). Coverage of these events far exceeds that of other major stories during this period including Afghanistan (2.3 percent) and gun control (2.3 percent) ...


----------



## MilEME09 (15 Sep 2021)

Big factor here is who is comfortable to go and vote given a 4th wave a covid, and how that will effect the ballot box


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> How one think tank (McGill & U of T) saw things between 27 Aug & 9 Sept in the media landscape ...



That's telling.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Big factor here is who is comfortable to go and vote given a 4th wave a covid, and how that will effect the ballot box


Reports are nearly a 20% uptick in advance voting, and mail in from 50k requests last time to over 1m this time...


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Dr Jordan Peterson is hosting Max Bernier on his podcast very soon. Doubtful Peterson would associate with a leader of a party that holds “mainstreamed racism within its collective beliefs” unless Peterson plans to take him apart. But the interview will definitely give the listeners a chance to determine what Max and the PPC stand for, and get it on the record.
> 
> At least Peterson is giving Max a chance to speak to a large audience, unlike our unbiased and fair media and electoral debate processes. Peterson has over 4 million subscribers, this could really help or really hurt Max. Let’s hear what he has to say, baseless accusations of racism and attempts to silence are illiberal.


It’s hard to call the accusations of racism baseless when the party has embraced those types.  It started off fine but it has accepted various racist types into the party and haven’t done that much to course correct,  if the party is being defined by others, it’s because it has set the conditions and provided all the ammo required.  I don’t think Bernier is a a racist.  Quite the opposite.  But the PPC is now known largely as the party that attracts racists and more recently is now the anti vaccine party.    If it wants to occupy those spaces that is on them and everything that comes with it.

and it has nothing to do with mainstream racism or racism as defined by biology.  The types attracted to the PPC that people will lament are those that espouse post modern racism and are all to eager to support a party that has all the ingredients to fit their view and their feelings in relation to whatever culture war they feel they are part of.   It’s no coincidence that Immigration, cultural identity, refugees and Muslims are stated prominently in a lot of their platform points.  

I have no doubt that most PPC supporters are anti establishment, angry at the world and where it is heading and want to see change.  But don’t kid yourself if you think that the vocal, racist culture warriors are not sinking their roots into the party and trying to influence its direction.  They found a platform that welcomed them and they will use that to their advantage to spread their message and influence.  And some nice but naive people will be all too accommodating to enable that because of their worldview that somehow free speech suppression, big government and media conspiracies are trying to keep them down.


----------



## QV (15 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> It’s hard to call the accusations of racism baseless when the party has embraced those types.  It started off fine but it has accepted various racist types into the party and haven’t done that much to course correct,  if the party is being defined by others, it’s because it has set the conditions and provided all the ammo required.  I don’t think Bernier is a a racist.  Quite the opposite.  But the PPC is now known largely as the party that attracts racists and more recently is now the anti vaccine party.    If it wants to occupy those spaces that is on them and everything that comes with it.
> 
> and it has nothing to do with mainstream racism or racism as defined by biology.  The types attracted to the PPC that people will lament are those that espouse post modern racism and are all to eager to support a party that has all the ingredients to fit their view and their feelings in relation to whatever culture war they feel they are part of.   It’s no coincidence that Immigration, cultural identity, refugees and Muslims are stated prominently in a lot of their platform points.
> 
> I have no doubt that most PPC supporters are anti establishment, angry at the world and where it is heading and want to see change.  But don’t kid yourself if you think that the vocal, racist culture warriors are not sinking their roots into the party and trying to influence its direction.  They found a platform that welcomed them and they will use that to their advantage to spread their message and influence.  And some nice but naive people will be all too accommodating to enable that because of their worldview that somehow free speech suppression, big government and media conspiracies are trying to keep them down.


"Embraced"... right.

Why don't you give me some examples and list all the racists the PPC has embraced. 

Secondly, the PPC is not anti vaccine. The PPC is anti vaccine passport and anti mandatory vaccine. Which is the same position our current government had only a few months ago (recall Trudeau expressly stated there would be no mandatory vaccines or vax passports, and anyone who suggested this is where we were headed was a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist).


----------



## Weinie (15 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> I’m not skating away from a blessed thing. You made and stated an extrapolation based on my logic and I substantially agreed with you. You spoke directly and I replied directly. You tried to set me up for an argument to make a point and instead I basically said “yeah, that checks out”. If you want to challenge my opinion of the PPC then just go for it. I’ve made my opinion quite known and I’m comfortable repeating it or elaborating on it, subject to the time I have available to do so.
> 
> The party, in its written platform, has made a number of claims or statements and articulated several platform points that I believe show a mainstreamed racism within the party’s collective beliefs. Some of it is subtle, some of it isn’t. My observation is corroborated by the type of fringe that has flocked to the party, and it’s corroborated by them literally embracing known and public racists in party positions. That’s a choice the PPC has made to try to pull enough votes to be relevant, but they’re accountable for it.
> 
> ...


Imputing racism has become the de facto Staples "Easy button" during an election campaign. It's not a matter of if, it is a matter of when do we (insert political party) dispense it, either in response to past or current statements, or because it is politically expedient to do so.

Every major political party in this country has had electioneering candidates who were exposed, disavowed, and ultimately dropped from the party's ballot because of their views. I would never state that (insert political party) supporters were racist because the party had originally championed a candidate. That is absurd.

Don't like the PPC's immigration policy?. Canada has a policy, endorsed by successive governments, that allowed those who invested a certain amount of money in Canada, or had certain skills, to be fast-tracked as potential immigrants. Is that racist, elitist, or pragmatic? And if it is racist, then we all are.

Immigration to Canada - Wikipedia


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> "Embraced"... right.
> 
> Why don't you give me some examples and list all the racists the PPC has embraced.
> 
> Secondly, the PPC is not anti vaccine. The PPC is anti vaccine passport and anti mandatory vaccine. Which is the same position our current government had only a few months ago (recall Trudeau expressly stated there would be no mandatory vaccines or vax passports, and anyone who suggested this is where we were headed was a tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist).


What difference does it make?  You won’t change your view.  That’s your prerogative and choice.  But you are just putting lipstick on a pig and I’m not buying it. 









						B.C. candidate expelled from PPC asks Maxime Bernier to denounce racism  | Globalnews.ca
					

Brian Misera's name no longer appears on the party's website, which no longer links to his Twitter and Facebook profiles.




					globalnews.ca
				






			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bernier-kinsella-defamation-lawsuit-1.6015385
		










						Mad at Max: Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada is revolting in British Columbia
					

A slew of provincial organizers have left the party amid allegations of racism, xenophobia and the infiltration of the far-right following an executive changeover in late February.




					www.thestar.com
				












						Far-right and white nationalist groups urge followers to support Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada
					

Like the Reform Party in the early 90s, white nationalist groups see Maxime Bernier’s party as a vehicle to oppose immigration, mandatory vaccinations.




					www.thestar.com
				












						Former neo-Nazi, Pegida Canada official among People’s Party of Canada signatories  | Globalnews.ca
					

The signature of a former Soldiers of Odin member is also among those submitted to Elections Canada to officially register the People's Party of Canada.




					globalnews.ca
				












						Former PPC staffer linked to neo-Nazis called for white revolution
					

Local party leader Shaun Walker said he wanted American laws to only benefit whites in 2005 radio broadcast




					www.stcatharinesstandard.ca
				




Or this guy who has ties to white supremacy groups. He was kicked for throwing rocks, not because he is a racist.









						Former PPC London riding president arrested for Trudeau gravel-throwing incident  | Globalnews.ca
					

As a result of this investigation, Shane Marshall, 25, of St. Thomas, has been charged with one count of assault with a weapon.




					globalnews.ca
				






oh and the any vax stuff

https://.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-mad-max-stokes-anti-vax-rage-could-help-trudeau-2021-09-14/


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> What difference does it make?  You won’t change your view.  That’s your prerogative and choice.  But you are just putting lipstick on a pig and I’m not buying it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Sep 2021)

I suppose since I lean strongly classically liberal/libertarian, my preference for the CPC makes them a bunch of libertarian extremists.


----------



## RangerRay (15 Sep 2021)

Echos of when extremists started flocking to the Reform Party back in the 90’s. Preston Manning had them all cast into outer darkness. 

I’m not seeing Bernier doing that today.  Just deny, deny, deny. Reminds me of someone else who didn’t denounce extremist supporters…


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2021)

The Federal Public Service has Pathfinders? Cool....

Remaking the Public Service: Here are the parties’ plans for a post-pandemic workforce​_Pre-pandemic, the capital's rush hour was defined by a small army of federal government workers who made their way, usually by public transit, from a handful of suburbs to the core._

It’s one of the big questions in the dozen or so local campaigns in this federal election: when will government employees return to their offices, and under what conditions?

 The answers, for one thing, will determine just how robust will be the economic recovery in the two downtown ridings. Ottawa Centre and Hull-Aylmer respectively account for 45 per cent and 20 per cent of the federal government’s owned and leased office space in the capital region. The return to the office, if it happens, will also have a significant impact on commuting patterns throughout the city. 

Pre-pandemic, the capital’s rush hour was defined by a small army of federal government workers who made their way, usually by public transit, from a handful of suburbs to the core. For the past 18 months, most of these office workers have been doing their jobs from home in the bedroom communities of Orléans, Barrhaven, Kanata and Aylmer.

 The resistance to abandoning this new way of working is apparently strong.

The department in charge of the federal government’s massive real estate holdings — Public Services and Procurement Canada — said it does not have “a target date for the return to the workplace for all employees. We are currently exploring various possibilities.” This, essentially, is the Liberal Party position.

“Having done a lot of canvassing these past few weeks, I know that public servants in Orléans have different perspectives on returning to work in person,” said Marie-France Lalonde, the Liberal incumbent candidate for Orléans. “A majority seem to be leaning towards a hybrid model,” she added in reference to the arrangement that allows employees to work from home some of the time.

 Lalonde stressed the government should not rush into potentially profound changes of the workplace. “The realities are not the same from one department to another,” she said, “and I know that each is working to determine the best way to proceed internally.” 
Earlier this summer, PSPC launched its “pathfinder project” calling on volunteers to return to the office to test various configurations. In the first few weeks, a couple of hundred employees in the capital region stepped up.

At the beginning of the economic lockdown early last year, some 126,000 workers were directly employed locally by the federal government, representing nearly 17 per cent of the region’s workforce. Add in municipal and provincial government employees and you’ve got close to 24 per cent. Then include thousands of specialists working under contract and it’s easy to see why the region’s commuting and shopping patterns have been so radically upended during the past 18 months.

 “Government offices should re-open when provincial and municipal health guidance has allowed it,” says MacEwan, “and when workers and their unions have come to an agreement that these workplaces are safe for workers.” 

Which leaves the question of what to do for all those businesses adjacent to the federal towers. “We should also have targeted supports for our downtown small businesses,” adds MacEwan, pointing out these have been some of the hardest hit by the pandemic-inspired lockdowns.

 For suburban ridings, the economic imperative to re-open government offices is less of a force. Nepean, for instance, accounts for less than eight per cent of the federal government’s office space in the region. The same is true of Ottawa South and Ottawa West. Most other ridings in the census metropolitan area of Ottawa-Gatineau have a minuscule federal government presence in terms of office infrastructure. 

Most of Nepean’s 14,000 government workers pre-pandemic commuted to other ridings, including to the downtown core. Now they are pondering whether they should ever resume that sort of regular journey again.

“The NDP would continue to work closely with public sector unions, who are already consulting their members about permanent work-from-home solutions,” says Sean Devine, the NDP candidate for Nepean, adding that “our goal would be to arrive at mutually accepted options for where and how to work, so that the Canadian public can continue to benefit from the skill and dedication of public servants, while also ensuring that workers have choices for their own health and safety needs.”

The federal public sector unions have so far not been pressured by any of the major political parties to see their members return to the office. 
Nevertheless, the Conservatives’ campaign platform framed the issue in a manner that has raised suspicions within the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the largest federal government union. PSAC focused on a couple of lines in the Conservatives’ campaign playbook that emphasized achieving savings “by making government more efficient.”

PSAC interpreted this to mean a Conservative government would trim employment and contract out more work to the private sector, though the context of the policy document suggests government employees would be permitted to work from home wherever possible, thus offering potential savings from reduced office space downtown.

Conservative candidate for Nepean stressed during the riding’s first all-candidates’ debate. “We’re going to continue to let them work remotely.” 

Which leads naturally to the issue of what to do with whatever empty space emerges.

This could provide an important opening for whichever party controls the next government. Roughly half of all federal properties are in poor condition, according to Public Services and Procurement Canada. Depending on location and building type, it might be more economical to convert such properties into apartments, or sell these properties to a private developer for the same purpose.

“The post-pandemic economy presents a unique opportunity to examine new ways to address our critical housing needs,” says Devine. “If we were to support a transition of these physical workspaces into living space, this might also help address how we re-vitalize our downtown core.”

The federal government also has flexibility with a portfolio that consists of owned and leased properties in roughly equal measure. Selling off owned properties in favour of leased offices would likely allow the government to better accommodate the unpredictable demands of a hybrid or work-from-home workforce. It would also generate some gains that could be deployed for other purposes.

Remaking the Public Service: Here are the parties’ plans for a post-pandemic workforce


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Sep 2021)

For context in Ottawa, just prior to COVID the public transit rolled out our new LRT, and it was a disaster. The winning bid was actually not technically compliant, but got forced through the council by some kind of project review board that wouldn't even provide basics like a summary of the bid scores. Our spineless leaders signed it off anyway.

Before COVID, there was daily breakdowns, long delays, missed services etc. Train switches froze in the cold, trains stopped working in the rain, and then when you got to the bus station transit points, you could be waiting an hour (outside, with hundreds of other people, with a single bus shelter). One of the underground stations stank like raw sewage because they hit a sewage pipe during construction without realizing it, but was a year or two before they figured it out.

Most recently, the trains had an axle fall off, wheels with flat spots and all kinds of other issues.

Previously most of the outstations outside the core had bus routes that ran through the communities and terminated at Place du Portage (the huge complex on Gatineau with 25k+ PS employees), so you could take a single bus to/from work. Right now it's a bus to the train, train to downtown, bus from downtown to PDP. Best case it is the same amount of time, but realistically adding rapid transit actually extended the commute, and it's a crapshoot if you'll get stuck somewhere on the train between stations and be unable to get off.

People with 20+ years of bus riding are now looking at that and giving it a 'hard no', and shouldn't be a surprise. This whole LRT is probably a good case study on major public infrastructure gone bad, but honestly don't want to go back unless I can drive, as it was a soul destroying pile on to the general Cthulu feel of cubicle 2.0 and bureaucracy. It's literally still faster for me to ride a pedal bike in then use public transit, and that's at the slow pace I'm chugging along with the post-COVID recovery that messed up my breathing for a year.

WFH is really inefficient in some ways, but spending 3-4 hours a day on a 50 km round trip is just stupid. Some things take longer to get done, some things are faster, but I definitely feel a lot better about life when I sign off at the end of the day and my commute is a walk upstairs.


----------



## ModlrMike (15 Sep 2021)




----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> For context in Ottawa, just prior to COVID the public transit rolled out our new LRT, and it was a disaster. The winning bid was actually not technically compliant, but got forced through the council by some kind of project review board that wouldn't even provide basics like a summary of the bid scores. Our spineless leaders signed it off anyway.
> 
> Before COVID, there was daily breakdowns, long delays, missed services etc. Train switches froze in the cold, trains stopped working in the rain, and then when you got to the bus station transit points, you could be waiting an hour (outside, with hundreds of other people, with a single bus shelter). One of the underground stations stank like raw sewage because they hit a sewage pipe during construction without realizing it, but was a year or two before they figured it out.
> 
> ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> It’s hard to call the accusations of racism baseless when the party has embraced those types.  It started off fine but it has accepted various racist types into the party and haven’t done that much to course correct,  if the party is being defined by others, it’s because it has set the conditions and provided all the ammo required.  I don’t think Bernier is a a racist.  Quite the opposite.  But the PPC is now known largely as the party that attracts racists and more recently is now the anti vaccine party.    If it wants to occupy those spaces that is on them and everything that comes with it.
> 
> and it has nothing to do with mainstream racism or racism as defined by biology.  The types attracted to the PPC that people will lament are those that espouse post modern racism and are all to eager to support a party that has all the ingredients to fit their view and their feelings in relation to whatever culture war they feel they are part of.   It’s no coincidence that Immigration, cultural identity, refugees and Muslims are stated prominently in a lot of their platform points.
> 
> I have no doubt that most PPC supporters are anti establishment, angry at the world and where it is heading and want to see change.  But don’t kid yourself if you think that the vocal, racist culture warriors are not sinking their roots into the party and trying to influence its direction.  They found a platform that welcomed them and they will use that to their advantage to spread their message and influence.  And some nice but naive people will be all too accommodating to enable that because of their worldview that somehow free speech suppression, big government and media conspiracies are trying to keep them down.


In my view, the LPC and NDP are the extremists. they will go to any length to be "safe" Toss 2.1 million Canadians under the buss for no appreciable Public Safety benefit, sure why not. Toss aside industries that produce revenue for the country with no real replacement, for sure. "Admire dictatorships" check that box off. Punish anyone that stands up to the leadership cabal, dam right! and the list goes on.


----------



## Navy_Pete (15 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


>


Yup; pretty bad. At least with the Simpsons monorail they had an amusing musical interlude!

Also forgot to mention, a few of the stations had awful drainage/water flow issues. There are a few where you get impromptu lakes that turn into skating rinks and I think one of them had the stairs covered with ice. Just really poor basic landscaping, so not sure who signed off on that.

The delivery contract is with SNC, and is performance based, so they frequently don't get paid at all each month, but think people here would be pretty happy to have reliable transit and pay the bill.

The wheels literally falling off the train was something you can't make up though. Even for government procurement that's pretty appalling, and when civil servants are angry at how bad you f*&d up a big procurement, you know things have gone wrong!


----------



## QV (15 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> What difference does it make?  You won’t change your view.  That’s your prerogative and choice.  But you are just putting lipstick on a pig and I’m not buying it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what is that, two or three miscreants out of over 300 candidates in a new start up party? That might be a lower ratio than the population. 

Plus you found some ugly media articles about a party that will end the billion dollar media bailouts... ok.

Now do the other political parties.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> So what is that, two or three miscreants out of over 300 candidates in a new start up party? That might be a lower ratio than the population.
> 
> Plus you found some ugly media articles about a party that will end the billion dollar media bailouts... ok.
> 
> Now do the other political parties.


You do them.  Every time you ask for proof or sources or whatever and someone ponies up you use the tired bought media line, government conspiracy to suppress or whatever crazy theory is out there.  Stay blind.  I don’t care, your party isn’t going to win so it’s moot.  If anything it’s spurring the LPC supporters to come out.  Well done PPC, well done.  Split the vote and ensure the liberals win again. 

You obviously missed my point or the articles about the type of people the PPC attracts. Especially the ringing endorsement it got from white nationalist groups telling their members to vote PPC.  

You’ve done nothing or provided anything to disprove anything I sourced.  So…ok.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Sep 2021)

One of the most amusing features of rail transit is when the line is blocked and...they bring in bus shuttles.  It's surprisingly difficult to impress upon our highly intelligent and educated classes how much cheaper and more flexible buses are.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> One of the most amusing features of rail transit is when the line is blocked and...they bring in bus shuttles.  It's surprisingly difficult to impress upon our highly intelligent and educated classes how much cheaper and more flexible buses are.


Considering OC transpo laid off its bus drivers before the system was even up and running and had to hire them again makes your comment even more relevant.


----------



## dimsum (15 Sep 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> WFH is really inefficient in some ways, but spending 3-4 hours a day on a 50 km round trip is just stupid. Some things take longer to get done, some things are faster, but I definitely feel a lot better about life when I sign off at the end of the day and my commute is a walk upstairs.


Also not spending half a day to get to one or two meetings, or so I've heard.


----------



## brihard (15 Sep 2021)

I’m glad that among the discord and anger of our election, we all still have OC Transpo’s shittiness to bring us back together. ♥️


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> I’m glad that among the discord and anger of our election, we all still have OC Transpo’s shittiness to bring us back together. ♥️


----------



## QV (15 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> You do them.  Every time you ask for proof or sources or whatever and someone ponies up you use the tired bought media line, government conspiracy to suppress or whatever crazy theory is out there.  Stay blind.  I don’t care, your party isn’t going to win so it’s moot.  If anything it’s spurring the LPC supporters to come out.  Well done PPC, well done.  Split the vote and ensure the liberals win again.
> 
> You obviously missed my point or the articles about the type of people the PPC attracts. Especially the ringing endorsement it got from white nationalist groups telling their members to vote PPC.
> 
> You’ve done nothing or provided anything to disprove anything I sourced.  So…ok.


I'm not making accusations a political party is a racist party, so I don't have to prove that which I don't assert and I equally don't have to try and disprove something that is not proven.  

In each of your sources you cited, once found out, the problem was removed. There is no doubt Max Bernier has his work cut out for him trying to keep the party clean and get established. It's an up hill battle between the extreme fringe right looking for a political home, media spending their billions in bailouts on hit pieces, and the CPC hiring firms to smear the PPC. It's certainly ugly business.     

How dare the PPC. Only the LPC, NDP, and CPC should be allowed.


----------



## Remius (15 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> I'm not making accusations a political party is a racist party, so I don't have to prove that which I don't assert and I equally don't have to try and disprove something that is not proven.
> 
> In each of your sources you cited, once found out, the problem was removed. There is no doubt Max Bernier has his work cut out for him trying to keep the party clean and get established. It's an up hill battle between the extreme fringe right looking for a political home, media spending their billions in bailouts on hit pieces, and the CPC hiring firms to smear the PPC. It's certainly ugly business.
> 
> How dare the PPC. Only the LPC, NDP, and CPC should be allowed.


You said to to do the other parties.  Do them yourself.  I provided my evidence.  You failed to refute them with any.  Like I said…ok.  I’m not asking for any evidence.  Just pointing out that you haven’t refuted anything with any sources just the same old bought media or government suppression line.  

So I maintain my assertion that the PPC attracts racist and white nationalists.  Why is that?  

Everyone is allowed, and the LPC will cheer the PPC the whole way.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2021)

Only one poll, but intriguing comparisons (trying to find the specific poll still) ....


> ... The typical Canadian has about an even chance of thinking Canada is letting in too many immigrants — 47 per cent of the country feels that way, and that includes three in five Conservatives, half of Bloc voters, a third of Liberal and NPD voters — but a whopping 83 per cent of PPC voters. PPC voters are way more likely than the rest to favour a very hands-off approach to gun control and regulation; the typical Conservative is a lot closer to a Liberal or NDP voter on this issue than they are a PPC voter.
> 
> But that’s about what you’d expect for a vaguely libertarian party that has been publicly critical of immigration. It gets weirder from here.
> 
> ...


If link doesn't work, text also attached for purposes of research, private study or education under the Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's Copyright Act.


----------



## QV (16 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Only one poll, but intriguing comparisons (trying to find the specific poll still) ....
> 
> If link doesn't work, text also attached for purposes of research, private study or education under the Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's Copyright Act.


Interesting data. I think an equivalent exaggerated perspective would be the climate alarmism on the left. On one side you have "the government is tyrannical" and on the other "we have just 10 years left (said 50 years ago)". 

I subscribe to more moderate perspectives which I think the majority of people would agree with:

1. We should be very cautious what extra powers we grant the government over it's citizens; and
2. We need to be good stewards of the environment without destroying our resource sector.

I think the PPC should get as much air time as the NDP/LPC on these issues. But considering (and Remius won't like these very obvious facts) the media skews heavily left and is bailed out by hundreds of millions by the incumbent LPC/NDP unofficial coalition, there will absolutely be bias in the coverage.


----------



## Scott (16 Sep 2021)

Max should be sending Jason Kenney flowers this morning.


----------



## Remius (16 Sep 2021)

Scott said:


> Max should be sending Jason Kenney flowers this morning.


If anything, Kenney has clearly demonstrated what opening without restrictions looks like.  Anti lockdown, anti vax types take note.  Imagine how effed up our health system would be right now if the PPC were in power.


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Sep 2021)

> But that’s about what you’d expect for a vaguely libertarian party that has been publicly critical of immigration.



Another reason not to tag them "libertarian".  Libertarians basically favour much more open borders.  To the extent they would be critical of our immigration policy, I'd expect them to say it's too elitist.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (16 Sep 2021)

I read that Bernier hasn't  done much to formalize his party. No constitution, no by-laws, no board,  no gathering of the minds (candidates), no brain trust. I looked a bit, but couldn't  find anything. I'm sure there's an election team. Probably mostly volunteers. Candidates are asked to sign a pledge, saying they won't embarrass the party,  will be guided by bernie's principles and send it in with a resume. That easy. Since the party was bernier's idea, and not a movement, the policies are his and his alone, not debated and selected by the members. Basically, just Max running things. Sounds a tad dictatorial. How long has the party been established? To me, if you want a real party going after the top job, these things would be in place. Otherwise, it might look like your just trying to be the fly in the ointment, or a spoiler. He reminds me of Bob Rae, running for Ontario Premier. Lots of outrageous promises, saying what people wanted to hear, but never expecting to be elected to fulfill those promises. Then he woke up the next day as Premier and ended up trashing the province, because there was no real plan to govern. Of course as soon as he was ousted he, also being a Laurentian Elite, put his liberal uniform back on and started haunting the halls of Ottawa and Montreal once again.


----------



## Quirky (16 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> If anything, Kenney has clearly demonstrated what opening without restrictions looks like.  Anti lockdown, anti vax types take note.  Imagine how effed up our health system would be right now if the PPC were in power.



Cut the unvaccinated anti-vaxxers off from timely access to healthcare and this problem solves itself overnight.


----------



## mariomike (16 Sep 2021)

Quirky said:


> Cut the unvaccinated anti-vaxxers off from timely access to healthcare and this problem solves itself overnight.


Do you think any of Canada's political parties would support that?

From what I have read, my understanding is:

The same ethics that guarantee life-long smokers "timely access to healthcare" to be treated for lung cancer, also apply to Covid treatment for the  unvaccinated.

There is a caveat, if the vaccinated patient is considered to have a better chance of survival, they may get triage priority over an unvaccinated patient.

In the field, triage priority ussually goes to the person(s) with the best chance of survival. Regardless if they were wearing seat-belts, helmets etc.

I have been reading that some employers may be withholding death benefits from unvaccinated workers. So, that might motivate some to get the shot.








						MTA will pay $500,000 death benefit to only vaccinated subway workers
					

The MTA will be extending a program that provides families of employees who die of Covid-related causes with $500,000 - but only if the worker was vaccinated.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## Quirky (16 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> Do you think any of Canada's political parties would support that?
> 
> From what I have read, my understanding is:
> 
> ...



No one has the balls, like your average Canadian, to demand access to healthcare be restricted to the anti-vaxers. I would've thought the PPC would be the first to implement it in their policy, but they are completely the opposite. While smokers and obese cause their own issues in the hospitals, they don't overflow ICU's and stress out our healthcare system. At least the tax revenue generated from cigarette sales cover off, mostly, the healthcare costs. Until they start setting up tents outside hospitals and stuff all the unvaccinated outside, nothing will change. We will run out of nurses long before ICU beds and ventilators anyway.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> .... Since the party was bernier's idea, and not a movement, the policies are his and his alone, not debated and selected by the members. Basically, just Max running things ... How long has the party been established? To me, if you want a real party going after the top job, these things would be in place. Otherwise, *it might look like your just trying to be the fly in the ointment, or a spoiler* ...


Could be that's what he _wants_ to be - for now, anyway. Getting all the fun of attacking without having to settle in and govern & ride herd on members.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (16 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> If anything, Kenney has clearly demonstrated what opening without restrictions looks like.  Anti lockdown, anti vax types take note.  Imagine how effed up our health system would be right now if the PPC were in power.


It would look a lot like Sweden


----------



## Remius (16 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> It would look a lot like Sweden


Right,  a mess.


----------



## Halifax Tar (16 Sep 2021)

You cannot start denying citizens access to our single payer health care program period, all stop.  

That's simply a veiled threat against freedom of choice. 

To do that sets a precedent and opens a Pandoras Box we don't want to peer into. 

There is no fix for this.  But the virus may act in culling those who don't believe it's lethality.


----------



## RangerRay (16 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> I read that Bernier hasn't  done much to formalize his party. No constitution, no by-laws, no board,  no gathering of the minds (candidates), no brain trust. I looked a bit, but couldn't  find anything. I'm sure there's an election team. Probably mostly volunteers. Candidates are asked to sign a pledge, saying they won't embarrass the party,  will be guided by bernie's principles and send it in with a resume. That easy. Since the party was bernier's idea, and not a movement, the policies are his and his alone, not debated and selected by the members. Basically, just Max running things. Sounds a tad dictatorial. How long has the party been established? To me, if you want a real party going after the top job, these things would be in place. Otherwise, it might look like your just trying to be the fly in the ointment, or a spoiler. He reminds me of Bob Rae, running for Ontario Premier. Lots of outrageous promises, saying what people wanted to hear, but never expecting to be elected to fulfill those promises. Then he woke up the next day as Premier and ended up trashing the province, because there was no real plan to govern. Of course as soon as he was ousted he, also being a Laurentian Elite, put his liberal uniform back on and started haunting the halls of Ottawa and Montreal once again.


I always that the PPC was nothing more than a vanity project for Bernier. This just proves it. 

Edited to remove extra quotes.


----------



## daftandbarmy (16 Sep 2021)

I don't care for his politics but I thought that Blanchet was brilliant during the debate, in many ways, especially the way he seized on the opening question and turned it into a huge political lever for his party. 

It might just 'accidentally' tip the balance away from the Liberals, and other parties, in PQ:


Controversial question in English debate may have galvanized Bloc voters​
At a bowling alley in Montreal's east end on a weekday afternoon, Réal Desrochers is playing in his weekly league and also considering his choices in next week's federal election.

Desrochers had been planning to vote Liberal, but a key moment in last Thursday's English-language leaders' debate galvanized identity sentiments in Quebec and spurred him to change his mind and choose the Bloc Québécois led by Yves-François Blanchet. 

"For me, it's because the Bloc will balance the situation in Ottawa," Desrochers said. "I know he won't form a government, but he will defend Quebec [in Parliament]." 

Desrochers called the moment "a direct attack on Quebec, and I don't like it."



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bloc-debate-reaction-1.6176663


----------



## suffolkowner (16 Sep 2021)

How many votes do the liberals or NDP siphon off each other? How many votes do the PPC siphon off the conservatives? Where does the Green vote go, with a party that self destructed? All the signs suggest another minority Liberal government, likely smaller than last time, but the Conservative vote is always under reported in polls?


----------



## brihard (16 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> but the Conservative vote is always under reported in polls?


Genuine curiosity, not a challenge: do you have a source substantiating that? Is there a history of the CPC outperforming the polls immediately preceding Election Day?


----------



## suffolkowner (16 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Genuine curiosity, not a challenge: do you have a source substantiating that? Is there a history of the CPC outperforming the polls immediately preceding Election Day?


Not really just an impression I've had for a while that I can always add a couple percentage points to the Conservative popular vote and usually a couple seats to what is projected.

This is 338's record so far









						The record so far | 338Canada
					






					338canada.com


----------



## Remius (16 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Not really just an impression I've had for a while that I can always add a couple percentage points to the Conservative popular vote and usually a couple seats to what is projected.
> 
> This is 338's record so far
> 
> ...


Is it normally within the margin of error?


----------



## MilEME09 (16 Sep 2021)

Now, very real possibility, people have warned of vote splitting, what if both the left and right split? What if we get 4 parties all in the 70 to 100 seat range? I doubt the PPC could get that much support but humor me


----------



## Haggis (16 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Now, very real possibility, people have warned of vote splitting, what if both the left and right split? What if we get 4 parties all in the 70 to 100 seat range? I doubt the PPC could get that much support but humor me


Then you're looking at a Liberal-led coalition, which, IMO, would be worse than a weak Liberal majority.


----------



## brihard (16 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Now, very real possibility, people have warned of vote splitting, what if both the left and right split? What if we get 4 parties all in the 70 to 100 seat range? I doubt the PPC could get that much support but humor me


PPC would be very lucky to get a single seat. Other than Beauce I don’t think any are in serious contention.


----------



## MilEME09 (16 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> PPC would be very lucky to get a single seat. Other than Beauce I don’t think any are in serious contention.


I'd say they could pick up a seat or two in rural Prarie ridings, that's about it. But a strong BQ,Con, NDP showing could lead to a very weak minority situation


----------



## brihard (16 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I'd say they could pick up a seat or two in rural Prarie ridings, that's about it. But a strong BQ,Con, NDP showing could lead to a very weak minority situation


Are there any where PPC are polling anywhere close to serious contention?


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Sep 2021)

Could it also be because, sadly, veterans' affairs isn't a big issue on most Canadians' radar?


> ... the issue has been noticeably absent from this election campaign. None of the leaders have gone out of their way to court the community or highlight their party’s promises, while the issues that arose in 2015 and, to a lesser degree, 2019 have largely flown under the radar.
> 
> That is despite what Jim Scott, president of the Equitas Society, which spearheaded the lawsuit by the same name, says is continuing frustration over the fact there are now three separate systems offering different benefits to veterans with the same injuries.
> 
> ...


----------



## suffolkowner (17 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Is it normally within the margin of error?


I think they are, but biased in one direction as I tend to think it a sampling error where Conservative voters are less likely to partake in many of the surveys. This is just my opinion from casual observation of polls, predictions and results over the past few years.


----------



## Remius (17 Sep 2021)

So O’toole had a bad day yesterday.  Dodging the Kenney question, fair enough, the media is latching to that.   He’s pretty calm though.  But cancelling an interview at this time doesn’t look good and will lead to more questions.  I’m not sure but this may have an effect.  Strangely, he latched onto Kenney but avoided Ford.  Maybe should have stuck with Ford lol. 

The campaign was going so well but he seems to limping towards the end.  I hope he manages to stay on.  But I suspect his party will want to dump him. 

At the same time, Trudeau may be at risk of him being dumped, even if he wins. 

We might have a whole new cast of characters next time.


----------



## Quirky (17 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Could it also be because, sadly, veterans' affairs isn't a big issue on most Canadians' radar?



National Defence and Military isn't on the radar, they don't care and it's obvious. I haven't heard one mention of anything related to the CAF this election. The entire support our troops campaign (caring about modernising equipment, supporting our veterans etc) is just virtue signalling and cannon fodder. 



Remius said:


> We might have a whole new cast of characters next time.



This is the best possible outcome.


----------



## Remius (17 Sep 2021)

Poll using what each party should be called. Lol.


----------



## Haggis (17 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> We might have a whole new cast of characters next time.





Quirky said:


> This is the best possible outcome.


Be careful what you wish for.  There are a few in the LPC who can easily out-Trudeau Trudeau when it comes to virtue signalling.


----------



## brihard (17 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> So O’toole had a bad day yesterday.  Dodging the Kenney question, fair enough, the media is latching to that.   He’s pretty calm though.  But cancelling an interview at this time doesn’t look good and will lead to more questions.  I’m not sure but this may have an effect.  Strangely, he latched onto Kenney but avoided Ford.  Maybe should have stuck with Ford lol.
> 
> The campaign was going so well but he seems to limping towards the end.  I hope he manages to stay on.  But I suspect his party will want to dump him.
> 
> ...


No kidding. O’Toole shit the bed trying to dodge the Kenney thing. That’s one where it would look a hell of a lot better if he rolled with the punch, and acknowledged that how things looked at one point changed to something else and that they absolutely have to be live to and responsive to those changes. Instead he got clowned for a whole presser. Bad look.


----------



## Kilted (17 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Are there any where PPC are polling anywhere close to serious contention?


I think their biggest impact may be splitting the vote in a few close ridings resulting in them going Liberal/NDP.  The majority of ridings that I have looked at where they are doing better (8-11%) are strong Conservative ridings that likely won't be affected.


----------



## brihard (17 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> I think their biggest impact may be splitting the vote in a few close ridings resulting in them going Liberal/NDP.  The majority of ridings that I have looked at where they are doing better (8-11%) are strong Conservative ridings that likely won't be affected.


That’s what I figured, yeah. A lot of their ‘best’ ridings have precisely zero chance of anything but blue. The real key will be how many they serve as spoilers in. I’m curious how long they can stay relevant if they return zero seats again. I wonder if there’ll be a new and unlikely champion for proportional representation?


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> ... I wonder if there’ll be a new and unlikely champion for proportional representation?


If the tiny-number-of-seat parties want a chance to get to the table, that may be their best option.  You see it not infrequently in Italy or Israel having party x have to bring 1-2 folks from tiny (and even other side of the political spectrum) party y to stay in power.

Mind you, if you don't like elections, you're likely going to get more of them under prop-rep.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> ... I wonder if there’ll be a new and unlikely champion for proportional representation?


Of course, Trudeau!

Oh wait….’Words, not Deeds’

…never mind…


----------



## Remius (17 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> I think their biggest impact may be splitting the vote in a few close ridings resulting in them going Liberal/NDP.  The majority of ridings that I have looked at where they are doing better (8-11%) are strong Conservative ridings that likely won't be affected.


Agreed.  I read an article saying that their biggest areas of influence will be in Ontario and NS.


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Sep 2021)

I'm not optimistic. I think as a nation we're done for. 

The Big Three  (US, UK and Australia have sidelined us) and that is our fault for failing to look past nice hair and sunny ways. His nibs admiration of Cuba and China will - have - bitten Canada in the ass and the wound is not pretty.


----------



## brihard (17 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Agreed.  I read an article saying that their biggest areas of influence will be in Ontario and NS.


Yup. While their greatest support is in the prairies, it overlaps the safest conservative seats. Ontario in particular seems to me to be where the LPC/CPC margins are most permissive of PPC spoilers in favour of Trudeau.

Go figure; Max is Trudeau’s star candidate, and he won’t even need to give him a seat in caucus.


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Sep 2021)

The latest from Nanos....

Assuming current scenario holds, 'we're looking at a Liberal win,' Nanos says​
The Liberals are in winning territory with votes coming from mail-in ballots heavily in their favour, according to projections from Nanos Research.

With only one weekend left before Canadians head to the polls, Nik Nanos, the founder and chief data scientist at Nanos Research, said they have been crunching the numbers in their seat projection and modelling data over the last few days.

“Right now, assuming that this current scenario upholds for the next two days, and there’s no significant movement, we’re looking at a Liberal win. Period. Full stop,” Nanos said on Friday’s edition of CTV’s Trend Line podcast.

“Then the question is: ‘How big a win will it be?’"

Nanos said the most likely outcome is that the Liberals will form a minority government; however, a Liberal majority is “not out of the realm of possibility” either.










						Assuming current scenario holds, 'we're looking at a Liberal win,' Nanos says
					

The Liberals are in winning territory with votes coming from mail-in ballots heavily in their favour, according to projections from Nanos Research.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Remius (17 Sep 2021)

Maybe this guy can stop them.









						This Guy Running For Canadian Parliament Wants Men Not to Ejaculate
					

The anti-ejaculation candidate is running for the People's Party of Canada, the anti-vax, anti-climate science, anti-immigration party that is somehow gaining steam in the polls.




					www.vice.com


----------



## Blackadder1916 (17 Sep 2021)

Another election wrinkle with a twist . . . 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/liberal-kevin-vuong-spadina-fort-york-allegations-1.6179652
		



> Toronto Liberal candidate is asked to 'pause' campaign after report of dropped sexual assault charge​Kevin Vuong says allegations are 'false' and he is 'deeply' troubled they've resurfaced just before election
> CBC News · Posted: Sep 17, 2021 1:28 PM ET | Last Updated: 5 hours ago
> 
> In a statement issued to CBC News through his campaign manager, Vuong said he wanted to 'unequivocally state' that allegations of sexual assault 'are false.'
> ...



The twist . . . While not mentioned in this article, on the TV news, Mr. Voung is identified as being a Reservist.  On his campaign webpage he does refer to being a "military officer".  Though the allegations had no military nexus, they report that the CAF's response to a request for comment included that they were unaware of the dropped charges as he had not informed the military, "as he was required to do", that he had been charged.  Whether it is a military spokesperson or news organization misunderstanding about that requirement to so report, what 
QR&O 19.56 - Report of Arrest By Civil Authority says is . . . "member has been *arrested* by a civil authority, the member shall cause the arrest to be reported to the member's commanding officer".  Operative word is "arrested" not "charged".


----------



## brihard (17 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Another election wrinkle with a twist . . .
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Likely but not definite that he was arrested if charged for sexual assault. Usually an accused will be arrested so as to allow release on no contact with the victim conditions.

So now the fun question: will he stay on the ballot? Can he even be removed at this point? Will we see a fast by election on this one?

Depending on how the likely minority government is configured, every seat could matter.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Sep 2021)

Too late to be removed from the ballot.


----------



## suffolkowner (17 Sep 2021)

He can still be elected and if he's elected he's elected, right? I'm curious how many candidates in these situations there are going to be this election and compared to others. It sure seems like a there's been a few this time around


----------



## ModlrMike (17 Sep 2021)

Like the man said, "Saini ways"!


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Like the man said, "Saini ways"!


----------



## Haggis (17 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The latest from Nanos....


...telling those who have not yet voted that the election is already over and Sunny Ways are once again ahead.


----------



## dimsum (17 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The Liberals are in winning territory with votes coming from mail-in ballots heavily in their favour, according to projections from Nanos Research.


Well, if the US elections were anything to go by, folks who voted by mail were by and large folks who would vote left anyway, so LPC/NDP/Green.  This shouldn't be a surprise.


----------



## YZT580 (17 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> ...telling those who have not yet voted that the election is already over and Sunny Ways are once again ahead.


but perhaps it will jar some fence sitters out to vote for the other guy


----------



## lenaitch (17 Sep 2021)

"Pause his campaign" = Keep him away from uncomfortable questions.

He's still a candidate on the ballot and will no doubt take his oath and seat if he wins.  I suspect it will be up in the nosebleed section, but a blue seat nonetheless.


----------



## daftandbarmy (17 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Another election wrinkle with a twist . . .
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There, FTFY 

Toronto Liberal candidate who paused campaign under review by military over dropped sexual assault charge​Toronto Liberal candidate Kevin Vuong, who is on pause from campaigning in the federal election over a past sexual assault charge that was dropped, is also now under review by the Canadian Armed Forces.

Defence Department spokesperson Daniel Le Bouthillier confirmed that, based on available information at this time, Vuong, who is also a naval reservist, failed to notify the military in 2019 about the arrest.

Military members are required to share criminal charges with their chain of command. The military is deliberating what steps to take next, and they could be administrative in nature, said Le Bouthillier.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/liberal-kevin-vuong-spadina-fort-york-allegations-1.6179652


----------



## Haggis (17 Sep 2021)

His name is still on the ballot meaning he could win his seat.  He hasn't been convicted of anything and _may_ be subject to administrative action by the CAF.  Or may not, if Trudeau's record of intervening in the legal affairs of his departments holds out. 

I think we just found our new Liberal MND.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> His name is still on the ballot meaning he could win his seat.  He hasn't been convicted of anything and _may_ be subject to administrative action by the CAF.  Or may not, if Trudeau's record of intervening in the legal affairs of his departments holds out.
> 
> I think we just found our new Liberal MND.


Don't know whether to  or  ...


----------



## OldSolduer (18 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> There, FTFY
> 
> Toronto Liberal candidate who paused campaign under review by military over dropped sexual assault charge​Toronto Liberal candidate Kevin Vuong, who is on pause from campaigning in the federal election over a past sexual assault charge that was dropped, is also now under review by the Canadian Armed Forces.
> 
> ...


Oh F&ck me this gets better and better. When will this effing nonsense end?


----------



## Haggis (18 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Go figure; Max is Trudeau’s star candidate, and he won’t even need to give him a seat in caucus.


I'm LOL because it's sad and but true.

If Max can deny the Conservatives a win, he will deem the campaign a success.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I'm LOL because it's sad and but true.
> 
> If Max can deny the Conservatives a win, he will deem the campaign a success.


Can you imagine being so narcissistic that you damn a whole country because you're a petulant child ?


----------



## dimsum (18 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Can you imagine being so narcissistic that you damn a whole country because your a petulant child ?


_cough cough US, 2016-2020..._


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Sep 2021)

> Can you imagine being so narcissistic that you damn a whole country because your a petulant child ?



Max doesn't control the 35-60% of voters who typically vote LPC or NDP.

I see a few PPC signs around.  People who have voted CPC for several elections are not "narcissistic" if the CPC rewards their loyalty by promising to do things for people who have not voted CPC for several elections.  It may be the fate of the left and right "bases" to always turn up at the ball and never be asked to dance, but they are not "narcissistic" for following someone else around the room after being spurned.


----------



## dangerboy (18 Sep 2021)

Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-liberals-ranked-ballot-1.6181216



> Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau says he remains open to getting rid of Canada's first-past-the-post electoral system if his party is re-elected, provided there's consensus on the issue — something he says was lacking in the past.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Can you imagine being so narcissistic that you damn a whole country because you're a petulant child ?


Like others have said up-thread, makes perfect sense if you see your role as that of spoiler, not interested in taking power, but in changing the narrative and/or getting the spotlight without the messiness of coming up with a party infrastructure or herding members at the edge of the ideological herd.


> Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-liberals-ranked-ballot-1.6181216
> 
> ... Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau says he remains open to getting rid of Canada's first-past-the-post electoral system if his party is re-elected, *provided there's consensus on the issue* — something he says was lacking in the past ...


... and as long as there are more than a miniscule minority saying, "uh, you know, if we go to (prop-rep/insert some other option), our odds of forming any majority to get things done without bending to others", there will never be consensus.

Meanwhile, from the bought-and-paid-for media 😉 ....


> NP View: Erin O'Toole and the Conservatives are right for Canada​
> Our recovery calls for a government that takes these things seriously ...


----------



## kev994 (18 Sep 2021)

dangerboy said:


> Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-liberals-ranked-ballot-1.6181216


Yeah, I think that’s been said by the winning party in every election as long as I’ve been allowed to vote. And yet here we are.


----------



## Remius (18 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Max doesn't control the 35-60% of voters who typically vote LPC or NDP.
> 
> I see a few PPC signs around.  People who have voted CPC for several elections are not "narcissistic" if the CPC rewards their loyalty by promising to do things for people who have not voted CPC for several elections.  It may be the fate of the left and right "bases" to always turn up at the ball and never be asked to dance, but they are not "narcissistic" for following someone else around the room after being spurned.


I think he was saying the leader was narcissistic not the voters.

At any rate, I was listening to the radio this morning and they had an interesting break down of who is actually supporting the PPC, at least poll wise.  Around 1/3rd are the traditional PPC supporters.  10% are disaffected liberals, a few greens and NDP with the bulk being angry conservatives and people that normally don’t vote.   The PPC seem to be the “anti vax” party as most are lashing out and restrictions and mandatory actions being taken at all levels.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> There, FTFY
> 
> Toronto Liberal candidate who paused campaign under review by military over dropped sexual assault charge ...​


Aspiration to get to Parliament Hill firing alright, aspiration - STOPS!


> ... On Saturday, the Liberals announced they would drop a candidate over a 2019 sexual assault charge that the party said was not disclosed to them. Kevin Vuong, a naval reservist running in an open Liberal seat in downtown Toronto, denied the allegations on Friday, noting the charge was withdrawn.
> 
> "Mr. Vuong will no longer be a Liberal candidate, and should he be elected, he will not be a member of the Liberal caucus," the party said in a statement on Saturday ...


----------



## PuckChaser (18 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I think he was saying the leader was narcissistic not the voters.
> 
> At any rate, I was listening to the radio this morning and they had an interesting break down of who is actually supporting the PPC, at least poll wise.  Around 1/3rd are the traditional PPC supporters.  10% are disaffected liberals, a few greens and NDP with the bulk being angry conservatives and people that normally don’t vote.   The PPC seem to be the “anti vax” party as most are lashing out and restrictions and mandatory actions being taken at all levels.


Anti-vax and anti-forced vax or vaccine hesitant people are completely different. There's a ton of folks who are fully vaccinated for everything else and get annual flu shots, but are hesitant about any of the COVID-19 vax. A good portion of them also feel if you want to roll the dice on ending up in an ICU with COVID, that's on you, but there shouldn't still be restrictions on people who did the right thing.

Throwing around "anti-vaxxer" as a pejorative is just a way to dismiss someone's opinions without actually having intelligent debate or discussion.


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Sep 2021)

dangerboy said:


> Stop me if you think that you've heard this one before
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-liberals-ranked-ballot-1.6181216


The only lack of effective consensus last time was from Le Dauphin himself, after he (ie. Telford & Butts) assessed that the LPC would have greater difficulty maintaining its ‘Natural Ruling Party’ status moving away from the FPTP Westminster system…


----------



## brihard (18 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Aspiration to get to Parliament Hill firing alright, aspiration - STOPS!


He’ll probably get the seat, at that. It’s a very safe Liberal riding.

Meanwhile the erstwhile CPC candidate who got dumped for various racist Twitter posts is a third place also-ran wel behind the second place NDP in a “Safe Liberal” riding, so she won’t figure in any real terms.


----------



## Remius (18 Sep 2021)

PuckChaser said:


> Anti-vax and anti-forced vax or vaccine hesitant people are completely different. There's a ton of folks who are fully vaccinated for everything else and get annual flu shots, but are hesitant about any of the COVID-19 vax. A good portion of them also feel if you want to roll the dice on ending up in an ICU with COVID, that's on you, but there shouldn't still be restrictions on people who did the right thing.
> 
> Throwing around "anti-vaxxer" as a pejorative is just a way to dismiss someone's opinions without actually having intelligent debate or discussion.


That’s why I used quotations.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (18 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I think he was saying the leader was narcissistic not the voters.
> 
> At any rate, I was listening to the radio this morning and they had an interesting break down of who is actually supporting the PPC, at least poll wise.  Around 1/3rd are the traditional PPC supporters.  10% are disaffected liberals, a few greens and NDP with the bulk being angry conservatives and people that normally don’t vote.   The PPC seem to be the “anti vax” party as most are lashing out and restrictions and mandatory actions being taken at all levels.



While I recognize your use of quotes around "anti vax" I would just add my own commentary that the term is very misleading. The media and other political opponents are using the term as a pejorative to belittle and "other" the people who are supporting the PPC. True, there is a contingent of PPC voters/supporters who are idiots, but in my encounters the vast majority are normal people, most of whom got on the PPC train over mandatory/forced vaccinations rather than over the vaccinations themselves.

I think there is a gigantic difference between being "anti vax" and being "anti vax mandate". 

Also, my impression of Maxime Bernier, having spoken to him on a number of occasions and knowing people who know him is that he's not narcissistic. The first time I spoke to him I was actually very surprised at how unassuming and humble he came across, since I went into that meeting expecting he'd be an arrogant used car salesman type. I was among those who was quite salty towards him for starting the PPC shortly before last election and had a very bad opinion of him based on conversations with CPC people. At this point I think it's hard to say that the PPC isn't offering something totally different from what the CPC offers so it doesn't seem like temper tantrum to me but taking a principled stand and wanting to offer Canadians that choice.


----------



## brihard (18 Sep 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> While I recognize your use of quotes around "anti vax" I would just add my own commentary that the term is very misleading. The media and other political opponents are using the term as a pejorative to belittle and "other" the people who are supporting the PPC. True, there is a contingent of PPC voters/supporters who are idiots, but in my encounters the vast majority are normal people, most of whom got on the PPC train over mandatory/forced vaccinations rather than over the vaccinations themselves.
> 
> I think there is a gigantic difference between being "anti vax" and being "anti vax mandate".
> 
> Also, my impression of Maxime Bernier, having spoken to him on a number of occasions and knowing people who know him is that he's not narcissistic. The first time I spoke to him I was actually very surprised at how unassuming and humble he came across, since I went into that meeting expecting he'd be an arrogant used car salesman type. I was among those who was quite salty towards him for starting the PPC shortly before last election and had a very bad opinion of him based on conversations with CPC people. At this point I think it's hard to say that the PPC isn't offering something totally different from what the CPC offers so it doesn't seem like temper tantrum to me but taking a principled stand and wanting to offer Canadians that choice.


Sure. The CPC offers the opportunity to actually have seats in the House of Commons and a chance at forming or at least influencing government. You’re right that the PPC offers something different from that.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (18 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Sure. The CPC offers the opportunity to actually have seats in the House of Commons and a chance at forming or at least influencing government. You’re right that the PPC offers something different from that.



I think that the "strategic voting" argument and "a chance at forming or influencing government" argument only works if the party in question offers SOMETHING on the topic that the voter is concerned about. 

Also, I would argue that there is more than one way to influence government. Your argument seems to be that certain voters should vote CPC even though they disagree with CPC, because CPC has a chance of winning ... yet those same people might actually have more influence over the CPC and change the trajectory of that party by voting PPC and showing the CPC they cannot take certain votes for granted without ever giving that base anything in return for their decades of loyalty.

From yet another perspective, those who want the CPC to jettison "SoCon" or "far right" from the party, having those people lured away by the PPC is a good thing, no? It then frees the party to move further leftward without embarrassing votes happening at CPC conventions anymore.


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Sep 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> ... those who want the CPC to jettison "SoCon" or "far right" from the party, having those people lured away by the PPC is a good thing, no? It then frees the party to move further leftward without embarrassing votes happening at CPC conventions anymore.


That for sure makes life easier for the CPC.  

Also, it's always good to see political participation/engagement, even if I disagree with the ideas being shared - or, in some cases, how they're being propagated.

That said, voting for the PPC in the current environment may express an opinion, but the chances of it leading to people being chosen under the PPC banner of being elected are still slim.  In this mix, it also increases the odds of the incumbent getting back in - something I think people all along the political continuum aren't going to be happy with.

Like this guy said ....


----------



## MilEME09 (18 Sep 2021)

Retired vice-admiral Mark Norman endorses O'Toole as 'leader of substance'
					

'I believe Erin O'Toole is the leader that Canada needs now'




					nationalpost.com
				




Interesting endorsement, not surprised Norman is anti liberal, but surprised he would come out during an election.


----------



## Remius (18 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Retired vice-admiral Mark Norman endorses O'Toole as 'leader of substance'
> 
> 
> 'I believe Erin O'Toole is the leader that Canada needs now'
> ...


Why surprised?  He’s a private citizen now no?  It wouldn’t be much of an endorsement if he did it any other time.


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Sep 2021)

Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?

Justin Trudeau says he is open to replacing first-past-the-post electoral system if Liberals elected​Paywall


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?
> 
> Justin Trudeau says he is open to replacing first-past-the-post electoral system if Liberals elected​Paywall


----------



## MJP (18 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?
> ​


Yes


----------



## Remius (18 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?
> 
> Justin Trudeau says he is open to replacing first-past-the-post electoral system if Liberals elected​Paywall


The answer is C)


----------



## The Bread Guy (18 Sep 2021)

Bit of wire service coverage as ballot day approaches ...

_*"Conservative challenger O'Toole takes aim at stumbling Trudeau as Canada votes"*_ (Agence-France Presse)
*"Trudeau warns against vote split in tight Canada election"* (Reuters)


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?
> 
> Justin Trudeau says he is open to replacing first-past-the-post electoral system if Liberals elected​Paywall


I voted Lib in the hopes of electoral reform in 2015. 

Won't get me a second time.


----------



## daftandbarmy (19 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I voted Lib in the hopes of electoral reform in 2015.
> 
> Won't get me a second time.


----------



## OldSolduer (19 Sep 2021)

The Great Reset sounds a lot like The Great Leap Forward. 

Justin did say he admired China’s dictatorship. And people still believe in this pretend PM


----------



## dimsum (19 Sep 2021)

From a couple of days ago.  Apologies if already posted.









						Matt Gurney: If the moderates can't hold the CPC, Canada is in deep, deep trouble
					

If the moderates can't hold the CPC, our democracy will be the worse for it.




					theline.substack.com


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Before you click the link let's play a game. Do you think this is from 2015, or 2021?
> 
> Justin Trudeau says he is open to replacing first-past-the-post electoral system if Liberals elected​Paywall


----------



## OldTanker (19 Sep 2021)

canada-election-retired-gen-rick-hillier-endorses-erin-otoole

Rick Hillier shares his endorsement of Erin O'Toole.


----------



## dapaterson (19 Sep 2021)

"Erin O'Toole will do for Canada what I did for Ontario's vaccine roll out" may not be the endorsement he thinks it is.


----------



## daftandbarmy (19 Sep 2021)

Too close to call...


Liberals, Conservatives neck-and-neck on eve of 2021 Canada election, poll finds​
On Monday morning, millions of Canadians will begin flocking to their nearest polling station to cast their votes.




But with hours left before Election Day, a new poll finds Liberals and Conservatives locked in a dead heat with the latter inching ahead by just one per cent in the national popular vote.

An Ipsos poll of 2,359 Canadians conducted exclusively for Global News showed Conservatives on track to garner 32 per cent of the popular vote, while Liberals went down a 









						Liberals, Conservatives neck-and-neck on eve of 2021 Canada election, poll finds - National | Globalnews.ca
					

The Conservatives are on track to garner 32 per cent of the popular vote, while the Liberals went down a point in the polls and are slated to receive 31 per cent.




					globalnews.ca


----------



## MilEME09 (19 Sep 2021)

Weird, I Thought Hillier wanted nothing to do with politics, wonder what changed his mind, he may be popular among many CAF circles but I doubt his endorsement carries much weight any where else


----------



## daftandbarmy (19 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Weird, I Thought Hillier wanted nothing to do with politics, wonder what changed his mind, he may be popular among many CAF circles but I doubt his endorsement carries much weight any where else



Maybe he needs to upgrade his education with, you know, an architect's degree


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (19 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Too close to call...
> 
> 
> Liberals, Conservatives neck-and-neck on eve of 2021 Canada election, poll finds​
> ...




Neck-and-neck races are usually won by a nose on photo finish ... so to determine who the winner will be, all you have to do is figure out who the biggest liar is.


----------



## brihard (19 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I voted Lib in the hopes of electoral reform in 2015.
> 
> Won't get me a second time.



I voted Liberal in 2015 and that was part of my reasoning as well. I was not impressed when he backtracked.



daftandbarmy said:


> Too close to call...
> 
> 
> Liberals, Conservatives neck-and-neck on eve of 2021 Canada election, poll finds​
> ...


I'm skeptical. The Conservative vote has historically been very inefficiently and heavily weighted to the prairies. A neck and neck popular vote typically works out in favour of the LPC. 

338canada.com currently has them damned close on popular vote, but with a considerable seat advantage to the LPC. Hopefully the polling is off.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (19 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Liberals, Conservatives neck-and-neck on eve of 2021 Canada election, poll finds​



Pollsters must be working overtime.  I've occasionally participated in telephone polls.  One probably ends up on a list of those who will generally cooperate so there may be a tendency to get called more often, however the frequency has jumped during this election.  Since Friday I've been called seven times with robo-polls, three of those times were today - not all the same polling firm and while there were questions about tomorrow's federal election some of the polls did touch on provincial government performance and the upcoming municipal election.


----------



## ModlrMike (19 Sep 2021)

It's worth remembering that 50% of the Canadian population lives in a roughly 200km wide band that runs from Montreal to Hamilton. The election is won or lost there. The Conservatives trail the Liberals by 5% in the most seat rich part of that band.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> It's worth remembering that 50% of the Canadian population lives in a roughly 200km wide band that runs from Montreal to Hamilton. The election is won or lost there. The Conservatives trail the Liberals by 5% in the most seat rich part of that band.


Put another way ...


----------



## dimsum (20 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Put another way ...
> View attachment 66559


That is an amazing diagram.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> That is an amazing diagram.


First pointed out to me by someone WAY smarter than me.


----------



## FJAG (20 Sep 2021)

So I've done my patriotic chore and voted. I did this solely because I feel its not right to bitch about how stupid politicians are unless you have voted. The choices in my riding were dismal although the CPC support here is so strong that a dead monkey would win for them.

While I've believed ever since the writ was dropped that this election was nothing more or less than a vanity project for the dumbest Trudeau put on earth and that calling an election in the middle of a pandemic was proof positive that he is the dumbest, I didn't realize the true extent of the stupidity until I actually got to the polls.

Ours was in a community centre where all the different polls had to funnel through a small entry room were we were all held up until our poll was free. We were then funneled through a narrow doorway where you were checked off and recorded for contact tracing (my guess is there will be a lot of calls in a week or two) and then sent to our respective polls to again wait in line. All the spaces set out were more like 4 feet rather than 6 feet apart and we were crowded like sardines. Yes there were hand sanitizers and everyone was masked but the mingling was far tighter than anywhere else I've been in the last year and, of course, no one checked for symptoms of infection or vaccination because ... voting is a right ... and why would we set up a special place for the symptomatic or unvaccinated?

Why anyone in Ottawa thought it would be a good idea in the middle of a new wave of a highly contagious variant to funnel all of the population of Canada through restricted places absolutely boggles the mind. And that's before you even consider the $600 million wasted on this boondoggle. 

I really do hope someone sends a message to those dumbasses. Looking forward to tonight.


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> It's worth remembering that 50% of the Canadian population lives in a roughly 200km wide band that runs from Montreal to Hamilton. The election is won or lost there. The Conservatives trail the Liberals by 5% in the most seat rich part of that band.



And only about 50% of those who can vote do so.


----------



## FSTO (20 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> So I've done my patriotic chore and voted. I did this solely because I feel its not right to bitch about how stupid politicians are unless you have voted. The choices in my riding were dismal although the CPC support here is so strong that a dead monkey would win for them.
> 
> While I've believed ever since the writ was dropped that this election was nothing more or less than a vanity project for the dumbest Trudeau put on earth and that calling an election in the middle of a pandemic was proof positive that he is the dumbest, I didn't realize the true extent of the stupidity until I actually got to the polls.
> 
> ...


Where did you vote? As in what city?


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> And only about 50% of those who can vote do so.


Closer to 60-ish since 2000, but still way too few ....

HIghest turnout:  79.4% March 1958
Lowest (election) turnout:  58.8% October 2008


----------



## FJAG (20 Sep 2021)

FSTO said:


> Where did you vote? As in what city?


Smaller town outside London.

🍻


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Sep 2021)

Election Canada has rented our Cadet hall, it's good as it has 3 large double doors allowing easy movement and lot's of fresh air. I was down last night helping them with their setup and doing some painting.


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Closer to 60-ish since 2000, but still way too few ....
> View attachment 66560
> HIghest turnout:  79.4% March 1958
> Lowest (election) turnout:  58.8% October 2008



Especially younger people:

Voter Turnout by Sex and Age​
The data shows that participation of voters aged 18 to 24 decreased by 3.2 percentage points to *53.9%* in 2019 after seeing the largest increase for that age group in the 2015 general election (57.1%) since Elections Canada began reporting demographic data in 2004.









						Voter Turnout by Sex and Age – Elections Canada
					

Voter Turnout by Sex and Age.



					www.elections.ca


----------



## Weinie (20 Sep 2021)

Just voted at the high school that my two eldest attend. Took longer to get there by driving than it did to vote. Pretty slick set up.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)

Oldgateboatdriver said:


> Neck-and-neck races are usually won by a nose on photo finish ... so to determine who the winner will be, all you have to do is figure out who the biggest liar is.


That’s only in horse racing.  Not sure how you measure when it’s an ASS.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> So I've done my patriotic chore and voted. I did this solely because I feel its not right to bitch about how stupid politicians are unless you have voted. The choices in my riding were dismal although the CPC support here is so strong that a dead monkey would win for them.
> 
> While I've believed ever since the writ was dropped that this election was nothing more or less than a vanity project for the dumbest Trudeau put on earth and that calling an election in the middle of a pandemic was proof positive that he is the dumbest, I didn't realize the true extent of the stupidity until I actually got to the polls.
> 
> ...


I went to a local arena for advance polling,  was really well set up.  Voting booths properly spaced, told to bring our own pencils or pens and provided disposal pencils for those that didn’t.   Proper entrance and different exit. Was Done quite well here.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)

That being said, I agree with you about this being during a pandemic.

Élections Canada struggled to find enough venues and staff for this.  If they pull it off kudos to them.  And I don’t blame them at all if some venues were terrible.  I blame the guy who started this election.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Sep 2021)

Any speculation out there on how long it'll be before a new leader is chosen if current management comes in with another minority?


----------



## OldSolduer (20 Sep 2021)

I voted this morning. Elections Canada got it right, at least where I voted.


----------



## Kilted (20 Sep 2021)

I voted at my local Legion, I'm waiting for the anti-Legion crowd to throw fruit at me.


----------



## Kilted (20 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Election Canada has rented our Cadet hall, it's good as it has 3 large double doors allowing easy movement and lot's of fresh air. I was down last night helping them with their setup and doing some painting.
> 
> View attachment 66561


Is there a secret message in the flags?


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> Is there a secret message in the flags?



Yes: "Join Cadets Now"


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)




----------



## Kilted (20 Sep 2021)

I got SXALM2A7S4I on the closest line.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (20 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Yes: "Join Cadets Now"


subliminal messaging "Come to the Cadet side, we have cookies". We do plan eventually to organize them into a message, but that's a long way down the list of things that need doing.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2021)

Our votes are cast.  From the polling workers sounds like a good turnout at my station in Halifax.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Any speculation out there on how long it'll be before a new leader is chosen if current management comes in with another minority?


I'd guess whenever Trudeau decides to step down and not a second before.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'd guess whenever Trudeau decides to step down and not a second before.


If he loses enough seats I think he won’t be the next guy to run.   Even if he wins and it looks like he will.


----------



## dimsum (20 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> I voted at my local Legion, I'm waiting for the anti-Legion crowd to throw fruit at me.


Why would they?  It's the best use of that building in years


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> If he loses enough seats I think he won’t be the next guy to run.   Even if he wins and it looks like he will.


I'm not too sure. 
If he looses seats it's because of racists from rebel news hating science and wanting to control women's bodies. 

Not because he did anything wrong 😏


----------



## cavalryman (20 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm not too sure.
> If he looses seats it's because of racists from rebel news hating science and wanting to control women's bodies.
> 
> Not because he did anything wrong 😏


I'm sure the people who actually control the LPC will have harsh words with him behind closed doors once it's clear their party ends up with essentially the same number of seats as before, but the party's coffers are substantially lighter.


----------



## Remius (20 Sep 2021)

cavalryman said:


> I'm sure the people who actually control the LPC will have harsh words with him behind closed doors once it's clear their party ends up with essentially the same number of seats as before, but the party's coffers are substantially lighter.


I predict 10 less seats or so for them.  Weakened minority.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (20 Sep 2021)

And the counting has begun.  Liberals in the lead - 1 seat, no . . . wait, 2 seats



			https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/federal/2021/results/


----------



## MilEME09 (20 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I predict 10 less seats or so for them.  Weakened minority.


Depends how big of an orange wave sweeps Ontario and Quebec, I suspect tonight the NDP may pull some vote left to then, more then what's polled.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Sep 2021)

Libs starting off well in the Atlantic, sadly.


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Libs starting off well in the Atlantic, sadly.



Losing three to the CPC is not a good start (early counts, my well change).

But if Southern Ontario loses a similar proportion, that's another dozen... Quebec remains an enigma, flip a few Lib seats to the NDP as well, and the road to a cumulative 170 seats may become very interesting.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (20 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Libs starting off well in the Atlantic, sadly.


CPC leading in eight seats which is double from 2019. Plus NDP leading in two when in 2019 they had none.


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

As you watch the early returns, remember this fundamental truth as expressed by The Beaverton:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440100822763851784


----------



## MilEME09 (20 Sep 2021)

It's a lot of close races though I'll never understand the media calling a race with 17/218 polls reporting


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

They have historical data, to the poll level, and can extrapolate reasonably well from small (ish) samples.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (20 Sep 2021)

Retired AF Guy said:


> CPC leading in eight seats which is double from 2019. Plus NDP leading in two when in 2019 they had none.


Opps!! Spoke too soon - 0 NDP and one BQ. Fifteen minutes until the polls open in Central Canada.


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

Fifty-one year old woman accidentally plows into crowd with her car at polling station in Montreal's West Island.  Eight taken to hospital.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/dollard-des-ormeaux-quebec-montreal-1.6182938


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

And in the "Only three polls are reporting, so I'm getting far ahead of things here" department, right now Erin O'Toole is behind the Liberal challenger in his riding, 61-47.  But if that holds, and he loses his seat...


----------



## dimsum (20 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> And in the "Only three polls are reporting, so I'm getting far ahead of things here" department, right now Erin O'Toole is behind the Liberal challenger in his riding, 61-47.  But if that holds, and he loses his seat...


----------



## MilEME09 (20 Sep 2021)

CTV calling it a liberal minority, but I think that is premature, people are still lined up to vote in the GTA, and are being allowed to vote as long as they were in line by closing time. Advanced polls, and mail in ballots wont be counted until tuesday, there are still a lot of wild cards here


----------



## Blackadder1916 (20 Sep 2021)

And in the "did you really expect something different" department, the leader of the Green Party is running fourth place in her Toronto riding.


----------



## dapaterson (20 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> And in the "did you really expect something different" department, the leader of the Green Party is running fourth place in her Toronto riding.



Hey, she's ahead of the People's Party, the Communist Party and the Animal Protection Party - combined!

(I'm still confident in my prediction of Kang and Kodos - 337 seats; Elizabeth May - 1 seat.)


----------



## ModlrMike (20 Sep 2021)

Did anyone expect that Mad Max would not get defeated?


----------



## MilEME09 (20 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Did anyone expect that Mad Max would not get defeated?


Max him self


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)

Ugh.

But ok. We’re no worse off than before the writ dropped. This may lead to Trudeau packing it in as leader. The PPC got stomped and a Bernier in particular did embarrassingly poorly in his own riding. The LPC will carry the stigma of having caused this stupid and wasteful election and that will impact them a bit next time. By next election we’ll be through Covid, the CPC will have fewer stupid distractions on the right and probably more political ammunition and a still more compelling case against the Liberals.

I think the biggest stories coming out of this will be what happened to Trudeau and what happens to O’Toole? Will we see Freeland or Poilievre ascendant? Or someone else come out of the woodwork?

However, in restating my thesis: Ugh.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Sep 2021)

Maryam Monsef has been declared defeated, the one behind GBA+, and the "our brothers" comment is gone


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

Maryam Monsef..


----------



## ballz (21 Sep 2021)

It's incredible that all you've gotta do is scare some Toronto voters about firearms to skewer the CPC.

I wish someone would kick Gerry Butts in the face, they couldn't find any Liberal that's less repulsive to bring on as a pundit?


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> However, in restating my thesis: Ugh.



It looks like the only leader safe in their job right now is Singh (based on the NDP appearing to grow their caucus). I suspect the LPC won't take down their leader just yet; the inevitable CPC review, followed by the turfing of O'Toole for a True Conservative (TM) will give the LPC hope of a majority in May of 2023... so while the flow may well be reduced, expect federal largesse to continue to flow.

For the next 18 months, the big question is whether it's the Bloc or the NDP that will extract their tithe to continue the LPC in power.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)




----------



## MilEME09 (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> It looks like the only leader safe in their job right now is Singh (based on the NDP appearing to grow their caucus). I suspect the LPC won't take down their leader just yet; the inevitable CPC review, followed by the turfing of O'Toole for a True Conservative (TM) will give the LPC hope of a majority in May of 2023... so while the flow may well be reduced, expect federal largesse to continue to flow.
> 
> For the next 18 months, the big question is whether it's the Bloc or the NDP that will extract their tithe to continue the LPC in power.


sounds more like the CPC is positioning to keep O'toole, I think they realize they need stable leadership, and if the CPC doesn't loose any seats then that may satisfy enough people to keep him on and prep for 2023, AAR, look what sank them in the debates and come up with a new plan.


----------



## ballz (21 Sep 2021)

I think it'd be a mistake to turf O'Toole. His time as leader made it almost impossible to become a known quantity to Canadians, yet he's managed to keep the seat count stable while making the party more popular nationally.

Any party members who have left because him, allows them to incrementally move closer to winning territory.

Give him another 2 years now that Canadians are actually paying attention to him, are more familiar with him, and he establishes more credibility, and the next election he should win.

Unless Rona Ambrose says she wants a go..... but that seems unlikely. Certainly Polievre is popular with Conservatives but I think he's spent too long as an antagonizer for Canadians to ever take to him.

EDIT: Also, possible game-changer........ Trudeau can't run away from the investigation into the fired Chinese scientists now.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

My dream scenario here is the LPC makes a official coalition with the NDP, parliament lasts 4 years, Trudeau gets to 10 years as PM, Singh gets a taste of government, and we don't need to do this again in 2 years time.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

Based on current vote results, CPC+PPC combined would have taken 21 additional seats.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440160109695422465


----------



## ballz (21 Sep 2021)

Also, if you want good commentary unlike mainstream news, a bunch of contributors from "The Line" are doing a live podcast...

"Canada Election Live with The Line! NO sets, NO scripts, NO sobriety"


----------



## SeaKingTacco (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Based on current vote results, CPC+PPC combined would have taken 21 additional seats.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440160109695422465


Max and his vanity project.…is he secretly on the Liberal payroll?


----------



## dimsum (21 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> We’re no worse off than before the writ dropped. This may lead to Trudeau packing it in as leader.


Doubt it.


----------



## dimsum (21 Sep 2021)

This is my preferred way of watching it right now:


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Max and his vanity project.…is he secretly on the Liberal payroll?


Fun story.

He's going to be in the next debates.


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

Well right after O’toole’s rah rah I’m staying speech, party insiders started to shoot that down.  Sigh.


----------



## GK .Dundas (21 Sep 2021)

On the other hand the Conservative insiders would be trying to stick knives in O'Toole 'a back even if he had won the election. It seems to be a spinal reflex.
Idiots!I
Oh, by the way it seems that Mad Max was given his pink slip tonight by his riding 's voters.
And so was the leader of the Green Party and while I disagreed with her I rather liked her . Unlike Bernier she.didn't seem to be in it purely for her ego's sake.


----------



## Maxman1 (21 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Max and his vanity project.…is he secretly on the Liberal payroll?



Probably.


----------



## Maxman1 (21 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> But ok. We’re no worse off than before the writ dropped.



Minus about $610 million.


----------



## Maxman1 (21 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Maryam Monsef..


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Sep 2021)

Just closed up the hall behind the exhausted Poll Workers at 11pm PDT. Great bunch, their supervisor has been there since 7am and still cheerful despite being run off her feet. A big thank you to all the people working the polls to make this totally unnecessary election work.


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Based on current vote results, CPC+PPC combined would have taken 21 additional seats.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440160109695422465


In theory if every single one of those ridings had gone CPC, that would have given it to them by a tiny handful of seats. Given how tight some of the margins are though, not realistic to believe that. The PPC cost them seats, but not the election. I don’t think it even impacted the balance of power. The LPC have another strong minority that could be about as stable as they allow it to be.


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Sep 2021)

Folks, gentle reminder we don't tolerate name calling no matter how much you despise someone. If your post is deleted, that's probably why. 

- Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)

Another observation: CPC again took a significant edge in the popular vote. That’s meaningless in its own right, but it shows that the LPC continue to achieve much more effective vote distribution. The CPC popular support in the prairies remains far in excess of what they need to take seats, and they’re lying for it in the east. It seems evident, at first glance, that their path to victory still has to run through the ideological centre. They have some real long term strategic soul searching to do here. If they discard O’Toole, or at least his efforts to modernize the party and pull it centre, they are likely dooming themselves to a long stint in opposition. I wonder to what extent a demographic shift away from Conservatism might be cementing this as a long term trend.


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Sep 2021)

Paint me naive, but try to remember ....


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Sep 2021)

While plenty of votes to count and over 30 races yet called, it looks like we are right back where we started at 157 lib, 122 cpc. If that holds, then we spent 600 million for the status quo


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Maryam Monsef has been declared defeated, the one behind GBA+, and the "our brothers" comment is gone


We could have spent $600M on something with worse results. Glad to read that. Thanks Trudeau?


----------



## Czech_pivo (21 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> While plenty of votes to count and over 30 races yet called, it looks like we are right back where we started at 157 lib, 122 cpc. If that holds, then we spent 600 million for the status quo


 then we spent  wasted 600 million for the status quo _and put a country through alot of pain and division that it didn't need during the middle of a pandemic - _


----------



## Halifax Tar (21 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> then we spent  wasted 600 million for the status quo _and put a country through alot of pain and division that it didn't need during the middle of a pandemic - _


But remember Trudeau isn't a divisive leader lol


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> then we spent  wasted 600 million for the status quo _and put a country through alot of pain and division that it didn't need during the middle of a pandemic - _


The fact that 32% of the Canadian voters didn't get that, is what I find even more baffling.


----------



## dimsum (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> The fact that 32% of the Canadian voters didn't get that, is what I find even more baffling.


My guess is that they looked at the alternatives and picked the least-worst.  

I didn't vote CPC because while I had every faith that O'Toole would _try_ to steer that party's ship back to centre, there are enough social conservative elements in that party that made me think that he'd lose that battle, and we'd get something too far right for me.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> My guess is that they looked at the alternatives and picked the least-worst.
> 
> I didn't vote CPC because while I had every faith that O'Toole would _try_ to steer that party's ship back to centre, there are enough social conservative elements in that party that made me think that he'd lose that battle, and we'd get something too far right for me.


I think we saw a lot of socons shift to the PPC, which I bet was part of the plan


----------



## Quirky (21 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> We could have spent $600M on something with worse results. Glad to read that. Thanks Trudeau?


$600M could’ve bought a lot of drinking water for the reserves built by SNC.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> I think we saw a lot of socons shift to the PPC, which I bet was part of the plan


Which parties plan, the LPC or CPC?


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

Quirky said:


> $600M could’ve bought a lot of drinking water for the reserves built by SNC.



Or on the WE program... although that was going to be more like $900M


----------



## GK .Dundas (21 Sep 2021)

GK .Dundas said:


> On the other hand the Conservative insiders would be trying to stick knives in O'Toole 's  back even if he had won the election. It seems to be a spinal reflex.
> Idiots !!
> Oh, by the way it seems that Mad Max was given his pink slip tonight by his riding 's voters.
> And so was the leader of the Green Party and while I disagreed with her I rather liked her . Unlike Bernier she didn't seem to be in it purely for her ego's sake.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> The fact that 32% of the Canadian voters didn't get that, is what I find even more baffling.


For those that voted for the Trudeau Liberals after ALL the nonsense that man has put this country through, it really makes me think these people are locked deeply into a political cult mind set and refuse to face reality


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Sep 2021)

Well the reality, at least for me at this moment, is the loss of about $15,000 based on the OiC on newly prohibited firearms. I'm also sure that that list will now be expanded costing me more of my retirement funds. What amazes me more than anything are the amount of gun owners that voted PPC knowing it would help get trudeau re-elected, resulting in the theft of their property by the government. I'm creating a bald spot scratching my head on that one.


----------



## Navy_Pete (21 Sep 2021)

Some really poor performers keep getting elected as MPs as well; no idea how someone like Cheryl Gallant keeps getting elected, and maintains here riding nomination for the CPC. There are some really great MPs that get voted in regardless of party affiliation, but she's probably an example of an MP that only gets in because of party affiliation, and actually is an active disservice to their riding.


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> For those that voted for the Trudeau Liberals after ALL the nonsense that man has put this country through, it really makes me think these people are locked deeply into a political cult mind set and refuse to face reality


I’m not so sure.  It has a lot to do with the alternatives being offered I think.   I see this as a get back to work already sort of thing.   O’Toole fell victim to his inexperience in a national campaign turning off some of his supporters and events that were untimely for him.  In the context of a pandemic he said a lot things most Canadians didn’t want to hear from a leader.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (21 Sep 2021)

As long as Trudeau is the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada I refuse to vote for them.  I've got some very simple reasons for this:

1.  The Admiral Norman Affair;
2.  WE Charity Scandal;
3.  Decision to Withdraw Military Assets in the Fight against ISIS;
4.  Foreign Policy Blunders; and
5.  Fiscal Mismanagement that's dragged in to COVID and will cause long term damage to our economy and working class people.

Basically it boils down to two triggers for me:

1.  Corruption; and
2.  Weak Foreign Policy.

Both of which I think are slowly but surely weakening Canada on the World Stage and setting us up for long-term pain.

I also acknowledge that many Canadians don't care because many of these policies personally benefit them at this point in time.  CEWS, CERB, etc.  CEWS has been wildly beneficial to certain businesses who have used it as basically a massive tax write-off.  This more or less explains PMJTs continued popularity.

What does this all point to?  A population addicted to Bread and Circus and that's never good for the long term health of a Country.

I think we are going to be in for some very lean years ahead:

Canada inflation hits 18-year-high with election just days away


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m not so sure.  It has a lot to do with the alternatives being offered I think.   I see this as a get back to work already sort of thing.   O’Toole fell victim to his inexperience in a national campaign turning off some of his supporters and events that were untimely for him.  In the context of a pandemic he said a lot things most Canadians didn’t want to hear from a leader.


Ummm no. Look at 
-Black Face multiple incidents
-Firing JWR for doing her job
-kicking Jane Philpott out for standing up for JWR 
-2 x Ethics Violations
-Belittling Celina Caesar-Chavennes and causing her to quit
-Agra Khan
-SNC-Lavalin
-WE Charity Scandal
-Embarrassing Canada on his India trip
-Still Reservations without potable water
-Elbowing fellow MPs
-Journalist groping

How LONG does the list need to be, Remius? A brain dead baboon on crystal meth would basically do a better job that Trudeau.

O'Toole lacks experience on campaigning? Oh please, he has the conservative party behind him  which has plenty of campaigning experience. 

To sum it up, the die hard Trudeau cult worshippers (thats all they are) were the ones spreading the same old rumours and mistruths about the Conservatives. When you look at their poorly thought our arguments (like "cons are bad" and "Can't trust any cons", you know the lame and intellectually lacking arguments) you know they are stuck in a sheltered world. To Me, Trudeau supporters are morally bankrupt people that lack integrity, accountability and transparency. Like their idiot leader.

Canada needs a wake up call.


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Well the reality, at least for me at this moment, is the loss of about $15,000 based on the OiC on newly prohibited firearms. I'm also sure that that list will now be expanded costing me more of my retirement funds. What amazes me more than anything are the amount of gun owners that voted PPC knowing it would help get trudeau re-elected, resulting in the theft of their property by the government. I'm creating a bald spot scratching my head on that one.


It will be telling when and if we see those numbers and the impact it may have had.  I see the PPC for all its craziness as a place that people can park their votes in protest to whatever.  But, it may also be a work in progress that some believe may actually lead to seats and a voice at some point in parliament.   The main problem I think, is that it does not have the ability (or even the will) to get the vote out in any efficient way.  It can generate a lot of popular support that is wide to an extent but no real depth.


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Ummm no. Look at
> -Black Face multiple incidents
> -Firing JWR for doing her job
> -kicking Jane Philpott out for standing up for JWR
> ...


Sorry Army Rick but this needs to be looked at in a critical way.  You list a lot valid things that are legit but some of those, most Canadians could care less about.  Or have already been litigated already in the court of public opinion. 

Again, this is about alternatives being offered.  It looks like those voters didn’t like what was on offer. 

Lack of experience.  Let me explain.  This is his first run for PM.  He had a great two weeks.  His last two weeks were not.  He got tripped up on his gun flip flop/confusing message.  So much so he had to amend his platform.  That didn’t help.  So decry the LPC all you want about cult following or what not, that turned away CPC supporters.  And opened a Pandora’s box of what else he may have flip flopped on.   That creates doubt.  He is to blame for that.  He could have stayed consistant.  To be honest the anti gun types were not going to vote for him so I’m not sure why he didn’t clarify better and stay consistant.  I think he saw that as a possible opening to be attacked on and he fumbled. 

On vaccine mandates he really did not perform well.  He wants 95% of the population vaccinated but wouldn’t commit to mandates, would not confirm his own members’ status and mishandled the Kenny vector by refusing to take questions, cancelled interviews and never mentioned Kenny again.  That could have been handled better. 

If all the CPC and CPC supporters do is blame LPC voters to be cult like and not actually look at what actually might be some points to improve on and change they will never win. 

And no offense.  But the CPC had terrible campaigns the last two times.  So add that to a new leader running and yes, experience plays a factor.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Ummm no. Look at
> -Black Face multiple incidents
> -Firing JWR for doing her job
> -kicking Jane Philpott out for standing up for JWR
> ...


The average voter doesn't track any of these issues though.  Look where the Liberals are popular.... Major urban centres in Canada.  

In order to understand the average Liberal voter, you need to put yourself in their shoes.  Liberal Policies have been wildly beneficial for them:


Massive Increases in Home Values
Redistribution of Tax Dollars to Business Owners and Corporations
Record Stock Market Values

The average Liberal Voter is a Middle-aged, White, Urban Dweller, worked for the Government, Major Corporation or owns a Business, Owns a Home,  Has significant retirement savings, etc.  

This is who is keeping the Liberals in power and that's who the LPC directs their policies towards. COVID-19 and Liberal Policies have benefitted this section of the population.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> *Sorry Army Rick but this needs to be looked at in a critical way.  You list a lot valid things that are legit but some of those, most Canadians could care less about.  Or have already been litigated already in the court of public opinion.*
> 
> Again, this is about alternatives being offered.  It looks like those voters didn’t like what was on offer.
> 
> ...


Hit the nail right on the head!

My personal opinion is that Canadian politics and the political spectrum in this Country have shifted to the left.  I would classify the Politics of this Country as being Corporate-Socialist in nature.  

I see a lot of parallels in Canada right now with Peronism in Argentina.  I personally think Canada, at least, economically, is heading in the direction of Argentina.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Ummm no. Look at
> -Black Face multiple incidents
> -Firing JWR for doing her job
> -kicking Jane Philpott out for standing up for JWR
> ...


Be that as it may, its easy to look past all that for things like 10 dollar a day daycare and not rolling back gun control. 

I said it before, the CPC needs to make inroads in Urban Canada and they got shut out of the 3 biggest cities again and to add insult to injury they are losing seats in urban Alberta.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

The more a party is re-elected, the less it cares about the consequences of its behaviour.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> The average voter doesn't track any of these issues though.  Look where the Liberals are popular.... Major urban centres in Canada.
> 
> In order to understand the average Liberal voter, you need to put yourself in their shoes.  Liberal Policies have been wildly beneficial for them:
> 
> ...


Toss in a national childcare program knocking down a large expense for urban dwellers and yes, it doesn't matter what Trudeau does, they will not vote against their interests. 

Same reason rural Alberta would not vote for the NDP, it would be going against their interests.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The more a party is re-elected, the less it cares about the consequences of its behaviour.


Well, I guess its imperative that the NDP or CPC provide a credible alternative then.


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Well the reality, at least for me at this moment, is the loss of about $15,000 based on the OiC on newly prohibited firearms. I'm also sure that that list will now be expanded costing me more of my retirement funds. What amazes me more than anything are the amount of gun owners that voted PPC knowing it would help get trudeau re-elected, resulting in the theft of their property by the government. I'm creating a bald spot scratching my head on that one.


I bet you Trudeau & Co. will keep the standard weapon of his beloved friend Xi Jinping’s dictatorial People’s Liberation Army, the not-at-all-assaulty Norinco Type 97, on the available to buy at your local Cabela’s because…well…Chinese ‘not-assault’ rifles would never think about hurting people…oh, and “because it’s 2021!”

Go down to Cabela’s today and get yours, because Trudeau thinks these are A.O.K.! Norinco® TYPE 97 NSR-G3 Semi-Automatic Rifle | Cabela's Canada

#noliberalhipocrasy


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Sorry Army Rick but this needs to be looked at in a critical way.  You list a lot valid things that are legit but some of those, most Canadians could care less about.  Or have already been litigated already in the court of public opinion.
> 
> Again, this is about alternatives being offered.  It looks like those voters didn’t like what was on offer.
> 
> ...


I will try this again. Trudeau supporters are cult die hard followers. 

I am looking at it critically. 

No EXCUSE for giving Trudeau another mandate when the man is totally bankrupt. When one looks at the popular vote, Conservatives again kicked Liberals backside BUT it doesn't count in first past the post. 

I do realize what makes up Trudeau liberal supporters. I also know many business owners who have no desire for Trudeau Liberals and their money sucking policies. 

I would understand Canadians voting NDP, Green, PPC, Bloc or Conservatives but voting Trudeau's brand of Liberals? Moral bankrupt. End story.

Curious, who did you vote?


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> I will try this again. Trudeau supporters are cult die hard followers.
> 
> I am looking at it critically.
> 
> ...


I voted for O’Toole.  That should have no impact on the discussion if looking at things as unbiased as possible though.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> I will try this again. Trudeau supporters are cult die hard followers.


Same as CPC voters, looking at rural alberta and Saskatchewan


ArmyRick said:


> I am looking at it critically.
> 
> No EXCUSE for giving Trudeau another mandate when the man is totally bankrupt. When one looks at the popular vote, Conservatives again kicked Liberals backside BUT it doesn't count in first past the post.


If people wanted childcare and the liberals were the only party to deliver on it it only makes sense to vote for the Liberals. And the reality of FPTP in Canada means that either the Liberals or Conservatives were winning the election, so if you wanted the progressive goodies the liberals were promising, then one needs to vote liberal.


ArmyRick said:


> I do realize what makes up Trudeau liberal supporters. I also know many business owners who have no desire for Trudeau Liberals and their money sucking policies.
> 
> I would understand Canadians voting NDP, Green, PPC, Bloc or Conservatives but voting Trudeau's brand of Liberals? Moral bankrupt. End story.


Well, I guess Alberta and Saskatchewan could have voted orange and kicked out trudeau while delivering progressive legislation.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I voted for O’Toole.  That should have no impact on the discussion if looking at things as unbiased as possible though.


From speaking to many Liberal supporters, their reasons for voting Trudeau was right out to lunch
-Better the devil you know than the devil you don't
-Can never trust the conservatives
-Erin O'Toole is a white supremacist blah, blah (Literally had a lady explain to me thats why she was urging everyone not to vote him)
-Look at what Harper/Mulroney did to the country
-O'Toole will take away our health care system and go for cash
-Doug Ford made a mess so I won't vote O'Toole 
-Cons are out to destroy the environment for profit
-Cons only care for their rich corporate friends (this one or similar was VERY common)

thats the MIND SET I have an issue with. If people wouldn't vote conservative for whatever reason, their was better alternatives especially for the more left leaning. 

People basically voted Trudeau back in for fear of a conservative government in my opinion


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

I will add in an interesting observation from an American immigrant to Canada who is a customer of mine (or was)

"Canadians are very timid and afraid of change or to challenge the status quo"

This came from a 50s something black lady from the US, somewhat left leaning and she originally voted Trudeau in 2015 and then said she couldn't stomach him in the 2019 election. 

She ended up leaving Canada and points many of the reasons to his policies and his behaviour. I keep in touch with her still.

Thats only one outsiders view, but think about it.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> People basically voted Trudeau back in for fear of a conservative government in my opinion


I know a lot of progressive voters in other forums I frequent were scared that the Conservatives would get rid of the childcare program that they were looking forward to.

Another thing is the environment, and the CPC looking to go back to the 30 percent target was a non starter for them.

Add that and strategic voting and this result isn't all that surprising.

If O'Toole kept the national childcare program, kept the OIC and left the carbon tax and climate targets alone he likely wins imho.


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> From speaking to many Liberal supporters, their reasons for voting Trudeau was right out to lunch
> -Better the devil you know than the devil you don't


This used in most cases with incumbents.  It’s why my MP keeps getting g elected despite being generally disliked.


ArmyRick said:


> -Can never trust the conservatives


This is on them.  O’Tooles flip flop validated that.  His Vaccine vagueness, Kenney etc all just reinforced it.  Valid or not. 


ArmyRick said:


> -Erin O'Toole is a white supremacist blah, blah (Literally had a lady explain to me thats why she was urging everyone not to vote him)


This is a new one.  I haven’t heard it nor have I heard it from any liberal supporters I know.


ArmyRick said:


> -Look at what Harper/Mulroney did to the country


look at what Trudeau Sr did to our country.  This very site is full of CPC supporters who constantly reference his father.  Sun king, dauphin etc.  This isn’t just LPC voters who do that. 


ArmyRick said:


> -O'Toole will take away our health care system and go for cash


Again, he opened that door.  He was certainly misquoted and the LPC used a false narrative but he managed to navigate it fairly well.  


ArmyRick said:


> -Doug Ford made a mess so I won't vote O'Toole


Sure.  People associate provincial politics with federal politics.  Many are li key at the hip.  In this case it was more Kenney than Ford.  I suspect his association with Kenney did more damage than Ford could ever do.  Remember Kathleen Wynn?  Yeah so this is common on both sides. 


ArmyRick said:


> -Cons are out to destroy the environment for profit


This stems from having no real climate plan for a long time.  They have one now, reluctantly and has been criticized for not going far enough. So it takes time to establish legitimacy on climate and environment when then conservatives spent so long even acknowledging a problem.  A problem a majority of Canadians especially young voters want to see action on. 


ArmyRick said:


> -Cons only care for their rich corporate friends (this one or similar was VERY common)


And yet we see the same criticism of the LPC.  Especially with Quebec companies.  You even mentioned SNC. 


ArmyRick said:


> thats the MIND SET I have an issue with. If people wouldn't vote conservative for whatever reason, their was better alternatives especially for the more left leaning.
> 
> People basically voted Trudeau back in for fear of a conservative government in my opinion


And how many people voted for Otoole for the exact same reason?  And people did vote for alternatives.  

Again you are blaming Liberal Voters and painting them all the same.  They are not.  If I had young kids I might have voted LPC for the child care system they were proposing.  It was far better than O’toole’s in my mind.  Maybe that could have been the one issue they chose to vote on.  Just like gun owners voted on one issue as well.  People vote for a variety of reasons.  The CPC didn’t reach everyone they could have and reinforced a few things that made some people hesitant to vote their way.  

The CPC needs to adjust their traverse sight dial a bit.  I think O’toole is on the right track but it’s a work in progress.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

On childcare, there is a generation scarred from the election in 2006. Paul Martin had a national childcare program all ready to go, ready to sit down and deal with the provinces, but then there was an election and the CPC killed it.

To a lot of people, there was a strong feeling of deja vu. Another LPC PM with a national childcare program all ready to go, and another CPC candidate saying they would kill it.

There is also a generation scarred from 2011. The last time Canadians abandoned the Liberals for the NDP, the CPC was able to win a majority government, which makes people hesitant to do that again. So the NDP are not yet a viable alternative and a lot of people were scared about losing childcare to the CPC yet again.

And when it comes right down to it, when you ask the average Canadian whether they give a damn about Aga Khan, or WE, or blackface, or if they care about their childcare costs going from 2000 a month currently to 200 a month under the LPC, well, the pocketbook is going to win every time.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> On childcare, there is a generation scarred from the election in 2006. Paul Martin had a national childcare program all ready to go, ready to sit down and deal with the provinces, but then there was an election and the CPC killed it.
> 
> To a lot of people, there was a strong feeling of deja vu. Another LPC PM with a national childcare program all ready to go, and another CPC candidate saying they would kill it.
> 
> ...


Pocketbook? How about a ridicolous ballooning debt?


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Pocketbook? How about a ridicolous ballooning debt?


Nobody really made that a central issue.  Both the liberal and CPC platform coating were relatively the same.  In fact the CPC budget will balance itself plan was the same one the LPC had a few years ago.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Sep 2021)

The childcare thing is a bit of a scam, if you don't use a "licenced daycare" , no money for you. The CPC giving money for childcare to be used by parent as they saw fit, was better, as we paid a friend to care for our kids.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Pocketbook? How about a ridicolous ballooning debt?


Okay, you live in a Canadian urban center.

You're paying 2000 a month on daycare, per child.

You are making the median income, 62k per year.  1/3 of the money you make is going to childcare. 

Lets say you're lower income, 42k a year. More than HALF your income is going to childcare. One may be forced to stay home because its not worth it to work.

The LPC says its going to get childcare from 24k a year to 2.4k a year. Saving someone with one kid in daycare 22k a year. Saving someone with two kids in daycare 44k a year. 

Do you honestly, seriously, not ironically, think that a person in line to save 22k a year cares about the ballooning debt in that case? 

Seriously?


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> The childcare thing is a bit of a scam, if you don't use a "licenced daycare" , no money for you. The CPC giving money for childcare to be used by parent as they saw fit, was better, as we paid a friend to care for our kids.


Ah yes, tax credits.

Unless you're not working, in which case no tax credit. And if you cannot get a spot, you cannot work, so no tax credit. And if you're income is low, your tax credit isn't going to be that high, so the 24k paid towards childcare doesn't really do anything.

And even at the max eligibility a family gets 6000 per year, but that drops childcare costs from 24k to 18k, still rampantly unaffordable. And according to O'Toole himself, that would be for the lowest tax bracket, so those earning under 40k a year.

The CPC childcare plan was hot garbage and nobody should be surprised that urban Canada flocked towards the LPC and the LPC childcare plan.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Okay, you live in a Canadian urban center.
> 
> You're paying 2000 a month on daycare, per child.
> 
> ...


Child care is just as expensive in rural Canada where people make significantly less money. 

Debt affects interest rate and taxation. Every Canadian should damn well give a crap about it. Ballooning debt will hamper an economy badly.

I am NOT asking why the Conservatives didn't get in. NO. Re-read my post.

I am asking why the hell would anyone vote for Trudeau this time around. All his great ideas now? He broke promises for the last six years so why expect different.

Again, why would anyone with a sense of the real world ever put Trudeau back in power in 2021?


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> Child care is just as expensive in rural Canada where people make significantly less money.


This is true.


ArmyRick said:


> Debt affects interest rate and taxation. Every Canadian should damn well give a crap about it. Ballooning debt will hamper an economy badly.


Every Canadian should, but a lot of Canadians were oddly comfortable spending near half a trillion to battle the pandemic. Turns out 30 billion on childcare over 5 years isn't going to turn too many heads.


ArmyRick said:


> I am NOT asking why the Conservatives didn't get in. NO. Re-read my post.


Fine.


ArmyRick said:


> I am asking why the hell would anyone vote for Trudeau this time around. All his great ideas now? He broke promises for the last six years so why expect different.


He also kept promises. But here's the kicker. Vote for the chance, a good chance seeing as 8 provinces have signed childcare agreements with the feds to date, to get a national childcare program, or vote NDP and risk the CPC winning and O'Toole killing the program, or vote CPC and watch O'Toole kill the program? 

It's not much of a choice.


ArmyRick said:


> Again, why would anyone with a sense of the real world ever put Trudeau back in power in 2021?


FPTP makes it so that 3rd parties have hard time winning plurality, thus it was Trudeau versus O'Toole, LPC platform versus CPC platform. 

Whatever you think of Trudeau the leader, the LPC plan was flat out better than the CPC plan if one is a progressive voter.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Nobody really made that a central issue.  Both the liberal and CPC platform coating were relatively the same.  In fact the CPC budget will balance itself plan was the same one the LPC had a few years ago.


How do you explain the importance of budgeting to a generation that can't balance their own budgets?


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> How do you explain the importance of budgeting to a generation that can't balance their own budgets?



Dude...


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

So I did a riding population density election result comparison before this election.

Last time around under Andrew Scheer, the CPC only started winning at riding 67, Edmonton Greisbach, 2,443 / km²

This time around....Calgary Center, riding 69, 2,422 / km²

Not bad on the face of it, but...

CPC losses.

Edmonton Center possibly, ranked 70, 2,422 / km²

Richmond Center, ranked 76, 2,276 / km²

Calgary Skyview, ranked 132, 1,107 / km²

More losses in Urban Canada.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Dude...


3-0

Defeated Harper.

Defeated Scheer.

Defeated O'Toole.

He's doing something right.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> 3-0
> 
> Defeated Harper.
> 
> ...



Well, he's clearly studied his Roman history... pre-Vandal invasion mainly I would say:


----------



## Blackadder1916 (21 Sep 2021)

And in the category of dropped/resigned candidates who remained on the ballot the nominees are . . .

For the NDP:
Sydney Coles (Toronto-St. Paul's) -  a not unsurprising weak 3rd place showing against a popular Liberal cabinet minister incumbent.
Dan Osborne (Cumberland-Colchester) - a weak 3rd place typical of past NDP performance in this riding.

For the CPC:
Lisa Robinson (Beaches-East York) - 3rd place against winning incumbent Liberal with vote percentages similar to the previous two elections.

For the LPC:
Raj Saini (Kitchener-Centre) - this incumbent MP came 4th in a race that gave the Green Party its first seat in Ontario.

And the winner is . . .

Kevin Voung (Spadina-Fort York) - former Liberal candidate (and "Naval" reservist) is leading in this race by over 1300 votes with over 99% of ballots counted.  The allegations against Voung came to light after advanced voting had closed.


----------



## Scott (21 Sep 2021)

Dan Osbourne's votes would have won it for Lenore. Thanks be to Dan's voters.


----------



## Kilted (21 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Chris Voung (Spadina-Fort York) - former Liberal candidate (and "Naval" reservist) is leading in this race by over 1300 votes with over 99% of ballots counted.  The allegations against Voung came to light after advanced voting had closed.


I know that CBC is still showing him as a Liberal, but in reality, he is an independent.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> I know that CBC is still showing him as a Liberal, but in reality, he is an independent.


Yeah, and in the grand scheme of things, the LPC being 12-14 seats short of majority means little if the Bloc and NDP have 34 and 25 seats respectively.

He probably votes with the LPC anyways.


----------



## Kilted (21 Sep 2021)

Glacing at some of the ridings it appears that the PPC has cost the CPC at least a few seats.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> Glacing at some of the ridings it appears that the NDP/BQ has cost the LPC at least a few seats.


Yes.


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, tax credits.
> 
> Unless you're not working, in which case no tax credit. And if you cannot get a spot, you cannot work, so no tax credit. And if you're income is low, your tax credit isn't going to be that high, so the 24k paid towards childcare doesn't really do anything.
> 
> ...


I guess JT is glad that most urban Canadians don't understand that someone ends up paying for that...

Nothing is free - it either comes back in your tax burden or that of your children or great grandchildren.


----------



## QV (21 Sep 2021)

All that money going to babysitting sure could have fixed a lot of military capability gaps, but alas this is Canada.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I guess JT is glad that most urban Canadians don't understand that someone ends up paying for that...


I'm not going to go over the economic benefits of childcare yet again.

I will say that 4 of the 5 parties in parliament support a national childcare plan and 66.1 voted for a party who would support a national childcare plan.


KevinB said:


> Nothing is free - it either comes back in your tax burden or that of your children or great grandchildren.


The CPC is free to embrace this opinion in perpetuity from the opposition benches.

But who am I kidding?

This is pretty locked in right now. Its one thing to kill this program while its still being rolled out the door, its another altogether to kill it after its been up and running for a few years. 

This is why I like the LPC. CPC opposes progressive legislation, say they will roll it back or cancel it, LPC wins, its runs for a few years and then the next CPC candidate doesn't touch it. 

Weed and CCB being two recent examples.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> All that money going to babysitting sure could have fixed a lot of military capability gaps, but alas this is Canada.


It is Canada and I don't think a single party was suggesting tossing an extra 5 billion a year at the military at the expense of Canadian families.

Tossing money at the military is bad economics anyways, there are much more economic benefits to childcare.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

For the record, I'm calling my shot now, Pharmacare will be rolled out just before the next election and the CPC candidate will oppose it.


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I guess JT is glad that most urban Canadians don't understand that someone ends up paying for that...
> 
> Nothing is free - it either comes back in your tax burden or that of your children or great grandchildren.


Not to worry, KevinB.

Trudeau “took on debt, so we don’t have to.”


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> It is Canada and I don't think a single party was suggesting tossing an extra 5 billion a year at the military at the expense of Canadian families.
> 
> Tossing money at the military is bad economics anyways, there are much more economic benefits to childcare.


Yes having stuff made, that builds infrastructure and makes more jobs is terrible than a handout.

People like you make me so happy to be an American now.


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Not to worry, KevinB.
> 
> Trudeau “took on debt, so we don’t have to.”


I cry.

Legitimately does anyone not have a problem with how he says that...


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Yes having stuff made, that builds infrastructure and makes more jobs is terrible than a handout.


A lot of the equipment is bought from outside the country, stuff bought inside the country is overpriced and plagued by delays, and as for infrastructure, it is spent not spent on stuff that grows the economy like roads, bridges, airports, ports, its spent on buildings and facilities and research for military means.

I love the military, but lets not pretend its not a money sink.


KevinB said:


> People like you make me so happy to be an American now.


Enjoy Biden I suppose.


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I cry.
> 
> Legitimately does anyone not have a problem with how he says that...


The cognitively deficient don’t….he looked pretty when he said it, so no synapses fired to think critically. Just the dopamine rush of seeing handsome vacuousness…


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I cry.
> 
> Legitimately does anyone not have a problem with how he says that...





Good2Golf said:


> The cognitively deficient don’t….he looked pretty when he said it, so no synapses fired to think critically. Just the dopamine rush of seeing handsome vacuousness…











						COMMENTARY: CERB did its job, but many Canadians polled say it’s time to move on - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Some 86 per cent of Canadians say CERB did a good job. Pollster Darrell Bricker says he expects party platforms will address universal income in the next federal election.




					globalnews.ca
				






> Just like the number of applicants, every aspect of CERB is unprecedented: from the number of families it has helped; to the amount of money involved; to the speed with which it was implemented by Canada’s public service.
> 
> Also unprecedented is the level of public approval CERB has enjoyed.
> 
> A strong majority (86 per cent) agrees CERB has done a good job of preventing financial disaster for many Canadians. We don’t often see Canadians agreeing like this to anything their governments do.


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> COMMENTARY: CERB did its job, but many Canadians polled say it’s time to move on - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> Some 86 per cent of Canadians say CERB did a good job. Pollster Darrell Bricker says he expects party platforms will address universal income in the next federal election.
> ...


I don't have any issue with the government helping during times like this -- but I absolutely am disgusted with his way of delivery -- he doesn't even acknowledge kicking the can down the road.
  The problem if one isn't upfront with it -- people start to believe it is "free money" (lets face it most people are incredibly stupid) - and it just becomes another item pushed to a later date with no plan to deal with it.

I can even understand Child Care etc plans -- but for the love of god, the Politician's should at least have a plan to not sink the country in debt.
   Do people understand that the Mint just can't print money to get back on track anymore?



Altair said:


> A lot of the equipment is bought from outside the country, stuff bought inside the country is overpriced and plagued by delays, and as for infrastructure, it is spent not spent on stuff that grows the economy like roads, bridges, airports, ports, its spent on buildings and facilities and research for military means.
> 
> I love the military, but lets not pretend its not a money sink.


It really doesn't need to be --a lot of material can be manufactured in Canada -- especially with a well thought procurement plan - and pre-planning for requirements.   As well joining Allied co-operative development helps spread costs, lowers costs, and gives a lot of national spin offs.

   Of course that only works if you are playing well with others, and have a plan -- for which I give most CDN Governments since Mulroney an F (and while the White Paper his Gov did was a B, the execution was an F)



Altair said:


> Enjoy Biden I suppose.


No enjoyment here on that - I'm not sure which one I loathe more - but at least here, no one is seizing my guns...
  Good old JB keeps sending me checks (or cheques to y'all  ) - they are paying people in advantage child tax credits -- (I just destroy them) - what a lot of Americans don't seem to understand is that money isn't free - it still needs to be accounted for - and it reduces the child tax credits you get when it comes to factoring in your income tax.


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)




----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I don't have any issue with the government helping during times like this -- but I absolutely am disgusted with his way of delivery -- he doesn't even acknowledge kicking the can down the road.
> The problem if one isn't upfront with it -- people start to believe it is "free money" (lets face it most people are incredibly stupid) - and it just becomes another item pushed to a later date with no plan to deal with it.


When people are stuck at home, unable to work, with bills pilling up and fridge getting empty, I don't think many care much how Trudeau said it, just so long as he did it. And CERB was done as of december 2nd 2020, replaced by various unemployment programs. It was also clawed back if people made more than 35k in that fiscal year. So while free money it didn't last forever.


KevinB said:


> I can even understand Child Care etc plans


This is good.


KevinB said:


> -- but for the love of god, the Politician's should at least have a plan to not sink the country in debt.
> Do people understand that the Mint just can't print money to get back on track anymore?


When was the last time the USA posted a surplus?

Not to make this a American Politics thread, but it has been decades since the last budgetary surplus in the USA.  Same goes for most of the G7. So with that out of the way, I think we can all agree its not the that a country plans to add debt, because all tend to, but how much debt. If you wanted to have a discussion on that front I would indulge you, but this "DEBT BAAAAD" talk is rather lacking in substance.


KevinB said:


> It really doesn't need to be --a lot of material can be manufactured in Canada -- especially with a well thought procurement plan - and pre-planning for requirements.   As well joining Allied co-operative development helps spread costs, lowers costs, and gives a lot of national spin offs.


The LAV is manufactured in Canada. What else is? Ships? We saw how that went.

As for a procurement plan, this is Canada. Come on.

As for joining Allied Co-Operatives, how much spin off would come back to Canada after taking this childcare money and tossing it at the military?

You must admit, spending 30 billion over 5 years, all of it in Canada, all of it freeing up parents to work and increasing both fertility rates and workplace participation is likely to have a much more direct economic impact that tossing that money at the military which may or may not see some of it come back, and that's if procurement doesn't go off the rails.


KevinB said:


> Of course that only works if you are playing well with others, and have a plan -- for which I give most CDN Governments since Mulroney an F (and while the White Paper his Gov did was a B, the execution was an F)


Meh.


KevinB said:


> No enjoyment here on that - I'm not sure which one I loathe more - but at least here, no one is seizing my guns...


True. If that is a priority I imagine that the USA is much better.

Most urban canadians do not place guns high on their list of priorities.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> View attachment 66576


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

> Well, I guess its imperative that the NDP or CPC provide a credible alternative then.



The CPC is credible, but it doesn't promise as much for nothing as the LPC or NDP.  The bill will come, and the working middle class will have to pay it, whether it realizes it or not.  I wish them luck.


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Most urban canadians do not place guns high on their list of priorities.


No one does till they need them...


Altair said:


> When people are stuck at home, unable to work, with bills pilling up and fridge getting empty, I don't think many care much how Trudeau said it, just so long as he did it. And CERB was done as of december 2nd 2020, replaced by various unemployment programs. It was also clawed back if people made more than 35k in that fiscal year. So while free money it didn't last forever.


35k isn't a lot - even DJT let folks make a slew more than that for the Stimulus checks down here.



Altair said:


> This is good.
> 
> When was the last time the USA posted a surplus?
> 
> Not to make this a American Politics thread, but it has been decades since the last budgetary surplus in the USA.  Same goes for most of the G7. So with that out of the way, I think we can all agree its not the that a country plans to add debt, because all tend to, but how much debt. If you wanted to have a discussion on that front I would indulge you, but this "DEBT BAAAAD" talk is rather lacking in substance.


Debt is bad, the problem is it seems to be accepted these days that we can just keep writing checks we can't cash -  running a deficit at times can be fine - but at the end of the day someone is going to come calling that loan if you keep borrowing against your good looks, and then you get old...



Altair said:


> The LAV is manufactured in Canada. What else is? Ships? We saw how that went.
> 
> As for a procurement plan, this is Canada. Come on.


That is the problem - the LAV hull is - but the major (re expensive and critical) aspects of it are not.
   Ships - well you can't let something rest then expect it to perform -- the repeated cancellation of programs led to that.
 EH-101, Canada dropped out of that - didn't get any of the pie, and paid more for a less capable version.

 Canada hasn't been investing in itself in that manner for a long long long time -- IIRC the CF-104 was the last fighter made in Canada (and while a US design - it was sold to allies by Canada - and made in Canada).





Altair said:


> As for joining Allied Co-Operatives, how much spin off would come back to Canada after taking this childcare money and tossing it at the military?
> 
> You must admit, spending 30 billion over 5 years, all of it in Canada, all of it freeing up parents to work and increasing both fertility rates and workplace participation is likely to have a much more direct economic impact that tossing that money at the military which may or may not see some of it come back, and that's if procurement doesn't go off the rails.



  That is the rub  - there is no long term plan - if you started today it would be 30 B down the toilet.

 But having a legitimate NON Partisan look at Canadas Defence needs - and planning it out so in 15-20 years there is something, cause right now I suspect the replacement Naval Sustainment Ships will arrive to service the sunken hulls of the CCF and Victoria class SSK's

 Canada borders three oceans - and has less to put to sea than the US Coast Guard...

   Childcare may sit better for those happy to stick their heads in the sand, but their should be teaching their children  Mandarin...


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

> No EXCUSE for giving Trudeau another mandate when the man is totally bankrupt.



There's always an excuse.  Guns on the streets, imminent theocracy, whatever the flavour of the day is.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The CPC is credible,


The Canadian election results say otherwise.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

Glass half full: LPC platform committed to growing Strat and tactical lift capabilities in the CAF.


----------



## KevinB (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> The Canadian election results say otherwise.


By Seat - but near mirror in the percentage of the popular vote...


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> No one does till they need them...


We also do not the history of armed revolution here. I think Quebec tried once for a few months and it ended poorly. So there is really little "need" for them here like people think in the USA.


KevinB said:


> 35k isn't a lot - even DJT let folks make a slew more than that for the Stimulus checks down here.


I thought you were complaining about the costs?


KevinB said:


> Debt is bad, the problem is it seems to be accepted these days that we can just keep writing checks we can't cash -  running a deficit at times can be fine - but at the end of the day someone is going to come calling that loan if you keep borrowing against your good looks, and then you get old...


If the economy grows it lessens the impact of the debt. Which is what Trudeau was trying to say when he said the debt will take care of itself, but of course memes are much easier to do than talk about monetary policy.


KevinB said:


> That is the problem - the LAV hull is - but the major (re expensive and critical) aspects of it are not.
> Ships - well you can't let something rest then expect it to perform -- the repeated cancellation of programs led to that.
> EH-101, Canada dropped out of that - didn't get any of the pie, and paid more for a less capable version.


Exactly my point. So we could throw 30 billion over 5 years to jump start a nascent domestic arms industry or actually get some use out of that money. Again, I love the military, being in it, but as currently organized in Canada, its a money sink.


KevinB said:


> Canada hasn't been investing in itself in that manner for a long long long time -- IIRC the CF-104 was the last fighter made in Canada (and while a US design - it was sold to allies by Canada - and made in Canada).


Lets just admit that 30 billion over 5 years will not do anything in this regard.


KevinB said:


> That is the rub  - there is no long term plan - if you started today it would be 30 B down the toilet.


Its being planned by the provinces. Its funded by the feds. Is that not the best plan?


KevinB said:


> But having a legitimate NON Partisan look at Canadas Defence needs - and planning it out so in 15-20 years there is something, cause right now I suspect the replacement Naval Sustainment Ships will arrive to service the sunken hulls of the CCF and Victoria class SSK's


Good luck with that.


KevinB said:


> Canada borders three oceans - and has less to put to sea than the US Coast Guard...


Who is encroaching on Canadians waters that our current navy cannot deal with?


KevinB said:


> Childcare may sit better for those happy to stick their heads in the sand, but their should be teaching their children  Mandarin...


I think America would have something to say about that which is why most Canadians are not overly concerned about it.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> By Seat - but near mirror in the percentage of the popular vote...


Yes, a overwhelming amount of Saskbertans think the CPC are viable, but more Canadians from all regions think that the CPC are not viable, especially in urban Canada.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

It's impossible to cost out how much standing militaries "save" by preventing war.  But war is much more expensive.


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Glass half full: LPC platform committed to growing Strat and tactical lift capabilities in the CAF.


Strat - a few Bombardier 650 Challengers down the road from Dauphin’s Papineau riding, and a few more to come, check.
Tac - the check will be in the mail sometime…


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

> Yes, a overwhelming amount of Saskbertans think the CPC are viable, but more Canadians from all regions think that the CPC are not viable,



The choices of voters don't mean a party is not "credible" or "viable".  There are always more losing parties than victorious parties after an election.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> It's impossible to cost out how much standing militaries "save" by preventing war.  But war is much more expensive.


I imagine Canadians know the reality of our geopolitical position. 

1) If Canada spent 4 percent of our GDP, double the NATO requirement and on par with the percent the USA spends, it would not prevent any geopolitical conflict from breaking out. 

2)Canadians know that the USA wont let their NATO partner and longest border suddenly fall to any enemy or instability so if the USA would step in why does Canada need to?

3) Canadians know that every other country knows number 2


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> We also do not the history of armed revolution here. I think Quebec tried once for a few months and it ended poorly. So there is really little "need" for them here like people think in the USA.
> 
> I thought you were complaining about the costs?
> 
> ...


This is the problem with Defence in Canada.  Who is encroaching on canadian waters?  Right.  Maybe not anytime soon but our Arctic territorial waters are constantly challenged.  I don’t think we have or will have the capability to enforce our sovereignty on that area unless we focus on spending and investing in capability and hardware.  China, the US and Russia just to name a few.  We are falling behind and may not be able to catch because of that exact mindset.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Sep 2021)

My CPC Candidate did not win, but for a new guy, he held his own against a very competent politician (Wilkinson) with a lot of support, when I say competent, he is very good at making you think your heard and playing to the audience, but to put it politely he is very malleable, I am sure if he felt it would keep him employed he would deftly switch parties at a drop of the hat, without losing a beat.  Canada election results: North Vancouver  | Globalnews.ca

The West Vancouver race is tighter, still not confirmed but Liberal has the lead but not all votes are counted yet.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The choices of voters don't mean a party is not "credible" or "viable".  There are always more losing parties than victorious parties after an election.


Simple answer to that is that the losing parties are all not viable alternatives if the Canadian public didn't choose them. 

More complicated answer to that is that the composition of the house of commons determines viability of any party and if the LPC didn't have a dance partner it wouldn't matter if they got 168 seats, no party would be viable. 

Either way, the CPC have no dance partners to win the confidence of the house and not enough seats and this is because they didn't win enough ridings which says to me that they are not a viable alternative. 

Very good officicial opposition party though.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> This is the problem with Defence in Canada.  Who is encroaching on canadian waters?  Right.  Maybe not anytime soon but our Arctic territorial waters are constantly challenged.  I don’t think we have or will have the capability to enforce our sovereignty on that area unless we focus on spending and investing in capability and hardware.  China, the US and Russia just to name a few.  We are falling behind and may not be able to catch because of that exact mindset.


Two administrations tried to somewhat deal with it. 

Both have been utter failures.

And Canadians don't care. 

The fact of the matter is defence has always been in back of mind for Canadian voters. And as such, there are no votes to be won on the subject. Thankfully our geography and military alliances keep us safe.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Strat - a few Bombardier 650 Challengers down the road from Dauphin’s Papineau riding, and a few more to come, check.
> Tac - the check will be in the mail sometime…


Well, I guess we could just buy from a proven producer like Sikorsky.  Their products arrive on time, on budget and meet the tech specs, right?


----------



## Remius (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Two administrations tried to somewhat deal with it.
> 
> Both have been utter failures.
> 
> ...


I’m not arguing that.  Just the mindset that we think that geography and alliances keep us safe.  The US is one that does not recognize our sovereignty up there.  You asked who is threatening our coastal waters.  I answered.  Your premise is that our coastal waters are not threatened.  Your premise is wrong. 

That’s all.


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m not arguing that.  Just the mindset that we think that geography and alliances keep us safe.  The US is one that does not recognize our sovereignty up there.  You asked who is threatening our coastal waters.  I answered.  Your premise is that our coastal waters are not threatened.  Your premise is wrong.
> 
> That’s all.


I get what you mean, but for right or wrong, I don't think shipping and drilling rights gets peoples interest in the same way as physical loss or damage of canadian territory.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

I don't know, passive-aggressive congratulations when you're about to fire your minister of health and come begging for federal aid may not be the best choice here.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440385388523126795


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> I don't know, passive-aggressive congratulations when you're about to fire your minister of health and come begging for federal aid may not be the best choice here.
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440385388523126795


I can’t even bring myself to schadenfreude on this one. Loathsome as I feel Kennedy’s ‘leadership’ has been, I grieve for Albertans in this. I hope the feds are in some sort of shape to assist.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> I can’t even bring myself to schadenfreude on this one. Loathsome as I feel Kennedy’s ‘leadership’ has been, I grieve for Albertans in this. I hope the feds are in some sort of shape to assist.



'minority government'... nice dig Mr. Glass House


----------



## FJAG (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, a overwhelming amount of Saskbertans think the CPC are viable, but more Canadians from all regions think that the CPC are not viable, especially in urban Canada.


I think that you are completely ignoring the fact that by latest count 5,447,509 "Canadians" voted CPC while only 5,189,909 voted LPC. The LPC won more seats because of how those votes are distributed across individual ridings.

It's one thing to say that the LPC won more ridings, which they did.

It's completely erroneous to say that "Canadians from all regions think that the CPC are not viable."

🍻


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> It's impossible to cost out how much standing militaries "save" by preventing war.  But war is much more expensive.


The cost of doing "business" is far cheaper than not doing "business".


----------



## SupersonicMax (21 Sep 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> The cost of doing "business" is far cheaper than not doing "business".


How much has Canada’s military actually deterred the enemy? Deterrence, in our case, is achieved through our alliances.  Also, given that since 1812, there hasn’t been a persistent, credible threat to Canada (or at least perceived), there is no interest, politically, to do more than the minimum necessary to keep our allies happy and our alliances intact.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

> 2)Canadians know that the USA wont let their NATO partner and longest border suddenly fall to any enemy or instability so if the USA would step in why does Canada need to?



So that the USA doesn't take what it wants from the periphery and waters of a free-riding and weak neighbour?


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

> Simple answer to that is that the losing parties are all not viable alternatives



What is it that you think viable means?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Sep 2021)

Whatever some save on childcare, we'll  lose in carbon tax, homeowner tax, tax, tax, tax. Everything trudeau gives away comes from taxpayers. He just plays a massive shell/scam game. And he gives away a lot. Especially, non recoverable, massive foreign grants with no accounting, terms of reference or follow up auditing. That is all hard working taxpayer money that will never come back to Canada. And of course, on another tact, the ChiComs now have until the next election to cement their influence, in government, real estate, R&D and manufacturing. All totally unhindered by the trudeau socialists. I wonder how many more viruses and bio weapons will be allowed to go to Red China and how much info Huawei will siphon from our cyber network. In 2030, you will own nothing and you will be happy.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Sep 2021)

Probably lose a lot more than most people realize.  The overspend for the deficit decade from '75 to '86 was about $70B; by the time of the 2008 recession total debt servicing charges were over $1T (yes, trillion).  All nominal dollars, not adjusted, but a heckuva lot to pay for not very much additional spending.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (21 Sep 2021)

A glimpse into the future of voting patterns, perhaps?







						Student Vote Canada
					






					studentvote.ca
				



Students elect Liberal minority government in national student parallel election​More than 750,000 elementary and high school students across the country participated in Student Vote Canada, coinciding with the 2021 federal election.
After learning about democracy and elections, researching the parties and platforms, and debating the future of the country, students cast their ballots for the official candidates running in their school’s electoral district.
In total, 769,049 votes were reported from 5,674 schools, with results reported from all 338 federal electoral districts.

The *Liberal Party* won 116 seats and 24% of the popular vote, forming a minority government. *Justin Trudeau* won in his seat in the riding of Papineau, QC.
The *NDP* won 106 seats and took 29% of the popular vote, forming the official opposition. *Jagmeet Singh* won his seat in the riding of Burnaby South, BC.
The *Conservative Party* won 92 seats and 25% of the popular vote. *Erin O’Toole* won his seat in the riding of Durham, ON.
The *Bloc Québecois* won 20 seats and took 2% of the popular vote. *Yves-François Blanchet *lost his seat in the riding of Beloeil—Chambly, QC.
The *Green Party* won 3 seats and 10% of the popular vote. *Annamie Paul* lost her seat in the riding of Toronto Centre, ON.
*View the complete national results, results by riding, and results by school by visiting: **https://studentvote.ca/results/canada2021*


----------



## Altair (21 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> What is it that you think viable means?


Capable of winning the most seats of all parties and thus have a chance of winning the election. 

I don't think a party that gets shut out of the 3 largest cities in Canada and is starting to lose the Urban centers of Alberta is viable.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Capable of winning the most seats of all parties and thus have a chance of winning the election.
> 
> I don't think a party that gets shut out of the 3 largest cities in Canada and is starting to lose the Urban centers of Alberta is viable.


This election should be a wakeup call to the CPC that they can't have their cake and eat it too. You can't try and cater to your old base and try to be centrist. Something has to be cut out in order to accommodate the shift. They need a consistent leader though, and know it's a minority again with another election in 18 months, the CPC can't afford another leadership race and a green leader, it's a recipe for a loss.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Sep 2021)

When they are ready, Poliviere and/or Lewis will be formidable opponents. Pierre already has recognition and I suspect O'Toole will give a fair amount of exposure to Leslyn.


----------



## The Bread Guy (21 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> ... I suspect O'Toole will give a fair amount of exposure to Leslyn.


A good presentation and good speaker, but he might be hesitant about being tooooooooooooooooo so-con forward, too (based on what he did during the election).  It'll be interesting to see Team Blue's upcoming team picks re:  critics/shadow cabinet.


----------



## Haggis (21 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> When they are ready, Poliviere and/or Lewis will be formidable opponents. Pierre already has recognition and I suspect O'Toole will give a fair amount of exposure to Leslyn.


Polievre is opposition leadership material, not prime minster material.  He can do more damage to the LPC as O'Toole's diplomatic pitbull.  Lewis is too conservative to be a successful CPC leader against Trudeau..


----------



## FJAG (21 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> How much has Canada’s military actually deterred the enemy? Deterrence, in our case, is achieved through our alliances.  Also, given that since 1812, there hasn’t been a persistent, credible threat to Canada (or at least perceived), there is no interest, politically, to do more than the minimum necessary to keep our allies happy and our alliances intact.


We've had several credible threats to Canada the most relevant being the Fenian raids in 1866 and 1870-1 which were serious enough to trigger confederation as a defensive measure. At the time we had a standing Militia which reacted to the invasion and, despite mixed results, basically protected the nation. The latter invasion also was the root cause of why Canada created a permanent full-time standing force.

Again, the events in Manitoba a few years later required an emergency force to be sent out and protect the country. Even the formation of the North West Mounted Police was designed to protect Canada's western territories from incursions by Americans. Similar events in Mexico a few decades earlier resulted in Mexico loosing Texas and other territories to rambunctious Yanks who were in an expansionist mood.

The fact that it's quiet right now is a blessing but, deterrence is always necessary. What the "minimum necessary" is, is very subjective. If its to "keep our allies happy" then undoubtedly the minimum necessary is based on their subjective opinion. Right now our more important allies think we are freeloaders and they aren't happy with us. Whatever brownie points we might have earned in Germany and Bosnia and during Afghanistan are fast fading.

🍻


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Well, I guess we could just buy from a proven producer like Sikorsky.  Their products arrive on time, on budget and meet the tech specs, right?


That’s a facile view of things. 

That was a Liberal Government-induced fiasco to save Jean Chretien’s reputation from a huberistic and arrogant decision to cancel the EH-101.  Paul Martin just benevolently and mistakenly tried to protect his father’s arch enemy’s reputation and ordered a “close enough” solution…the precursor to the “35-year old used Aussie Hornets solution” to a non-problem.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Sep 2021)

My entirely cynical view is that the Aussie Hornet purchase is all about keeping lines open with L3 in Mirabel.


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> My entirely cynical view is that the Aussie Hornet purchase is all about keeping lines open with L3 in Mirabel.


----------



## brihard (21 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> Polievre is opposition leadership material, not prime minster material.  He can do more damage to the LPC as O'Toole's diplomatic pitbull.  Lewis is too conservative to be a successful CPC leader against Trudeau..


I believe you’re right. Poilievre is a parliamentary bulldog, and gets some good sound bytes. He’s a skilled Parliamentarian. I’m not convinced he’s sell himself outside of the party.

Lewis is a So Con. Choosing her would bring in more of the votes the CPC doesn’t need, and throw away a lot more that it does. It would be a demographic regression, trading away younger votes for older ones. Want to throw away the centrists you’ve been fighting hard to bring onboard? That’s how you do it. I and many others would absolutely not vote for a CPC with an avowed Social Conservative at the helm. It would not be trustworthy.

Canada has shifted culturally and socially to be somewhat more progressive with the newest generation of voters. That must be taken into account. A lot of us miss progressive conservatism, and are happy to see a shift in that direction within the party under O’Toole.


----------



## Good2Golf (21 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> My entirely cynical view is that the Aussie Hornet purchase is all about keeping lines open with L3 in Mirabel.


That was a secondary effect. 

The primary raison d’etre was to appear to be doing something to the state of the existing Hornet fleet that would take the heat off having to make a real decision about FFCP…


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Canada has shifted culturally and socially to be somewhat more progressive with the newest generation of voters. That must be taken into account. A lot of us miss progressive conservatism, and are happy to see a shift in that direction within the party under O’Toole.



I think the fact the west was a fight between the CPC and NDP except a few ridings of CPC vs LPC, it shows a shift in Canada as younger canadians are getting out to vote, and coming of voting age with different values and outlooks on what they want for canada.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> I believe you’re right. Poilievre is a parliamentary bulldog, and gets some good sound bytes. He’s a skilled Parliamentarian. I’m not convinced he’s sell himself outside of the party.
> 
> Lewis is a So Con. Choosing her would bring in more of the votes the CPC doesn’t need, and throw away a lot more that it does. It would be a demographic regression, trading away younger votes for older ones. Want to throw away the centrists you’ve been fighting hard to bring onboard? That’s how you do it. I and many others would absolutely not vote for a CPC with an avowed Social Conservative at the helm. It would not be trustworthy.
> 
> Canada has shifted culturally and socially to be somewhat more progressive with the newest generation of voters. That must be taken into account. A lot of us miss progressive conservatism, and are happy to see a shift in that direction within the party under O’Toole.


I'm very torn. 

As a proud two time PPC voter, I want O'Toole to stay on so the PPC can continue to absorb disillusioned CPC voters. 

On the other hand, if they pick a Leslyn Lewis type and go hard for the PPC vote, that leave the LPC in the advantageous position of being the not scary center party. 

I feel like the former is has more staying power.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm very torn.
> 
> As a proud two time PPC voter, I want O'Toole to stay on so the PPC can continue to absorb disillusioned CPC voters.
> 
> ...


The creation of the PPC has created the blue divorce, the CPC as long as O'Toole remains leader will continue to shift to the center to be more attractive to left and right of center voters. There is far more votes to be gained there, then there is catering to the far right and the PPC. The CPC has 18 months until we will likely see another election, in that time the CPC needs a new strategy for the GTA, Montreal, and Vancover, if they can't make inroads in those areas, they have no chance.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> The creation of the PPC has created the blue divorce, the CPC as long as O'Toole remains leader will continue to shift to the center to be more attractive to left and right of center voters. There is far more votes to be gained there, then there is catering to the far right and the PPC. The CPC has 18 months until we will likely see another election, in that time the CPC needs a new strategy for the GTA, Montreal, and Vancover, if they can't make inroads in those areas, they have no chance.


The CPC took a big step towards the center, but they are not quite there yet.

They need to stop being scary when it comes to abortion, and if that means whipping votes it means whipping votes.

They need to stop trying to undo LPC gun regulations. Just maintain the status quo.

They need to fully embrace fighting climate change. Reducing emissions targets is not going to fly in urban Canada. And leave the carbon tax alone, carbon credits it tacky. Look at the UK Conservative party and their climate crusade as a inspiration. In comparison, O'Toole and the CPC not once tweeted about climate. They definitely tweeted a lot about other topics.

And once childcare is in place, leave it alone.

Pretty much challenge/copy the LPC platform with a less tainted leader than Trudeau.

I think most of the country is more or less in line with what the LPC is proposing, at least in the urban centers, but are sick of Trudeau at this point.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (22 Sep 2021)

I kinda just have one question through all this.....so will all those that said during years 2016 to 2020 that President Trump shouldn't be Prez because he lost the popular vote now stand up and say the same thing about PM Trudeau??

Rhetorical...dont answer please


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

> Capable of winning the most seats of all parties and thus have a chance of winning the election.



So, just something you made up, then.


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

The issues surrounding urban centres and their "affordability" reminds me very much of the issues Newfoundland faces.... except in the opposite direction.

That province is bleeding money trying to support people who feel entitled to live in a completely unsustainable living situation, and outnumber those in urban centres, and so the government panders to these little outports including some absolutely dirt policies such as providing a grant to these little towns to pay people to do nothing for 14 weeks so they can get EI for the rest of the year.

We see the same thing except it's Toronto. The country is literally subsidizing people who choose to live in Toronto despite how unsustainably unaffordable is. You like city living but don't want to pay Toronto or Vancouver prices? Move to Calgary or Edmonton. Don't like that idea? Why should everyone else have to pay for personal (stupid) choices?


----------



## Maxman1 (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So, just something you made up, then.



And for someone who admitted to voting PPC, a party incapable of winning even one seat, pretty damn rich.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> We see the same thing except it's Toronto. The country is literally subsidizing people who choose to live in Toronto despite how unsustainably unaffordable is. You like city living but don't want to pay Toronto or Vancouver prices? Move to Calgary or Edmonton. Don't like that idea? Why should everyone else have to pay for personal (stupid) choices?


Except its not just Toronto and Vancouver, most urban centers are getting unaffordable. So what, should everyone in a urban center just move to the countryside? Will the jobs follows? Or is everyone just going to hit the nearby towns within driving distance and then those prices shoot up?

So its much less of a stupid choice situation and much more a lack of supply/affordability issue. 

Not to mention that jobs that exist in Toronto may not exist in Calgary or Edmonton. Or people have spent countless years working their way up in their job may not wanting to start all over.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> And for someone who admitted to voting PPC, a party incapable of winning even one seat, pretty damn rich.


I didn't vote PPC because I thought they could win. Anything but. 

I voted PPC because I live in a safe Liberal riding and wanted to play my small part in pumping up a party that can one day grow into what the reform party was, and what the NDP is to the LPC, a vote splitting party.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So, just something you made up, then.


Well, I await with baited breath what you think is a viable alternative.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

What are you hoping to catch?  Or did you mean "bated"?


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> What are you hoping to catch?  Or did you mean "bated"?


you can take it up with autocorrect


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

> So what, should everyone in a urban center just move to the countryside?



Those who can't afford the city, yes.  Or settle for more modest accommodations (eg. small condo or apartment).  Real estate is finite, especially in metro areas that border on water and mountains, and the kinds of dwellings people would like to live in are made scarcer by zoning.  Population increase, however, is not limited.

Maybe if people could go back 35 years and force governments to institute zero-increase controls.  Too late now.  My experience is limited to metro Vancouver.  Sorry to say, it's really different today than it was in the mid-80s.


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Except its not just Toronto and Vancouver, most urban centers are getting unaffordable. So what, should everyone in a urban center just move to the countryside? Will the jobs follows? Or is everyone just going to hit the nearby towns within driving distance and then those prices shoot up?



Yes to everything, it's called supply & demand. However, the early bird gets the worm in all scenarios.


Altair said:


> So its much less of a stupid choice situation and much more a lack of supply/affordability issue.



So, supply & demand? Calling it an "affordability" issue is just silly. That's the symptom, not the disease.



Altair said:


> Not to mention that jobs that exist in Toronto may not exist in Calgary or Edmonton.



Really? Which ones? Do you think the only jobs out here are on the rigs and in the trades?



Altair said:


> Or people have spent countless years working their way up in their job may not wanting to start all over.



Considering it's apparently young adults who are feeling the squeeze because they can't get "established," this seems like a very weak argument.

I know so many people who moved to Alberta from all over the country, including my own family, and it seems to have worked out well. This is also true for Saskatchewan.


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

Sorry but I'm just not convinced that "I want to own a 3 bedroom lane house, 15 min from Bay Street, with my Bachelors of Women's Studies from U of T" is really a compelling argument for the rest of the country to bend over backwards to accommodate.


----------



## Maxman1 (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> The CPC took a big step towards the center, but they are not quite there yet.



So you threw your vote away on a protest party founded by a petulant manchild because the CPC are "too left," but you want them to go further left.

Make up your mind. You can't have your cake and eat it.

Although it seems to me someone who didn't vote for a party is in no position to be beaking off about what it "needs" to do.



Altair said:


> They need to stop being scary when it comes to abortion, and if that means whipping votes it means whipping votes.



They already do that. Harper vowed his government would never pass any abortion legislation, and any private member's bill on abortion would die before first reading. And he did just that: a private member's bill was introduced to restrict abortion past a certain point in the pregnancy, and Harper saw to it that bill never made it to first reading.

Erin O'Toole announced his pro-choice stance, and how he too would never let any abortion bill pass, weeks ago when this issue came up out of nowhere.

The only people still bringing up abortion are fear mongers.



Altair said:


> They need to stop trying to undo LPC gun regulations. Just maintain the status quo.



So, *exactly* what O'Toole announced two weeks ago?

Do try to keep up.



Altair said:


> They need to fully embrace fighting climate change.



They do. Perhaps try reading the climate change action plan.



Altair said:


> In comparison, O'Toole and the CPC not once tweeted about climate. They definitely tweeted a lot about other topics.



Tweets are meaningless and a grossly unprofessional activity for someone looking to lead a country.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Yes to everything, it's called supply & demand. However, the early bird gets the worm in all scenarios.


Of course it is. And this isn't a case of early birds getting the worm, its a case of there not being enough worms regardless of when the bird shows up.


ballz said:


> So, supply & demand? Calling it an "affordability" issue is just silly. That's the symptom, not the disease.


Yes, supply and demand. The lack of supply leading to pent up demand leading to problems with affordability. 


ballz said:


> Really? Which ones? Do you think the only jobs out here are on the rigs and in the trades?


Having lived in Alberta, no, there are more jobs than just oil and gas. But the financial sector of Toronto has no equal in Canada. The Government of Canada in Ottawa has no equal in Canada. Those who speak french only will not find work easily in Alberta. Those who work in aerospace will not find work easily in Alberta.  Those who work in auto plants or steel cannot just up and move to Alberta. Those who have family obligations cannot just up and move either. So your just up and move to Alberta is not a solution.


ballz said:


> Considering it's apparently young adults who are feeling the squeeze because they can't get "established," this seems like a very weak argument.


Millenials are those born between 1980–1995. So the oldest ones are 41, the youngest 26. It is not inconceivable that many of the older cohort of millennials have been working at the same place for over a decade now, saving up to buy a house only to find out that all their hard work has been undone in the last year or two because the amound they need for a down payment just jumped by 30-40 percent.


ballz said:


> I know so many people who moved to Alberta from all over the country, including my own family, and it seems to have worked out well. This is also true for Saskatchewan.


Good for them.


ballz said:


> Sorry but I'm just not convinced that "I want to own a 3 bedroom lane house, 15 min from Bay Street, with my Bachelors of Women's Studies from U of T" is really a compelling argument for the rest of the country to bend over backwards to accommodate.


Your anti Toronto bias is very clear, but looking at the urban sprawl happening in places like Toronto shows just how much people are willing to move away from bay street to find a place to live and deal with the commute. But even those areas outside of Toronto proper are unaffordable, and this phenomenon is not limited to Toronto. Its happening in Montreal, in Ottawa, even out in the Maritimes. 

And thankfully, if enough people make noise about the issue, politicians take notice. So it matters little if you are not convinced.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Maxman1 said:


> So you threw your vote away on a protest party founded by a petulant manchild because the CPC are "too left," but you want them to go further left.


I can do whatever I like with my vote, and anyone who says otherwise can go pound sand.


Maxman1 said:


> Make up your mind. You can't have your cake and eat it.


Yes I can. I voted PPC and got a LPC MP. See? Got my cake and ate it too.


Maxman1 said:


> Although it seems to me someone who didn't vote for a party is in no position to be beaking off about what it "needs" to do.


Yes, sorry Erin O'Toole and the CPC brain trust. Disregard my opinion here.


Maxman1 said:


> They already do that. Harper vowed his government would never pass any abortion legislation, and any private member's bill on abortion would die before first reading. And he did just that: a private member's bill was introduced to restrict abortion past a certain point in the pregnancy, and Harper saw to it that bill never made it to first reading.


Yet Erin O'Toole allowed a free vote on sex selective abortion and 2/3rd of his caucus voted for restrictions.

And one can defend the position all one likes, but at the end of the day all the public is going to see is CPC voting for more restrictions on abortion.


Maxman1 said:


> Erin O'Toole announced his pro-choice stance, and how he too would never let any abortion bill pass, weeks ago when this issue came up out of nowhere.
> 
> The only people still bringing up abortion are fear mongers.


Yet it works. The CPC brings it upon itself.


Maxman1 said:


> So, *exactly* what O'Toole announced two weeks ago?
> 
> Do try to keep up.


After their platform said they would do the opposite 4 weeks ago. 

Its hard to keep up when his position keeps changing.


Maxman1 said:


> They do. Perhaps try reading the climate change action plan.


Okay plan. But to be honest, it sounded like a plan just so they could say they had a plan. You didn't really hear O'Toole campaign on how the climate crisis was a very serious issue. You heard a lot more about the Canadas recovery plan and 1 million jobs. You didn't hear about him cutting emissions by 30 percent as much as you heard him talk about restarting the economy. Its one thing to have a plan, its another to run on that plan. Example, the LPC on defence. They have a plan in their platform, but they sure as hell didn't run on it.


Maxman1 said:


> Tweets are meaningless and a grossly unprofessional activity for someone looking to lead a country.


Yet the CPC and O'Toole tweeted a hell of a lot.


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Having lived in Alberta, no, there are more jobs than just oil and gas. But the financial sector of Toronto has no equal in Canada. The Government of Canada in Ottawa has no equal in Canada. Those who speak french only will not find work easily in Alberta. Those who work in aerospace will not find work easily in Alberta.  Those who work in auto plants or steel cannot just up and move to Alberta. Those who have family obligations cannot just up and move either. So your just up and move to Alberta is not a solution.



Man, I am sure glad I wasn't raised to resign myself to defeat just because things might require some work or sacrifice.

How many people in Toronto only speak French? You're finding small microcosms that don't represent the majority of the population and making it sound like the average person can't just do something worthwhile for themselves. It's garbage.



Altair said:


> And thankfully, if enough people make noise about the issue, politicians take notice. So it matters little if you are not convinced.



Yes, the loudest collective whining gets the attention, it's true. That's really something to be a guiding principle in life, great strategy for long-term happiness.

Do you actually think the government can do actually do anything about the housing problem? So far all they've done is make it worse.



Altair said:


> Your anti Toronto bias is very clear



It's not anti-Toronto, it's an anti-"normal people who just want the government to solve their first-world problems" bias. I grew up in rural Newfoundland, I can see it from a mile away.

There are a lot of people that are born with a shitty lot in life, and I feel very empathetic for them and would like to divert resources to helping them. In many cases, given the help, they become some of the most impressive and inspiring citizens in the nation. The _average_ person living in Toronto, however, was not born in such dire circumstances and does not deserve the same empathy or resources.

1. Hard times make strong people;
2. Strong people make good times;
3. Good times make weak people; and
4. Weak people make hard times.

The last 20-30 years were step 3, we're full into step 4 now.


----------



## Infanteer (22 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> 1. Hard times make strong people;
> 2. Strong people make good times;
> 3. Good times make weak people; and
> 4. Weak people make hard times.


Lol.  Makes sense.

1. Great Depression
2. Greatest Generation/WWII and after
3. Hippies/60s
4. 70s and 80s


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Man, I am sure glad I wasn't raised to resign myself to defeat just because things might require some work or sacrifice.


Your overly simplistic solution of everyone move to Calgary or Edmonton isn't feasible for everyone, full stop.

It's not even feasible for everyone in the forces, so just stop.


ballz said:


> How many people in Toronto only speak French?


Why is everything about toronto? The same thing is happening in Quebec. Where people speak French. Like I said, anti Toronto bias is clear.


ballz said:


> You're finding small microcosms that don't represent the majority of the population and making it sound like the average person can't just do something worthwhile for themselves. It's garbage.


So steel workers in Hamilton, Government of Canada employees in Ottawa, aerospace employees in Montreal, francophones in Quebec city, small business owner in Sudbury, all just can up and move to Alberta and find the same job they left, no problem?


ballz said:


> Yes, the loudest collective whining gets the attention, it's true. That's really something to be a guiding principle in life, great strategy for long-term happiness.


Yup, don't care.


ballz said:


> Do you actually think the government can do actually do anything about the housing problem? So far all they've done is make it worse.


If they increase supply while making it easier save for a house for first time homebuyers,  yes, i think they can do something about it.

the reason they haven't I assume is because those with houses are probably loving their home value skyrocket. It wasn't until the millennial generation was facing being locked out of the housing market forever being seen as a bad thing that governments took notice.


ballz said:


> It's not anti-Toronto,


lies


ballz said:


> it's an anti-"normal people who just want the government to solve their first-world problems" bias. I grew up in rural Newfoundland, I can see it from a mile away.


Government policy caused the issue, low interest rates, high levels of immigration, municipalities stunting zoning areas to appease homeowners, so ya, why wouldn't people want government to fix the problem they made?


ballz said:


> There are a lot of people that are born with a shitty lot in life, and I feel very empathetic for them and would like to divert resources to helping them. In many cases, given the help, they become some of the most impressive and inspiring citizens in the nation. The _average_ person living in Toronto,


Toronto. Again. Yet you say you don't have a anti toronto bias. This is happening in dozens of cities across the country, but hurr durr,  toranna


ballz said:


> however, was not born in such dire circumstances and does not deserve the same empathy or resources.


Work hard. Save money. Be responsible with money. Build credit. Buy house.

That is the general plan. Except many cannot do the last one. Why? Lack of supply. And what supply there is is being snatched up at ever increasing prices by foreign homebuyers, house flippers, those who remortgage their house and buy another as an income property, rich people who let them sit empty as an investment.

So it doesn't matter if someone worked hard. Saved their money. Were responsible with their money. Built their credit. They cannot keep up with housing prices rising 20 percent, 30 percent, 40 percent a year. And no, they cannot just up and move. Especially not to a boom and bust province such as Alberta where when things go bust everyone moves back to their home province anyways.

Salaries don't increase 20 percent a year. People cannot keep up with ever rising home prices.  So hell ya a entire generation is going to cry foul and demand that the government do something about it. And if the a political party doesn't address it, they will vote for one that will.



ballz said:


> 1. Hard times make strong people;
> 2. Strong people make good times;
> 3. Good times make weak people; and
> 4. Weak people make hard times.
> ...


Weak people must have invented covid 19 then.

I get it, you don't see this as an issue. That's fine, you don't have to. But I wonder how many people who own houses would be crying foul if house prices were dropping 20, 30, 40 percent a year.


----------



## MilEME09 (22 Sep 2021)

Liberal Calgary MP allegedly caught on camera nicking opponent's flyer
					

Campaign manager claims newly-elected Calgary-Skyview MP George Chahal removed the flyer because it contained 'incorrect polling location'




					calgarysun.com
				




Well now, this isn't suspicious at all


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Your overly simplistic solution of everyone move to Calgary or Edmonton isn't feasible for everyone, full stop.



Your assertion that NO ONE can do it is also bonkers, so just stop. Oh wait, you didn't say "no one," right? That's right, you didn't, so stop trying to mischaracterize what I'm saying and I'll return the favour.

There is a very large population of people aged 18-35 that can, they just don't, because crying for government intervention is easier.



Altair said:


> Why is everything about toronto?



It's analogous for large urban centers, I'm not going to type out the three biggest examples when I can just say Toronto and any one who wants to actually see the point knows it's not _necessarily_ Toronto.



Altair said:


> So steel workers in Hamilton, Government of Canada employees in Ottawa, aerospace employees in Montreal, francophones in Quebec city, small business owner in Sudbury, all just can up and move to Alberta and find the same job they left, no problem?



Okay, you've used two really odd examples so far... financial sector workers in Toronto, as if the rest of the country doesn't employ the same people, and now small businesses in Sudbury......... as if entrepreneurs can't / don't move to greener pastures. Government of Canada employees can transfer pretty easy, and generally get paid better than their private sector counterparts.

Aerospace employees? Steel workers? Which ones, specifically? You don't think they don't have transferable skills that will allow them to excel in other industries? The _vast majority_ do, I suspect.



Altair said:


> Government policy caused the issue, low interest rates, high levels of immigration, municipalities stunting zoning areas to appease homeowners, so ya, why wouldn't people want government to fix the problem they made?



With _more_ government intervention though? _Mor_e subsidies, _more_ programs to make it easier to buy a home, all things that have contributed to the current fiasco?

You think subsidized daycare won't contribute to higher home prices? Again, it's going to be early bird gets the worm and those who miss the opportunity for the brief period it lasts will be left just as bad or worst off, with one more option off the table.



Altair said:


> Weak people must have invented covid 19 then.



Housing affordability wasn't an issue before COVID-19?



Altair said:


> I get it, you don't see this as an issue. That's fine, you don't have to. But I wonder how many people who own houses would be crying foul if house prices were dropping 20, 30, 40 percent a year.



I do see it as an issue actually. I just don't think the government can solve it. I suspect it's one of those "hard times creates strong people" things. Over time, after government completely fails to provide the fix, and inflationary policies continues creating more and more problems, and we're all suffering from some really hard times....... people are slowly going to learn to fix their problems themselves again, like they used to do, by doing uncomfortable things like moving across the country, or even to a new country, to pursue opportunity.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Your assertion that NO ONE can do it is also bonkers, so just stop. Oh wait, you didn't say "no one," right? That's right, you didn't, so stop trying to mischaracterize what I'm saying and I'll return the favour.
> 
> There is a very large population of people aged 18-35 that can, they just don't, because crying for government intervention is easier.


Please elaborate what these people who move to Alberta do when that province goes bust again when oil prices drop?

Move back?

Your plan is amazing.


ballz said:


> It's analogous for large urban centers, I'm not going to type out the three biggest examples when I can just say Toronto and any one who wants to actually see the point knows it's not _necessarily_ Toronto.


Urban Canada.

So hard.


ballz said:


> Okay, you've used two really odd examples so far... financial sector workers in Toronto, as if the rest of the country doesn't employ the same people, and now small businesses in Sudbury......... as if entrepreneurs can't / don't move to greener pastures. Government of Canada employees can transfer pretty easy, and generally get paid better than their private sector counterparts.


Hahahahaha



ballz said:


> Aerospace employees? Steel workers? Which ones, specifically? You don't think they don't have transferable skills that will allow them to excel in other industries? The _vast majority_ do, I suspect.


Hahahahahaha


ballz said:


> With _more_ government intervention though? _Mor_e subsidies, _more_ programs to make it easier to buy a home, all things that have contributed to the current fiasco?


Supply is the other side of this coin. I've addressed it.


ballz said:


> You think subsidized daycare won't contribute to higher home prices?


depends on supply.


ballz said:


> Again, it's going to be early bird gets the worm and those who miss the opportunity for the brief period it lasts will be left just as bad or worst off, with one more option off the table.


Or government can make structural changes and keep supply rolling prioritizing first time homebuyers over those who already have houses or those who don't live in Canada.



ballz said:


> Housing affordability wasn't an issue before COVID-19?


It was an issue that very quickly turned into a crisis.


ballz said:


> I do see it as an issue actually. I just don't think the government can solve it. I suspect it's one of those "hard times creates strong people" things. Over time, after government completely fails to provide the fix, and inflationary policies continues creating more and more problems, and we're all suffering from some really hard times....... people are slowly going to learn to fix their problems themselves again, like they used to do, by doing uncomfortable things like moving across the country, or even to a new country, to pursue opportunity.


Oh, the cynic. You see the issue, but your response to it is too bad, so sad. Move away if you don't like it.

Again, if housing prices were dropping 20 percent a year and homeowners were losing their shirts I doubt you have the same opinion. No, that would be a crisis! The economy! Oh noes....

The inverse is meh, too bad.

I could say what I think of you and your opinion but I would likely be staring a ban in the face, so I'll end our little tete a tete by saying this is what I think of your opinion on this subject.


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Again, if housing prices were dropping 20 percent a year and homeowners were losing their shirts I doubt you have the same opinion. No, that would be a crisis! The economy! Oh noes....
> 
> The inverse is meh, too bad.



You'd lose that bet, obviously you haven't seen my posts over the years. Unfortunately no matter how many times it happens, the entitled crowd keeps doing it to themselves. If people such as yourself who think it's the government's role to put a band-aid on every bump and bruise life throws at them would have taken a more reasoned approach, we wouldn't have the skyrocketing house prices we have now.

As for the rest of your childish post, go take a nap.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (22 Sep 2021)

This election has shown how spoilt and vapid most Canadians are. Most the issues and problems that were debated are things that should be a personal responsibility, not the governments (many of them being issues that belong at the Provincial level as well). This election is leaving me questioning if universal suffrage is really working for us. When too many people are taking from the system and have no skin in it, we are left with the types of problems we are currently facing.

Political parties only reflect what the population desires in a democracy, and when the truly important things such as debt management, human rights, and such aren't the priority we are in for a world of trouble. Blatant lies, creation/tolerance of crime to suit a political agenda, ignoring basic rights (how many politicians campaigned against Quebecs anti-'religious symbol' law), scapegoating innocent citizens to suit agendas (firearms being the easiest example), etc.. Irresponsible governments lead to great suffering long term. When the government only thinks in 4 years cycles and re-election but doesn't care about anything beyond that we are witnessing the failings of democracy in action.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if the seats were rebalanced a bit to reflect the population more (such as how Alberta is under-represented, when Quebec is over-represented), however that is unlikely to happen well it benefits the government in power.


----------



## mariomike (22 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I kinda just have one question through all this.....so will all those that said during years 2016 to 2020 that President Trump shouldn't be Prez because he lost the popular vote now stand up and say the same thing about PM Trudeau??
> 
> Rhetorical...dont answer please


Since you decided to inject the former guy into Canadian Politics,


brihard said:


> Difficult to easily compare voting trends vs results with a Westminster Parliamentary system, against a perpetual two-party republic where the presidential candidate must win an outright majority of something to get the spot.


We have been down this road before regarding the popular vote in Canadian elections,








						CPC Leadership Discussion 2020-21
					

And when things level out, which they will invariably will, climate alarmists will find another windmill to tilt at.   Climate cooling? Winter is coming?    :giggle:




					army.ca


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> This election has shown how spoilt and vapid most Canadians are. Most the issues and problems that were debated are things that should be a personal responsibility, not the governments (many of them being issues that belong at the Provincial level as well). This election is leaving me questioning if universal suffrage is really working for us. When too many people are taking from the system and have no skin in it, we are left with the types of problems we are currently facing.


Silly Canadians wanting governments to address issues in their day to day lives, like healthcare, the pandemic, childcare and housing.


Eaglelord17 said:


> Political parties only reflect what the population desires in a democracy, and when the truly important things such as debt management,


Our credit rating hasn't dropped.


Eaglelord17 said:


> human rights,


Canadians don't care about foreign policy. I don't think we really ever have. Correct me if I'm wrong.


Eaglelord17 said:


> and such aren't the priority we are in for a world of trouble. Blatant lies,


Some people just call this campaigning.


Eaglelord17 said:


> creation/tolerance of crime to suit a political agenda,


no idea what you mean.


Eaglelord17 said:


> ignoring basic rights (how many politicians campaigned against Quebecs anti-'religious symbol' law)


Quebec used the notwithstanding clause to avoid judicial scrutiny thus making it a fait accompli. Not to mention it's rather popular in that province.

And rather than being a recent phenomenon, it's just a longstanding Canadian tradition of throwing linguistic and religious minorities in that province under the bus in order to curry favor with Quebec nationalists. Bill 101 anyone? That's not a recent creation. Been on the books since 1977.


Eaglelord17 said:


> , scapegoating innocent citizens to suit agendas (firearms being the easiest example), etc..


Canadians in urban Canada like gun control and 80 percent of Canadians live in what is considered to be a urban center.


Eaglelord17 said:


> Irresponsible governments lead to great suffering long term. When the government only thinks in 4 years cycles and re-election but doesn't care about anything beyond that we are witnessing the failings of democracy in action.


So we have been watching the failings of democracy for a hundred years then.


Eaglelord17 said:


> It would be interesting to see what would happen if the seats were rebalanced a bit to reflect the population more (such as how Alberta is under-represented, when Quebec is over-represented), however that is unlikely to happen well it benefits the government in power.


The seats will be redistributed in 2024.

It's done by a independent commission and based on the census.

Alberta is in line to get 4 more seats.

Quebec is losing 1, Ontario is gaining 1, BC is gaining 1. There is literally a formula for this, so all the bellyaching is a little much.


Quebec
8,500,000 ÷ 38,800,000=22.3

77÷343=22.4

Alberta
4,400,000÷38,000,000=11.5

38÷343=11

So within half percentage point of their population and Quebec likely being right on the dot.

Add this to our present parliament and you get what?

Bloc or CPC likely losing a seat, as it's rural Quebec getting smaller, not urban montreal.

Ontario gaining 1, so one of the NDP, LPC or CPC getting a seat.

CPC getting 4 seats, and I'm being generous here as they have shown they can lose in urban Alberta.

And 1 of NDP CPC or LPC getting 1 more seat in BC.

LPC 158-160

CPC 123-125

Bloc 33-34

NDP 25-27

So no great change.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Except its not just Toronto and Vancouver, most urban centers are getting unaffordable. So what, should everyone in a urban center just move to the countryside? Will the jobs follows? Or is everyone just going to hit the nearby towns within driving distance and then those prices shoot up?
> 
> So its much less of a stupid choice situation and much more a lack of supply/affordability issue.
> 
> Not to mention that jobs that exist in Toronto may not exist in Calgary or Edmonton. Or people have spent countless years working their way up in their job may not wanting to start all over.


We’ll sort of.  People do in fact move to the countryside to find affordable housing.  In the Ottawa area at least a lot of those nearby towns are getting unaffordable.   But one factor driving this move to the countryside is also COVID related.  A lot of sectors don’t need people on site and can work from home and will likely remain that way.  Many people would prefer the rural life but work and jobs force them Into urban centres.  My parents just sold their house in a small community (in Lanark County) outside Ottawa for 1.2 million to a family from Toronto who work remotely now.  

The post pandemic world may see an increase in rural living or people just staying and working from whatever little town they may be from.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> We’ll sort of.  People do in fact move to the countryside to find affordable housing.  In the Ottawa area at least a lot of those nearby towns are getting unaffordable.   But one factor driving this move to the countryside is also COVID related.  A lot of sectors don’t need people on site and can work from home and will likely remain that way.  Many people would prefer the rural life but work and jobs force them Into urban centres.  My parents just sold their house in a small community (in Lanark County) outside Ottawa for 1.2 million to a family from Toronto who work remotely now.
> 
> The post pandemic world may see an increase in rural living or people just staying and working from whatever little town they may be from.


Yes, but, and there is a big but here, people moving to the countryside should relieve pressure on housing in the urban area.

It's not. Prices are still rising in the urban centers, with the only change being prices are also rising in the outlying regions.

The pressure on the housing market isn't shifting, it's just spreading, which is only compounding the issue.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, but, and there is a big but here, people moving to the countryside should relieve pressure on housing in the urban area.
> 
> It's not. Prices are still rising in the urban centers, with the only change being prices are also rising in the outlying regions.
> 
> The pressure on the housing market isn't shifting, it's just spreading, which is only compounding the issue.


And there is nothing any federal party can do to really fix that.  It’s municipalities that need to loosen the zoning rules and enable more product to get out.  I may be off, but most municipalities have a bit of a leftist slant.  Green spaces, bike lanes, public transit, libraries.  All good things but they are very bad at urban planning and getting housing right. 

The liberal plan to make it easier to buy a home is just going to put more buyers in the market increasing demand and does not address the actual issue of supply.  And don’t get me started on the house tax plan.  Or their I’ll thought out flipping rule.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> And there is nothing any federal party can do to really fix that.  It’s municipalities that need to loosen the zoning rules and enable more product to get out.


Canadian municipalities are relatively powerless in comparison to the federal government.

they are also the ones constantly crying out that they are starved of the money needed to provide for their citizens.

A balanced approach of arm twisting and carrot dangling might be enough for some city councils to loosen zoning restrictions.



Remius said:


> I may be off, but most municipalities have a bit of a leftist slant.  Green spaces, bike lanes, public transit, libraries.  All good things but they are very bad at urban planning and getting housing right.
> 
> The liberal plan to make it easier to buy a home is just going to put more buyers in the market increasing demand and does not address the actual issue of supply.  And don’t get me started on the house tax plan.  Or their I’ll thought out flipping rule.


Every party focused on demand side in their promises because it's the most immediate thing they can do. Getting supply rolling will take a little bit. 

But the LPC did have some supply side proposals in their plan.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

The amount of sprawl that's been allowed is crazy. Everyday I can drive by a farmers field being turned into a subdivision while you can drive by empty lots in the city. Not really a federal issue in my mind other than how the federal government subsidizes infrastructure projects, the Bank of Canada approach to bond markets, and maybe the amount of security that the federal government provides banks to engage in their various adventures. I tend to favor a move to land tax valuation system and even stricter zoning rules. We're in a speculative bubble right now in my opinion, you could easily substitute tulip bulb for house. I can easily see a look at the capital gains exemption for housing for one as a means of exerting some control on this issue and the other it is just too much revenue escaping the governments grasp


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> The amount of sprawl that's been allowed is crazy. Everyday I can drive by a farmers field being turned into a subdivision while you can drive by empty lots in the city. Not really a federal issue in my mind other than how the federal government subsidizes infrastructure projects, the Bank of Canada approach to bond markets, and maybe the amount of security that the federal government provides banks to engage in their various adventures. I tend to favor a move to land tax valuation system and even stricter zoning rules. We're in a speculative bubble right now in my opinion, you could easily substitute tulip bulb for house. I can easily see a look at the capital gains exemption for housing for one as a means of exerting some control on this issue and the other it is just too much revenue escaping the governments grasp


People keep saying this, but what other level of government is equipped to deal with this issue?

It's a nationwide issue, so one province doing one thing will not help others in another province, and this goes 1000fold for municipalities.  If Laval loosens housing restrictions but montreal does not you just have the laval housing market go nuts.

Same for Peel region and Toronto.

Like it or not, the Feds are best equipped to deal with this right now IMHO.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I kinda just have one question through all this.....so will all those that said during years 2016 to 2020 that President Trump shouldn't be Prez because he lost the popular vote now stand up and say the same thing about PM Trudeau??
> 
> Rhetorical...dont answer please




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1440668448569257985
About that popular vote....

I hope the networks didn't call any close races too quickly, because the LPC are getting 4 out of 10 mail in votes.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

On the actual election it seems like a loss for all involved. No majority for the Liberals, no gain for the Tories or NDP, no seats for the PPC, a clear step back for the Greens. I think the turning point seemed to be the first french debate and the gun control issue, up until then the Conservatives were polling well and had momentum after which the Liberals kept gaining steadily. As much as I want the Conservatives to be a real alternative to the Liberals nationally, they can't be a carbon copy of the Liberal party from a policy/values side. They have to stand for and represent something.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> On the actual election it seems like a loss for all involved. No majority for the Liberals, no gain for the Tories or NDP, no seats for the PPC, a clear step back for the Greens. I think the turning point seemed to be the first french debate and the gun control issue, up until then the Conservatives were polling well and had momentum after which the Liberals kept gaining steadily. As much as I want the Conservatives to be a real alternative to the Liberals nationally, they can't be a carbon copy of the Liberal party from a policy/values side. They have to stand for and represent something.


I think the English debate was the turning point.

The bloc were losing q percentage point a week in the polls until Shachi Kurl insinuated that Quebec is racist.

After that the bloc reversed all those losses.

It's not inconceivable that the bloc could have lost 10 seats to the LPC making this parliament look like the LPC at 168 seats.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> People keep saying this, but what other level of government is equipped to deal with this issue?
> 
> It's a nationwide issue, so one province doing one thing will not help others in another province, and this goes 1000fold for municipalities.  If Laval loosens housing restrictions but montreal does not you just have the laval housing market go nuts.
> 
> ...


Municipalities are creations of the Province and zoning and taxation in that respect are under their control/influence. If the province allows radically different solutions and plans in neighbouring municipalities that's on them not the Federal government. I've already detailed what I think the Federal government could/should do, I'm not sure what else they can?


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I think the English debate was the turning point.
> 
> The bloc were losing q percentage point a week in the polls until Shachi Kurl insinuated that Quebec is racist.
> 
> ...



I can't say I'm that focused on Quebec, just going off some of the polls I looked at, and even conversations with people after that specifically brought up the gun issue









						338Canada Canada | Poll Analysis & Electoral Projections
					






					338canada.com


----------



## Fabius (22 Sep 2021)

There is some thinking here that is really unfortunate I think and will come back to haunt this country.
Having the CPC abandon any difference from the LPC in order to win in the three big cities is a power/ego centric view in my mind.  I thought diversity was our strength, just not of political thought I guess.  

Similar vein, why is it a problem if one party can't break into the urban areas but not a problem if another party can't break into rural areas? Why is being completely shut out or almost so in one region a problem for a party but not another?  Again if the answer is obtaining power that's one thing but its not the way to a stable, harmonious nation state.  Right now I only see one party even attempting to bridge a gap.

I don't expect this will change but the Federal Government Executive is not charged with Bread and Circus.  Peace, Order and Good Government are its things, and honestly its failing on all fronts. However those things are not things that get or keep you elected so instead we have a focus on Bread and Circus and stuff that is more properly the purview of the Province and/or municipality, any expansion of the structural deficient is almost certainly related to bread and circuses. 

Finally, the LPC Gun Control policies are divisive both regionally and urban/rural are not conducive to Peace, Order or Good Government and are completely partisan politics and no the CPC should not maintain them in their current form.  

What should the LPC give up to achieve a better percentage of the vote?


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Municipalities are creations of the Province and zoning and taxation in that respect are under their control/influence. If the province allows radically different solutions and plans in neighbouring municipalities that's on them not the Federal government. I've already detailed what I think the Federal government could/should do, I'm not sure what else they can?


One thing I think they can do is provide stable funding for cities. Cities have limited revenue collecting ability. So let's take something like the carbon tax, which the Feds say 90 percent is returned to citizens in form of rebates.

Take half of what remains, 5 percent, and give it to the cities each year to help out their budgets. In return a city has to show where they are loosening zoning restrictions. If they don't, more money for those that do.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Municipalities are creations of the Province and zoning and taxation in that respect are under their control/influence. If the province allows radically different solutions and plans in neighbouring municipalities that's on them not the Federal government. I've already detailed what I think the Federal government could/should do, I'm not sure what else they can?


Probably not much, really. It is typical of Canadian federal elections get fought on Provincial and Municipal issues, because Canadians generally have a poor understanding of who is Constitutionally responsible for what.

There are areas of housing concern that are directly under federal control: first nations and the CAF.

If the feds were to go on a housing blitz on both reserves and on bases (such that there was a PMQ for each CAF member and expectation that you would move from PMQ to PMQ, instead of receiving real estate and legal fees each posting) it could make at least a small difference in some markets. The feds should also review the real estate portfolio that they control in cities across Canada to see what might be suitably turned into housing stock.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> One thing I think they can do is provide stable funding for cities. Cities have limited revenue collecting ability. So let's take something like the carbon tax, which the Feds say 90 percent is returned to citizens in form of rebates.
> 
> Take half of what remains, 5 percent, and give it to the cities each year to help out their budgets. In return a city has to show where they are loosening zoning restrictions. If they don't, more money for those that do.


loosening what zoning restrictions? The zoning is approved by the province first and last though so the province has to be on board. To me this is covered by infrastucture funding or equivalent


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> There is some thinking here that is really unfortunate I think and will come back to haunt this country.
> Having the CPC abandon any difference from the LPC in order to win in the three big cities is a power/ego centric view in my mind.  I thought diversity was our strength, just not of political thought I guess.


Diversity is our strength but parties need to be electable. 


Fabius said:


> Similar vein, why is it a problem if one party can't break into the urban areas but not a problem if another party can't break into rural areas? Why is being completely shut out or almost so in one region a problem for a party but not another?  Again if the answer is obtaining power that's one thing but its not the way to a stable, harmonious nation state.  Right now I only see one party even attempting to bridge a gap.


The LPC is winning in rural maritime and some rural Quebec  ridings, so they are not being shut out.


Fabius said:


> I don't expect this will change but the Federal Government Executive is not charged with Bread and Circus.  Peace, Order and Good Government are its things, and honestly its failing on all fronts. However those things are not things that get or keep you elected so instead we have a focus on Bread and Circus and stuff that is more properly the purview of the Province and/or municipality, any expansion of the structural deficient is almost certainly related to bread and circuses.


How is housing and childcare being equated with Bread and circuses?


Fabius said:


> Finally, the LPC Gun Control policies are divisive both regionally and urban/rural are not conducive to Peace, Order or Good Government and are completely partisan politics and no the CPC should not maintain them in their current form.


Yet, when the issue of getting rid of the OIC came up, the CPC quickly changed its stance on the issue.

Gun control policies are popular. If the people didn't want them, the politicians would push them, and the CPC wouldn't back down on the matter



Fabius said:


> What should the LPC give up to achieve a better percentage of the vote?


They made their electoral strategy pretty clear. They will give Quebec a lot to try to squeeze out the extra 12-15 seats they need for 170. But they don't really need to get much more rural ridings than they already do. 

What's the CPC path to 170?


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> loosening what zoning restrictions? The zoning is approved by the province first and last though so the province has to be on board. To me this is covered by infrastucture funding or equivalent


Hey, it's one less obstacle in the way of getting more supply on board. If city councils don't allow it it matters little if the province approvals it or not.

The feds have more direct sway with the provinces anyways


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Hey, it's one less obstacle in the way of getting more supply on board. If city councils don't allow it it matters little if the province approvals it or not.
> 
> The feds have more direct sway with the provinces anyways


I'm just not clear on what the obstacle is exactly? The province can override, overrule and impose on municpal zoning decisions and official plans anytime they want not neglecting the fact that those plans had to have been previously approved in the first place


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

So there were 951k mail in ballots to be counted.

If 40 percent of them go liberal,  that's 380k

If 23 percent go CPC, that's 218k

The popular vote could be 162k votes closer.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> I'm just not clear on what the obstacle is exactly? The province can override, overrule and impose on municpal zoning decisions and official plans anytime they want not neglecting the fact that those plans had to have been previously approved in the first place


Yet here everyone is saying zoning is in the hands of municipalities


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> One thing I think they can do is provide stable funding for cities. Cities have limited revenue collecting ability. So let's take something like the carbon tax, which the Feds say 90 percent is returned to citizens in form of rebates.


I say pardon?

Cites have significant more revenue collecting ability / capita than rural areas.
  Land Values / SqFt are significantly higher, and all the infrastructure requirements are in a much smaller area / capita.

If a city can't manage it's budget - that is on the city - maybe they should sync the mayor and the city council, but they shouldn't get a bail out because the Mayor is snorting the budget up his nose (or is that just Moronto?)


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I say pardon?
> 
> Cites have significant more revenue collecting ability / capita than rural areas.
> Land Values / SqFt are significantly higher, and all the infrastructure requirements are in a much smaller area / capita.
> ...


Part of the issue is that most of our municipalities are not organised along “party lines” so you end up with Mayors trying to enforce their will and vison and councillors only concerned for their wards and not the city as a whole.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I say pardon?
> 
> Cites have significant more revenue collecting ability / capita than rural areas.
> Land Values / SqFt are significantly higher, and all the infrastructure requirements are in a much smaller area / capita.


And cities have the added expenses of large infrastructure projects, more public transit, municipal police budgets and countless other things that small rural areas do not need to deal with.

Especially since for a lot of cities, the people who use the services live outside the city itself and thus the city cannot collect taxes from those using the infrastructure.


KevinB said:


> If a city can't manage it's budget - that is on the city - maybe they should sync the mayor and the city council, but they shouldn't get a bail out because the Mayor is snorting the budget up his nose (or is that just Moronto?)


I always laugh at people dunking on Toronto. Toronto city debt is relatively small.

Montreal on the other hand has a debt the size of Toronto and a far smaller population and tax base to service it.

Lastly, I don't think John Tory or Valerie Plante are snorting budgets up their nose, but thank you for adding so much to the quality of the discussion here. 😏


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yet here everyone is saying zoning is in the hands of municipalities


It is.  In essence.  Yes the province can intervene.  But lots of municipalities are fractured along counsellor interests and not City vision.  So one ward will refuse affordable housing or gentrification, another wants bike lanes and green spaces.  Cities need vision and they don’t have it right now.

One thing the feds could do is divest itself of a lot of their real estate and buildings.  Arrange to develop those into housing.  With more PS working from home it seems like a no brainer.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> It is.  In essence.  Yes the province can intervene.  But lots of municipalities are fractured along counsellor interests and not City vision.  So one ward will refuse affordable housing or gentrification, another wants bike lanes and green spaces.  Cities need vision and they don’t have it right now.
> 
> One thing the feds could do is divest itself of a lot of their real estate and buildings.  Arrange to develop those into housing.  With more PS working from home it seems like a no brainer.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> And cities have the added expenses of large infrastructure projects, more public transit, municipal police budgets and countless other things that small rural areas do not need to deal with.


So you're telling me the city is unsustainable?
You have less requirements / capita, and less area to do it.

 It's almost like the Bureaucracy has expanded to take care of the needs of the Bureaucracy...



Altair said:


> Especially since for a lot of cities, the people who use the services live outside the city itself and thus the city cannot collect taxes from those using the infrastructure.


 Mass Transit - raise fees - or have out of area user increases.
Non HOV Commuter Lanes get Tolls (I hate it - but it's a revenue offset for the costs).
 NYC has a city rider on Income Tax.

If a metropolitan area can't sustain itself -- then it is a leech and shouldn't be supported.



Altair said:


> I always laugh at people dunking on Toronto. Toronto city debt is relatively small.


Moronto makes itself a target - it thinks it is New York - or at least a significant portion of its population does.



Altair said:


> Montreal on the other hand has a debt the size of Toronto and a far smaller population and tax base to service it.


Montreal has it's own issues, but La Belle Provance will take care of all. 
  Toronto is an easy example - and I like to pick on it, plus if I picked on Montreal - I'd be typing for days.



Altair said:


> Lastly, I don't think John Tory or Valerie Plante are snorting budgets up their nose, but thank you for adding so much to the quality of the discussion here. 😏


I guess you missed/ignored my jab at Rob Ford.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> So you're telling me the city is unsustainable?
> You have less requirements / capita, and less area to do it.
> 
> It's almost like the Bureaucracy has expanded to take care of the needs of the Bureaucracy...
> ...


The problem with transit fare hikes is if it becomes more of a hassle then people won’t take it.  In Ottawa it costs about 110$ for pass.  Then a gold pass for the park and ride is what?  60$?  So I would pay 170$ a month when I could just pay 200$ for parking and save me the hassle.  I gave up on public transit after the last strike we had.  

Another issue is or was when a building would come down or a lot became vacant it would be turned into pay parking. Original.  But did little to offset the housing issue.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> So you're telling me the city is unsustainable?
> You have less requirements / capita, and less area to do it.


Cities are one of the engines of our economy. 

Quebec is a nice little example. 

Quebec population 8.5 million.

Montréal population 1.78 million.

GDP of Quebec 377 billion.

GDP of Montréal 211 billion.

So 20 percent of the population is accounting for 55 percent of economic activity.

To say cities are not sustainable is assinine.

Municipalities, municipal budgets, those are unsustainable. Because those Municipalities as currently constructed cannot get enough revenue from their outsized economic output to service the needs of the city.


KevinB said:


> It's almost like the Bureaucracy has expanded to take care of the needs of the Bureaucracy...
> 
> 
> Mass Transit - raise fees - or have out of area user increases.
> ...


Raising fees on mass Transit only makes people take mass Transit less.

Tolls work but who votes for a party proposing Tolls?

so municipalities are stuck with their limited revenue sources, property tax, development charges and user fees.

It's like having a vast gold mine under you but you can only extract the wealth with a spoon.


KevinB said:


> If a metropolitan area can't sustain itself -- then it is a leech and shouldn't be supported.


Again, Montréal provides Quebec with 55 percent of its economic activity with 20 percent of the population. It's not a leech  if anything, Montréal is subsidizing the rest of the Province.

the same holds true for places like Toronto and Ontario.


KevinB said:


> Moronto makes itself a target - it thinks it is New York - or at least a significant portion of its population does.


If you say so.


KevinB said:


> Montreal has it's own issues, but La Belle Provance will take care of all.
> Toronto is an easy example - and I like to pick on it, plus if I picked on Montreal - I'd be typing for days.


Seems petty.


KevinB said:


> I guess you missed/ignored my jab at Rob Ford.


He's dead.


----------



## mariomike (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I guess you missed/ignored my jab at Rob Ford.



Altair said,


> He's dead.



He was powerless when alive.

As a matter of public safety, Council transferred his power to govern the city in a state of emergency to the Deputy Mayor.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Just for shits and giggles, I did Ontario and Toronto, because people love to dunk on Toronto so much.

GDP of Ontario 744 billion

GDP of Toronto 405 billion

Population of Ontario 14.5 million

Population of Toronto 2.9 million

So again, 20 percent of the population accounting for 54 percent of economic activity.

Very similar to Quebec.

Again, another example of the city pretty much subsidizing the province.

Edit: For people complaining about how the Albertan economy powers Canada, Alberta has a GDP of 334 billion. Smaller than the city of Toronto.


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

Zoning militates cost of accommodation, but not all types of accommodation.  Enlightened zoning can't create standard 1/2 chain by 2 chain city lots out of nothing.  When wonks discuss unhelpful zoning restrictions, they mean the restrictions preventing landowners and developers from turning blocks of detached houses and low-rise commercial into high-rise rabbit warrens with street-level commercial storefronts.  Undeveloped or under-developed parcels of land in metro areas are, inevitably, too high-value to be repurposed for detached housing.

The only way to lower the cost of detached housing is to build more of it - enough to outstrip demand, so that prices fall - using inexpensive construction and finishing standards and practices, on small lots.  That means building housing where there currently is none, which means in outlying areas.  (Some new parcels can be created by subdividing large lots.)

Most of the "ideas" floated for alleviating housing costs - including subsidized childcare - will push up housing costs.


----------



## QV (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> GDP of Toronto 405 billion
> For people complaining about how the Albertan economy powers Canada, Alberta has a GDP of 334 billion. Smaller than the city of Toronto.



How much equalization does Toronto pay to Alberta?


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

> Again, another example of the city pretty much subsidizing the province.



That's not a complete picture.  "The city" needs things that "the country" provides, and "the city" pays for those things by funding necessities and amenities for the people who live and work in "the country".  Finish the picture and do the analysis before making facially inane claims.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> How much equalization does Toronto pay to Alberta?


The same that Alberta pays to Toronto. 0.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Zoning militates cost of accommodation, but not all types of accommodation.  Enlightened zoning can't create standard 1/2 chain by 2 chain city lots out of nothing.  When wonks discuss unhelpful zoning restrictions, they mean the restrictions preventing landowners and developers from turning blocks of detached houses and low-rise commercial into high-rise rabbit warrens with street-level commercial storefronts.  Undeveloped or under-developed parcels of land in metro areas are, inevitably, too high-value to be repurposed for detached housing.


All correct. 


Brad Sallows said:


> The only way to lower the cost of detached housing is to build more of it - enough to outstrip demand, so that prices fall - using inexpensive construction and finishing standards and practices, on small lots.  That means building housing where there currently is none, which means in outlying areas.  (Some new parcels can be created by subdividing large lots.)


Also all correct.


Brad Sallows said:


> Most of the "ideas" floated for alleviating housing costs - including subsidized childcare - will push up housing costs.


This is not being floated as a idea to alleviate housing costs, it to make it daycare more affordable and increase workplace participation. Will that lead to people having more money in their hands either due to reduced childcare costs or being able to go back to work years earlier, yes, and will that money be used to purchase housing, yes, but its not a program with the housing market in mind.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yet here everyone is saying zoning is in the hand of municipalities


It is and it isn't. The zoning and official plans are approved by the municipality and then the province. Activities that fall within those approved plans and zoning are generally completely handled by the municipality and will not involve other municipalities, ministries or the province. In part because they have already commented and contributed and approved the plans. However circumstances change as do governments. Ususally you see non municipal involvement when changes are proposed which do not agree with the approved plan or zoning or when the municipality or ministry does not approve something for which the plan allows or approves. (This has been my experience in Ontario)

and then there are these






						Ontario minister's zoning orders controversy - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

Depends on the viewer.  Some people think their child care costs are part of what keeps them out of the housing market in which they would like to be.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's not a complete picture.  "The city" needs things that "the country" provides, and "the city" pays for those things by funding necessities and amenities for the people who live and work in "the country".  Finish the picture and do the analysis before making facially inane claims.


Those things being less in economic value than what the city produces. Not to mention that rural areas then to produce more of whatever they produce than the city needs, which means its usually destined for international markets, or interprovincial markets, which is of less immediate importance to the city in question.

Moving back to Quebec, as they have less urban areas in comparison to Ontario and thus makes for a less messy picture, the two metro areas, Montréal and Quebec City, combined population 2.33 million do not require all of the 6.2 million rural Quebec to function.


----------



## Good2Golf (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> The problem with transit fare hikes is if it becomes more of a hassle then people won’t take it.  In Ottawa it costs about 110$ for pass.  Then a gold pass for the park and ride is what?  60$?  So I would pay 170$ a month when I could just pay 200$ for parking and save me the hassle.  I gave up on public transit after the last strike we had.


…and in the particular case in Ottawa, the transit would be much more friendly if the wheels didn’t keep coming off the (SNC Lavelin-supplied) train…literally.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> …and in the particular case in Ottawa, the transit would be much more friendly if the wheels didn’t keep coming off the (Alstom-supplied) train…literally.


Fixed.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Those things being less in economic value than what the city produces. Not to mention that rural areas then to produce more of whatever they produce than the city needs, which means its usually destined for international markets, or interprovincial markets, which is of less immediate importance to the city in question.
> 
> Moving back to Quebec, as they have less urban areas in comparison to Ontario and thus makes for a less messy picture, the two metro areas, Montréal and Quebec City, combined population 2.33 million do not require all of the 6.2 million rural Quebec to function.


They might if all goods were sourced in house. The global market distorts the picture. GDP is an incomplete picture as the value is not always comparable and where the source of the value originated. Head office may "generate" a lot of GDP or may just be transporting it from elsewhere. The worlds primary industries (farming,fishing,logging and hard rock mining) tend to operate on a public loss function and are heavily subsidized yet pretty hard to live without them. An imperfect system and valuation


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Instead of subsidizing childcare so that more people can enter or participate in the workforce. We should just put these kids to work directly that way their parents are freed up to participate but we will get the benefit of the greater labour participation of the children and their economic participation and contribution as well. Not only will we save on daycare costs we will be able to cut our education costs substantially as well


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Instead of subsidizing childcare so that more people can enter or participate in the workforce. We should just put these kids to work directly that way their parents are freed up to participate but we will get the benefit of the greater labour participation of the children and their economic participation and contribution as well. Not only will we save on daycare costs we will be able to cut our education costs substantially as well



Sadly, they're removing that as an option 









						Minimum employment age being raised from 12 to 16 in BC this fall | Venture
					

The BC government is bringing their employment rules in line with international standards this fall, becoming the last province to do so.




					dailyhive.com


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> They might if all goods were sourced in house. The global market distorts the picture. GDP is an incomplete picture as the value is not always comparable and where the source of the value originated. Head office may "generate" a lot of GDP or may just be transporting it from elsewhere. The worlds primary industries (farming,fishing,logging and hard rock mining) tend to operate on a public loss function and are heavily subsidized yet pretty hard to live without them. An imperfect system and valuation


It is an imperfect system, and definitely a lot of the big cities GDP can be attributed to the human and resource capital of the surrounding regions.

That said, it cannot be ignored that even accounting for this fact, cities do punch well above their weight when it comes to economic output, both in terms of area and human production. A lot of services provided to outlying regions could not be financed without money coming from these urban centers.

So back to what @KevinB  was saying, that cities are unsustainable is just incorrect. Its simply that municipalities, in charge of servicing these big cities do not have the means to do so as currently constructed. They don't have access to revenue gathering mechanisms that allow them to take advantage of their economic output, and they often have to service those who do not live in the city in question.

Which brings me back to my original point. If the feds were to provide a steady source of funding to the cities, using a portion of the carbon tax for example, in return for loosening zoning restrictions at the municipal level, that is one step closer to solving the problem


suffolkowner said:


> Instead of subsidizing childcare so that more people can enter or participate in the workforce. We should just put these kids to work directly that way their parents are freed up to participate but we will get the benefit of the greater labour participation of the children and their economic participation and contribution as well. Not only will we save on daycare costs we will be able to cut our education costs substantially as well


Babies and toddlers are not terribly productive.

Unless there is something that can be produced with dirty diapers, in which case they are incredibly productive.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> It is an imperfect system, and definitely a lot of the big cities GDP can be attributed to the human and resource capital of the surrounding regions.
> 
> That said, it cannot be ignored that even accounting for this fact, cities do punch well above their weight when it comes to economic output, both in terms of area and human production. A lot of services provided to outlying regions could not be financed without money coming from these urban centers.
> 
> ...


Cities have the ability to tax their land within the provincial mandate and switching to a land value taxation would in my opinion alleviate a lot of these issues. The strain a lot of municipalities are under is due to the cost of servicing these low density areas with low tax revenue. It would help if they exercised some control over the number of vanity projects and underemployed people driving around all day


----------



## Brad Sallows (22 Sep 2021)

I doubt cities lack revenue-raising capability.  What many lack is fiscal discipline.  A little mission creep here and there might be harmless; a few decades' worth adds up and suddenly the politicians of today can't manage what their predecessors did.  Those who insist on expensive solutions to problems with less expensive alternatives (eg. rail transit, especially overhead and underground) create imbalances and then whine about the revenue side of the equation.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I doubt cities lack revenue-raising capability.  What many lack is fiscal discipline.  A little mission creep here and there might be harmless; a few decades' worth adds up and suddenly the politicians of today can't manage what their predecessors did.  Those who insist on expensive solutions to problems with less expensive alternatives (eg. rail transit, especially overhead and underground) create imbalances and then whine about the revenue side of the equation.


The biggest creep in budgets in most big cities has been Law enforcement.  Not sure what the solution is but I suspect it will come to a head at one point.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> It is an imperfect system, and definitely a lot of the big cities GDP can be attributed to the human and resource capital of the surrounding regions.
> 
> That said, it cannot be ignored that even accounting for this fact, cities do punch well above their weight when it comes to economic output, both in terms of area and human production. A lot of services provided to outlying regions could not be financed without money coming from these urban centers.
> 
> So back to what @KevinB  was saying, that cities are unsustainable is just incorrect. Its simply that municipalities, in charge of servicing these big cities do not have the means to do so as currently constructed. They don't have access to revenue gathering mechanisms that allow them to take advantage of their economic output, and they often have to service those who do not live in the city in question.


 It is or it isn't.
   You're stating that these Cities bring in massive #'s which isn't (as you admit 100% true due to your using the Corporate Earnings of a HQ in those numbers - the same way Calgary will spike during Oil price increases), but I agree with you in principle as generally urban areas have higher salaries than rural, and it is magnified due to population density.

My point is simply that IF those Cities are non self-supportable - let them rot.

 They are self-supportable - it is simply that it is more palatable for Municipalities to pass the buck and rely on Federal Subsidies.
   Which spreads the burden over everyone - which is very socialist - probably why dense urban folks gravitate to a socialist agenda over more rural folks.





Altair said:


> Which brings me back to my original point. If the feds were to provide a steady source of funding to the cities, using a portion of the carbon tax for example, in return for loosening zoning restrictions at the municipal level, that is one step closer to solving the problem


Which brings me back to my point - why in all that is Holy is it a Federal responsibility?
    The Federal Gov isn't mandating that people live in cities - so why should Federal transfer payments go towards municipalities?

I would suggest a better method would be for Cities/Municipalities strive towards a more balanced budget - and raise property taxes to support the needs of the local area.

   This in turn would lower the Federal Tax Burden over all Canadians.

The more people you can cut out of a Government Loop - the better off every one is - as reduces overall costs, and makes the local elected officials directly accountable to their voters.



Altair said:


> Babies and toddlers are not terribly productive.
> 
> Unless there is something that can be produced with dirty diapers, in which case they are incredibly productive.


Looking at most of the Politicians in Canada - I suspect the Babies and Toddlers win in productivity even without a City Diaper Energy Solution -- at least there is Future potential in the children.


----------



## dapaterson (22 Sep 2021)

Only one wheel fell off, most recent was a train derailment on entering a station that no one noticed so it set off again.

Plus defective construction.

And odd smells in some stations.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> The biggest creep in budgets in most big cities has been Law enforcement.  Not sure what the solution is but I suspect it will come to a head at one point.


Higher Population Density combined with a vast disparity of wealth is a recipe for crime - look at any Big City and the crime rate is significantly larger than rural areas (where people have their own guns ).
   That bears out across the world (other than areas where the Populace doesn't have guns, then they are just slave labor...)


----------



## Fabius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> The LPC is winning in rural maritime and some rural Quebec ridings, so they are not being shut out.


But they have been and still are largely shut out of the Prairie Provinces.


Altair said:


> Gun control policies are popular. If the people didn't want them, the politicians would push them, and the CPC wouldn't back down on the matter


They are not popular in rural areas, nor are they popular in the west. The LPC stance on this is a key factor for a large region not voting for them I think. 
I also do not believe that "popular" should be the main or even significant factor in policy making.  That's a recipe for disaster. 


Altair said:


> They made their electoral strategy pretty clear. They will give Quebec a lot to try to squeeze out the extra 12-15 seats they need for 170. But they don't really need to get much more rural ridings than they already do.


Not surprised by this answer but again its an answer that is driven by power and ego and implicit is an acceptance that the rural population and western prairie provinces don't matter because we can gain power without them. Is that really the approach that a truly inclusive NATIONAL party would take, one with a statesman at its helm or is it one that a party solely driven by ego and desire for power would take? Note I am not aiming that sentence at any one party but its a philosophical question.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> But they have been and still are largely shut out of the Prairie Provinces.
> 
> They are not popular in rural areas, nor are they popular in the west. The LPC stance on this is a key factor for a large region not voting for them I think.
> I also do not believe that "popular" should be the main or even significant factor in policy making.  That's a recipe for disaster.
> ...



An interesting article on the subject, from 2019:

Untangling Canada’s East-West Political Divide​
"Between 2015 and 2019, the Trudeau government tried to strike a balance between stimulating the Prairies’ economy and enforcing better environmental regulation. Ultimately, this has failed to create support for Liberals West of Manitoba – and with reason, some might argue. Economic data shows that Alberta’s economy has faced numerous downturns since 2015, when it entered into a severe recession. As of 2019, the province faces mild recession, with an economic growth rate of -0.8%. Saskatchewan faces a similar economic reality. Individuals losing income and jobs now view continuous economic hardship as going hand in hand with a Liberal government, pushing them further into the conservative base.

An interesting observation can be made about the geography of this divide. Generally speaking, support for progressive parties stems largely from urban, densely populated areas. According to data collected during this past campaign, the opposite is also true: less populated and rural ridings mostly lean blue. Due to their large territory and relatively small population, the Prairies’ ridings tend to be less densely populated, which is coherent with their strong preference towards the Conservative Party. This rule extends well beyond the Prairies, with similar observations ringing true in most provinces across the country. Seen this way, the East-West political divide appears to stem from a more widespread urban-rural divide."









						Untangling Canada’s East-West Political Divide
					

At its core, this fracture highlights some fundamental challenges associated with governing a country made of numerous groups with competing interests.




					www.mironline.ca


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> An interesting article on the subject, from 2019:


The US has a somewhat similar divide -- makes one wonder if a cross border merger would do better.
   Of course then you would also need to adopt our habit of picking the worst possible candidate from a political party and having them be the chosen leader -- not a big stretch though in the last bit for Canada though either...


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> But they have been and still are largely shut out of the Prairie Provinces.


Hey, they have 2 Alberta MPs now.


Fabius said:


> They are not popular in rural areas, nor are they popular in the west. The LPC stance on this is a key factor for a large region not voting for them I think.


And the CPC isn't winning in the 3 largest cities, and they are starting to lose the in the urban areas of Alberta. They too have a problem.

Never mind Quebec, when minus the enclave around Quebec city they largely shut out as well.


Fabius said:


> I also do not believe that "popular" should be the main or even significant factor in policy making.  That's a recipe for disaster.


What are elections really?


Fabius said:


> Not surprised by this answer but again its an answer that is driven by power and ego and implicit is an acceptance that the rural population and western prairie provinces don't matter because we can gain power without them. Is that really the approach that a truly inclusive NATIONAL party would take, one with a statesman at its helm or is it one that a party solely driven by ego and desire for power would take? Note I am not aiming that sentence at any one party but its a philosophical question.


I'm going to reminiscent a little bit.

The year was 2016. The LPC had a few seats in Alberta. Not many, but a few.

The environmental wing of the LPC was pushing for less pipelines. The environmental wing was much larger than the Alberta wing of the LPC.  Trudeau nixed a few, but was more or less supportive of 1, transmountain. The LPC threw Alberta a bone, they could easily have watched that project die. But they bought it and assured it would would be completed.

What did Alberta do? Shut the LPC out.

So are you surprised that the LPC decided to look elsewhere for votes? Nomatter what they do Alberta will not be appreciative of it, and it costs them dearly with progressive voters. How many times did jagmeet singh attack Trudeau over buying a pipeline? 

Voters, sometimes, get the governments they deserve.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Which brings me back to my point - why in all that is Holy is it a Federal responsibility?


Because, we the people, have made it so.

Enough Canadians locked out of the housing market stood up and made enough noise that the Federal parties looked down from their elevated station above us and took notice.

And all federal parties had a plan on how to deal with it.


Every now and again, the little guy gets a voice in Politics.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Because, we the people, have made it so.
> 
> Enough Canadians locked out of the housing market stood up and made enough noise that the Federal parties looked down from their elevated station above us and took notice.
> 
> ...


That's a terrible example to set.   no one thought to just maybe tell folks to suck it up?
 1) Move out of a city 
 2) Buy a smaller home
 3) Rent longer than you wanted?

The little guy isn't getting a voice - they are getting chocked out by more taxes - and they are being fooled into thinking it is salvation.

   But you get the .gov you deserve -- I mean hey look at us down here, the Democracies of the Americas are living proof of Devolution in action..


----------



## mariomike (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> - look at any Big City and the crime rate is significantly larger than rural areas (where people have their own guns ).
> That bears out across the world (other than areas where the Populace doesn't have guns, then they are just slave labor...)


I've owned hunting rifles and shotguns all my life. Maybe that makes me safer. But, thats not why I own them.

If concerned about safest places in Canada, and the world,









						Canada's Most Dangerous Places 2020 - Macleans.ca
					

Use this interactive tool to see the full ranking of Canada's most dangerous places. Rank cities by type of crime or see all the statistics for one city.




					www.macleans.ca
				












						Safe Cities Index 2021
					

The Economist Intelligence Unit, sponsored by NEC, has released the Safe Cities Index 2021, covering 60 major urban areas. In its fourth edition, the Index consists of 76 sub indicators grouped under 5 domains.




					safecities.economist.com
				





> The top 5 cities were Copenhagen, Toronto, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo, in that order.





KevinB said:


> Moronto makes itself a target - it thinks it is New York - or at least a significant portion of its population does.


No. NYC, LA, and Mexico City are are biggest in North America.  Toronto comes in fourth. That does not include the GTA.



Remius said:


> Part of the issue is that most of our municipalities are not organised along “party lines”


Thank God for that. There's no Liberal or Conservative way to fix a sewer.

I retired "a gazillion years ago", so am no longer as familiar with the upwards of 240 official and unofficial neighbourhoods within Toronto city limits as it seems some others are.

I tend to mostly stick to my own now.

Neighbourhood conversation is more likely to be about if they should, or should not, install sidewalks. Or, "Why don't the garbagemen pick up from their doorstep anymore, rather than us having to wheel it to the curb ourselves?" Fix the potholes, or leave them as they are. That sort of thing. Not party politics.

Lot of talk on here about funding. I'll leave that for those better informed on the subject than I am.

One thing I do recall was that funding for the department I worked for was a result of a mixed formula, with fifty percent of funding coming from the municipal tax base and fifty percent from the provincial government. Provincial funding was based on the census population, not the business day population. As a result, there were always more people requiring 9-1-1 service than the system was funded for.



> But you get the .gov you deserve



Governor Long said, "One day the people of Louisiana are going to get good government. And they are not gonna like it!"


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Higher Population Density combined with a vast disparity of wealth is a recipe for crime - look at any Big City and the crime rate is significantly larger than rural areas (where people have their own guns ).
> That bears out across the world (other than areas where the Populace doesn't have guns, then they are just slave labor...)


Not sure about that.  I think we have far more rural or small towns where the crime rate is significantly higher than most big cities.


----------



## suffolkowner (22 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> I've owned hunting rifles and shotguns all my life.
> 
> If concerned about safest places in Canada, and the world,
> 
> ...


why do the numbers not correspond to the rankings?


----------



## mariomike (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> why do the numbers not correspond to the rankings?


Which numbers to which rankings specifically?

The MacLeans rankings or the Economist rankings?

You will have to interpret the data for yourself.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> That's a terrible example to set.   no one thought to just maybe tell folks to suck it up?
> 1) Move out of a city
> 2) Buy a smaller home
> 3) Rent longer than you wanted?
> ...


Agree to disagree.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Agree to disagree.


People have to live within their means.  I’m not saying we should make it impossible but not everyone is the same or equal.  If you are living on minimum wage, homeownership isn’t likely.  But alternatives like renting should be feasible.  My brother in law wants a 4 bedroom home and pool.  He doesn’t want to rent.  He has to pay child support for four kids.  At some point he will need to realise that that is feasible.  Buy something smaller, rent or move out of the city and maybe find something better than mom’s basement. 

Some people live in denial.  Some people make it work with what they have.  It took me 25 years from renting (8 years), first small townhouse (2 years), big 4 bedroom (1 year), divorce so down graded to a small 2 bedroom garden home with no yard (8years) to a semi detached (5 years) to where I am now in a single family home.    In all that time I had options to move to the country for bigger,  stay in town with smaller,  rent an older nice place or rent a smaller new place etc etc etc.

People have options,  but people make choices. They want a brand new truck, iPhone and every streaming show around but lament they can’t afford a house.  We have choices.  We don’t all have the same ones but choices can be made.


----------



## mariomike (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> My brother in law wants a 4 bedroom home and pool.  He doesn’t want to rent.  He has to pay child support for four kids.  At some point he will need to realise that that is feasible.  Buy something smaller, rent or move out of the city and maybe find something better than mom’s basement.


Either that, or marry the boss's daughter.


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> People have to live within their means.  I’m not saying we should make it impossible but not everyone is the same or equal.  If you are living on minimum wage, homeownership isn’t likely.  But alternatives like renting should be feasible.  My brother in law wants a 4 bedroom home and pool.  He doesn’t want to rent.  He has to pay child support for four kids.  At some point he will need to realise that that is feasible.  Buy something smaller, rent or move out of the city and maybe find something better than mom’s basement.
> 
> Some people live in denial.  Some people make it work with what they have.  It took me 25 years from renting (8 years), first small townhouse (2 years), big 4 bedroom (1 year), divorce so down graded to a small 2 bedroom garden home with no yard (8years) to a semi detached (5 years) to where I am now in a single family home.    In all that time I had options to move to the country for bigger,  stay in town with smaller,  rent an older nice place or rent a smaller new place etc etc etc.
> 
> People have options,  but people make choices. They want a brand new truck, iPhone and every streaming show around but lament they can’t afford a house.  We have choices.  We don’t all have the same ones but choices can be made.


100% I feel the same for the ageing folks who pissed their working years away and never planned for life after work.  Tons of these  folks in the Maritimes. 

Ones inability to lead a mature, productive life should not entitle one to anothers fruits of labor.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100% I feel the same for the ageing folks who pissed their working years away and never planned for life after work.  Tons of these  folks in the Maritimes.
> 
> Ones inability to lead a mature, productive life should not entitle one to anothers fruits of labor.


I wish we taught more financial literacy in high school.  I took calculus and algebra.  Never use it at all and likely wouldn’t be able to given what I see my son doing right now.  Budgets, investments, interest rates, credit card management, mortgages, pensions and RRSPs.  Imagine how much better people could be if we taught these skills formally in a meaningful way.


----------



## daftandbarmy (22 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100% I feel the same for the ageing folks who pissed their working years away and never planned for life after work.  Tons of these  folks in the Maritimes.
> 
> *Ones inability to lead a mature, productive life should not entitle one to anothers fruits of labor.*




“It is easy, when you are young, to believe that what you desire is no less than what you deserve, to assume that if you want something badly enough, it is your God-given right to have it.”

― Jon Krakauer, Into the Wild


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100% I feel the same for the ageing folks who pissed their working years away and never planned for life after work.  Tons of these  folks in the Maritimes.
> 
> Ones inability to lead a mature, productive life should not entitle one to anothers fruits of labor.


Bingo - Trudeau the elder bought the Maritimes in the mid 60s.


----------



## Good2Golf (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> I wish we taught more financial literacy in high school.  I took calculus and algebra.  Never use it at all and likely wouldn’t be able to given what I see my son doing right now.  Budgets, investments, interest rates, credit card management, mortgages, pensions and RRSPs.  Imagine how much better people could be if we taught these skills formally in a meaningful way.


My son may have rolled his eyes at his old man’s fiscal lessons, but on the cusp of his fourth decade of existence and ownership of an appropriately-sized house and decent savings, he too lamented about the education system’s woeful performance in arming youth for the practical challenges they will face in adult life.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Cheer up, Tories. And don't do that stupid thing you're thinking of doing - Macleans.ca
					

Jen Gerson: Let Justin Trudeau and the Liberals eat every morsel of cake coming to them, because time and circumstances are finally on your side.




					www.macleans.ca
				




A good opinion piece Conservatives should heed.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

But looks like they won’t…









						Conservative on national council says members should review O'Toole's leadership
					

A Conservative who sits on the party's national council says Erin O'Toole should undergo an accelerated leadership review by members following his election loss, marking the first open challenge to him staying in the role.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> People have to live within their means.


I agree


Remius said:


> I’m not saying we should make it impossible but not everyone is the same or equal.


Also agree.


Remius said:


> If you are living on minimum wage, homeownership isn’t likely.


Agreed.


Remius said:


> But alternatives like renting should be feasible.  My brother in law wants a 4 bedroom home and pool.  He doesn’t want to rent.  He has to pay child support for four kids.  At some point he will need to realise that that is feasible.  Buy something smaller, rent or move out of the city and maybe find something better than mom’s basement.


Make sense.


Remius said:


> Some people live in denial.  Some people make it work with what they have.  It took me 25 years from renting (8 years), first small townhouse (2 years), big 4 bedroom (1 year), divorce so down graded to a small 2 bedroom garden home with no yard (8years) to a semi detached (5 years) to where I am now in a single family home.    In all that time I had options to move to the country for bigger,  stay in town with smaller,  rent an older nice place or rent a smaller new place etc etc etc.


Makes sense.


Remius said:


> People have options,  but people make choices. They want a brand new truck, iPhone and every streaming show around but lament they can’t afford a house.  We have choices.  We don’t all have the same ones but choices can be made.


I do like how people assume people are making bad choices.

I'm about to dump my financials here.

My household income is around 85k.

The wife and I identified the neighborhood we want to live in.  Housing price around 350-400k 

In order to make the finances work, we made a plan. Save a lot of money. 90k. We we have been putting aside around 10k a year. 4 years into our plan, no vacations, no new vehicles, living rather frugally, we saved around 45k. We had some investments pay off, to the tune of about 20k. So we are thinking we are doing really well. almost there. 

Then covid hits and this housing market goes nuts. Suddenly 90k isn't enough. Fine, whats another 20k? Two more years? Fine. Another year passes. Another 15k on top of that? What the hell, fine, the neighborhood we planned on isn't going to work. Lets look outside the city. And whats happening? Right, of course, those prices are now rising faster than we can save as well.

So home ownership for us is pretty much out of the window.

I work for the forces, and my exit job is tied to this geographical location, so I cannot simply move across the country and net a job that pays anywhere near what my exit job is going to pay.  

Where exactly did I screw up? What bad choices did I make?


----------



## QV (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> The same that Alberta pays to Toronto. 0.


Oh.


Altair said:


> I agree
> 
> Also agree.
> 
> ...


Trying to make it in a six figure region on a five figure salary? It's a mistake many make.


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree
> 
> Also agree.
> 
> ...


That's life.  Who ever told you is was gonna be easy, or you had some sort of entitled state  lied to you.

Keep you stick on the ice and keep plugging away.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Not sure about that.  I think we have far more rural or small towns where the crime rate is significantly higher than most big cities.


Crime or reported Crime?
   I've done enough ride alongs with various Big City Departments both in Canada and down here - and I know that crime does not equal reported crimes.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Crime or reported Crime?
> I've done enough ride alongs with various Big City Departments both in Canada and down here - and I know that crime does not equal reported crimes.


VPD got their pee pee slapped for not recording or responding to property crimes for awhile now they are obliged to attend.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm about to dump my financials here.
> 
> My household income is around 85k.
> 
> ...


I don't want to come across as a smart ass, as I am legitimately sorry for your situation.

However the adage Life Sucks, Wear a Helmet comes to mind -- good people get F'd over by life all the time, you do the best with what you can, and you adapt as necessary.

  I live in Horse Country Northern Virginia -- when we moved from Florida, our FL house which we owned outright - wasn't going to come close to helping with a house up here -- at least one we wanted.
  We rented for 9 years - and slightly over a year ago where able to move in on a home built for us-- we had to have it built, as we had started looking pre-COVID - but homes where in the 800K plus range for what we wanted, and then where going for above asking - and most of the homes needed work - so you where looking at around 1.1M USD - which to me and my wife was crazy -- we managed to find a builder who had build a home for family friends - and he did fantastic work, had land to build on - and wasn't going to charge us a fortune.
  We lucked out - we paid a tad over 800k, and now it's allegedly worth 1.3m
      That said - I lost money on many houses before.
1) Calgary - Divorce from Trg Wife
2) Calgary Condo - I went back to the PPCLI after 9/11 and the market had crashed - so that was a 30k hit.

Now - if my wife or I need to go into the Pentagon, or worse DC - its a frightful hike - 27miles doesn't seem like much - until your doing 5 mph.
  When I was working for FN in McLean VA - my commute was around a 4hr trip - I ended up working an off peak schedule like a lot of Fed gov folks do - to try to miss peak traffic - even then it was an hour or so either way -- for a 34.7m drive.


BUT if we had wanted to live closer to DC - a home we would need (2 kids, mother in law, 3 Labs) would be way over 3M - which I can't afford anytime soon.

   I would suggest that you look further out -- you may find you enjoy it more - even if the commute in to work makes you homicidal at times --
Even if you buy out of your planned area - it will at least allow you to build up equity, so later if you want you can move to a more permanent home.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> That's life.  Who ever told you is was gonna be easy, or you had some sort of entitled state  lied to you.


I don't think anyone told me that.

What people did say was work hard, save money, build your credit and when you have done these things long enough home ownership will be the next step.

Those people lied. I might as well have spent recklessly and travelled the world and bought new vehicles and the newest electronics because I have the same chance of buying a house as those folks and had a lot less fun in the past few years than they did.


Halifax Tar said:


> Keep you stick on the ice and keep plugging away.


I don't think one can keep plugging away when house prices are rising faster than I am able to save. Math doesn't work that way. I am actually further away from home ownership today than I was 2 years ago and I have saved more money.

Riddle me that.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I don't want to come across as a smart ass, as I am legitimately sorry for your situation.
> 
> However the adage Life Sucks, Wear a Helmet comes to mind -- good people get F'd over by life all the time, you do the best with what you can, and you adapt as necessary.
> 
> ...


Our ideal neighborhood was a a 30 minute drive to work.

As those got more expensive, we looked further out. 45-50 minute drive, and no transit now.

As those got more expensive, trying to get something basic is over an hour drive with traffic.

It's better to rent.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Our ideal neighborhood was a a 30 minute drive to work.
> 
> As those got more expensive, we looked further out. 45-50 minute drive, and no transit now.
> 
> ...


Understood - but based on your own admission the situation isn't going to get better anytime soon.
   Not sure if you and the Mrs. have kids - but if you do, the drive may be worth it (two reasons - to get away {I kid sort of} but so they ca have a decent quality of life).

 A basic house now will at least allow you to sell that to use towards a more ideal home.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Understood - but based on your own admission the situation isn't going to get better anytime soon.
> Not sure if you and the Mrs. have kids - but if you do, the drive may be worth it (two reasons - to get away {I kid sort of} but so they ca have a decent quality of life).
> 
> A basic house now will at least allow you to sell that to use towards a more ideal home.


Its good advice. 

We don't know what to do. Wait and see most likely. 

What I will stress though is that it's not all because people don't know how to budget or feel entitled to simply be handed a house out of thin air. 

Even those who did everything right are simply being priced out.


----------



## SupersonicMax (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I don't want to come across as a smart ass, as I am legitimately sorry for your situation.
> 
> However the adage Life Sucks, Wear a Helmet comes to mind -- good people get F'd over by life all the time, you do the best with what you can, and you adapt as necessary.


But when « life sucks » for most average people, that’s when intervention is required.


----------



## Halifax Tar (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I don't think anyone told me that.
> 
> What people did say was work hard, save money, build your credit and when you have done these things long enough home ownership will be the next step.
> 
> Those people lied. I might as well have spent recklessly and travelled the world and bought new vehicles and the newest electronics because I have the same chance of buying a house as those folks and had a lot less fun in the past few years than they did.


No one lied.  You're just not done working and saving. And maybe you need to reel in your expectations.

Life is a series of obstacles to be overcome.



Altair said:


> I don't think one can keep plugging away when house prices are rising faster than I am able to save. Math doesn't work that way. I am actually further away from home ownership today than I was 2 years ago and I have saved more money.
> 
> Riddle me that.



Maybe you won't get to own a home.  Tough cookies.  Make the best of what you have, or dont.  It's up to you.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Its good advice.
> 
> We don't know what to do. Wait and see most likely.
> 
> ...


If have a fair amount of friends in the same boat.

 Several USG entities packed up from Northern Virginia and moved certain things to places like Texas and Louisiana - which gave those workers a massive break in housing.

My uncle used to work for Shell -- they wholesale abandoned Toronto one year for Calgary - back when Calgary housing was a fraction of TO's

   It doesn't sound like that is an option for you, and I wish you luck.


----------



## KevinB (22 Sep 2021)

SupersonicMax said:


> But when « life sucks » for most average people, that’s when intervention is required.


Usually we call that a revolution...


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree
> 
> Also agree.
> 
> ...


I never said bad choices,  just choices,  and I specified some of us have different choices but choices just the same. 

I don’t know what choices you or your wife made. I have no idea how old you are or what your situation is.  So I can’t comment.  All I know is that at one point in my life I had to cut cable, home phone, new clothes and change my eating habits and drive a 12 year old car to own my home.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Its good advice.
> 
> We don't know what to do. Wait and see most likely.
> 
> ...


Not to worry. You'll get your house. Trudeau gave us his promises. You can take those to the bank.

*Homeownership:*

Help young Canadians afford a down payment faster by introducing a tax-free First Home Savings Account that would allow Canadians under 40 to save up to $40,000 toward their first home and withdraw it tax-free to put toward their purchase, with no requirement to repay it.
Double the first-time homebuyers tax credit from $5,000 to $10,000 — an incentive that would help buyers with the many closing costs that come with buying property.
To reduce mortgage costs, a Liberal-led government would force the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to reduce mortgage insurance rates by 25% — a $6,100 annual savings for the average household.
For those ready to buy, Trudeau said the Liberals would “make sure the process is fair and transparent” by creating a Home Buyers’ Bill of Rights that would ban measures like blind bidding, which would require home sellers to disclose competing offers on their properties.
Impose a ban on new foreign ownership for the next two years and expand the upcoming tax on vacant and underused housing owned by non-resident and non-Canadians to include foreign-owned vacant land within large urban areas.
Impose an “anti-flipping tax” on residential properties, which would require that properties either be held for at least 12 months or face taxes — a move intended to reduce speculative demand in the marketplace and help cool excessive price growth.
*Build more homes:*

To help with supply, Trudeau said the Liberals plan to build, preserve, or repair 1.4 million affordable homes in four years.
The Liberals’ housing plan also includes a Housing Accelerator Fund, which would make $4 billion available to help large cities speed up their housing plans, targeting 100,000 new middle-class homes by 2024-2025.
The party also promised $2.7 billion over four years to build or repair more affordable homes, money to convert empty office space into housing, a multigenerational home renovation tax credit to offset the costs of adding a secondary unit to a home.


----------



## Remius (22 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Crime or reported Crime?
> I've done enough ride alongs with various Big City Departments both in Canada and down here - and I know that crime does not equal reported crimes.


Just going off stats across the country.


----------



## lenaitch (22 Sep 2021)

I was always of the belief that you don't acquire something until you can afford it, and that includes kids, but do truly feel sorry for the folks who have been caught up in the recent market silliness that has surrounded Covid.  Whether the prices stick remains to be seen.

I'm not exactly sure what the federal government can realistically do to impact housing costs in any meaningful way.  Tweaking tax laws just clips around the edges.  Provincial and municipal governments can have more impact since they control land use planning, zoning, etc. as well as transit development. The big problem in the Toronto area, and I assume Vancouver, is supply.  Folks stuck in a small condo, working form home, with kids, decided they needed the space offered by a single family home, and there was more demand than listings.  At the same time, advocates and planners call for more density to reduce sprawl.  Toronto has been a hot market for a while, Covid made it worse.

Among the younger generation of city dwellers, some are honestly committed (or resigned to) the downtown condo-dwelling, non-vehicle owning, transit-using lifestyle.  Others bemoan the fact that they can't find a job with their arts degree and moving north of Bloor St. is akin to the tundra.  The concept of leaving friends, family, favourite bistro or club for a well-paying job in a new community is foreign to them.


----------



## lenaitch (22 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Not to worry. You'll get your house. Trudeau gave us his promises. You can take those to the bank.
> 
> *Homeownership:*
> 
> ...



Like many other planks in the platforms of the parties in this last election, many of the promises touch on provincial jurisdiction.  Shovelling money out the door always runs up against provinces saying 'just give us the money and we'll figure out what the spend it on.

How does a First Home Savings Account differ from a TFSA.  Have folks looking for their first home maxed-out their TSFAs and RSPs?  From what I have read, investment options  aren't the problem.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Trudeau gave us his promises. You can take those to the bank.


Absolutely. 



Hero of the party MP George Chahal, only Liberal to win a seat in blue Calgary.








						Liberal Calgary MP allegedly caught on camera nicking opponent's flyer
					

Campaign manager claims newly-elected Calgary-Skyview MP George Chahal removed the flyer because it contained 'incorrect polling location'




					torontosun.com


----------



## ballz (22 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Like many other planks in the platforms of the parties in this last election, many of the promises touch on provincial jurisdiction.  Shovelling money out the door always runs up against provinces saying 'just give us the money and we'll figure out what the spend it on.
> 
> How does a First Home Savings Account differ from a TFSA.  Have folks looking for their first home maxed-out their TSFAs and RSPs?  From what I have read, investment options  aren't the problem.



It's not a big advantage over a TFSA, other than really it creates a bigger TFSA for first-time home buyers to start trying to build some savings...

If you're 18 or 19 years old,  you don't have much TFSA room, this essentially increases it by $40k of the hop... however, if you're that age, you probably don't have enough income to max out your TFSA room as it is. I guess it allows your parents to help you out more with their own money but again, this only helps those that already have more advantages than your average Joe.

If you're older, say 32, and have $35k in your RRSP and maxed out TFSAs, then you've already got access to ~$100k for a downpayment.

The RRSP HBP was the best tool, but that's already at $35k.... if anything increasing it is the only thing in these types of programs that could make a big difference. But, that's only temporary, it's an early-bird gets the worm again... once the market adjusts to that increased demand and it would very quickly, it would just drive up the housing prices even further.

Perhaps what really needs to be supported is people who want to do new builds / buy new builds from a builder / substantial renovation projects... for example, making them 100% GST-free. This would lead to more decisions to buy new, leading to more companies building, or encourages more people to take the project on themselves. Land obviously causes a huge constraint, they could also probably do away with the GST on new lots. These are all still just tweaks but at least they address the supply side and don't drive up costs even further.

One thing Jen Gerson mentioned, which she admits is political suicide, but perhaps access to subsidized long-term care should be tied to home equity. I think it's worth looking at but not sure how many people going into long-term care have a huge amounts of equity.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Not to worry. You'll get your house. Trudeau gave us his promises. You can take those to the bank.


One of his candidates let slip that the LPC were considering capital gains tax on the sale of your primary residence. He was quickly shushed and never spoke of it again. 

I think that is one thing you - or the GoC more correctly - can take to the bank.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I don't think one can keep plugging away when house prices are rising faster than I am able to save. Math doesn't work that way. I am actually further away from home ownership today than I was 2 years ago and I have saved more money.
> 
> Riddle me that.


Yet we (as a whole) were stupid enough to elect the same Federal party that allowed that to happen.  We are a collective stupid....


----------



## Maxman1 (22 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree
> 
> Also agree.
> 
> ...



So no one told you life was going to be this way?
👏👏👏👏


----------



## Maxman1 (22 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Instead of subsidizing childcare so that more people can enter or participate in the workforce. We should just put these kids to work directly that way their parents are freed up to participate but we will get the benefit of the greater labour participation of the children and their economic participation and contribution as well. Not only will we save on daycare costs we will be able to cut our education costs substantially as well


----------



## lenaitch (22 Sep 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> One of his candidates let slip that the LPC were considering capital gains tax on the sale of your primary residence. He was quickly shushed and never spoke of it again.
> 
> I think that is one thing you - or the GoC more correctly - can take to the bank.



That would probably be political suicide.  Geeze, I don't think even the NDP would propose it.  For a lot of folks, their home equity is a big chunk of their retirement nest egg, especially to fund retirement home living and long term care.


----------



## Altair (22 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Yet we (as a whole) were stupid enough to elect the same Federal party that allowed that to happen.  We are a collective stupid....


Far too much time is spent looking at the past when we need to look towards the future.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Sep 2021)

A high-school course isn't needed to teach financial prudence.

1. Use a debit card instead of a credit card. 
1a. A credit card is something you get in order to use services that require a credit card (eg. hotel, car rental).
1b. If you have to actually use the credit card, pay it off every month so that you never pay interest.

2. Never use borrowed money to buy stuff that depreciates (eg. cars).
2a. It's OK to borrow to buy a home.
2b. If you do know how to invest, it's OK to borrow to invest (provided earnings > interest).*

3. 10, 10, and 6.
a. Minimum of 10% of gross income into short-term savings (for emergencies and occasional big purchases - car, vacation).
b. Minimum of 10% of gross income into long-term savings (retirement, not to be withdrawn until).
c. 6 months' expenses in a low-risk account.  Never to be touched except in case of unemployment.

(Should be 10, 20, and 6 if you want the kind of retirement income a typical public employee pension plan provides.)

*If you don't know much, buy index funds.


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Sep 2021)

The problem with all the policy planks that involve subsidies is that all the people who qualify get the same thing.  All the extra money just lifts the bids (prices).

Buy land and find a floor plan from 1970 and build to it.


----------



## Kilted (23 Sep 2021)

So apparently Kevin Vuong is still serving.  I didn't know that you can sit as an MP while being a member of the military.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Sep 2021)

however if you are fiscally prudent, you can get credit cards from places like TD that gives you cash back, but be careful not to carry a balance, we recently got back $1500 because we put almost everything on it. I bought my Landrover for $900 25 years ago, putting about 4-5,000 into as a hobby, will likley get $12,000+ when i sell it.


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> So apparently Kevin Vuong is still serving.  I didn't know that you can sit as an MP while being a member of the military.


Harjit Sajjan was elected while still serving.

Reservists are weird like that.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Sep 2021)

Unsheath the blades ....


> A Conservative who sits on the party's national council says Erin O'Toole should undergo a leadership review by members following his election loss, marking the first open challenge to him staying in the role.
> 
> Bert Chen represents Ontario, but says he's speaking as a loyal member and there are a lot of others unhappy with the more moderate direction O'Toole has taken the party, which was opposite to how he ran in its leadership contest to win over party faithful.
> 
> ...


Still only one voice out of 20 on the Team Blue National Council - for now.


----------



## lenaitch (23 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The problem with all the policy planks that involve subsidies is that all the people who qualify get the same thing.  All the extra money just lifts the bids (prices).
> 
> Buy land and find a floor plan from 1970 and build to it.


Too bad Eaton's wasn't still around:


----------



## MilEME09 (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Harjit Sajjan was elected while still serving.
> 
> Reservists are weird like that.


Shouldn't be, but it's s matter of enforcement of the rules it would seem as you shouldn't be an elected member of a political party, and a CAF member


----------



## Czech_pivo (23 Sep 2021)

From what I've been reading only 59% of the eligible electorate decided to leave their house and vote in this most recent election.
So if we use the nice and round number of 100 to represent all eligible voters in Canada, then only 59 of them voted.
Of those 59 people, 34% voted CPC, 33% the Libs, 18% for NDP, 8% for the BQ, 5% for the PPC and bringing up the rear 2% for the Greens.
This works out to be 20 people of the 59 voted for the CPC, 19 people for the Libs, 10 for the NDP, 5 for the BQ, 3 for the PPC and finally 1 lonely person for the Greens, the rest of the 59 represent the fringe voters (shout out to my old home city of Windsor, Ontario who still continues to field Marxist-Leninist candidates!)   
When looking at this in its crude form, Trudeau has been elected based on the actions of 19 people out of 100 eligible voters and our current system of first past the post. 
So when he says that the 'people have spoken', nah, just 19 with the loudest voices have spoken.


----------



## mariomike (23 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> The concept of leaving friends, family, favourite bistro or club for a well-paying job in a new community is foreign to them.


Fortunately, when I graduated high school, there was still a Residency Requirement.


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Shouldn't be, but it's s matter of enforcement of the rules it would seem as you shouldn't be an elected member of a political party, and a CAF member


No bar at statute or regulation for Res F members.

And ample precedent for military members to be members of the house - read the Hansard for June 1944.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> From what I've been reading only 59% of the eligible electorate decided to leave their house and vote in this most recent election ... Trudeau has been elected based on the actions of 19 people out of 100 eligible voters and our current system of first past the post ...


Repeat as required for almost all elections held under first past the post systems.


----------



## MilEME09 (23 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Repeat as required for almost all elections held under first past the post systems.


Perhaps we need to go the aussie route and make voting legally mandatory


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Perhaps we need to go the aussie route and make voting legally mandatory


Part of me loves the idea because it'll get more people out to vote (check out the almost 92% nat'l election turnout in 2019), but part of me worries that it won't necessarily mean more _informed_ voters turning out.  Also, if we live in a free democracy, it might be considered ... ironic that we wouldn't have the freedom NOT to vote ...

I'd love to hear from anyone who knows more about how the Aussie electoral system works in reality.


----------



## Haggis (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Harjit Sajjan was elected while still serving.
> 
> Reservists are weird like that.


He released shortly thereafter and was appointed MND.


----------



## KevinB (23 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Perhaps we need to go the aussie route and make voting legally mandatory


Or go full Robert A. Heinlein and "Service guarantees Citizenship" - where only those who do Federal service get citizenship and can vote...


----------



## Remius (23 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Or go full Robert A. Heinlein and "Service guarantees Citizenship" - where only those who do Federal service get citizenship and can vote...


I am all for that.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2021)

Go Navy!


Expelled Liberal candidate says he'll sit as an Independent as angry voters call for byelection​Former Liberal candidate Kevin Vuong — who won his Toronto riding in a close-fought race — says he plans to sit as an Independent after the Liberals cut ties with him just days before the election over a sexual assault charge that was later dropped.

Vuong failed to disclose to the Liberal Party that he had been charged in 2019. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said his party learned about the charge from a Toronto Star article during the final week of the election campaign and asked Vuong to pause his local campaign.

Trudeau dropped Vuong as a candidate two days before the election — too late to remove his name from the ballot. The party said Vuong would not be part of the Liberal caucus. He won his seat in a tight race, by a margin of 2,094 votes over the NDP candidate.

In a statement issued today, Vuong maintained his innocence and said he understands that "not everyone is happy with my election."

"For those who feel this way, I understand the source of your doubts and I will work hard to earn your trust," he wrote.




			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/undecided-races-2021-federal-election-1.6185685


----------



## Fabius (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Far too much time is spent looking at the past when we need to look towards the future.


History, aka the past does offer a predictor of how people, organizations and countries behave though.  The past causes the present and therefore impacts and influences the future. Looking at the past gives an understanding of why thing occurred and how they occurred. History may not repeat but it definitely rhymes. 
Deeds not words. Deeds matter more than words, and the past can offer an evaluation of both and how they relate.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (23 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Go Navy!
> 
> Expelled Liberal candidate says he'll sit as an Independent as angry voters call for byelection​
> 
> ...



Aye, aye!







And in a more embarrassing image (for the organization)


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Maybe you won't get to own a home.  Tough cookies.  Make the best of what you have, or dont.  It's up to you.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Far too much time is spent looking at the past when we need to look towards the future.


Sorry. The trudeau liberals aren't getting off that easy.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (23 Sep 2021)

Czech_pivo said:


> So when he says that the 'people have spoken', nah, just 19 with the loudest voices have spoken.



Not even the loudest voices. some of those 19 were given megaphones based on their geography. 

FPTP worked when we were a small nation of 4 provinces. We are the second largest country by area in the world. Being "Canadian" unites us all when its the IIHF World juniors, but I guarantee the interests and concerns a person in St. John's has differ tremendously to someone in Calgary, and thus are not "Canadian" interests. 

Moreover, it only serves to alienate the rest of the country to have Toronto and Montreal dictate who will run the country before the polls even close on the West Coast. Its lunacy like this that will lead to stronger calls for succession in places like Alberta. Hell even in rural Ontario there are a lot of people pissed off that Toronto called the election for them.


----------



## QV (23 Sep 2021)

I’ve found a number of people voted LPC because they identify as being liberal and they actually believe Trudeau and the LPC espouse liberal values.  A lot can be assumed just from a name. I don’t like the CPC name, it comes across as the old dusty party of our grandparents, “conservative” doesn’t sound as enlightening as “liberal”. The CPC needs new branding and a name change to appeal to a large group of voters.


----------



## YZT580 (23 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The problem with all the policy planks that involve subsidies is that all the people who qualify get the same thing.  All the extra money just lifts the bids (prices).
> 
> Buy land and find a floor plan from 1970 and build to it.


no one needs 2500 square foot house with 3 bathrooms, a Jacuzzi, sauna and exercise room and almost everyone can learn to hang drywall and do other basic rennos.


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> He released shortly thereafter and was appointed MND


I'll admit I don't know the procedure here, was the only reason he released because he was going to be MND or because he was a MP?


----------



## YZT580 (23 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Too bad Eaton's wasn't still around:


no, but colonial homes and other pre-fab outfits still exist


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Sorry.


I don't buy it.


Fishbone Jones said:


> The trudeau liberals aren't getting off that easy.


When my house is on fire I care less about what started it and more about putting it out.


----------



## YZT580 (23 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> I’ve found a number of people voted LPC because they identify as being liberal and they actually believe Trudeau and the LPC espouse liberal values.  A lot can be assumed just from a name. I don’t like the CPC name, it comes across as the old dusty party of our grandparents, “conservative” doesn’t sound as enlightening as “liberal”. The CPC needs new branding and a name change to appeal to a large group of voters.


how about reform?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I'll admit I don't know the procedure here, was the only reason he released because he was going to be MND or because he was a MP?



From 2015









						Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan released from military — so he doesn't have to take orders from generals
					

Theoretically, as a member of the military he would have been required to take orders from generals who are supposed to be answering to him




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> History, aka the past does offer a predictor of how people, organizations and countries behave though.  The past causes the present and therefore impacts and influences the future. Looking at the past gives an understanding of why thing occurred and how they occurred. History may not repeat but it definitely rhymes.
> Deeds not words. Deeds matter more than words, and the past can offer an evaluation of both and how they relate.


If everyone thinks this way, aren't things like reconciliation doomed from the start?

Wouldn't support for Quebec separation still be at all time highs?

Place too much emphasis on the past and previous mistakes and one never moves forward to fixing the issue.

That's what I tell my wife at least.


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> From 2015
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So what I gather is that he could have stayed on as a reservist if he wasn't going to be MND.

So I guess this Vuong fella can stay in the reserves so long as the military doesn't kick him to the curb then.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Aye, aye!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

There is no statute or regulation that would force his release. See QR&O chapter 19, article 19.44.

The custom has been in recent years to not have Reg F or P Res members serve in the House (I am uncertain whether any members were in the Supp Res when serving as MPs).


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Sep 2021)

AS far as the Liberal riding association crying and whining about Vuong and demanding he step down or have a by-election, too F-ing bad.

That's how this works and when it doesn't work in your favour, you can not cry like ill tempered toddlers.


----------



## QV (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> how about reform?


Nope. That wouldn't do. Too much negativity tied to that name.


----------



## mariomike (23 Sep 2021)

rmc_wannabe said:


> Its lunacy like this that will lead to stronger calls for succession in places like Alberta.



Nothing new about that.









						Western Alienation - Split from General Election 2019
					

“ Instead, it continued into British Columbia's Interior and northeast, parts of the province where support for Conservative candidates ranged from 45.1 per cent in Kootenay-Columbia in the south to a full 69.9 per cent in Prince George-Peace River-Northern Rockies in the north.”  This is real...




					www.milnet.ca
				












						The libertarian case for (Western) independence
					

Can this “radical decentralization” work? To me, it seems very far-fetched.    The libertarian case for independence  Independence is a legitimate option for the West, but only if it does so to end overreaching government, not replicate it.  Published 6 days ago on September 8, 2020 Darcy Gerow...




					www.milnet.ca
				





Or, the urban vs rural divide in Canadian politics,








						338Canada: The urban-rural divide, right along party lines - Macleans.ca
					

Philippe J. Fournier: In the least populated ridings, Conservatives dominate voting intentions by 16 points. In the most populated, Liberals are up by 26 points.




					www.macleans.ca
				





> In the least populated ridings, Conservatives dominate voting intentions by 16 points. In the most populated, Liberals are up by 26 points.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Nope. That wouldn't do. Too much negativity tied to that name.


👍🏼 

Needs something that captures both progress and responsibility.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> There is no statute or regulation that would force his release. See QR&O chapter 19, article 19.44.
> 
> The custom has been in recent years to not have Reg F or P Res members serve in the House (I am uncertain whether any members were in the Supp Res when serving as MPs).



Maybe one not following the custom.









						Home - Dane Lloyd | Sturgeon River-Parkland
					






					danelloyd.com
				





> . . . As an Infantry Officer in the Canadian Forces Primary Reserves, Dane is currently the only serving member of the Canadian Forces in Parliament.



His Wikipedia page says he is with the GGFG.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> So I guess this Vuong fella can stay in the reserves so long as the military doesn't kick him to the curb then.


Does the CAF need more officers that hide sexual misconduct allegations and charges?


----------



## RangerRay (23 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> I’ve found a number of people voted LPC because they identify as being liberal and they actually believe Trudeau and the LPC espouse liberal values.  A lot can be assumed just from a name. I don’t like the CPC name, it comes across as the old dusty party of our grandparents, “conservative” doesn’t sound as enlightening as “liberal”. The CPC needs new branding and a name change to appeal to a large group of voters.


I self identify as “liberal” but I have never voted “Liberal” (except for in BC).  The opposite of “liberalism” is not “conservatism”, but “illiberalism”. 

I believe that I am in the minority of self-identified “liberals” in this country.


----------



## RangerRay (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> how about reform?


Or how about bring back “Liberal-Conservatives”?









						Liberal-Conservative Party - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org
				




Illiberal conservatives can go that way —>.


----------



## Weinie (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> no one needs 2500 square foot house with 3 bathrooms, a Jacuzzi, sauna and exercise room and almost everyone can learn to hang drywall and do other basic rennos.


I have 4 kids, 3 of whom are teens or pre-teen.They all have their own rooms, barring that we would have war and likely 2 less kids and one in Juvie for murder. My wife and I both work, and bathroom schedules clash.

I grew up with 8 people, 3 rooms,and an outhouse. Ain’t looking back fondly.


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2021)




----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> I have 4 kids, 3 of whom are teens or pre-teen.They all have their own rooms, barring that we would have war and likely 2 less kids and one in Juvie for murder. My wife and I both work, and bathroom schedules clash.
> 
> I grew up with 8 people, 3 rooms,and an outhouse. Ain’t looking back fondly.


This is why the wife and I decided one kid would do.


----------



## The Bread Guy (23 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Or go full Robert A. Heinlein and "Service guarantees Citizenship" - where only those who do Federal service get citizenship and can vote...


I've been a fan of that big time in the past, but I'm also thinking that if we think of the biggest rodent fornicator we've ever served with, greasy and dodgy, dishonest etc., are they more likely to vote for the good of the whole more than the most intelligent, civic-minded civilian we know?  After all, as of a few months ago, even this guy could vote under that system, right?  (OK, maybe not for much longer now, but still ...)


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> I grew up with 8 people, 3 rooms,and an outhouse. Ain’t looking back fondly.


Well sure, someone should have made a second hole in the outhouse.


----------



## Halifax Tar (23 Sep 2021)

rmc_wannabe said:


> Not even the loudest voices. some of those 19 were given megaphones based on their geography.
> 
> FPTP worked when we were a small nation of 4 provinces. We are the second largest country by area in the world. Being "Canadian" unites us all when its the IIHF World juniors, but I guarantee the interests and concerns a person in St. John's has differ tremendously to someone in Calgary, and thus are not "Canadian" interests.
> 
> Moreover, it only serves to alienate the rest of the country to have Toronto and Montreal dictate who will run the country before the polls even close on the West Coast. Its lunacy like this that will lead to stronger calls for succession in places like Alberta. Hell even in rural Ontario there are a lot of people pissed off that Toronto called the election for them.


Preach brother! 

Volume of population does not equal more important concerns.  Or shouldn't anyways.

The problem is we're asking for the party that's benefiting most from the current system to change the system so that it doesn't favor them. 

The NDP should be screaming from the mountains about this.  They get, what, a million more votes than the BQ but less seats.


----------



## dimsum (23 Sep 2021)

Raise your hand if you're surprised by this.









						Leader of Canadian Far-Right Party Has Twitter Frozen For Targeting Journalists
					

After Maxime Bernier sent out the contact info of journalists and told his followers to "play dirty," the information was reposted by white nationalists and the journalists were set upon by 4chan trolls.




					www.vice.com


----------



## Weinie (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Well sure, someone should have made a second hole in the outhouse.


Yeah, but that would have led to fights in the outhouse over the Eaton's catalogue, the smaller the pictures, the less abrasive it was.


----------



## PMedMoe (23 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> Raise your hand if you're surprised by this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Less surprised by this: Supporters of Maxime Bernier and People’s Party of Canada Call Election ‘Rigged’


----------



## Haggis (23 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I'll admit I don't know the procedure here, was the only reason he released because he was going to be MND or because he was a MP?


As CO of a P Res unit and MND, it was, at least, a perceived conflict of interest. There is at least one other MP who is currently a P Res officer.


----------



## Altair (23 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> As CO of a P Res unit and MND, it was, at least, a perceived conflict of interest. There is at least one other MP who is currently a P Res officer.


Interesting, I wonder if they can show up on weekends or when parliament is not sitting and do work with the unit.


----------



## Haggis (23 Sep 2021)

I don't see why not. Day job vs evening/weekend job. No different than me working for a federal public safety agency during the day and the CAF on weekends.


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

Except he's in an NCR unit, while representing an Alberta riding...


----------



## Remius (23 Sep 2021)

deleted for redundancy


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (23 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Okay, you've used two really odd examples so far... financial sector workers in Toronto, as if the rest of the country doesn't employ the same people, and now small businesses in Sudbury......... as if entrepreneurs can't / don't move to greener pastures. Government of Canada employees can transfer pretty easy, and generally get paid better than their private sector counterparts.
> 
> Aerospace employees? Steel workers? Which ones, specifically? You don't think they don't have transferable skills that will allow them to excel in other industries? The _vast majority_ do, I suspect.


I just wanted to comment on this as I found it very funny.  My Father-in-Law is a Steel Worker.  He has worked in three different Countries for multiple companies in many different industrial settings.  He has worked his way up from the floor all the way to Management.

The people that are part of USW today are highly skilled workers and are highly employable.... ANYWHERE.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Sep 2021)

How the Left see the results

_And for all the money spent on the leader’s tour, which saw the party charter a plane and send Singh to 51 ridings, it doesn’t seem to have delivered much in the way of ROI. As former NDP candidate for York-Simcoe Jessa McLean tweeted, “NDP federal council took the rebates from the local ridings and poured it all into @theJagmeetSingh’s image and campaign… We’re not a movement. We’re an ad campaign.”_









						After $24 million, is the NDP just done?
					

This was the second straight campaign where Jagmeet Singh rated as the most popular leader in Canada, only to wind up leading his party to a fourth-place finish, writes columnist Max Fawcett.




					www.nationalobserver.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Sep 2021)

> I have 4 kids, 3 of whom are teens or pre-teen.They all have their own rooms, barring that we would have war and likely 2 less kids and one in Juvie for murder. My wife and I both work, and bathroom schedules clash.



The 1600 sq ft boxes that were standard in the neighbourhood in which I grew up had a master + 2 bedrooms and full bathroom upstairs, and rec room, 2 rooms (potential bedrooms, or workshops, or whatever), and bathroom in the sub-basement.  The houses were built with basements half-finished or unfinished.  How much of the space made it to "finished" depended on the need of the family and industry of the father.


----------



## Kilted (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> There is no statute or regulation that would force his release. See QR&O chapter 19, article 19.44.
> 
> The custom has been in recent years to not have Reg F or P Res members serve in the House (I am uncertain whether any members were in the Supp Res when serving as MPs).


It's a custom, not a law.  Given the number of commitments that some reservists have and are still able to serve, I am not surprised.  We should have an NCM in parliament to even everything out.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Sep 2021)

Kilted said:


> It's a custom, not a law.  Given the number of commitments that some reservists have and are still able to serve, I am not surprised.  We should have an NCM in parliament to even everything out.


Yeah, about that…Hellyer was an NCM…

I kid, because Brooke Claxton was arguably the best MND Canada ever had, and he was a BSM in WW1.


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Sep 2021)

Haggis said:


> I don't see why not. Day job vs evening/weekend job. No different than me working for a federal public safety agency during the day and the CAF on weekends.


I wonder if Kevin Vuong can request a REO for an assistant. Maybe someone from the Toronto area?


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Yeah, about that…Hellyer was an NCM…
> 
> I kid, because Brooke Claxton was arguably the best MND Canada ever had, and he was a BSM in WW1.


Remember, if you donate enough money, you can be an honorary officer; but you still have to earn your way into the Sgt/WO mess...


----------



## dapaterson (23 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I wonder if Kevin Vuong can request a REO for an assistant. Maybe someone from the Toronto area?


Does he have any friends suspended from their job as a cop who he can claim ignorance about?


----------



## daftandbarmy (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Remember, if you donate enough money, *or can blackmail your way in*, you can be an honorary officer; but you still have to earn your way into the Sgt/WO mess...



There, FTFY


----------



## Halifax Tar (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Remember, if you donate enough money, you can be an honorary officer; but you still have to earn your way into the Sgt/WO mess...


----------



## Haggis (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Except he's in an NCR unit, while representing an Alberta riding...


Good point.  Would the gaining and losing unit COs be willing to entertain an attach posting for the term of the 44th Parliament, say, 12 - 18 months?


----------



## SupersonicMax (23 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Except he's in an NCR unit, while representing an Alberta riding...


Why does it matter? It he spends a lot of his time in the NCR for work, why is it an issue?


----------



## YZT580 (23 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> I have 4 kids, 3 of whom are teens or pre-teen.They all have their own rooms, barring that we would have war and likely 2 less kids and one in Juvie for murder. My wife and I both work, and bathroom schedules clash.
> 
> I grew up with 8 people, 3 rooms,and an outhouse. Ain’t looking back fondly.


Seriously, ask yourself why your family (and you are the norm) requires all those goodies.  Our farm had 3 bedrooms, 5 kids plus parents and an outhouse.  Every bedroom was equipped with a thundermug which we took turns dumping into the john in the morning.  A trip out back was no fun at -30.  (CYXE territory).  I am definitely not wishing for the good ol' days but the question remains: why do we demand or expect so much?


----------



## YZT580 (23 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> I've been a fan of that big time in the past, but I'm also thinking that if we think of the biggest rodent fornicator we've ever served with, greasy and dodgy, dishonest etc., are they more likely to vote for the good of the whole more than the most intelligent, civic-minded civilian we know?  After all, as of a few months ago, even this guy could vote under that system, right?  (OK, maybe not for much longer now, but still ...)


first done in ancient Greece.  Great idea


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Seriously, ask yourself why your family (and you are the norm) requires all those goodies.  Our farm had 3 bedrooms, 5 kids plus parents and an outhouse.  Every bedroom was equipped with a thundermug which we took turns dumping into the john in the morning.  A trip out back was no fun at -30.  (CYXE territory).  I am definitely not wishing for the good ol' days but the question remains: why do we demand or expect so much?


Yeah!  And every Canadian should be legislated to walk to and from work/school…uphill…both ways…


Seriously, a bed room per person and more than a single shared bathroom is totally unreasonable?  

You should go into politics. Canadians would elect you in a heartbeat.  🙄


----------



## dimsum (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Seriously, ask yourself why your family (and you are the norm) requires all those goodies.  Our farm had 3 bedrooms, 5 kids plus parents and an outhouse.  Every bedroom was equipped with a thundermug which we took turns dumping into the john in the morning.  A trip out back was no fun at -30.  (CYXE territory).  I am definitely not wishing for the good ol' days but the question remains: why do we demand or expect so much?


Uh, was this in 1925?

Hell, it's just the two of us and one of my mandatory requirements is at least 1.5 bathrooms - in the same building as the rest of the rooms.


----------



## Weinie (23 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Seriously, ask yourself why your family (and you are the norm) *requires all those goodies. * Our farm had 3 bedrooms, 5 kids plus parents and an outhouse.  Every bedroom was equipped with a thundermug which we took turns dumping into the john in the morning.  A trip out back was no fun at -30.  (CYXE territory).  I am definitely not wishing for the good ol' days but the question remains: why do we demand or expect so much?


I guess that the interpretation of "goodies" has changed in the last fifty years. I will never accede to the thought that my kids should not have it better than I did.


----------



## FSTO (23 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> Uh, was this in 1925?
> 
> Hell, it's just the two of us and one of my mandatory requirements is at least 1.5 bathrooms - in the same building as the rest of the rooms.


Well son, it was the winter of 1967-68 when we moved into our new house on the farm that had running water and indoor plumbing. And I still had to share a bedroom with my older brother. Granted I was only 6 at the time, but yea, sometimes I really wonder why we have these monster homes for a family of 4.


----------



## dimsum (23 Sep 2021)

FSTO said:


> sometimes I really wonder why we have these monster homes for a family of 4.


Oh, I agree that current homes are generally too big.  Then again I don't have kids so I don't have that perspective.  

Still, no less than 1.5 bathrooms.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (23 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> Oh, I agree that current homes are generally too big.  Then again I don't have kids so I don't have that perspective.
> 
> Still, no less than 1.5 bathrooms.


I would rather live in a very well laid out 1500 sq ft house, than a poorly designed 3000 sq ft house.


----------



## Weinie (23 Sep 2021)

FSTO said:


> Well son, it was the winter of 1967-68 when we moved into our new house on the farm that had *running water and indoor plumbing.* And I still had to share a bedroom with my older brother. Granted I was only 6 at the time, but yea, sometimes I really wonder why we have these monster homes for a family of 4.


Luxury


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Luxury



Paper bag in middle t' road...


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Nothing wrong with more of whatever.  But building trades don't provide "more" for free.

More floor area is more expensive.  Complex layouts are more expensive.  Oddball breaks in wall and roof lines are more expensive.  Full finishing is more expensive.  Decorative add-ons are more expensive.  Fashionable appliances are more expensive.  Etc.

Much of the cost in the hottest markets is simply high-demand land, but the cost of escalating preferences is a non-trivial factor.  And for that, the blame lies with buyers.

Some of the programs will be counter-productive.  When someone buys a crappy rental house that has been divvied up into two or more suites and renovates it as a single family dwelling, that results in a net loss of total available accommodations.  When someone buys a decent single-family house and upgrades it and raises the price tag by 50 to 100K, that isn't a downward pressure on prices.


----------



## ModlrMike (24 Sep 2021)

Saw this elsewhere today:


----------



## Altair (24 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Saw this elsewhere today:
> 
> View attachment 66600


Speaking of seats, I just noticed the LPC flipped a lead based on mail in votes,Brome-Missisquoi. Was a LPC seat before, but bloc had the lead on election night.

Up to 159 now. Wonder if we start hearing conspiracies about mail in votes...


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> first done in ancient Greece.  Great idea


True, but it would still leave the greasy rodent fornicator (GRF)*** troop being able to vote vs. smart/engaged civilian not being able to vote.

** *Realizing there would be a small percentage of GRFs in any veteran's group - just bringing up the principle of the thing.


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Speaking of seats, I just noticed the LPC flipped a lead based on mail in votes,Brome-Missisquoi. Was a LPC seat before, but bloc had the lead on election night.


Close one in Sault Ste. Marie, too, only it stayed Team Red -- lookit how close it was for Team Blue, though (and how many Team Purple/Almost Blue votes were in play) ...

... before the mail-in ballots were counted - and afterwards?


> ... At final count Sheehan collected 15,231 votes for 37.9 per cent and Spina ended up with 14,984 for 37.4 per cent ...


Also, on the PPC drift, one riding I heard some commentators talking about on various podcasts is worth noting.  Michelle Rempel (Conservative - Calgary Nose Hill) went from just under 70% of the popular vote in her riding in 2019 ....

... to not quite 56% this time around



Altair said:


> Wonder if we start hearing conspiracies about mail in votes...


Does this count?   


PMedMoe said:


> Less surprised by this: Supporters of Maxime Bernier and People’s Party of Canada Call Election ‘Rigged’


----------



## Altair (24 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Close one in Sault Ste. Marie, too, only it stayed Team Red -- lookit how close it was for Team Blue, though (and how many Team Purple/Almost Blue votes were in play) ...
> View attachment 66602
> ... before the mail-in ballots were counted - and afterwards?
> 
> ...


I'll allow it.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I would rather live in a very well laid out 1500 sq ft house, than a poorly designed 3000 sq ft house.


The problem is they don't build houses like this anymore.  I've been looking for a house in the 1200ft-1500ft range but there are none available.
It's either buy a condo or buy a 3000ft square home on a tiny plot of land.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




I always find this peculiar.  Why people want such big houses on such tiny plots of land?  I grew up in what used to be a Paper town.  The Power Corporation of Canada owned the Mill at one time and built many of the Houses for the workers.  It was what you would call, a true company town.  Here is a picture:


Some of these houses are around 100 years old, are modest in size but well maintained.  I have looked for houses around this size but they just don't build them anymore.  It's interesting because families are far smaller than they were in the past.


----------



## Remius (24 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> The problem is they don't build houses like this anymore.  I've been looking for a house in the 1200ft-1500ft range but there are none available.
> It's either buy a condo or buy a 3000ft square home on a tiny plot of land.
> 
> 
> ...


Families didn’t need finished basements and rec rooms.  Back then it was “get the eff outside and don’t come back until the street lights come on” and “take a dime with you to make a phone call if you get in trouble.  It better be serious”


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (24 Sep 2021)

I watched a reno show today and laughed when the reno guy said "hmm, not even a double vanity".    

Umm, ...really??


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Contractors build what they think most people want, as demonstrated by what people are buying.  There are two ways to get a simpler house: pay to have one built, or shop in neighbourhoods which were developed in the appropriate time frame.  (The latter won't work very well in urban neighbourhoods in which a lot of older stock has been replaced by houses meant to fill the lot to whatever limits are in the by-laws.)


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Families didn’t need finished basements and rec rooms.  Back then it was “get the eff outside and don’t come back until the street lights come on” and “take a dime with you to make a phone call if you get in trouble.  It better be serious”


I don't really think families need any of those things, the real estate industry has cleverly convinced them that they want them.  

They've been aided and abetted by politicians and policy makers who give developers favorable zoning conditions.


----------



## Halifax Tar (24 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I don't really think families need any of those things, the real estate industry has cleverly convinced them that they want them.
> 
> They've been aided and abetted by politicians and policy makers who give developers favorable zoning conditions.


That and a image they want to portray is very important


----------



## FJAG (24 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I watched a reno show today and laughed when the reno guy said "hmm, not even a double vanity".
> 
> Umm, ...really??


Double vanities have always puzzled me. Do people really spend that much time at the sink prettying themselves up that they can't share one? Even couples who have to go to work at the same time?

And don't get me started on walk-in closets the size of a bedroom. Do people really need that many clothes that they need a room all of their own?


----------



## dimsum (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> And don't get me started on walk-in closets the size of a bedroom. Do people really need that many clothes that they need a room all of their own?


When did you retire from the CAF again?  If I took out all my kit, it'd be 3 closets   

To @Humphrey Bogart's question about 1200-1500 sqft townhouses, they're actually building tons of them in the NCR.  I'm in one now - an older one, but I see them going up in the suburbs.


----------



## Remius (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> Double vanities have always puzzled me. Do people really spend that much time at the sink prettying themselves up that they can't share one? Even couples who have to go to work at the same time?
> 
> And don't get me started on walk-in closets the size of a bedroom. Do people really need that many clothes that they need a room all of their own?


Need and want are two different things.  I didn’t need a double garage but I sure did want one.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (24 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> When did you retire from the CAF again?  If I took out all my kit, it'd be 3 closets
> 
> To @Humphrey Bogart's question about 1200-1500 sqft townhouses, they're actually building tons of them in the NCR.  I'm in one now - an older one, but I see them going up in the suburbs.


But it was probably  a fight for the builder against all the monster home owners already there.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> That and a image they want to portray is very important


I see this a lot in Victoria.  People want a flashy car and a big house.  I've got some friends like this who are Navy.  They make a good salary but really don't have two pennies to rub together.  

Having a wife that sells mortgages gives me some insight in to who has money and who is a pretender.  90% of the GP is up to their eyes in debt.



> To @Humphrey Bogart's question about 1200-1500 sqft townhouses, they're actually building tons of them in the NCR.  I'm in one now - an older one, but I see them going up in the suburbs.



I don't think this is very common.  What I have seen is developers buying single family homes and then turning the property in to a multi-unit.  A developer just bought two single family homes across from me for around $600k each.  They then had them rezoned to put 8 units on each one at $550k a piece.  Crazy!


----------



## dapaterson (24 Sep 2021)

In my hood, they buy a single family home on a 60x100 lot, demolish it, build two triplexes (per zoning) and as soon as construction is complete, they discover that there's a non compliant fourth suite in each basement, and apply for the variance.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Migration from 100 to 33 foot lot frontages has been ongoing for decades.  The few "character" (old, original) homes remaining exist only where they were built in the middle of the original 100 foot lots.

1970: 1600-1800 sq ft, unfinished or partially finished basement, single carport, one car (occasionally two), very few recreational vehicles and trailers (the latter mainly those small collapsible tent trailers and some Bolers), rooftop-transported canoes and skiffs, once-every-few-years family vacation to Disneyland Anaheim.

2020: 2800+ sq ft, fully finished, two- or three-bay enclosed garage full of bicycles and seasonal recreational equipment and stacks of totes and boxes full of "stuff", at least two cars plus a project car or truck or motorized RV, large camper trailers and boat trailers, once-every-couple-of-years family vacation to resorts in Hawaii, Mexico, or Mediterranean.

Obviously the federal government has to step in and hand out money to these poor people trying to get by.


----------



## Remius (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Migration from 100 to 33 foot lot frontages has been ongoing for decades.  The few "character" (old, original) homes remaining exist only where they were built in the middle of the original 100 foot lots.
> 
> 1970: 1600-1800 sq ft, unfinished or partially finished basement, single carport, one car (occasionally two), very few recreational vehicles and trailers (the latter mainly those small collapsible tent trailers and some Bolers), rooftop-transported canoes and skiffs, once-every-few-years family vacation to Disneyland Anaheim.
> 
> ...


Smaller homes on larger lots would allow for more home gardens and even things like chickens lol.  When I was living in a garden home with no yard I missed growing my own stuff.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

Yep.  After my parents bought the lot and built the house, next spring the garden and chicken coop went in.


----------



## Remius (24 Sep 2021)

Heck, even for the enviro types: composters.


----------



## PMedMoe (24 Sep 2021)

Maybe this thread should be closed and a new one started....


----------



## OldSolduer (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> Double vanities have always puzzled me. Do people really spend that much time at the sink prettying themselves up that they can't share one? Even couples who have to go to work at the same time?
> 
> And don't get me started on walk-in closets the size of a bedroom. Do people really need that many clothes that they need a room all of their own?


You should see my North Face wardrobe 😉


----------



## Colin Parkinson (24 Sep 2021)

I suspect the large bathrooms and closest are to make the wife happy and that has a value all it's own.


----------



## ModlrMike (24 Sep 2021)

Pesky door cameras...

Calgary police investigating Liberal MP-elect George Chahal​Former Calgary city councillor captured on camera removing opponent's campaign material from porch​LINK


----------



## brihard (24 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Pesky door cameras...
> 
> Calgary police investigating Liberal MP-elect George Chahal​Former Calgary city councillor captured on camera removing opponent's campaign material from porch​LINK


Whoops. That’ll learn ya.


----------



## Weinie (24 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Whoops. That’ll learn ya.


Anyone else doing this would be called a POS


----------



## brihard (24 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Anyone else doing this would be called a POS


Guess we’ll wait and see if any charge is laid.


----------



## OldSolduer (24 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Whoops. That’ll learn ya.


Unfortunately it probably won't.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Sep 2021)

Why do you need:
a home that big
a pickup truck
an AR15
to drink alcohol
two computers
a garage AND a shed
a $800 garmin watch
a fast boat for fishing


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Why do you need:
> a home that big
> a pickup truck
> an AR15
> ...



Wait, only _one _home?

Asking for a friend


----------



## FJAG (24 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> When did you retire from the CAF again?  If I took out all my kit, it'd be 3 closets



2009. My gear is down to three old grey t-shirts, two sets of thermal underwear and my 1970's summer AVF crew suit (still regret turning my winter crew suit jacket in - that would be it here.)

.

🍻


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Sep 2021)

Housing just been on a long run and seems like more than a little bubble. The longer it goes the bigger the correction.

On the election and voting I would like to see the ballots return to not listing the party association that might have eliminated the Vuong situation


----------



## mariomike (24 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> On the election and voting I would like to see the ballots return to not listing the party association that might have eliminated the Vuong situation


When did they start listing the party association?


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

Since we’re talking Nanny State restrictions on what kind of home I can have, shouldn’t we also consider restricting personal savings to either government bonds or stuffing cash in your mattress?  Cars only with manual roll-up windows?  Shovels only, no snow blowers?

Jesus, the Yorkshiremen have nothing on some of you!  And to think that some people dared insinuate the government already interferes too much in legislating life…big pat on the back for everyone who grew up in a shoebox…I’ll stick with spend my money in as informed, or uniformed manner as I wish.  Heck, someone going to complain that I have a riding mower instead of a scythe?


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> When did they start listing the party association?


Seems like just yesterday but im not sure


----------



## mariomike (24 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Seems like just yesterday but im not sure


Thanks, I'm not sure either.


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> Thanks, I'm not sure either.











						Chapter 3 – A History of the Vote in Canada – Elections Canada
					

A History of the Vote in Canada. Chapter 3



					www.elections.ca
				




This seems to suggest that it was in the 70's, I would have said the 90's


----------



## SeaKingTacco (24 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Since we’re talking Nanny State restrictions on what kind of home I can have, shouldn’t we also consider restricting personal savings to either government bonds or stuffing cash in your mattress?  Cars only with manual roll-up windows?  Shovels only, no snow blowers?
> 
> Jesus, the Yorkshiremen have nothing on some of you!  And to think that some people dared insinuate the government already interferes too much in legislating life…big pat on the back for everyone who grew up in a shoebox…I’ll stick with spend my money in as informed, or uniformed manner as I wish.  Heck, someone going to complain that I have a riding mower instead of a scythe?
> 
> View attachment 66609


Scythe?
Tweezers for you!


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Since we’re talking Nanny State restrictions on what kind of home I can have, shouldn’t we also consider restricting personal savings to either government bonds or stuffing cash in your mattress?  Cars only with manual roll-up windows?  Shovels only, no snow blowers?


We could make people require a permit if they want to own a snow blower; only  people with certain length driveways or medical conditions need apply


----------



## FJAG (24 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> We could make people require a permit if they want to own a snow blower; only  people with certain length driveways or medical conditions need apply


I hope there's a lot of grandfathering involved with all these initiatives. I like the number of bathrooms I have and my snow blower.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Pesky door cameras...
> 
> Calgary police investigating Liberal MP-elect George Chahal​Former Calgary city councillor captured on camera removing opponent's campaign material from porch​LINK


Couple days into the re-elected Liberals and their's a police investigation. (Theft? Ethics?)
Hitting the ground running.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> I hope there's a lot of grandfathering involved with all these initiatives. I like the number of bathrooms I have and my snow blower.


As do most.  Those who have managed things well, or even moderately decently, don’t need a nanny state barging in, helping redistribution of capital equity to those who have less sense in how best to balance their wants and their needs.


----------



## brihard (24 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Couple days into the re-elected Liberals and their's a police investigation. (Theft? Ethics?)
> Hitting the ground running.


Going by the news the day after it happened, sounds like an Election Act complaint for removing the other guy’s campaign material. Not a statute I’m particularly familiar with, and it has a TON of different offences, so I’m not sure what the potential sanctions look like.


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

brihard said:


> Not a statute I’m particularly familiar with, and it has a TON of different offences, so I’m not sure what the potential sanctions look like.


Mandatory press conference, to include crying and a pledge to “do better.”


----------



## SeaKingTacco (24 Sep 2021)

FJAG said:


> I hope there's a lot of grandfathering involved with all these initiatives. I like the number of bathrooms I have and my snow blower.


You thought the Liberals would stop at guns, eh?
Guns were just a warm up…


----------



## Weinie (24 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> You thought the Liberals would stop at guns, eh?
> Guns were just a warm up…


Your evil polluting death machine snow blower is verboten. Yogic warming is now the mantra.


----------



## Brad Sallows (24 Sep 2021)

You guys think you're joking.  But after making life harder for lawn owners by banning a slate of lawn care products, why would the enviro-zealots balk at removing noisy, polluting machinery from one of the other seasons?


----------



## Good2Golf (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You guys think you're joking.  But after making life harder for lawn owners by banning a slate of lawn care products, why would the enviro-zealots balk at removing noisy, polluting machinery from one of the other seasons?


Probably for the same ‘altruistic’ reasons that some people thinks there should be restrictions placed on how many bedrooms or bathrooms a Canadian homeowner should be allowed…


----------



## lenaitch (24 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You guys think you're joking.  But after making life harder for lawn owners by banning a slate of lawn care products, why would the enviro-zealots balk at removing noisy, polluting machinery from one of the other seasons?


Don't need any of that nasty stuff when you live in a 800sf downtown condo.  But energy for heated sidewalks and transit stops = good.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

I haven't seen anyone advocating limits on bedrooms/bathrooms.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I haven't seen anyone advocating limits on bedrooms/bathrooms.


…other than the Canuck Yorkshireman saying why anything more than 1500sf and an outhouse is excessive…sure.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

Not excessive, expensive.  Nothing wrong with having a large well-appointed home; problematic to aspire to one without the means to actually achieve it.  When I sing that song, I intend to make two points: a cheaper solution is a better aiming point; and earlier generations didn't just stumble into prosperity.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

Which are two very valid points, which I support fully, and practice; however, I will never support increased government intervention to over-prescribe a housing equity framework that would inappropriately impact the responsible.  It seems to me that the people who complain most about the injustice of the current housing market conditions have amongst them, many who fail to properly manage their means and desires.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Which are two very valid points, which I support fully, and practice; however, I will never support increased government intervention to over-prescribe a housing equity framework that would inappropriately impact the responsible.  It seems to me that the people who complain most about the injustice of the current housing market conditions have amongst them, many who fail to properly manage their means and desires.


Nor would I accept a government dictating the size of house that you can/cannot have.

With that said, there should be a large stock of smaller, simpler, less expensive starter type home built (1500 sq ft, 3 bedroom, two bath unfinished basement) that can people housed fairly quickly.


----------



## FSTO (25 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Nor would I accept a government dictating the size of house that you can/cannot have.
> 
> With that said, there should be a large stock of smaller, simpler, less expensive starter type home built (1500 sq ft, 3 bedroom, two bath unfinished basement) that can people housed fairly quickly.


Heck, my first home in Lower Sackville was a new build 2 bedroom, 1 bath and unfinished basement. 99,000.00 in 1993. Perfect for a couple and one child.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Nor would I accept a government dictating the size of house that you can/cannot have.
> 
> With that said, there should be a large stock of smaller, simpler, less expensive starter type home built (1500 sq ft, 3 bedroom, two bath unfinished basement) that can people housed fairly quickly.



WW 2 provides a few good examples of what might be done in this regard:

A RIVETED COMMUNITY: NORTH VANCOUVER’S WARTIME SHIPBUILDING​The City of North Vancouver was unable to keep up with the housing needs of a huge influx of shipyard employees. The federal government stepped in to help fill the void by establishing Wartime Housing Ltd. in 1941. It moved quickly to end the crisis, signing agreements with municipalities to build three types of standardized houses.





__





						North Vancouver's Wartime Shipbuilding - Wartime Housing - MONOVA
					






					monova.ca
				




And the 'Strawberry Boxes":

*Strawberry box houses* or *Strawberry-box bungalow* was a style of homes built during World War II[1] and into the 1950s to 1960s and found throughout Canada. The style uses a square or rectangular foundation and named due to the similarity with boxes used to hold strawberries. This style has also been called the "Simplified Cape Cod", or "Victory Houses" in the case of certain government advertisements.









						Strawberry box houses - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Sep 2021)

The answer is apparently $305,000,000


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> The answer is apparently $305,000,000


?


----------



## YZT580 (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Which are two very valid points, which I support fully, and practice; however, I will never support increased government intervention to over-prescribe a housing equity framework that would inappropriately impact the responsible.  It seems to me that the people who complain most about the injustice of the current housing market conditions have amongst them, many who fail to properly manage their means and desires.


amen to that


----------



## YZT580 (25 Sep 2021)

basic homes are few and far between.  Developers don't offer a basic package within the construct itself and they don't offer a smaller construct when they market a new development.  Consequently, many folks are shut out.  Even condos and towns have 65,000 dollar kitchens when IKEA can supply the basics for 20


----------



## Altair (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Which are two very valid points, which I support fully, and practice; however, I will never support increased government intervention to over-prescribe a housing equity framework that would inappropriately impact the responsible.  It seems to me that the people who complain most about the injustice of the current housing market conditions have amongst them, many who fail to properly manage their means and desires.


Well, good thing enough people made enough noise about the current situation for parliament to take action.

Democracy is a wonderful thing.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (25 Sep 2021)

What action have they taken?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Since we’re talking Nanny State restrictions on what kind of home I can have, shouldn’t we also consider restricting personal savings to either government bonds or stuffing cash in your mattress?  Cars only with manual roll-up windows?  Shovels only, no snow blowers?
> 
> Jesus, the Yorkshiremen have nothing on some of you!  And to think that some people dared insinuate the government already interferes too much in legislating life…big pat on the back for everyone who grew up in a shoebox…I’ll stick with spend my money in as informed, or uniformed manner as I wish.  Heck, someone going to complain that I have a riding mower instead of a scythe?
> 
> View attachment 66609



People can own whatever home they want to have and can afford.  My comments earlier in the thread were more aimed at developers not really building anything that I actually want.

The choice here seems to be condo, townhouse or mansion.  Only the mansions have an actual yard. The 1500ft 2 bedroom, + Den, Kitchen and Bathroom with yard for garden/shed or garage doesn't exist here.

I have been looking for freehold land for sometime but Victoria is in love with Strata and most land is owned by developers.  

I am very content to live in a shoebox atm rather than be house poor and give my money to someone else.  It isn't even a good idea to buy a house/condo as an income generating investment anymore as the margins aren't great and there is better value elsewhere.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

> Democracy is a wonderful thing.



Like anything else, it can be vile.  There's nothing about 50%+1 which renders something "correct", let alone "right".


----------



## brihard (25 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> People can own whatever home they want to have and can afford.  My comments earlier in the thread were more aimed at developers not really building anything that I actually want.
> 
> The choice here seems to be condo, townhouse or mansion.  Only the mansions have an actual yard. The 1500ft 2 bedroom, + Den, Kitchen and Bathroom with yard for garden/shed or garage doesn't exist here.
> 
> ...



My neighbourhood still has active construction. Smallest detached home from our builder is a 1650!square foot bungalow on a 35’ x 100’ lot for about $850k.

To build the same house we built in 2017 is now $450k than it was then. From ~$555k to over $1m. Absolutely bananas. It’s a relatively large house, but that’s an >80% increase in four and a half years.

No idea what the hell other people in my generation who don’t already own are supposed to do. We were only able to do this due to the very early and untimely death of my wife’s parents, who themselves had bought in Vancouver when it was affordable.

You should be able to own a home off two decent incomes without relying on someone dying and leaving you money. But at >600k for even modest townhouses, good luck.


----------



## RangerRay (25 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Well, good thing enough people made enough noise about the current situation for parliament to take action.
> 
> Democracy is a wonderful thing.


The Liberal childcare plan was better because it addressed the lack of supply by creating more spaces. 

Their housing plan sucks because it increases demand without addressing supply, which is largely out of their hands. Talk to the municipal councillors in thrall of the NIMBY’s in their wards.


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> ?


The price for each of the two seats team red gained in the election.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2021)

The higher the cost of land, the more sense it makes to build an expensive house upon it.

This is about California, but the underlying principles are applicable.  How To Make Housing More Affordable (DR Henderson, an economist).


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

YZT580 said:


> basic homes are few and far between.  Developers don't offer a basic package within the construct itself and they don't offer a smaller construct when they market a new development.  Consequently, many folks are shut out.  Even condos and towns have 65,000 dollar kitchens when IKEA can supply the basics for 20


My frugal Scotch grandpa would appreciate the IKEA-ness of the basement I’m finishing on my own. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 💵


----------



## mariomike (25 Sep 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Their housing plan sucks because it increases demand without addressing supply, which is largely out of their hands. Talk to the municipal councillors in thrall of the NIMBY’s in their wards.


Sounds like our Ratepayers Association. Formally founded in 1929.

They are active in municipal and provincial politics.

Over 90 years of tradition, unimpeded by progress. < just kidding. Sort of.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> My frugal Scotch grandpa . . .  🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 💵



My scotch relations no longer espouse a frugal existence.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2021)

Really?!?!?!  *"Peterborough editorial: Expect Monsef to contest Peterborough-Kawartha riding again"*


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> My scotch relations no longer espouse a frugal existence.
> 
> View attachment 66618


Well, yes…selective frugality is a thing, BA! 😉 

I’m low on Achentoshan at the moment, but otherwise methinks we have much in common.  Betting there’s room for some Dalwhinnie, Oban and Laphroaig too. 😉


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Really?!?!?!  *"Peterborough editorial: Expect Monsef to contest Peterborough-Kawartha riding again"*


Hmmm, is the writer attempting to say that Electoral Reform not being pursued by the Government was Monsef’s fault???


> Monsef defeated Del Mastro’s replacement as Conservative candidate and three weeks later was sworn in as minister for democratic institutions with *responsibility for two high-profile Trudeau campaign promises: Senate reform and a switch from traditional first-past-the-post elections to some form of proportional voting.
> 
> That did not go well. Monsef’s inexperience showed and the Liberal leadership has no stomach for using its majority to drive reform. Neither initiative happened and Monsef was shuffled to a more natural position*, minister for women and gender equality, where she found her stride and developed a strong international reputation.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Hmmm, is the writer attempting to say that Electoral Reform not being pursued by the Government was Monsef’s fault???


To mangle an old saying to fit this politically, poor is the critic that blames the tools for the craftsman's poor work.


----------



## RangerRay (25 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Really?!?!?!  *"Peterborough editorial: Expect Monsef to contest Peterborough-Kawartha riding again"*


I always thought her ambitions far exceeded her capabilities.


----------



## Altair (25 Sep 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> The price for each of the three seats team red gained in the election.


Fixed

4 if you counted vuong


----------



## lenaitch (25 Sep 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Well, yes…selective frugality is a thing, BA! 😉
> 
> I’m low on Achentoshan at the moment, but otherwise methinks we have much in common.  Betting there’s room for some Dalwhinnie, Oban and Laphroaig too. 😉



I was going to thumbs-up all except the last one - because the stuff generally available at the LCBO is akin to kerosene -  but I've had some brought from the UK that was quite nice.  I just started a bottle of Highland Park bought (by me) for my birthday.


----------



## daftandbarmy (25 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> I was going to thumbs-up all except the last one - because the stuff generally available at the LCBO is akin to kerosene -  but I've had some brought from the UK that was quite nice.  I just started a bottle of Highland Park bought (by me) for my birthday.



I like to take Laphroaig on my more 'excruciating' climbs.

A good swig of that at the end of the day reminds me that:

a) I'm still alive, and

b) Things could be worse... as in 'I could be drinking this year round, but I only drink it on expeditions'


----------



## ballz (25 Sep 2021)

RangerRay said:


> The Liberal childcare plan was better because it addressed the lack of supply by creating more spaces.



How, exactly? I kept reading talking points about this but could never find out the "how" behind this claim?


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Sep 2021)

lenaitch said:


> I was going to thumbs-up all except the last one - because the stuff generally available at the LCBO is akin to kerosene -  but I've had some brought from the UK that was quite nice.  I just started a bottle of Highland Park bought (by me) for my birthday.


HP is a greatly under appreciated scotch.  The 12 is a great go to.


----------



## PuckChaser (25 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> How, exactly? I kept reading talking points about this but could never find out the "how" behind this claim?


The spaces will balance themselves.


----------



## Altair (25 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> How, exactly? I kept reading talking points about this but could never find out the "how" behind this claim?


The money the provinces get is dependent on the spots being  rented is my understanding.

Excluding Quebec which already had its system up and running.



PuckChaser said:


> The spaces will balance themselves.


Unless you are fishing for this kind of informative answer.


----------



## ballz (25 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> The money the provinces get is dependent on the spots being  rented is my understanding.



So commercial real estate is at a premium in downtown Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, and the provincial government now needs to either use thes scarce space available to build more spaces or rent all the space that exists?

This does not seem like a smart way to address supply issues. This seems to again throw more money at the problem and will increase the costs in the long-run... as government subsidies always do. Except now it's going to bleed into every single business as well, and seriously handicap start-ups.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> So commercial real estate is at a premium in downtown Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, and the provincial government now needs to either use thes scarce space available to build more spaces or rent all the space that exists?


Quebec has a system in place where they supply 76 percent of all daycare spots in the province, and the real estate market isn't significantly worse off than in Ontario or BC.


ballz said:


> This does not seem like a smart way to address supply issues.


having parents pay 24k a year or forced to stay home seems like a dumber decision.


ballz said:


> This seems to again throw more money at the problem and will increase the costs in the long-run...


Except costs are far lower in Quebec.


ballz said:


> as government subsidies always do. Except now it's going to bleed into every single business as well, and seriously handicap start-ups.


I wish people didn't act like this system wasn't field tested in Canada for 25 years.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Sep 2021)




----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Quebec has a system in place where they supply 76 percent of all daycare spots in the province, and the real estate market isn't significantly worse off than in Ontario or BC.



I'll go take a look, we don't hear about commercial real estate much I'm not sure what I could find. In saying that, there could literally be a 1000+ things that are affecting the market price of commercial real estate that help bring it down. The approach shouldn't be to do a single variable analysis to compare commercial real estate markets in different provinces. The question is, would commercial real estate be cheaper in Montreal if tomorrow, all those subsidized daycare spaces went away? I have no idea how much real estate it actually uses up, and it's impact on the local market, to equip a city like Montreal.... but it's _certainly_ worth considering. Or not, since the cities can then just whine until everyone is in Canada gets forced by vote-chasing politicians to pay for that, too.



Altair said:


> having parents pay 24k a year or forced to stay home seems like a dumber decision.



Living in a city where it costs that much for childcare seems like a dumber decision. I guess we'll add that to my list of things people in urban centers want feel entitled to without the necessary income.

Without going down this rabbit hole again, the more points you make the more convinced I am that these urban centers are heading down the same welfare trap as rural Newfoundland.... and now the province is on the brink of insolvency with seemingly no road to climb out since everyone feels entitled to government support for everything and is even having trouble borrowing now because it looks so bleak.



Altair said:


> I wish people didn't act like this system wasn't field tested in Canada for 25 years.



Admittedly I've always found their system intriguing but never understood it enough. I've seen some interesting numbers but I'm skeptical... considering that until the Liberals blew up Ontario, Quebec had the highest debt-to-GDP ratio for a long long time. They do not exactly have a good track record on fiscal management, they were a train wreck despite a completely unfair equalization program that skews to their favour heavily.

While you may choose to ignore the sources of revenue that leads to Federal government equalization payments (which is a pretty foolish thing to do), when the overall debt load becomes too high and all of Canada has become entitled to our unsustainable entitlements and put us in a situation where even the Federal government can no longer provide support, do you think Canada is going to receive equalization money from other countries?

I guess global superpowers like China might be interested in helping us out.... with many, many strings attached.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> having parents pay 24k a year or forced to stay home seems like a dumber decision.



Damn, costs are going up fast.  A few days ago someone was talking about 20K...


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Damn, costs are going up fast.  A few days ago someone was talking about 20K...











						Child Care in Canada: Types, Cost & Tips for Newcomers | Arrive
					

Explore the various child care options, get costs and subsidies to help you budget, and get tips for finding a suitable child care service in Canada.




					arrivein.com
				





23,208


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> I'll go take a look, we don't hear about commercial real estate much I'm not sure what I could find. In saying that, there could literally be a 1000+ things that are affecting the market price of commercial real estate that help bring it down. The approach shouldn't be to do a single variable analysis to compare commercial real estate markets in different provinces. The question is, would commercial real estate be cheaper in Montreal if tomorrow, all those subsidized daycare spaces went away? I have no idea how much real estate it actually uses up, and it's impact on the local market, to equip a city like Montreal.... but it's _certainly_ worth considering. Or not, since the cities can then just whine until everyone is in Canada gets forced by vote-chasing politicians to pay for that, too.


While there is going to be new spots created in the system, I suspect a lot of it is going to be existing spaces that are going for these absurd prices being rolled into the provincial system.

Depends on what the provinces have negotiated with the feds.


ballz said:


> Living in a city where it costs that much for childcare seems like a dumber decision. I guess we'll add that to my list of things people in urban centers want feel entitled to without the necessary income.


Everyone move to Quebec!

People live in cities, surprise surprise. Canada gets more urban every year that goes by.


ballz said:


> Without going down this rabbit hole again, the more points you make the more convinced I am that these urban centers are heading down the same welfare trap as rural Newfoundland.... and now the province is on the brink of insolvency with seemingly no road to climb out since everyone feels entitled to government support for everything and is even having trouble borrowing now because it looks so bleak.


Except for childcare increasing female workplace participation leading to an increase in female workplace participation which leads to increased economic activity, but we have have been down this conversation before.


ballz said:


> Admittedly I've always found their system intriguing but never understood it enough. I've seen some interesting numbers but I'm skeptical... considering that until the Liberals blew up Ontario, Quebec had the highest debt-to-GDP ratio for a long long time. They do not exactly have a good track record on fiscal management, they were a train wreck despite a completely unfair equalization program that skews to their favour heavily.


Quebec was a fiscal basket case before putting in universal healthcare and they have been doing better in the decades since putting it in.

And since everyone here has been through the discussion of how equalization pays more per capita to the Atlantic provinces than it does to Quebec, going over that again would be beating a dead horse.


ballz said:


> While you may choose to ignore the sources of revenue that leads to Federal government equalization payments (which is a pretty foolish thing to do), when the overall debt load becomes too high and all of Canada has become entitled to our unsustainable entitlements and put us in a situation where even the Federal government can no longer provide support, do you think Canada is going to receive equalization money from other countries?


I've said it before and I'll say it again,


Debt to GDP of the G7
Germany (85), USA (108), the UK (111.5),France (118), Italy (160), Japan, (260).

All these nations are among the top economies on the planet and they are all pilling on debt as well. Are you concerned about who is going to bail out Japan, or Italy? Or is Canada unique in its inability to service its debt? And is childcare, a program which can help give a boost to the economy, someone going to be the program that breaks the camels back?

It would be completely typical I guess, that Canada can spend hundreds of billions a year, and borrow tens of billions a year, but try to help working class Canadians to the tune of a 6 billion dollar annual childcare program and suddenly there is talk of being far too indebted. Well, make cuts to the 29 billion dollars that go to corporate subsidies annually and call it even, I really do not care.


ballz said:


> I guess global superpowers like China might be interested in helping us out.... with many, many strings attached.


Or we can do what we have done in the past, without foreign intervention.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> 23,208



Citing the most expensive data point didn't strengthen your point.  The people already paying for high-end child care are unlikely to qualify for much in the way of subsidy.  If they do, it's a piss-poor implementation on the politicians' part.


----------



## daftandbarmy (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Citing the most expensive data point didn't strengthen your point.  The people already paying for high-end child care are unlikely to qualify for much in the way of subsidy.  If they do, it's a piss-poor implementation on the politicians' part.



So being 'unfair', based on income, is one of the criteria?


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

Usually the desire for social programs comes from progressives, and often progressives want some kind of means-testing in order to give more help to people who need help more.  It'd save them a lot of future grief if they bake it in right now.  If they prefer to be harassed by stories in the news of public dollars flowing to well-off earners, they can do it that way.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Quebec has a system in place where they supply 76 percent of all daycare spots in the province, and the real estate market isn't significantly worse off than in Ontario or BC.
> 
> having parents pay 24k a year or forced to stay home seems like a dumber decision.
> 
> ...




Altair - I really don't want to pick a fight but somethings demand they be addressed.

I understand that you like the set of circumstances that provide for you in Quebec.  But not all of us live in Quebec.  Some of us find ourselves living in places like Alberta.

Alberta could, no doubt, have afforded to provide some of those services that you enjoy.  But it was made harder by the net tendency of money to flow out of the province to the federal government and on to other provinces.  There seemed to be a lot less of that money left here to be able to buy goods either publically or on the private market.

Things have gotten harder because of market conditions.

But they have not been improved by the policies of the federal government, and some of our sister provinces, making it harder for us to make money from foreigners.  Money that could then be used by the federal government to make other provinces better provisioned.

Nor have they been improved by the fact that, despite money being harder to come by these days, the federal government still considers that we should continuing contributing to the federal coffers at the same rate as when we were making money so that they can continue to supply cash to other provinces.

It is true that the federal government is doing its bit to find other sources of revenue, such as printing money and borrowing money.  

The has had the effect of increasing the price of our oil.  Unfortunately the value of that oil, the number of lettuces it can buy and the number of roofs it can supply, are decreasing.

So, please, continue to enjoy your services.   

Meanwhile, here in Alberta, we'll figure something out, eventually.

Slainte Mhor.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Citing the most expensive data point didn't strengthen your point.  The people already paying for high-end child care are unlikely to qualify for much in the way of subsidy.  If they do, it's a piss-poor implementation on the politicians' part.


People paying for high end childcare who like what they are paying for will likely stay in the private system, assuming their daycare doesn't get rolled up in the public system. 

People who are paying 15-20k who do not want to be paying 15-20k will naturally migrate to the public sector. 

But here is the clincher. Its universal. So same way a billionaire can walk into a public hospital and get treated same as a janitor making 30k a year can walk into a public hospital and get treated, universal is universal. 

Same way a billionaire can send their kid to public school same as any homecare worker can send their kid to public school. 

Same way a billionaire can call the police service and have cops show up same as any nurse can call the police and have cops show up. 

So universal is universal. Unless all public systems in Canada are suffering from piss poor implementation on the politicians part.


----------



## Fabius (26 Sep 2021)

Why do people think that the cost of child care is absurd and unreasonable? 

Don’t the female employees who generally provide the service deserve a proper wage?


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> People live in cities, surprise surprise. Canada gets more urban every year that goes by.



Yes, why wouldn't they when they can get all the perks and not have to pay for them? We're creating a vicious cycle by then feeding that choice with more money. Exactly like rural Newfoundland where given they can have the benefits of small-town life and the amenities of urban life brought right to them, courtesy of taxpayers. Which over time has now led to a situation where they're spiraling out of control, having trouble lending any further, begging for federal help.... and of course, as they say, they don't want handouts, only what is "fair." Sound familiar?



Altair said:


> Except for childcare increasing female workplace participation leading to an increase in female workplace participation which leads to increased economic activity, but we have have been down this conversation before.



Like I said, I'm interested in public support to childcare, but I'm skeptical.... universal healthcare is a great dea too, yet we have found the most unsustainable, worst way in the OECD to do it which is by using Federal spending powers... the same way we're about to go about implementing national childcare. And once a system implemented, like our healthcare system has proven, we're too stupid to analyze if it's working and change course as required. Perhaps Quebec's worked to net benefit because they did it fully in-house, provincially?



Altair said:


> Debt to GDP of the G7
> Germany (85), USA (108), the UK (111.5),France (118), Italy (160), Japan, (260).
> 
> All these nations are among the top economies on the planet and they are all pilling on debt as well. Are you concerned about who is going to bail out Japan, or Italy? Or is Canada unique in its inability to service its debt?



No, Canada is not unique, and yes I am concerned about the path western democracies are headed down. Yes, those countries and Canada are _currently _able to service their debt. But the situation doesn't seem to be getting _better _and yet we're piling on more public spending, in particular programs that are pretty much impossible to turn off. I'm thinking long-term here and you're thinking about your personal wants.



Altair said:


> It would be completely typical I guess, that Canada can spend hundreds of billions a year, and borrow tens of billions a year, but try to help working class Canadians to the tune of a 6 billion dollar annual childcare program and suddenly there is talk of being far too indebted. Well, make cuts to the 29 billion dollars that go to corporate subsidies annually and call it even, I really do not care.



This paragraph is a bunch of bullshit and shows you aren't interested in actually discussing the topic,  just your own selfish wants. Debt hasn't "suddenly" become a problem, many of us have been sounding off about it for years. I've been advocating to stop the corporate welfare for probably 10 years.

Stop making strawman's because you don't want to think of the long-term consequences that are inconvenient to your wants.



Altair said:


> Or we can do what we have done in the past, without foreign intervention.



I guess you don't understand that debt accumulates over time. In no time in the past have we had so much debt, and in no time in the past have we had such high spending and such high deficits. These are apples and melons. 

Fact of the matter is, Newfoundland is showing what happens to people who think these are all just numbers on papers. Except, as I said, when it's scaled up and it's Canada that's in the same boat, there won't be a higher level government to fall back on. We'll either have to pay the piper, or we'll be welcoming foreign actors to buy our sovereignty. And Canadians will be so personally weak and unable to take personal responsibility, they'll probably choose the latter.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Altair - I really don't want to pick a fight but somethings demand they be addressed.


Okay, lets do it.


Kirkhill said:


> I understand that you like the set of circumstances that provide for you in Quebec.  But not all of us live in Quebec.  Some of us find ourselves living in places like Alberta.


I didn't have my child in Quebec. My spouse stayed at home to care for them. So....no.


Kirkhill said:


> Alberta could, no doubt, have afforded to provide some of those services that you enjoy.  But it was made harder by the net tendency of money to flow out of the province to the federal government and on to other provinces.  There seemed to be a lot less of that money left here to be able to buy goods either publically or on the private market.


Alberta also has a higher average income, collects more taxes per capita, has a younger population thus not needing to support as many elderly people, and has a lower overall tax burden. Alberta made the choice to not have a sales tax of which proceeds could go towards things like child care. Alberta crying poor is really rich. Even with the oil crash and job losses it still has among the highest average incomes in the nation.


Kirkhill said:


> But they have not been improved by the policies of the federal government, and some of our sister provinces, making it harder for us to make money from foreigners.  Money that could then be used by the federal government to make other provinces better provisioned.


Trans mountain will be done in a year I think? 2? KeystoneXL was done in by president of the USA? What do you want?


Kirkhill said:


> Nor have they been improved by the fact that, despite money being harder to come by these days, the federal government still considers that we should continuing contributing to the federal coffers at the same rate as when we were making money so that they can continue to supply cash to other provinces.


Again, despite everything, Alberta is still one of the most wealthy jurisdictions in Canada. Average salary 77k a year compared to the Canadian average of 58k. 


Kirkhill said:


> It is true that the federal government is doing its bit to find other sources of revenue, such as printing money and borrowing money.


This is getting further and further away from childcare I notice.


Kirkhill said:


> The has had the effect of increasing the price of our oil.  Unfortunately the value of that oil, the number of lettuces it can buy and the number of roofs it can supply, are decreasing.


Further and further away.


Kirkhill said:


> So, please, continue to enjoy your services.


I never got it and my kid is in school now so I never will.


Kirkhill said:


> Meanwhile, here in Alberta, we'll figure something out, eventually.
> 
> Slainte Mhor.


Put in a sales tax and stop complaining.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> Why do people think that the cost of child care is absurd and unreasonable?
> 
> Don’t the female employees who generally provide the service deserve a proper wage?


They do. Same a nurses and doctors deserve a proper wage.

But same way we do not pay for healthcare directly to cover those wages people wont be paying the female employees of the childcare system directly.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> Why do people think that the cost of child care is absurd and unreasonable?
> 
> Don’t the female employees who generally provide the service deserve a proper wage?



If you're from an urban centre, apparently the answer is "only if other people have to pay for it."

I'm actually surprised to see those numbers for infants... I'm not saying there's not circumstances people are in, _largely by choice_, where you need to put your infant in full-day care, but it's kinda screwing my mind up. We have 2 year parental leave already. I'm not sure why someone would have a child and want to put them in full-time care two weeks later, to go back to work for $50-60k, when they can collect parental income to stay at home for the first year. I also can't see how that's a good way to raise a generation. But admittedly I don't have kids and being in the military has insulated me from what leads to these kind of decisions, but it's definitely raised my eyebrows.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Yes, why wouldn't they when they can get all the perks and not have to pay for them? We're creating a vicious cycle by then feeding that choice with more money. Exactly like rural Newfoundland where given they can have the benefits of small-town life and the amenities of urban life brought right to them, courtesy of taxpayers. Which over time has now led to a situation where they're spiraling out of control, having trouble lending any further, begging for federal help.... and of course, as they say, they don't want handouts, only what is "fair." Sound familiar?


Except cities have, as I have shown, contributed greatly to the economic success of the provinces they are in. 

Montreal providing 55 percent of Quebecs GDP. Toronto providing 54 percent. You want to get people in the cities to...not live in cities? Are small towns in the country ready for the influx of city dwellers descending on their communities? Is the infrastructure there? The housing, the jobs, the hospitals? 

I doubt that very much. But it would be a great experiment to take 10 percent of Torontos populations and dump in in Wawa ontario.


ballz said:


> Like I said, I'm interested in public support to childcare, but I'm skeptical.... universal healthcare is a great dea too, yet we have found the most unsustainable, worst way in the OECD to do it which is by using Federal spending powers... the same way we're about to go about implementing national childcare. And once a system implemented, like our healthcare system has proven, we're too stupid to analyze if it's working and change course as required. Perhaps Quebec's worked to net benefit because they did it fully in-house, provincially?


The reason that Canadian healthcare sucks so bad is because we are have locked the private sector out of the equation. Europe achieves amazing results blending private and public healthcare. Americans receives mediocre healthcare results by not providing a effective public option and Canada achieves mediocre results by not allowing for much of a private option. 

Why do I bring this up? Because this universal healthcare system is based on Quebec. Why does that matter? Because Quebec only provides 76 percent of all childcare spots in the province. This is a good blend of private and public. A good omen. 


ballz said:


> No, Canada is not unique, and yes I am concerned about the path western democracies are headed down. Yes, those countries and Canada are _currently _able to service their debt. But the situation doesn't seem to be getting _better _and yet we're piling on more public spending, in particular programs that are pretty much impossible to turn off. I'm thinking long-term here and you're thinking about your personal wants.


I get nothing out of this childcare deal.


ballz said:


> This paragraph is a bunch of bullshit and shows you aren't interested in actually discussing the topic,  just your own selfish wants. Debt hasn't "suddenly" become a problem, many of us have been sounding off about it for years. I've been advocating to stop the corporate welfare for probably 10 years.


When the top credit rating agencies stop considering Canadians debt amongst the top tier I will start to care.


ballz said:


> Stop making strawman's because you don't want to think of the long-term consequences that are inconvenient to your wants.


I get 0 out of this childcare deal.


ballz said:


> I guess you don't understand that debt accumulates over time. In no time in the past have we had so much debt, and in no time in the past have we had such high spending and such high deficits. These are apples and melons.


I guess you do not understand that if the economy grows faster than the debt accumulates it gets easier to service that debt.


ballz said:


> Fact of the matter is, Newfoundland is showing what happens to people who think these are all just numbers on papers. Except, as I said, when it's scaled up and it's Canada that's in the same boat, there won't be a higher level government to fall back on. We'll either have to pay the piper, or we'll be welcoming foreign actors to buy our sovereignty. And Canadians will be so personally weak and unable to take personal responsibility, they'll probably choose the latter.


Newfoundland is a poor example. Its doesn't have a very industrialized economy. It doesn't have massive resource exports. It doesn't have a massive financial sector. But sure, why not take Newfoundland and apply it writ large across the nation? Why not use PEI next? Or Yukon...


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> If you're from an urban centre, apparently the answer is "only if other people have to pay for it."


What else should urban canadians need to pay directly for?

Schools?
Hospitals?
Police?
Road maintenance? 
Firefighters?

What other public service should urban canadians need to break out the credit card for in order to receive a service, or is childcare where the line must be drawn?


ballz said:


> I'm actually surprised to see those numbers for infants... I'm not saying there's not circumstances people are in, _largely by choice_, where you need to put your infant in full-day care, but it's kinda screwing my mind up. We have 2 year parental leave already. I'm not sure why someone would have a child and want to put them in full-time care two weeks later, to go back to work for $50-60k, when they can collect parental income to stay at home for the first year. I also can't see how that's a good way to raise a generation. But admittedly I don't have kids and being in the military has insulated me from what leads to these kind of decisions, but it's definitely raised my eyebrows.


Why would women want to get ahead in their careers? Why would women want to work? Why would families not want to have a duel income so they can afford the things they had before having kids?

Better question, if you have kids one day, why don't you stay home for 2 years? You're asking women(and its largely women) to do so, maybe as a society we should ask men to do that and watch the results.

Unless you prescribe to the philosophy that women belong at home raising kids and men must go out and earn a living.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Seems strange to me to pay $24000 in daycare to go to work at a $24000 a year job


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Seems strange to me to pay $24000 in daycare to go to work at a $24000 a year job


Taking taxes, transportation, and any other workplace expenses, the break even point is probably in the 40k range.

Make under that and its better to stay home. 

There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Taking taxes, transportation, and any other workplace expenses, the break even point is probably in the 40k range.
> 
> Make under that and its better to stay home.
> 
> There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.


$40,000 decent money what do the people who make less than that get out of this arrangement? 

Like I said before put the little bastards to work solves the daycare problem plus society gets the benefit of greater childhood workplace participation. We wouldn't need foreign farm labourers anymore as 5 year olds can pick tomatoes


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Okay, lets do it.
> 
> I didn't have my child in Quebec. My spouse stayed at home to care for them. So....no.
> 
> ...



As I said.

Your health.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> There is a good reason that Quebec has a higher female workplace participation rate than places like Ontario.


Are women in Quebec better represented in traditionally male dominated work places now?


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> As I said.
> 
> Your health.


So I see you don't actually want to address anything that you wrote and everything I took the time to respond to.

Seen.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Are women in Quebec better represented in traditionally male dominated work places now?


Why does this matter? 

Women will work where they want to work.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> So I see you don't actually want to address anything that you wrote and everything I took the time to respond to.
> 
> Seen.


I started by saying I didn't want a fight.  I still don't.  You had your say.  I had my say.  You responded.  I'm satisfied.  I doubt either one of us will change the other's view.  But perhaps we might influence a third party.

Cheers.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> $40,000 decent money what do the people who make less than that get out of this arrangement?


They probably stay home. Which leads to less workplace participation, less income tax, less economic activity. 

Or they don't have kids. Which leads to a lower birthrate, more immigration, riskier pregnancies later in life, or infertility. And of course, probably more abortions as women feel that having a child would be prohibitively expensive and cost them their careers.


suffolkowner said:


> Like I said before put the little bastards to work solves the daycare problem plus society gets the benefit of greater childhood workplace participation. We wouldn't need foreign farm labourers anymore as 5 year olds can pick tomatoes


You sound very reasonable. You should start a political party with that as your main campaign promise.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> I started by saying I didn't want a fight.  I still don't.  You had your say.  I had my say.  You responded.  I'm satisfied.  I doubt either one of us will change the other's view.  But perhaps we might influence a third party.
> 
> Cheers.


Fair enough.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Why does this matter?
> 
> Women will work where they want to work.


I'm curious if instituting child care benefits allowed women to break the glass ceiling into male dominated realms or they just work in traditionally women dominated places more.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> They probably stay home. Which leads to less workplace participation, less income tax, less economic activity.
> 
> Or they don't have kids. Which leads to a lower birthrate, more immigration, riskier pregnancies later in life, or infertility. And of course, probably more abortions as women feel that having a child would be prohibitively expensive and cost them their careers.
> 
> You sound very reasonable. You should start a political party with that as your main campaign promise.


Well I didn't put the sarcasm emoji in or whatever BUT if greater labour participation is good for women why wouldn't it be for kids as well?

Does the childcare actually lead to a greater birthrate? I had been led to believe that while this was the goal of Quebec's plan that it hadn't been realized

You don't get elected with reasonable policies that's not what the process is about


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Well I didn't put the sarcasm emoji in or whatever BUT if greater labour participation is good for women why wouldn't it be for kids as well?


I hope you are not comparing adult women who have children to children.


suffolkowner said:


> Does the childcare actually lead to a greater birthrate? I had been led to believe that while this was the goal of Quebec's plan that it hadn't been realized








						Fertility rates and labour force participation among women in Quebec and Ontario
					

Using data from the Canadian Vital Statistics Birth Database and from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), this study examines the relationship between fertility rates and labour force participation among women aged 15 to 44 in Ontario and in Quebec between 1996 and 2016, two provinces that followed...




					www150.statcan.gc.ca
				





After four decades of similarity, fertility rates have been slightly higher in Quebec than in Ontario since 2005. In 2016, Quebec’s total fertility rate was 1.59 children per woman, while Ontario’s was 1.46.
The difference was mostly driven by women in their twenties, who tend to have more children in Quebec than in Ontario. This is partly because the proportion of women in their twenties who are in a couple is higher in Quebec (39%, versus 28% in Ontario in 2016).
As fertility rates increased in Quebec, the labour force participation of women aged 15 to 44 also increased, exceeding that of women in Ontario after 2003. In 2016, the participation rate of women was 81% in Quebec, compared with 75% in Ontario.
Most of the relative increase in female labour force participation in Quebec occurred among women with young children. Between 1996 and 2016, the labour force participation rate of women whose youngest child was under the age of 3 increased by nearly 20 percentage points in Quebec, compared with a 4 percentage point increase in Ontario. The Quebec–Ontario difference was smaller among women without children under the age of 13.
Changes in the composition of the population of women aged 15 to 44 and differences in real wage growth for this population do not explain the divergent trends observed in female labour force participation in Quebec and Ontario after 1996. At the same time, the costs associated with child care and housekeeping services grew less in Quebec than in Ontario over the period.



suffolkowner said:


> You don't get elected with reasonable policies that's not what the process is about


"Reasonable"


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm curious if instituting child care benefits allowed women to break the glass ceiling into male dominated realms or they just work in traditionally women dominated places more.


As long as women who want to work are able to work, and it seems like this is the case in Quebec, then I really don't care where they work.

If you want to know, you are free to do the research, but seeing as I do not care I wont be doing it, and I do not know the answer to your question.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I hope you are not comparing adult women who have children to children.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


adult women or men (let's not be sexist) to children sure they are or could be labour force participants

the numbers are interesting but 1.46 to 1.59 isn't much especially since there are multiple factors involved and still well below 2.1

obviously wage growth is going to be there and child care costs are lower because its subsidized that doesn't really explain anything

"reasonable"?


----------



## dapaterson (26 Sep 2021)

A nine percent increase across the population is significant.


----------



## Fabius (26 Sep 2021)

Is having both parents outsource caring for their offspring really something we want to encourage as a society? 
Having both parents prioritize jobs and dollars with the state caring for the kids from 7am to 6pm is really the best choice a society will encourage? 
Any family who disagrees and keeps a parent home will now pay more taxes to allow others to afford the same things they could before having kids? Sounds great.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> A nine percent increase across the population is significant.


Its interesting, maybe even significant is it statistically significant? What's the p value? It still falls way short of 2.1


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> adult women or men (let's not be sexixt) to children sure they are or could be labour force participants


Are you comparing the legal to the illegal?


suffolkowner said:


> the numbers are interesting but 1.46 to 1.59 isn't much especially since there are multiple factors involved and still well below 2.1


There were multiple factors involved before as well, but Quebec was in lockstep with Ontario none the less. Besides, question you asked was did childcare lead to increased birthrate, and the answer is yes. 


suffolkowner said:


> obviously wage growth is going to be there and child care costs are lower because its subsidized that doesn't really explain anything


I think that wage growth, economic participation, increased economic activity, more independence for women, women having children earlier in life leading to less challenging pregnancies' later on in life, women not being forces to put their careers on pause are all really important developments.


suffolkowner said:


> "reasonable"?


Child labour being "reasonable"


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> .Is having both parents outsource caring for their offspring really something we want to encourage as a society?
> Having both parents prioritize jobs and dollars with the state caring for the kids from 7am to 6pm is really the best choice a society will encourage?
> Any family who disagrees and keeps a parent home will now pay more taxes to allow others to afford the same things they could before having kids? Sounds great.


asking what we are trying to achieve and why would be helpful. I'm not dead set against subsidized childcare but something seems off on the equation to me. My children went to daycare, but it was also cheap compared to today. 

There is clearly something wrong in the construct of our society when we have to mandate minimum wages, subsidized housing, subsidized everything but still as a society trend toward extinction. Obvioulsy this is a function of modern industrialized/service economies and not limited to Canada or even Western democracies


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> Is having both parents outsource caring for their offspring really something we want to encourage as a society?


Is forcing a parent to stay at home when they want to be out working something we want to encourage as a society?

Women in Quebec are not forced to put their children in childcare, but they are choosing to do so in order to participate in the workforce.

Its 2021 by the way, not 1950.


Fabius said:


> Having both parents prioritize jobs and dollars with the state caring for the kids from 7am to 6pm is really the best choice a society will encourage?


Give parents the choice. 


Fabius said:


> Any family who disagrees and keeps a parent home will now pay more taxes to allow others to afford the same things they could before having kids? Sounds great.


Show me where people are paying more taxes. Did taxes rise overnight? Is there a childcare levy added to the GST? No? Well, sounds like taxes didn't rise. 

And again, lets ignore all the economic benefits that are associated with increased economic activity and increased female workplace participation. Lets ignore all the income tax, job creation, spending, lets ignore all of that.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Alberta also has a higher average income, collects more taxes per capita, has a younger population thus not needing to support as many elderly people, and has a lower overall tax burden. Alberta made the choice to not have a sales tax of which proceeds could go towards things like child care. Alberta crying poor is really rich. Even with the oil crash and job losses it still has among the highest average incomes in the nation.



Except Alberta never cried poor. All Alberta wants is to be the left the fuck alone, because the people in the province actually believe in personal responsibility.

Finger-wagging from Quebec just deserves a punch in the face quite frankly. They're nothing but a drain on Confederation and somehow go around thinking they _deserve_ to be treated better than everyone else. Anything else is "unfair" and treating them equally is "picking on them," i.e. Bill C-21.



Altair said:


> Put in a sales tax and stop complaining.



Put in a sales tax so we can further serve people like you who can't take responsibility for themselves. What were you saying about "that's really rich."

Albertan should put in a sales tax so Altair out in Ontario can buy a house so he doesn't have to make the sacrifices most people in Alberta made.



Altair said:


> Except cities have, as I have shown, contributed greatly to the economic success of the provinces they are in.
> 
> Montreal providing 55 percent of Quebecs GDP. Toronto providing 54 percent. You want to get people in the cities to...not live in cities? Are small towns in the country ready for the influx of city dwellers descending on their communities? Is the infrastructure there? The housing, the jobs, the hospitals?
> 
> I doubt that very much. But it would be a great experiment to take 10 percent of Torontos populations and dump in in Wawa ontario.



Except GDP is not the only measure of an economy. You realize part of GDP is government spending right? So if the government borrows a $1 billion and then spends it on a bridge to nowhere or in other words burns $1 billion dollars, that's $1 billion added to the GDP.

What are these cities doing that produces wealth exactly? What their net exports (and not just goods, including financial and tech services, etc.)? How much money are they being paid vs how much money are paying out? That's the real measure of whether you're generating wealth or just being a drain.

In 2018, Toronto represented 40% of Canada's import requirements... I'm not so confident they are making up for that with their tech and service industries.

Also, people migrate gradually over time, your "experiment" is just you making more strawman's.



Altair said:


> What else should urban canadians need to pay directly for?
> 
> Schools?
> Hospitals?
> ...



Again, you're not able to understand the topic. I never said they should "directly" pay for any of those services... I do think however that all those things listed are provincial responsibilities for a reason, and when the province is unable manage itself, they  need to figure it out, not start stealing from other provinces for their failures through the Federal government spending powers. Newfoundland's inability to govern itself shouldn't become Alberta's problem... Toronto's inability to govern itself shouldn't become Alberta's problem. Draw the line where the constitution drew it... and people in unsustainable situations can either vote for better government policies at the provincial and municipal level or vote with their feet.

The Federal government spending powers are going to break Confederation.



Altair said:


> Why would women want to get ahead in their careers? Why would women want to work? Why would families not want to have a duel income so they can afford the things they had before having kids?
> 
> Better question, if you have kids one day, why don't you stay home for 2 years? You're asking women(and its largely women) to do so, maybe as a society we should ask men to do that and watch the results.
> 
> Unless you prescribe to the philosophy that women belong at home raising kids and men must go out and earn a living.



That would be between myself and my partner, and what King Altair thinks we should do will not factor into the equation. I'm not asking women to do anything they don't want / choose to do, so you can take all your insinuations and go pound sand.

Do you ever stop to think that maybe women are less likely to dedicate their entire life to their career, and choose a more balanced lifestyle, is not because we're oppressing them but maybe because they are _smarter _than men? That investing in your family is a better long-term strategy for happiness, and that for most people pursuing C-suite jobs and working 80 hours a week in pursuit of status is simply not a good idea?

Again, personal choices and responsibility. Your desire to socially engineer society is a circus, and Scandinavian countries have shown the more egalitarian society becomes, the more likely they are to make choices that you are exactly advocating they shouldn't.



Altair said:


> When the top credit rating agencies stop considering Canadians debt amongst the top tier I will start to care.



That would be waaaay too late to start caring.



Altair said:


> I guess you do not understand that if the economy grows faster than the debt accumulates it gets easier to service that debt.



Like I said, GDP is not the only measure, not even the best measure of an economy's strength. If the GDP is primarily made up of government spending, for example, then no, it does not indicate that you're able to service your debt.

What indicates your ability to service your debt are is your operating income, liquidity, etc., which is why when evaluating corporations (which is all the government really is) ratios like debt-to-service, etc. are used by banks to evaluate a company's ability to service their debt. The Federal gov'ts debt-to-service ratio is good _right now _at ~10% thanks to Chretien, Martin, and Harper who brought it down after Trudeau 1 managed to bring it from ~12% to ~48% in only 16 years.... in other words, we can quickly go from "good" to "crisis" real relatively quickly, which is what I would be concerned about.

The Federal government's debt-service ratio is only one issue. The cumulative government (federal + provincial + municipal) debt-service ratio is really the measure of the entire country's ability to service all of its debt.

But who am I kidding, we'll just inflate the currency by printing more money, which makes debt cheaper.... and destroys the value of people's savings..... leaving behind people like yourself who are saving to buy a house. This fiat currency thing is a doomed social experiment in the making.

I don't need lessons in financial statements analysis from you quite frankly. I do understand what they mean, you clearly don't and are just spouting off the same shit the government says.


Bottom line, the welfare trap was bad for Newfoundland, and it's going to be bad for Canada.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> There is clearly something wrong in the construct of our society when we have to mandate minimum wages, subsidized housing, subsidized everything


Well, that's what happens when wage growth is increasing by the bare minimum and other expenses like housing and childcare are rising by leaps and bounds. The private sector doesn't care, and would have people living in huts if it meant they could eke out more in profit for their shareholders.


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Are you comparing the legal to the illegal?


Yes if the goal is increased labour force participation why not widen the labour pool. I'm not trolling you exactly just pointing out an issue the legality of which is totally arbitrary. We coddle our children way too much and they are much more capable than they are treated.


Altair said:


> There were multiple factors involved before as well, but Quebec was in lockstep with Ontario none the less. Besides, question you asked was did childcare lead to increased birthrate, and the answer is yes.


I don't know that the answer is yes, there's a 9% increase how much of that increase is due to one factor and at what significance level


Altair said:


> I think that wage growth, economic participation, increased economic activity, more independence for women, women having children earlier in life leading to less challenging pregnancies' later on in life, women not being forces to put their careers on pause are all really important developments.


These all seem positive


----------



## Fabius (26 Sep 2021)

Its 2021 by the way, not 1950.
Ah, the true essence of the argument, care to be explicit about what you think my statements said?


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Except Alberta never cried poor. All Alberta wants is to be the left the fuck alone, because the people in the province actually believe in personal responsibility.


Welcome to confederation, enjoy your stay.


ballz said:


> Finger-wagging from Quebec just deserves a punch in the face quite frankly. They're nothing but a drain on Confederation and somehow go around thinking they _deserve_ to be treated better than everyone else. Anything else is "unfair" and treating them equally is "picking on them," i.e. Bill C-21.


Quebec will do what Quebec will do. 


ballz said:


> Put in a sales tax so we can further serve people like you who can't take responsibility for themselves. What were you saying about "that's really rich."


lol, put in a sales tax and balance the books in alberta, or don't and stop complaining about how the province is suffering from the oil crash.

If Alberta did away with income tax and then complained to the rest of the provinces that it couldn't balance the books, do you think that would be looked on favorably? Probably not.


ballz said:


> Albertan should put in a sales tax so Altair out in Ontario can buy


I don't see how a sales tax put in place in Alberta would benefit anyone outside of Alberta. So sales taxes get sent elsewhere? I'm curious. I know Alberta doesn't have a lot of experience with the concept but I don't think that's how sales taxes work.


ballz said:


> Except GDP is not the only measure of an economy. You realize part of GDP is government spending right? So if the government borrows a $1 billion and then spends it on a bridge to nowhere or in other words burns $1 billion dollars, that's $1 billion added to the GDP.


Okay, well, if you let me know what other metric I should use I'll use that. But poo pooing GDP and not presenting an alternative isn't very productive now is it?


ballz said:


> What are these cities doing that produces wealth exactly? What their net exports (and not just goods, including financial and tech services, etc.)? How much money are they being paid vs how much money are paying out? That's the real measure of whether you're generating wealth or just being a drain.


aerospace, electronic goods, pharmaceuticals, printed goods, software engineering, telecommunications, textile and apparel manufacturing, tourism and transportation, civil, mechanical and process engineering, finance, higher education, and research and development.


ballz said:


> In 2018, Toronto represented 40% of Canada's import requirements... I'm not so confident they are making up for that with their tech and service industries.


Well, until it can be proven otherwise.


ballz said:


> Also, people migrate gradually over time, your "experiment" is just you making more strawman's.


Right, so what do we do in the meantime? hmmm.


ballz said:


> Again, you're not able to understand the topic. I never said they should "directly" pay for any of those services... I do think however that all those things listed are provincial responsibilities for a reason, and when the province is unable manage itself, they  need to figure it out, not start stealing from other provinces for their failures through the Federal government spending problems. Newfoundland's inability to govern itself shouldn't become Alberta's problem... Toronto's inability to govern itself shouldn't become Alberta's problem. Draw the line where the constitution drew it... and people in unsustainable situations can either vote for better government policies at the provincial and municipal level or vote with their feet.


I like how a federally funded program that offers the program to all provinces is somehow stealing.


ballz said:


> The Federal government spending powers are going to break Confederation.


Provincial spending powers are going to break confederation. Federally, Canadian debt loads are not that bad.


ballz said:


> That would be between myself and my partner, and what King Altair thinks we should do will not factor into the equation. I'm not asking women to do anything they don't want / choose to do, so you can take all your insinuations and go pound sand.


Haha, well, shame. Alberta and Ontario, the last two holdouts for the childcare program are both talking about getting on board, so you may go weep about that all you like, but its coming.


ballz said:


> Do you ever stop to think that maybe women are less likely to dedicate their entire life to their career, and choose a more balanced lifestyle, is not because we're oppressing them but maybe because they are _smarter _than men? That investing in your family is a better long-term strategy for happiness, and that for most people pursuing C-suite jobs and working 80 hours a week in pursuit of status is simply not a good idea?


No, because when Quebec women were given the choice with universal childcare they choose to get back to work. 


ballz said:


> Again, personal choices and responsibility. Your desire to socially engineer society is a circus, and Scandinavian countries have shown the more egalitarian society becomes, the more likely they are to make choices that you are exactly advocating they shouldn't.


You talk about choices. In what scenario is having a person stuck at home raising a child when they want to be in the workforce considered more choices than giving someone the option to have access to affordable childcare freeing them up to work if they choose or stay home if they so desire?


ballz said:


> That would be waaaay too late to start caring.


Well, in my opinion, crying about it being harder to borrow money before the fact is way to early. Again, the G7 is in largely the same boat, some better some worse, but most are on a debt binge and I don't see people taking about the west collapsing under the weight of its debt. Just Canada.


ballz said:


> Like I said, GDP is not the only measure, not even the best measure of an economy's strength. If the GDP is primarily made up of government spending, for example, then no, it does not indicate that you're able to service your debt.


Present your alternative.


ballz said:


> What indicates your ability to service your debt are is your operating income, liquidity, etc., which is why when evaluating corporations (which is all the government really is) ratios like debt-to-service, etc. are used by banks to evaluate a company's ability to service their debt. The Federal gov'ts debt-to-service ratio is good _right now _at ~10% thanks to Chretien, Martin, and Harper who brought it down after Trudeau 1 managed to bring it from ~12% to ~48% in only 16 years.... in other words, we can quickly go from "good" to "crisis" real relatively quickly, which is what I would be concerned about.


We can, but even with the debt binge now, we are not at crisis levels. What matters more right now is that operating income rises in the next few years to get us back on track. 


ballz said:


> The Federal government's debt-service ratio is only one issue. The cumulative government (federal + provincial + municipal) debt-service ratio is really the measure of the entire country's ability to service all of its debt.


Unless you want the federal government to start dictating provincial budgets, leave provincial debt out of the equation. Because even if the federal government gets it house in order and provinces do not, the cumulative debt levels would still rise and you would still complain.


ballz said:


> But who am I kidding, we'll just inflate the currency by printing more money, which makes debt cheaper.... and destroys the value of people's savings..... leaving behind people like yourself who are saving to buy a house. This fiat currency thing is a doomed social experiment in the making.


Except we have been printing money like mad and the currency is stable. Because everyone is printing money like mad, which means it doesn't effect the Canadian currency in any particular way. It would have been interesting if Canada didn't print money, because then you might get the case where the currency shot up in value making exports more expensive and suffering a shock to the system in that way. 

Economics is fun.


ballz said:


> I don't need lessons in financial statements analysis from you quite frankly. I do understand what they mean, you clearly don't and are just spouting off the same shit the government says.


Of course, you must know better than I and the gov, and economists...


ballz said:


> Bottom line, the welfare trap was bad for Newfoundland, and it's going to be bad for Canada.


Yes, as goes Newfoundland, as goes Canada, as has been the case since 1949...


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Fabius said:


> Its 2021 by the way, not 1950.
> Ah, the true essence of the argument, care to be explicit about what you think my statements said?


No.


----------



## Remius (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Except Alberta never cried poor. All Alberta wants is to be the left the fuck alone, because the people in the province actually believe in personal responsibility.


you have seen Alberta sending patients outside the province and the military coming in to help? Because they wanted to be left the eff alone and take personal responsibility during a pandemic,   Welcome to confederation indeed.  The bad stuff and the good stuff.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (26 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Yes if the goal is increased labour force participation why not widen the labour pool. I'm not trolling you exactly just pointing out an issue the legality of which is totally arbitrary. We coddle our children way too much and they are much more capable than they are treated.



Yes, let's put the little b****rds (literal and figurative) to work.  Now, what are they capable of doing?  Since even most minimum wage jobs prefer applicants to have some education, high school completion ideal - what skill sets/credentials should be the minimum before putting them on the job?  Literacy and numeracy?  Some familiarity with basic hand tools? Social skills that translate to some degree of customer service relations?  Or is at least one functioning hand and a weak mind sufficient?  How long will it take to prepare a "yout" for minimum participation in the workforce?  It's probably been over a hundred years since any province (less Newfoundland which wasn't a province a 100 years ago) had a school leaving age under 14 years.  I think it was either 14 or 15 back when I was in high school (Nfld) a half century ago.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Its 2021 by the way, not 1950.


Where a hot tub, double vanity, and fancy vacations are more important then raising your children......


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Where a hot tub, double vanity, and fancy vacations are more important then raising your children......


Ah yes, lets us all go back to the 1950s shall we?


----------



## suffolkowner (26 Sep 2021)

Blackadder1916 said:


> Yes, let's put the little b****rds (literal and figurative) to work.  Now, what are they capable of doing?  Since even most minimum wage jobs prefer applicants to have some education, high school completion ideal - what skill sets/credentials should be the minimum before putting them on the job?  Literacy and numeracy?  Some familiarity with basic hand tools? Social skills that translate to some degree of customer service relations?  Or is at least one functioning hand and a weak mind sufficient?  How long will it take to prepare a "yout" for minimum participation in the workforce?  It's probably been over a hundred years since any province (less Newfoundland which wasn't a province a 100 years ago) had a school leaving age under 14 years.  I think it was either 14 or 15 back when I was in high school (Nfld) a half century ago.


I don't know if your response is supposed to be taken 100% seriously but mine haven't as I have stated twice already. 

But kids not teenagers can do much more than what they allowed to do now, and people wonder why there are so many discipline and self-worth issues. Myself and my kids and my grandkids have all "worked" when appropriate. Cooking, cleaning, gardening, painting etc...Todays work environment is not as easy to navigate, and having your kids work at the family business like we did probably wouldn't be viewed as favourably as it was then.

The point being if workplace participation is be all and end all goal why stop at daycare lower the working minimum age raise the age of CPP eligibility to 75(if that makes it easier to wrap your head around)


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, lets us all go back to the 1950s shall we?


Ah yes,   all ya' got.   I guess I was in "the 1950's" during the 1990's, and somehow made it through.  Still have never had a hot tub, double vanity, or been on a fancy vacation.     Yet somehow I'm not broken....


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Ah yes,   all ya' got.   I guess I was in "the 1950's" during the 1990's, and somehow made it through.  Still have never had a hot tub, double vanity, or been on a fancy vacation.     Yet somehow I'm not broken....


If you bothered to care you would have learned that many people just want a basic house and still not be able to afford it, but you don't care to learn and I'm done trying to convince you, so yes, back to the 1950s.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> Unless all public systems in Canada are suffering from piss poor implementation on the politicians part.



I wrote about social programs, not "all public systems".  Universality of social programs is mostly a debate progressives have among themselves.  If they want to pay for one social program that is universal instead of two or three aimed at the people most in need, they can do that.  It vacates their perpetual moralistic whinging about the needy, but if they can't grasp the practical effects of opportunity cost I doubt they have enough sentience to recognize their own shortcomings.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I wrote about social programs, not "all public systems".  Universality of social programs is mostly a debate progressives have among themselves.  If they want to pay for one social program that is universal instead of two or three aimed at the people most in need, they can do that.  It vacates their perpetual moralistic whinging about the needy, but if they can't grasp the practical effects of opportunity cost I doubt they have enough sentience to recognize their own shortcomings.


I'm just going off of Quebecs system.

But, and this is the part I do like, its up to the provinces to create a system. Same as weed, alcohol, healthcare, education, its up to the provinces to come up with their own system within the limits set up by the feds for funding. 

I imagine if the provinces want to make it means tested, the feds wont get in their way.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> Is forcing a parent to stay at home when they want to be out working something we want to encourage as a society?



Try to think before you write.  No-one is "forcing a parent to stay at home".  People make choices that have consequences that limit courses of action for their future choices.

*>The private sector doesn't care*

Where do you get your happy horseshit from?  The "private sector" only succeeds when it provides things people want, which means it has to "care" about what they want.  If you wanted to find people who don't care, look for people who have rules to follow and stick closely to them irrespective of the circumstances of any particular petitioner for some kind of service.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

The other big change in 1996 was EI reform.  EI reform affected all of Canada, not just QC.  Changes in work force composition were observed in QC and elsewhere.  The prudent explanation is that EI reform was the larger driver.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Try to think before you write.  No-one is "forcing a parent to stay at home".  People make choices that have consequences that limit courses of action for their future choices.


If someone cannot afford childcare and are thus unable to work, then that seems pretty forced to me.

Less choice.

Affordable childcare would allow people, especially women, to re-enter the workforce earlier, and society would reap all the benefits associated with that.

I do like how the BQ like childcare, seeing as the system originated in Quebec, the NDP have been advocating for it for decades, since the 90s I believe, and the LPC are finally getting around to it, and there is one party in parliament that is opposed to it.

Now numbers in parliament don't make something right or wrong, but I do find it interesting that there is one party that is still not in keeping up with the other parties.

Same as with legal weed, same as with universal healthcare (I looked it up, guess who opposed it way back when?) same as with CCB, same as with gay marriage, same as with conversion therapy, etc.

I'll end this with saying that if the opinions presented here are largely shared within the CPC, as it seems like many here are CPC supporters, it doesn't shock me at all that the CPC didn't win a SINGLE seat in Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, and are losing ground in Edmonton and Calgary.

I will go as far as to say this. If the CPC left the LPC OIC on guns alone, continued the LPC childcare plan, vaccinated all their candidates, they would be forming government now.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The other big change in 1996 was EI reform.  EI reform affected all of Canada, not just QC.  Changes in work force composition were observed in QC and elsewhere.  The prudent explanation is that EI reform was the larger driver.


Yet when you narrow it down to female workplace participation, with Quebec and Ontario in lockstep for decades, and the only diverging factor being childcare being universal in Quebec from 1996 onwards, it stands to reason the Quebec and Ontario would have remained in lockstep after 1996 with EI reform, as opposed to women in Quebec having more children and having higher workplace participation than Ontario in the decades afterwards.

TLDR: it makes no sense that EI reform would effect Quebec women with young children more than Ontario women with young children.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> *>The private sector doesn't care*


^THIS.

Statistically, one of the truest statements on this forum.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

There's not much point comparing QC to some of the other provinces.  QC taxpayers, in aggregate, are willing to bear QC income tax rates.  2021:


$45,105 or less15%More than $45,105 but not more than $90,20020%More than $90,200 but not more than $109,75524%More than $109,75525.75%

AB: 

*AB Tax Bracket 2021**Tax Rate 2021**AB Tax Bracket 2020**Tax Rate 2020*Up to $131,22010%Up to $131,22010%$131,221 to $157,46412%$131,221 to $157,46412%$157,465 to $209,95213%$157,465 to $209,95213%$209,953 to $314,92814%$209,953 to $314,92814%$314,929 and over15%$314,929 and over15%

BC, 2021: 

$0 to $42,1845.06%$42,184.01 to $84,3697.70%$84,369.01 to $96,86610.50%$96,866.01 to $117,62312.29%$117,623.01 to $159,48314.70%$159,483.01 to $222,42016.80%Over $222,42020.5%
                                                                                                                                                                                                    ON 2021:


*5.05%* on the first *$45,142* of taxable income, plus…
*9.15%* on the next *$45,142 up to $90,287,* plus…
*11.16%* on the next *$90,287 up to $150,000,* plus…
*12.16%* on the next *$150,000 up to $220,000,* plus…
*13.16 %* on the amount over *$220,000*
 
I can see part of the reason people living in QC might be feeling a bit pinched.


----------



## daftandbarmy (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> If someone cannot afford childcare and are thus unable to work, then that seems pretty forced to me.
> 
> Less choice.
> 
> ...



There are some downsides that people seem to be ignoring in the rush to fund child care.

e.g., want more criminals? Provide subsidized childcare... apparently:

Universal Child Care: A Bad Deal For Kids?​
Years of emotional and behavioral assessments collected on children who had attended child care after the launch of Quebec’s universal child care program indicated cause for concern. On average, 2- to 4-year-old children who had been in child care showed significant increases in anxiety, aggression, and hyperactivity, and experienced more hostile, inconsistent parenting and lower-quality parent-child relationships compared to children who had not attended. As children grew older, these negative outcomes did not dissipate: among 5- to 9-year-olds, the social-emotional problems not only persisted, but in some cases increased, particularly for boys with the most elevated behavioral problems. 

Follow-up studies conducted 20 years after the program’s inception further revealed that negative social-emotional outcomes associated with attending child care persisted through adolescence and into young adulthood. Among young people from ages 12 to 20, self-reported health and life satisfaction decreased significantly. The scale-up of universal child care in Quebec was also associated with a subsequent “sharp and contemporaneous increase in criminal behavior” across Quebec, as the rate of crime conviction jumped 22 percent. As the following figure indicates, though crime rates in Quebec are lower than the rest of Canada, there was a significant increase in crime accusation and conviction rates for cohorts exposed to the child care program.  









						Universal Child Care: A Bad Deal For Kids?
					

Emphasizing a “caregiving crisis” caused by inadequate access to affordable care for children under age five, the Biden campaign highlighted a universal child care plan that aims to “cultivate the potential of young children” through high-quality early learning, while enabling their mothers to...




					ifstudies.org


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> and the only diverging factor being childcare being universal in Quebec from 1996 onwards, it stands to reason the Quebec and Ontario would have remained in lockstep after 1996 with EI reform



That's an invalid assumption.  There are too many dissimilarities to assume the EI reforms had to affect the two provinces identically.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> If someone cannot afford childcare and are thus unable to work, then that seems pretty forced to me.



Everything in life is "forced", then.  Literally no-one can do every thing to which he might aspire.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's an invalid assumption.  There are too many dissimilarities to assume the EI reforms had to affect the two provinces identically.


It is not. A very small divergence, maybe. We are seeing huge divergences between Quebec and Ontario after decades of being largely identical before universal childcare came to be in Quebec.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Everything in life is "forced", then.  Literally no-one can do every thing to which he might aspire.


Well, toss childcare in the category of things that Canadians now have more access to at affordable prices. 

Put it alongside things like public healthcare, public education, public transit, public police forces, etc.


----------



## Good2Golf (26 Sep 2021)

> As the following figure indicates, though crime rates in Quebec are lower than the rest of Canada, there was a significant increase in crime accusation and conviction rates for cohorts *exposed* to the child care program.


 
 I think you accidentally misspelled ‘subjected’…


----------



## mariomike (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Its 2021 by the way, not 1950.


Out there it is.

"Out there it's the 1990's, but _in this house it's 1954."





_


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

QC and ON are not "largely identical".  Their dominant cultures are different, their histories are different, their economies are different, their government finances are different.  Even a small perturbation in non-linear dynamic systems can cause wildly diverging outcomes.  There is simply no way of easily identifying one cause and one effect and saying "this caused that".


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> QC and ON are not "largely identical".  Their dominant cultures are different, their histories are different, their economies are different, their government finances are different.  Even a small perturbation in non-linear dynamic systems can cause wildly diverging outcomes.  There is simply no way of easily identifying one cause and one effect and saying "this caused that".


lol....

Trying to square this circle is interesting to watch.

QC and ON are not largely identical, their dominant cultures are different, their histories are different, their economies are different, their government finances are different, yet before QC put in universal childcare their female workplace participation and fertility rates were largely identical...

And the childcare program, designed to increase fertility and female workplace participation, isn't the reason for largely increased female fertility and workplace participation in QC, no, it was because of EI...

Hahaha, I'm done. We have talked about this before the election, during the election, and now after the election, and 219 seats in parliament are held by parties which support universal childcare. I think the people of Canada have spoken. In the next few years the system will be cemented, funds flowing and provincial system in place, so I think the CPC will move on like they did with universal health care, gay marriage, the CCB, and legal weed.

Or not, and they can simply surrender  the top 72 urban ridings to ABC voters and continue to be the party of rural discontent. Their choice.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> Hahaha, I'm done.



Good.  You go on bragging about QC, which seems to have all the things BC has, plus a generously financed child care program and an extra tithe - literally - of provincial income taxes.  I'd be trying to get the fuck out of there.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Good.  You go on bragging about QC, which seems to have all the things BC has, plus a generously financed child care program and an extra tithe - literally - of provincial income taxes.  I'd be trying to get the fuck out of there.


You do you mon ami.

Meanwhile I'll be happy for all the parents using the universal healthcare system in the next few years as the program gets rolling. I never got it, but I'm going to be happy for those that will. 

I'm guessing we shall be butting heads next election, whenever that is, about universal pharma care. I look forward to that.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> You do you mon ami.
> 
> Meanwhile I'll be happy for all the parents using the universal healthcare system in the next few years as the program gets rolling. I never got it, but I'm going to be happy for those that will.
> 
> I'm guessing we shall be butting heads next election, whenever that is, about universal pharma care. I look forward to that.


But you went and hid this time when your man was behind,....you only came out when it was gloat time.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> I'm guessing we shall be butting heads next election, whenever that is, about universal pharma care. I look forward to that.



Sure.  But given my age, I benefit either way.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> But you went and hid this time when your man was behind,....you only came out when it was gloat time.


I left after @Jarnhamar insinuated that Trudeau was pleased at the protestors dogging his campaign, like that level of political discourse was acceptable in Canada.

I said I would be back after the election. I think Trudeau was "behind" before that happened. I didn't return even after it became clear he was rebounding. 

Why? Because I was very likely to say something that would get me banned. I would rather not get banned (Again) and I didn't want to drag the discourse here down any more than it already was. 

As for gloating, you have not seen me gloating. If I was gloating you would know it.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Sure.  But given my age, I benefit either way.


Ah, so social programs are okay when YOU benefit.

Seen.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, lets us all go back to the 1950s shall we?



You the people that fought and won two World Wars and didn't sit around feeling sorry for themselves afterwards? Yes, let's do that.



Remius said:


> you have seen Alberta sending patients outside the province and the military coming in to help? Because they wanted to be left the eff alone and take personal responsibility during a pandemic,   Welcome to confederation indeed.  The bad stuff and the good stuff.



Yep. Alberta's population overwhelmingly supported stronger measures and the government didn't act. You know what they're going to do? Vote out a gov't that had one of the strongest majorities ever. Alberta's not going to sit around and feel sorry for themselves, they're not going to blame the Federal government.

That's without addressing the fact that 1. Alberta will be paying for those patients care from other provinces 2. Alberta has been feeding money into Confederation since it began, and hasn't received an equalization payment in over 50 years 3. Alberta was sending ventilators without being asked to other provinces out of goodwill when they were in trouble 4. It's still nowhere near the problems Ontario and Quebec faced in the first wave..... yet we're the bad guys and they're just going to get more support from the Feds for it.

And yet the rest of the country is just sitting there salivating at every misfortune Alberta has, asking for more and more when they won't even try to help themselves, it's disgusting.




Altair said:


> Welcome to confederation, enjoy your stay.
> 
> Quebec will do what Quebec will do.
> 
> ...



Why don't you worry about working within your own means instead of chastising Alberta who's still got the best finances in the country? Don't bite the hand that feeds you buds, we'll take no tips from the guy that can't even sort out his own personal finances.



Altair said:


> I don't see how a sales tax put in place in Alberta would benefit anyone outside of Alberta. So sales taxes get sent elsewhere? I'm curious. I know Alberta doesn't have a lot of experience with the concept but I don't think that's how sales taxes work.



Sales tax revenues goes to Alberta coffers, Alberta coffers to go to Federal coffers, Federal coffers go to Quebec. Like I said, while you want to ignore the sources of revenue, that's your own stupidity / desire to be a spoiled brat.



Altair said:


> Okay, well, if you let me know what other metric I should use I'll use that. But poo pooing GDP and not presenting an alternative isn't very productive now is it?



I did. 



Altair said:


> aerospace, electronic goods, pharmaceuticals, printed goods, software engineering, telecommunications, textile and apparel manufacturing, tourism and transportation, civil, mechanical and process engineering, finance, higher education, and research and development.
> 
> Well, until it can be proven otherwise.



Okay, let's take your head out of the sand for a second:

"Calgary posted the highest net exports, while Toronto had the highest net imports."






						The Daily — Study: Trade in goods by exporter and importer characteristics, by census metropolitan area
					

In 2018, the five major census metropolitan areas in terms of trade—Toronto, Calgary, Montréal, Vancouver and Windsor—contributed to nearly 60% of Canada's total international merchandise trade. Calgary posted the highest net exports, while Toronto had the highest net imports.




					www150.statcan.gc.ca
				




So in other words, in 2018 Calgary was increasing the wealth in the country, and Toronto was decreasing it.

Now stick your head back in the sand.




Altair said:


> Right, so what do we do in the meantime? hmmm.



We leave it the fuck alone, and stop giving people reasons to stay in unsustainable situations, and let them make the choice to be poor in their current situation or move to places that actually contribute.



Altair said:


> You talk about choices. In what scenario is having a person stuck at home raising a child when they want to be in the workforce considered more choices than giving someone the option to have access to affordable childcare freeing them up to work if they choose or stay home if they so desire?



The scenario where they were a willing participant is making children, the way most children are made.

You asked about what me and my partner would do... like I said, that's our business, but I'll tell you what we won't do. We won't do it flippantly and put ourselves in a situation that we can't afford the things we want most. That may include taking a hit on income, it may include moving to a different part of the country, it might include having kids later in life, it might include many things, it might even include not having _everything we want _but knowing we're not entitled to everything, we won't make a plan that relies on the government to do it all for us.



Altair said:


> Present your alternative.



There is no "single" measure of an economy. It has to be viewed as a whole.... although net exports is probably the best place to start, as I presented and you ignored.



Altair said:


> Unless you want the federal government to start dictating provincial budgets, leave provincial debt out of the equation. Because even if the federal government gets it house in order and provinces do not, the cumulative debt levels would still rise and you would still complain.



As has been shown, unsustainable municipal debt becomes the province's problem (which is fine, since provinces own the municipalities), unsustainable provincial debt becomes a federal problem.... no, I don't want the feds to dictate provincial budgets, I want the feds to practice "peace, order, and _good governance_" by making provinces sleep in the bed they make so that it doesn't become a national problem.



Altair said:


> Except we have been printing money like mad and the currency is stable. Because everyone is printing money like mad, which means it doesn't effect the Canadian currency in any particular way. It would have been interesting if Canada didn't print money, because then you might get the case where the currency shot up in value making exports more expensive and suffering a shock to the system in that way.



Really? Last I read we were experiencing the highest inflation we've ever experienced? How did that work out for you and your savings for a house? What could have bought you a house, no longer can... the literal definition of inflation.

It's astounding that you are a victim of this poor strategy and can't see it.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> You the people that fought and won two World Wars and didn't sit around feeling sorry for themselves afterwards? Yes, let's do that.


Yup, and women back to the kitchen, pushing out babies, forget work as that is not the role of the woman, gays persecuted, back to the 1950s we go!


ballz said:


> Why don't you worry about working within your own means instead of chastising Alberta who's still got the best finances in the country? Don't bite the hand that feeds you buds, we'll take no tips from the guy that can't even sort out his own personal finances.


Alberta was running deficits in the years before the pandemic and Quebec was posting surpluses...So you're right, I may listen to those with the best finances, but I don't think that's who you think it is.


ballz said:


> Sales tax revenues goes to Alberta coffers, Alberta coffers to go to Federal coffers, Federal coffers go to Quebec. Like I said, while you want to ignore the sources of revenue, that's your own stupidity / desire to be a spoiled brat.


So not only do you not understand how sales tax works, you do not understand how equalization works.

I would explain it to you but I don't think you care to learn, so I wont waste my time all knowing ballz.


ballz said:


> I did.


Not really.


ballz said:


> Okay, let's take your head out of the sand for a second:
> 
> "Calgary posted the highest net exports, while Toronto had the highest net imports."
> 
> ...


Of course, Toronto is importing more than the 54 percent it contributes to the Ontario economy. Of course.

Back in reality.






						Measuring the economy, region by region
					

On January 27, 2017, Statistics Canada released economic data on Canadian cities. Canadians now have access to data on gross domestic product (GDP) for 33 census metropolitan areas (CMAs), as well as 9 non-CMA regions within the country. Going forward,......




					www.statcan.gc.ca
				






> How important are cities to the country's economic health? According to the recent GDP release, Canada's 33 CMAs generated more than 70% of Canada's national GDP in 2013. That's a big piece of the economic pie. An even closer look reveals that nearly one-fifth of the country's entire economic output comes from Toronto alone. Clearly, Canada's cities play an important role in the country's economy and warrant specific attention.


You can keep pushing the fallacy that cities are not the economic drivers of the Canadian economy but I don't think the facts agree with you.


ballz said:


> We leave it the fuck alone, and stop giving people reasons to stay in unsustainable situations, and let them make the choice to be poor in their current situation or move to places that actually contribute.


You can choose that.

The people of Canada put in 219 MPs who are of a differing opinion. And considering that even the CPC had a plan to address the housing issue (it was just a bad one) which would have subsidized it to a lesser extent, then if you look at it that way, Canadians sent 338 MPs of a differing opinion.

Democracy is a wonderful thing.


ballz said:


> The scenario where they were a willing participant is making children, the way most children are made.
> 
> You asked about what me and my partner would do... like I said, that's our business, but I'll tell you what we won't do. We won't do it flippantly and put ourselves in a situation that we can't afford the things we want most. That may include taking a hit on income, it may include moving to a different part of the country, it might include having kids later in life, it might include many things, it might even include not having _everything we want _but knowing we're not entitled to everything, we won't make a plan that relies on the government to do it all for us.


Funny that these are some of the same arguments made in the USA when people say that they shouldn't pay for universal healthcare.

Don't put yourself in a situation where you cannot afford it. Ha.

Again, as I said to Brad, I'll enjoy watching the childcare programs become cemented in Canadian society. You may pout.


ballz said:


> There is no "single" measure of an economy. It has to be viewed as a whole.... although net exports is probably the best place to start, as I presented and you ignored.


How to calculate the export value of tourism and the financial sector I wonder...


ballz said:


> As has been shown, unsustainable municipal debt becomes the province's problem (which is fine, since provinces own the municipalities), unsustainable provincial debt becomes a federal problem.... no, I don't want the feds to dictate provincial budgets, I want the feds to practice "peace, order, and _good governance_" by making provinces sleep in the bed they make so that it doesn't become a national problem.


Well, there have been no bailouts of the provinces to date so I guess you're a happy individual. Until such a time comes, provincial debt=/= federal  debt.


ballz said:


> Really? Last I read we were experiencing the highest inflation we've ever experienced? How did that work out for you and your savings for a house? What could have bought you a house, no longer can... the literal definition of inflation.


Lol, no. No where near record amounts of inflation.  21.60 percent in June of 1920 was the record all knowing Ballz.

Also, housing prices are not calculated in inflation rates, so that also doesn't compute Mr you know better than me.









						Why inflation numbers fail to capture Canada’s red-hot housing market
					

As bidding wars and six-figure price increases become the norm, it’s tough to find much of an impact on the consumer price index




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				













						Why don’t rising house prices count towards inflation?
					

Property values have increased much faster than other costs of living




					www.economist.com
				





ballz said:


> It's astounding that you are a victim of this poor strategy and can't see it.


Well, considering that housing and inflation are calculated separately, I doubt this is the case.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Democracy is a wonderful thing.
> 
> Again, as I said to Brad, I'll enjoy watching the childcare programs become cemented in Canadian society. You may pout.



Once again, I'm not necessarily against a childcare system. You just choose to hear what you want because you're incapable of a rational thought process. I'm concerned we're hastily setting up an unsustainable system the same as our healthcare system. You make wild assumptions that I don't support universal healthcare, which is entirely false. But it's much easier to argue with strawmen than it is to face the facts.

Democracy, like all things, is not perfect. Those who don't manage to get into the housing market now are not only screwed, their kids are screwed, and for many generational poverty will become a thing. Sounds like you're on the brink of that. Good luck.


----------



## mariomike (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yup, and women back to the kitchen, pushing out babies, forget work as that is not the role of the woman, gays persecuted, back to the 1950s we go!


My mother is still alive and well.  We had a nice detached home. Mom never worked ( outside the house ).

She had her babies in the 1950's.

She said back then a healthy mother and child stayed in the hospital a good seven days.

"The nurse would bring you in and I had a cigarette here, a breast there, and you there. I loved it!"

Not to say the 1950's were perfect. But, perhaps not as bad as some might suggest.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> So not only do you not understand how sales tax works, you do not understand how equalization works.
> 
> I would explain it to you but I don't think you care to learn, so I wont waste my time all knowing ballz.









Dude, I'm a professional accountant and you can't manage your household budget.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Alberta was running deficits in the years before the pandemic and Quebec was posting surpluses...So you're right, I may listen to those with the best finances, but I don't think that's who you think it is.



Honestly man, what universe do you even live in?

Here, since Debt-to-GDP is all you seem to care about, I'll even cater to your skewed version of reality. Let's look at Alberta and Quebec.... Alberta's has never even been close to Quebec's, despite paying their bills for them.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Dude, I'm a professional accountant and you can't manage your household budget.


Yes, me finding ways to set aside 12 percent of my annual income shows that I clearly do not know how to manage my household budget. 

More importantly, you seem to think that a Alberta sales tax, of which revenue from which would only be available for Alberta would somehow, magically, be taken by the federal government.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-votes-2019-equalization-payments-provinces-kenney-1.5281736
		




> Who actually pays?
> Not the provinces. Not provincial governments. According to the Library of Parliament, "Equalization is financed entirely from government of Canada general revenues" raised through federal taxes on all Canadians.
> 
> In plainer terms: equalization is funded by the federal government from its general revenue, raised through federal taxes, paid for by all Canadians.
> ...


So a sales tax in Alberta does not pay for anything in Quebec, or PEI or anywhere else Mr Professional accountant.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, me finding ways to set aside 12 percent of my annual income shows that I clearly do not know how to manage my household budget.
> 
> More importantly, you seem to think that a Alberta sales tax, of which revenue from which would only be available for Alberta would somehow, magically, be taken by the federal government.
> 
> ...



Sorry, you're right.... Federal government takes the money directly from me and gives it to Quebec.

Meanwhile, Alberta is left with a reduced level on income to pull from and has to increase taxes on me and other Albertans, in the end, the same people are paying.

It's a distinction without a difference.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Honestly man, what universe do you even live in?


Universe 616


ballz said:


> Here, since Debt-to-GDP is all you seem to care about, I'll even cater to your skewed version of reality. Let's look at Alberta and Quebec.... Alberta's has never even been close to Quebec's, despite paying their bills for them.
> 
> View attachment 66627


So since 2014 Quebec has been using surpluses and economic growth and trending down, and since 2010, Alberta has been running more and more deficits.

Yup, thank you for confirming, Quebec has been paying down their debt and Alberta has been adding on to theirs. I know how I will consult now, and let me tell you, its not the government in Edmonton.

Get a sales tax, balance the books, and then Alberta can talk.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Sorry, you're right.... Federal government takes the money directly from me and gives it to Quebec.
> 
> Meanwhile, Alberta is left with a reduced level on income to pull from and has to increase taxes on me and other Albertans, in the end, the same people are paying.
> 
> It's a distinction without a difference.


You still fail to explain your claim that money from any Alberta sales tax ends up in Quebec or NB or PEI or NS


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> Ah, so social programs are okay when YOU benefit.



You exhibit remarkably poor reading comprehension.  I wrote that I benefit either way.  I benefit from good governance if government resists the temptation to socialize all costs.  I benefit personally if a social program puts money in my pocket.  Whether the program is "OK" is a different question.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Universe 616
> 
> So since 2014 Quebec has been using surpluses and economic growth and trending down, and since 2010, Alberta has been running more and more deficits.
> 
> ...



I know you're incapable of long-term thought, but....

Quebec's teeny tiny surplus budgets disappears without all of it's handouts. Nothing to be smug about buddy. Just stop. A couple years of surplus on the backs of everyone else is hardly anything to gloat about. The long-term picture shows the real story.

This also coming from the guy that has no problems with deficits, but Alberta has a few small ones to weather a recession that it gets no federal support for and suddenly they're incompetent. It's just all too much.



Altair said:


> You still fail to explain your claim that money from any Alberta sales tax ends up in Quebec or NB or PEI or NS



I just told you, you were right. Unlike you, I'm capable of admitting when I'm wrong.

But, as I said, it's a distinction without a difference. The source is the same, it's still Albertans paying for it. Had that money not been taken by the Federal government for buy votes from Quebec, maybe Alberta would have a PST to raise additional revenue. Maybe Albertans actually have a modicum of respect for their neighbors.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You exhibit remarkably poor reading comprehension.  I wrote that....



It doesn't matter what you say, he just wants to twist it into random strawmen to argue with which is why the conversation can't get anywhere.

"I have concerns about this method of universal childcare" becomes "you hate women" real quick with this guy.

I think it might be Yves Blanchet to be honest.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Sep 2021)

If Alberta could only abandon their affinity for failed Ontario dudes like Harper and Kenney...


----------



## Remius (26 Sep 2021)

Is it really universal day care though?  I thought each province was setting up their own systems with money from the feds.


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Trudeau was pleased at the protestors dogging his campaign, like that level of political discourse was acceptable in Canada.


You bet.

Ignoring Canadians (surprise) he thought he was in for an easy victory. His regular go to attacks weren't working and he was surprised Canadians weren't praising him, so he was desperate. Fear tactics are always a favorite so the idiots aggressively protesting were a godsend to his beleaguered campaign. 

Never let a good crisis go to waste


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> Get a sales tax, balance the books, and then Alberta can talk.



Fuck, no.  QC has provincial income tax rates double those of several other (healthy) provinces, receives equalization payments, and does not really deliver much more in the way of provincial services than other provinces do.  No lessons worth learning there except bad ones.  Where the hell is all that money going?  It sure as shit doesn't go into keeping up the quality of infrastructure; I've driven in Montreal.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> I know you're incapable of long-term thought, but....
> 
> Quebec's teeny tiny surplus budgets disappears without all of it's handouts. Nothing to be smug about buddy. Just stop. A couple years of surplus on the backs of everyone else is hardly anything to gloat about. The long-term picture shows the real story.
> 
> This also coming from the guy that has no problems with deficits, but Alberta has a few small ones to weather a recession that it gets no federal support for and suddenly they're incompetent. It's just all too much.


Quebecers have lower incomes, and bring in less per capita than other provinces (still better than all the atlantic provinces, but nobody talks about them)

So while they do get support from other provinces it is called equalization. It doesn't shoot Quebec or the atlantic provinces ahead of the others. 

So all things being equal, I would say Quebec is doing rather well. They were a economic basket case and they turned things around. Thats not always the case, as the other atlantic provinces, who receive much more per capita than Quebec does, have shown.


ballz said:


> I just told you, you were right. Unlike you, I'm capable of admitting when I'm wrong.


Ah, thats what that was.  Must have misunderstood.


ballz said:


> But, as I said, it's a distinction without a difference. The source is the same, it's still Albertans paying for it. Had that money not been taken by the Federal government for buy votes from Quebec, maybe Alberta would have a PST to raise additional revenue. Maybe Albertans actually have a modicum of respect for their neighbors.


The money gets taken by everyone. From Quebecers, from Ontarians, from Albertans, from coast to coast. The money is taken regardless. Its coming from general revenues. Same taxes you pay that goes to the military? Yeah, that same general revenue.

The difference equalization makes is Quebec sees some of it come back and alberta does not. 

So this Alberta would have a sales tax if only equalization didn't get taken away is not how the system works.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> Is it really universal day care though?  I thought each province was setting up their own systems with money from the feds.


Same way our healthcare is universal but every province runs their own system.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

dapaterson said:


> If Alberta could only abandon their affinity for failed Ontario dudes like Harper and Kenney...



PM Harper was pretty good.

Kenney is about to get kicked to the curb after only one mandate. Not much of an affinity for him.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Fuck, no.  QC has provincial income tax rates double those of several other (healthy) provinces, receives equalization payments, and does not really deliver much more in the way of provincial services than other provinces do.  No lessons worth learning there except bad ones.  Where the hell is all that money going?  It sure as shit doesn't go into keeping up the quality of infrastructure; I've driven in Montreal.


Its not meant to provide more, its supposed to provide the same. 

Equalization is the process of making key services equal across the nation, its not supposed to put another province ahead of another. Its so provinces don't fall behind. 

So yes, Quebec does not deliver much more in the way of provincial services. If it did it would mean equalization was broken.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> You bet.
> 
> Ignoring Canadians (surprise) he thought he was in for an easy victory. His regular go to attacks weren't working and he was surprised Canadians weren't praising him, so he was desperate. Fear tactics are always a favorite so the idiots aggressively protesting were a godsend to his beleaguered campaign.
> 
> Never let a good crisis go to waste


I'm not about to get myself banned after the election is done.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> It doesn't matter what you say, he just wants to twist it into random strawmen to argue with which is why the conversation can't get anywhere.
> 
> "I have concerns about this method of universal childcare" becomes "you hate women" real quick with this guy.
> 
> I think it might be Yves Blanchet to be honest.


I'm a PPC voting Liberal supporter, I think I'm far too confusing for any political party to understand.

I definately wouldn't run for the bloc though.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You exhibit remarkably poor reading comprehension.  I wrote that I benefit either way.  I benefit from good governance if government resists the temptation to socialize all costs.  I benefit personally if a social program puts money in my pocket.  Whether the program is "OK" is a different question.


You seemed far more okay when you received personal benefits from a social program than when you do not receive benefits from a social program.

I wasn't talking about whether the programs are any more okay.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

For all the heat and light over equalization, the amounts involved are not particularly large.  And while all the people writing about equalization are strangely reluctant to reveal the benchmark taxation rate used to calculate fiscal capacity (I've skimmed quite a few articles now), I suppose that it isn't 20%.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> For all the heat and light over equalization, the amounts involved are not particularly large.  And while all the people writing about equalization are strangely reluctant to reveal the benchmark taxation rate used to calculate fiscal capacity (I've skimmed quite a few articles now), I suppose that it isn't 20%.


People also fail to realize that even if equalization were to be scrapped, that doesn't result in more money for places like alberta, at leas.t not directly.

Just more money for the feds to spend other priorities instead of sending it to Quebec and the atlantic provinces.

The only way getting rid of equalization would see more money in the hands of places like alberta is if it was accompanied with a tax cut. 

So the argument could not be more petty. Its not about places like alberta getting more, its about places like quebec getting less.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> You seemed far more okay when you received personal benefits from a social program than when you do not receive benefits from a social program.



You missed the point entirely, which is that I don't care which way the ball lands.  I'll argue for what will probably provide better long-term fiscal growth and stability (and thus fulfill the first requirement for social programs - be able to pay for them), which I see as a better deal for young Canadians and less well-off Canadians.  But if others persist in making what I think are poor decisions, I'll pocket my cheque (this was in the context of universal pharmacare) and let them deal with the unforeseen consequences.


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Sep 2021)

> So the argument could not be more petty. Its not about places like alberta getting more, its about places like quebec getting less



Pay more attention to federal-provincial relations, an example of which is going on right now (ie. the latter demanding more money from the former).  If equalization ended tomorrow, the premiers would be full of ideas that would in common share the theme that the best use of newly uncommitted federal funds would be other transfers to provinces.  And AB might get a piece of that, so "more".


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Pay more attention to federal-provincial relations, an example of which is going on right now (ie. the latter demanding more money from the former).  If equalization ended tomorrow, the premiers would be full of ideas that would in common share the theme that the best use of newly uncommitted federal funds would be other transfers to provinces.  And AB might get a piece of that, so "more".


Sure they "might" get more, but the government could also just toss that money at the deficit with the provinces not receive a penny. 

But as you hear opponents to equalization talk about it, they don't want to send Alberta money to Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. Fine, so stop that and that money just sits in federal coffers. So at the heart of the issue, its not more for Alberta, its less for Quebec, which, at the end of the day to me, is petty.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Quebecers have lower incomes, and bring in less per capita than other provinces (still better than all the atlantic provinces, but nobody talks about them)
> 
> So while they do get support from other provinces it is called equalization. It doesn't shoot Quebec or the atlantic provinces ahead of the others.



It's welfare for provinces, plain and simple. It doesn't shoot them "ahead" because Alberta has historically managed itself pretty well. But an extra $11.7 billion, or $1379 per citizen, is one hell of a handicap. That would be $6 billion for Alberta, and would cover every deficit they've run by a long shot.

Why do Quebecers have lower incomes? Again man, you just want to ignore whatever doesn't suit you.

They also benefit hugely by the fact that hydropower is exempt from the formula. This wasn't by mistake.



Altair said:


> So all things being equal, I would say Quebec is doing rather well. They were a economic basket case and they turned things around.



All things aren't equal, that's the only reason they're running any surpluses and like I said, a few years isn't very impressive.



Altair said:


> The money gets taken by everyone. From Quebecers, from Ontarians, from Albertans, from coast to coast. The money is taken regardless. Its coming from general revenues. Same taxes you pay that goes to the military? Yeah, that same general revenue.



No, the money does not get taken "regardless." Do you think if the equalization program didn't exist, we couldn't have lower tax rates and leave that money in the hands that earned it?

Or put it towards the deficit?

Or put it towards things the benefit all Canadians?

The point of a federal government is to govern for the benefit of all Canadians, the animosity about equalization is justifiably about the fact that it's not a fair system, even the formula isn't fair. The animosity is further multiplied when the province that benefits the most (due to the formula which was _hand-tailored_ for them) is arrogant about it and goes out of their way to screw over the provinces whose backs they ride to balance their budget.



Altair said:


> Sure they "might" get more, but the government could also just toss that money at the deficit with the provinces not receive a penny.
> 
> But as you hear opponents to equalization talk about it, they don't want to send Alberta money to Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. Fine, so stop that and that money just sits in federal coffers. So at the heart of the issue, its not more for Alberta, its less for Quebec, which, at the end of the day to me, is petty.



Yeah yeah, Quebec is just a victim.



Altair said:


> The difference equalization makes is Quebec sees some of it come back and alberta does not.



Right. So in other words, Albertans pay it into the Federal government, and Quebec withdraws it. If it were cash you could literally mark the bills and watch them appear in Quebec and Atlantic Canada.



Altair said:


> So this Alberta would have a sales tax if only equalization didn't get taken away is not how the system works.



I never stated that. What I was getting at is it's "rich" that the welfare cases who are benefitting from the work of "have" provinces (who are apparently a fiscal wreck according to you) and then saying "ah fuck your deficit, just raise taxes even more" despite the fact that their only scraping by because of equalization. Here's an idea, why don't we get rid of equalization and put it towards the deficit, and Quebec can raise it's own damn taxes???

What you clearly don't understand... remember when you proposed how impossible it would be to move because of things like family? Starting over? etc.? Fact is many Albertans left their homes, sacrifices _some people won't make for themselves, _and now realize they're the ones subsidizing all those who are simply not willing to make that sacrifice for themselves. They're content that someone else makes the sacrifice for them and uses their vote to convince the government to abandon "governing for everyone" and just want to use government for personal gain.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> It's welfare for provinces, plain and simple. It doesn't shoot them "ahead" because Alberta has historically managed itself pretty well. But an extra $11.7 billion, or $1379 per citizen, is one hell of a handicap. That would be $6 billion for Alberta, and would cover every deficit they've run by a long shot.


Alberta's deficits is 7.8 billion.


ballz said:


> Why do Quebecers have lower incomes? Again man, you just want to ignore whatever doesn't suit you.
> 
> They also benefit hugely by the fact that hydropower is exempt from the formula. This wasn't by mistake.


Most provincial utilities is not included in the formula. 


ballz said:


> All things aren't equal, that's the only reason they're running any surpluses and like I said, a few years isn't very impressive.


They are on par with Ontario, which is leaps and bounds ahead of where they used to be.


ballz said:


> No, the money does not get taken "regardless." Do you think if the equalization program didn't exist, we couldn't have lower tax rates and leave that money in the hands that earned it?


Lol, the government does not do tax cuts very well.


ballz said:


> Or put it towards the deficit?


Maybe


ballz said:


> Or put it towards things the benefit all Canadians?


Could. But in the age of deficit spending, they are usually covering what they want to cover anyways. 


ballz said:


> The point of a federal government is to govern for the benefit of all Canadians, the animosity about equalization is justifiably about the fact that it's not a fair system, even the formula isn't fair. The animosity is further multiplied when the province that benefits the most (due to the formula which was _hand-tailored_ for them) is arrogant about it and goes out of their way to screw over the provinces whose backs they ride to balance their budget.


You are being really mean to PEI.


ballz said:


> Yeah yeah, Quebec is just a victim.


Petty.


ballz said:


> Right. So in other words, Albertans pay it into the Federal government, and Quebec withdraws it. If it were cash you could literally mark the bills and watch them appear in Quebec and Atlantic Canada.


If you think that Quebecers only pay 1379 per capita in taxes every spring, well, I don't know what to tell you. 

I wouldn't want your accounting expertise though.


ballz said:


> I never stated that. What I was getting at is it's "rich" that the welfare cases who are benefitting from the work of "have" provinces (who are apparently a fiscal wreck according to you) and then saying "ah fuck your deficit, just raise taxes even more" despite the fact that their only scraping by because of equalization. Here's an idea, why don't we get rid of equalization and put it towards the deficit, and Quebec can raise it's own damn taxes???


Scrap equalization and Alberta isn't any further ahead. So yes, get a sales tax like every other province and stop blaming everyone else for its fiscal situation.


ballz said:


> What you clearly don't understand... remember when you proposed how impossible it would be to move because of things like family? Starting over? etc.? Fact is many Albertans left their homes, sacrifices _some people won't make for themselves, _and now realize they're the ones subsidizing all those who are simply not willing to make that sacrifice for themselves. They're content that someone else makes the sacrifice for them and uses their vote to convince the government to abandon "governing for everyone" and just want to use government for personal gain.


Equalization is the boogie man here, but again, take it away and Alberta isn't any further ahead. Quebec and the Atlantic are just more behind. Yay?


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Equalization is the boogie man here, but again, take it away and Alberta isn't any further ahead. Quebec and the Atlantic are just more behind. Yay?


Why shouldn't they be further behind ?


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Why shouldn't they be further behind ?


Well, first reason is the constitution.

_"Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation." (Subsection 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982)_

Other than that, I suppose there is no reason they shouldn't be. But to complain Alberta has had a rough go and the solution is to make others have a worse go is nothing if not petty.


----------



## Halifax Tar (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Well, first reason is the constitution.
> 
> Other than that, I suppose there is no reason they shouldn't be. But to complain Alberta has had a rough go and the solution is to make others have a worse go is nothing if not petty.


I don't necessarily disagree with you.  I mean I would help any of my siblings out.  

The question for me is how long should a province be allowed to draw equalization payments ?  

Shouldn't we expect Que and the Maritimes to be able to live within their means at some point ?


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Alberta's deficits is 7.8 billion.



Once again, picking flyshit from pepper because you've got nothing useful to add. 

Sorry, let me be more precise... it would cover the cumulative amount of the deficits they've ever run.



Altair said:


> Most provincial utilities is not included in the formula.



The market value of hydropower is excluded from the formula that is supposed to calculate revenue capacity. It's a scam.



Altair said:


> Lol, the government does not do tax cuts very well.



That's because of poisonous people like yourself.



Altair said:


> You are being really mean to PEI.



Nope. I'm not talking about benefitting the most per capita or gross, I'm talking about a formula that's designed specifically to benefit Quebec.



Altair said:


> Petty.



Just calling a spade a spade, Yves.



Altair said:


> If you think that Quebecers only pay 1379 per capita in taxes every spring, well, I don't know what to tell you.



Again, your reading comprehension fails you. The equalization payments are equal to about $1379/Quebecker. Get rid of equalization and they can raise their own taxes by $1379/per person.



Altair said:


> I wouldn't want your accounting expertise though.



You couldn't afford it.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't necessarily disagree with you.  I mean I would help any of my siblings out.
> 
> The question for me is how long should a province be allowed to draw equalization payments ?
> 
> Shouldn't we expect Que and the Maritimes to be able to live within their means at some point ?


We should open up the constitution and change a few things around then. 

That always works so well.

Back to serious world, I don't think places like PEI will ever be able to keep up with places like Alberta. The resource base isn't there, the industries are not there, there are a lot of reasons that places like Alberta will always be more dynamic than places like PEI. 

So it doesn't matter how long they are on equalization, the second they are off for any reason other than their economy, wage growth, resource base, accelerates to the point its a have province and you have a case where they only fall further and further behind in terms of services to the point that you have massive inequalities across the nation.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Once again, picking flyshit from pepper because you've got nothing useful to add.
> 
> Sorry, let me be more precise... it would cover the cumulative amount of the deficits they've ever run.


Sorry, I didn't know we were going to retroactively repay every province all its ever contributed to equalization. 

I assumed we were talking about tinkering or getting rid of the current program as of present day.


ballz said:


> The market value of hydropower is excluded from the formula that is supposed to calculate revenue capacity. It's a scam.


Okay.


ballz said:


> That's because of poisonous people like yourself.










ballz said:


> Nope. I'm not talking about benefitting the most per capita or gross, I'm talking about a formula that's designed specifically to benefit Quebec.


Poor PEI.


ballz said:


> Just calling a spade a spade, Yves.


Petty.


ballz said:


> Again, your reading comprehension fails you. The equalization payments are equal to about $1379/Quebecker. Get rid of equalization and they can raise their own taxes by $1379/per person.


Or, and this is a fun game, Quebecers pay 9k in taxes, their own money originating in Quebec, and they get 1379 back. 

Look at that, not a cent from Alberta made it to Quebec. But that doesn't fit the narrative of a money pipeline starting in Edmonton and ending in Quebec city does it?


ballz said:


> You couldn't afford it.


Win Win.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Or, and this is a fun game, Quebecers pay 9k in taxes, their own money originating in Quebec, and they get 1379 back.
> 
> Look at that, not a cent from Alberta made it to Quebec. But that doesn't fit the narrative of a money pipeline starting in Edmonton and ending in Quebec city does it?



Or, Quebecers pay $9k/person in tax, their government spends $10,379/person, and yet they magically balance the budget.

Meanwhile, Albertans pay $9k/person in tax, their government spends $9k/persn, and yet they are in a deficit of $1379/person.

Anyway, agree to disagree, I can't handle this nonsense anymore.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Or, Quebecers pay $9k/person in tax, their government spends $10,379/person, and yet they magically balance the budget.


Federal, Provincial, so not so simple. 


ballz said:


> Meanwhile, Albertans pay $9k/person in tax, their government spends $9k/persn, and yet they are in a deficit of $1379/person.


Ah yes, this.

So Alberta chooses to have low taxes and high spending and when they cannot balance the books its everyone else fault. Meanwhile Quebec had a surplus but double the taxes of Alberta and yet the only reason for this is equalization.

Of course. Alberta could balance its book tomorrow if they wanted to, but they want to enjoy their low taxes. You talk about choices, well that's a choice Albertans are making.


ballz said:


> Anyway, agree to disagree, I can't handle this nonsense anymore.


You have yourself a good night.


----------



## ballz (26 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Federal, Provincial, so not so simple.



Altair, honestly, you're clearly just trying to be nuisance, get a sense of shame for God's sake. Before I hit send I thought "there's no way I need to add in both levels of tax to get the point across" but here we are..... obviously I overestimated you.


----------



## Altair (26 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Altair, honestly, you're clearly just trying to be nuisance. Before I hit send I thought "there's no way I need to add in both levels of tax to get the point across" but here we are..... obviously I overestimated you.


Equalization is not the simplest system to explain, or even to debate.

Which is why people can rage against it in the most simple of terms because who spends their time trying to understand the byzantine rules behind the policy?

This guy.

There are three major transfer programs: the Canada Health Transfer, the Canada Social Transfer and Equalization.

Canada health transfer and Canada social transfer are based on population. These are given to all provinces based on population. Quebec is twice as big as Alberta so they receive twice as much. 

Equalization is doing what it was set out to do in the constitution. Might it be tweaked? Maybe. But an uncomfortable truth is nearly three in four federal transfer dollars are coming through the Canada Health transfer and the Canada Social transfer program. So all the talk is about equalization when its the smallest overall transfer of the bunch. 

And then you have politicians saying Alberta sends out 20 billion more than they receive annually. Which is true, but it's not equalization doing this. Alberta has a young population making a high average income, which leads to less CPP and OAS money coming back. Solution for Alberta here is to ironically get older. 

Which leads to the big outflow of money from Alberta to the rest of confederation. Income tax and GST. But these are not transfer programs, these are taxes. Its flat across the board. Higher income individuals pay more income tax because they make more money. Solution for Alberta here is have lower average incomes.

These are the nuances involved in the system which cannot simply be explained away by equalization bad.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (27 Sep 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> asking what we are trying to achieve and why would be helpful. I'm not dead set against subsidized childcare but something seems off on the equation to me. My children went to daycare, but it was also cheap compared to today.
> 
> There is clearly something wrong in the construct of our society when we have to mandate minimum wages, subsidized housing, subsidized everything but still as a society trend toward extinction. Obvioulsy this is a function of modern industrialized/service economies and not limited to Canada or even Western democracies


We aren't a industrialized society anymore, we are a 'post-industrial' society. There is some industry, but nothing near what there should be. As I tell people the difference between a pre-industrial society and a post-industrial society is the pre-industrial society had some manufacturing capability with the skilled tradespeople that existed (i.e. blacksmiths, leatherworkers, etc.). We are 100% dependent on others to survive when we could be pretty much the only country in the world to be completely capable of surviving in isolation due to how resource rich our country is. 

Want to see the economy boom? Start making things in house again and stop the importation of products we can't even legally make in country due to how bad the pollution is.



Altair said:


> Well, first reason is the constitution.
> 
> _"Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation." (Subsection 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982)_
> 
> Other than that, I suppose there is no reason they shouldn't be. But to complain Alberta has had a rough go and the solution is to make others have a worse go is nothing if not petty.


Which Constitution? You mean the one Quebec refused to sign and actively attacks with the Notwithstanding Clause? Just a bit of sarcasm on a province which wants to have its cake and eat it too.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Sep 2021)

This says it all in one Venn diagram


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2021)

So instead we create a financial ecosystem where we allow some to live outside their means at the expense of others with no incentive to get off the dole, so to speak ?  

In essence it's welfare on provincial scale.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> This says it all in one Venn diagram


Lol I'm the minority on the hard blue side lol


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (27 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Except cities have, as I have shown, contributed greatly to the economic success of the provinces they are in.
> 
> Montreal providing 55 percent of Quebecs GDP. Toronto providing 54 percent. You want to get people in the cities to...not live in cities? Are small towns in the country ready for the influx of city dwellers descending on their communities? Is the infrastructure there? The housing, the jobs, the hospitals?
> 
> ...



Newfoundland is a massive exporter of resources and energy so I'm not sure where you got this from?  Hibernia, Iron Ore Company of Canada, Churchill Falls.... ever heard of them?

Newfoundland's primary problem is it has always 
liked to spend like a drunken sailor.  Tbh though, most of the East Coast is the same.  

As for debt, Canada's problem isn't necessarily high sovereign debt although that is becoming more of an issue.  Our main issue is high personal debt, that when combined with high sovereign debt doesn't give us a lot of fiscal room to manoeuvre.

This might not be a problem because as you say, if our economy grows and we are able to service the debt, no biggie. BUT...... and it's a big BUT....

What if our economic growth projections are overly optimistic? 

I actually think there are some factors that are going to begin coming in to play that haven't been accounted for or considered adequately, namely:

Aging Population
Supply Issues
Reduced Immigration
Inflation and Increased Cost of Living

Higher childcare costs in larger cities are a direct result of lack of supply and increased cost of living.  Think about it.... 

In order to provide child care as a service, what do you need?

The first thing you need is space and lots of it for kids to run around and play in.  In smaller populated areas of Canada, a lot of childcare is provided by individuals out of there own homes.  This is run as a small business venture.  My Aunt did it for years, had a large house outside Saint John, NB and would look after 7 or 8 children on her own.  

In large Cities this isn't nearly as prevalent because most people aren't living in large houses able to support this kind of small business, so already supply is impacted. 

Then there is the fact that cost of living in those areas is also significantly higher, to the point that people don't have the ability to run a small childcare business because it just isn't lucrative enough to make it worth their time.  

My personal opinion is the Government should be providing subsidies and Incentives to people who want to start childcare businesses in order to increase the supply in the market.  This would help stimulate an Industry that people clearly want and need and encourage more people to start childcare businesses in Major Metropolitan areas.  

I agree with you that childcare in large Cities is an issue worth examining, how I would tackle the problem would be different.


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2021)

And by adding to supply you create competition and competition creates value for money.


----------



## daftandbarmy (27 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> My personal opinion is the Government should be providing subsidies and Incentives to people who want to start childcare businesses in order to increase the supply in the market.  This would help stimulate an Industry that people clearly want and need and encourage more people to start childcare businesses in Major Metropolitan areas.



Because you want your kid to be looked after by a potential business failure?


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Sep 2021)

Was gonna say...any business that relies on subsidies is at risk of being a business that is always dependent on subsidies, and thus one which folds up as soon as the subsidies disappear.

Where I live in the Fraser Valley, there is a lot of new construction (condos and townhouses) and several new child care businesses have started.  No idea whether they were subsidized.  But I can guess that child care is subject to the same demographic effects as schools, except that parents are willing to put in the time to travel a lot further than a school catchment area to get kids into child care.  Given how the bureaucrats struggle with managing school populations as distributions change, I suppose they aren't the best people to be picking "winners" for child care.


----------



## MilEME09 (27 Sep 2021)

Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country, shouldn't we be growing Quebec and Ontario to be able to pay in instead of take out?


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country, shouldn't we be growing Quebec and Ontario to be able to pay in instead of take out?


For the record, Ontario hasn't received equalization payments since 2019-20 fiscal.


----------



## Remius (27 Sep 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> For the record, Ontario hasn't received equalization payments since 2019-20 fiscal.


Perception isn’t always reality.  Another reality is Kenney was part of the Harper Gvt when it created the current equalization formula.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Sep 2021)

> there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces.



Certainly not as long as relative measures are used.  If we were to look at "fiscal capacity" as a measure of the ability to meet some fixed set of responsibilities - without allowing mission creep to keep moving the target - we probably would have ended equalization long ago.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country, shouldn't we be growing Quebec and Ontario to be able to pay in instead of take out?


Part of the problem is that politicians look for best vote for the money benefit and that is not in the areas that need the programs. We haven't had politicians at the provincial level who can see their province as a whole for a long time. I look at the work that WAC Bennett did in the 1960's and credit him with a lot of BC successes.


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country, shouldn't we be growing Quebec and Ontario to be able to pay in instead of take out?


Okay.

And I wont say this to be condesending, but as a honest question.

How do you get the average wage and GDP per person in a place like PEI to a place like Ontario or Alberta? And how do you get Ontario and Alberta to not grow while PEI and Quebec catch up?

Either you pick favorites in confederation and go beyond what Equalization is meant to do, keep things equal, and that would involve even MORE money and renaming the program acceleration, in order to make Quebec and the Atlantic provinces grow much faster than the have provinces or you keep the current system where Quebec and the Atlantic provinces more or less keep up but are not gaining on the have provinces.


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Certainly not as long as relative measures are used.  If we were to look at "fiscal capacity" as a measure of the ability to meet some fixed set of responsibilities - without allowing mission creep to keep moving the target - we probably would have ended equalization long ago.


It would be deemed unconstitutional. 

Because its in the constitution.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Sep 2021)

Third option.  Just end equalization, and let people figure out where they want to live, work, and pay taxes.


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Third option.  Just end equalization, and let people figure out where they want to live, work, and pay taxes.


It would be deemed unconstitutional.

Because its in the constitution.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Okay.
> 
> And I wont say this to be condesending, but as a honest question.
> 
> How do you get the average wage and GDP per person in a place like PEI to a place like Ontario or Alberta? And how do you get Ontario and Alberta to not grow while PEI and Quebec catch up?



Why should the average wage and GDP per person in PEI be like those in Ont or Alberta if PEI can't do that organically ? 

Shouldn't this be what encourages people to strike out and make their own way ? 



Altair said:


> Either you pick favorites in confederation and go beyond what Equalization is meant to do, keep things equal, and that would involve even MORE money and renaming the program acceleration, in order to make Quebec and the Atlantic provinces grow much faster than the have provinces or you keep the current system where Quebec and the Atlantic provinces more or less keep up but are not gaining on the have provinces.



I would say we are picking favorites by allowing certain provinces to expect to be kept afloat by an annual infusion of cash from others.  

I've said it before, I can understand the separation movement in the west.  I may not like it but I can see where it comes from.


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Newfoundland is a massive exporter of resources and energy so I'm not sure where you got this from?  Hibernia, Iron Ore Company of Canada, Churchill Falls.... ever heard of them?
> 
> Newfoundland's primary problem is it has always
> liked to spend like a drunken sailor.  Tbh though, most of the East Coast is the same.


Yes, I'm aware NFLD isn't a barren wasteland, and they do have a lot of economic activity. 

I'm even aware that they are not a have not province. 

But I also aware that their economy is not as dynamic as others in confederation and they are very vulnerable to things like the price of oil dropping and resources prices fluctuating. One cannot look at NFLD and think that their economy is widely diversified and capable of withstanding external changes as well as Canada as a whole is.

Which is why I say it may not be the best practice to compare NFLD and Canada as a whole and come to the same conclusions for both.


Humphrey Bogart said:


> As for debt, Canada's problem isn't necessarily high sovereign debt although that is becoming more of an issue.  Our main issue is high personal debt, that when combined with high sovereign debt doesn't give us a lot of fiscal room to manoeuvre.


High personal debt is bad, agreed. What to do about it however?


Humphrey Bogart said:


> This might not be a problem because as you say, if our economy grows and we are able to service the debt, no biggie. BUT...... and it's a big BUT....
> 
> What if our economic growth projections are overly optimistic?


Then the debt load goes down more slowly. We are talking generally a percentage point here, a percentage point there, nothing world shattering in the grand scheme of things.


Humphrey Bogart said:


> I actually think there are some factors that are going to begin coming in to play that haven't been accounted for or considered adequately, namely:
> 
> Aging Population
> Supply Issues
> ...


I don't think immigration is reducing anytime soon.

Inflation is up now, but it was stagnant last year, so over the last 2 pandemic years nothing is out of the ordinary. Next year will tell us a fuller picture.


Humphrey Bogart said:


> Higher childcare costs in larger cities are a direct result of lack of supply and increased cost of living.  Think about it....
> 
> In order to provide child care as a service, what do you need?
> 
> ...


I have no problem with that. Different options can be explored for sure, and the merits of them discussed. 

What I don't like is people saying thats a problem, but so sad, too bad, suck it up.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2021)

Leader of the Greens says bye bye 









						Annamie Paul resigns as Green Party leader
					

Annamie Paul is resigning. The embattled Green Party leader announced Monday that she’s started the process of withdrawing from the role, calling her less than a year at the helm of the party 'the worst period' in her life. Paul's decision to step down comes on the heels of the party initiating...



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Altair (27 Sep 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Why should the average wage and GDP per person in PEI be like those in Ont or Alberta if PEI can't do that organically ?
> 
> Shouldn't this be what encourages people to strike out and make their own way ?


Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

— Constitution Act, 1982, s. 36(2)


Halifax Tar said:


> I would say we are picking favorites by allowing certain provinces to expect to be kept afloat by an annual infusion of cash from others.


Parliament and the government of Canada are committed to the principle of making equalization payments to ensure that provincial governments have sufficient revenues to provide reasonably comparable levels of public services at reasonably comparable levels of taxation.

— Constitution Act, 1982, s. 36(2)


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Sep 2021)

Interprovincial migration is useful for the same reasons that immigration is useful.  To the extent that policy choices militate interprovincial migration, they are counterproductive.  No real underlying logic in supporting some policies because they will promote economic growth while supporting others which retard economic growth.


----------



## Weinie (27 Sep 2021)

MilEME09 said:


> Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country, shouldn't we be growing Quebec and Ontario to be able to pay in instead of take out?


Oh, but there are. To wit:

Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency - Canada.ca

I prefer to describe it as equalization under another guise, as it seems to get lots of Maritimers to that magic number of weeks when EI kicks in. But then, I am from there, and despise what Maritimers have allowed themselves to be bribed with.

It's really fun when I go home every two years or so. Most family avoids me like the plague, for fear of abuse and chastisement, but that fear melts away when I hold the free barbecue day at the rental cottage. I then can launch on the many mooches I am related to, (who have made an art of milking the system), who have vowed for the last ten years "never to speak to me again" only to show up for the lobster that I buy at the next visit.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Oh, but there are. To wit:
> 
> Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency - Canada.ca
> 
> ...


----------



## dimsum (27 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> It's really fun when I go home every two years or so. Most family avoids me like the plague, for fear of abuse and chastisement, but that fear melts away when I hold the free barbecue day at the rental cottage. I then can launch on the many mooches I am related to, (who have made an art of milking the system), who have vowed for the last ten years "never to speak to me again" only to show up for the lobster that I buy at the next visit.


So what you're saying is your family has the Simpson Gene.


----------



## The Bread Guy (27 Sep 2021)

Weinie said:


> Oh, but there are. To wit:
> 
> Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency - Canada.ca
> 
> I prefer to describe it as equalization under another guise ...


And it's not the only such agency out there in Canada ....


----------



## mariomike (27 Sep 2021)

Saw this in the news,



> 95 per cent of the new Tory caucus will be white





			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conserative-caucus-95-per-cent-white-1.6185707
		


Perhaps more diversity might help their chances?


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> Perhaps more diversity might help their chances?



Like a Black Jewish female lawyer?


----------



## McG (27 Sep 2021)

Kirkhill said:


> Alberta could, no doubt, have afforded to provide some of those services that you enjoy. But it was made harder by the net tendency of money to flow out of the province to the federal government and on to other provinces.


That is not how it works. Alberta has the lowest provincial taxes in Canada. If Alberta has lacked the revenues to do what Quebec does, it has nothing to do with federal tax flows and everything to do with the choice to maintain the lowest provincial taxes. I’m not saying that Alberta should or should not raise its own taxes, but that there is no truth to the UCP narrative that Alberta is hard-done by federal transfer & equalization payments.



MilEME09 said:


> Here's my only issue with equalization, there seems to be no mechanism to be turning have not provinces into have provinces. Why are there no targeted federal programs to encourage growth in economically weaker parts of the country,


There are targeted programs: Canada's Regional Development Agencies - Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> That is not how it works. Alberta has the lowest provincial taxes in Canada. If Alberta has lacked the revenues to do what Quebec does, it has nothing to do with federal tax flows and everything to do with the choice to maintain the lowest provincial taxes. I’m not saying that Alberta should or should not raise its own taxes, but that there is no truth to the UCP narrative that Alberta is hard-done by federal transfer & equalization payments.


…for the same reason that at the federal government’s current burn-rate, it would at least take a return of GST to 7%, if not more, to at least try to bring the spiraling debt under slightly more control so we don’t get bought by China in 2033…


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> That is not how it works. Alberta has the lowest provincial taxes in Canada. If Alberta has lacked the revenues to do what Quebec does, it has nothing to do with federal tax flows and everything to do with the choice to maintain the lowest provincial taxes.



In Alberta PST stands for 'Political Suicide Tax'


----------



## QV (28 Sep 2021)

As it should. Governments have a spending problem, not a too low tax problem. What’s next, a tax that’ll change the earth‘s climate? The federal government is giving Quebec $6B (that’s one thousand million, six times) for babysitting if you can imagine. We’re so fucked.


----------



## ballz (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> That is not how it works. Alberta has the lowest provincial taxes in Canada. If Alberta has lacked the revenues to do what Quebec does, it has nothing to do with federal tax flows and everything to do with the choice to maintain the lowest provincial taxes. I’m not saying that Alberta should or should not raise its own taxes, but that there is no truth to the UCP narrative that Alberta is hard-done by federal transfer & equalization payments.



It's exactly how it works. The money is coming from the same source, it's absolute nonsense to argue that the Federal government's tax rate does not affect Alberta's finances. Would you make the same argument if the Federal income tax was 100%, therefore leaving zero income left for the provincial government to draw tax from? Of course you wouldn't, so then at what point did you change your mind? At 15% federal tax? At 20%? 50%? Please, be precise...

If it were a well, and the Federal government came in and took water out of it and gave it to other provinces, would you argue that it has no affect on the water left in the well for Alberta to drink from?

Let's call a spade a spade here, fact is people don't like that Alberta is able to have high income, low taxes, and the same level of services as other provinces. They feel entitled to it, they feel it's not "fair" that they don't have it, without any consideration for the sacrifices many many Albertans make in order to get that high income, such as leaving their family, starting over again from the bottom, switching careers altogether, or doing tough manual labour with ridiculous working hours.

They can have it all too, by doing the honest thing and making the same sacrifices... or they can use tyranny via majority vote.


----------



## Altair (28 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> It's exactly how it works. The money is coming from the same source, it's absolute nonsense to argue that the Federal government's tax rate does not affect Alberta's finances. Would you make the same argument if the Federal income tax was 100%, therefore leaving zero income left for the provincial government to draw tax from? Of course you wouldn't, so then at what point did you change your mind? At 15% federal tax? At 20%? 50%? Please, be precise...


Yet every other provinces can manage to have a sales tax.

Go figure.


ballz said:


> If it were a well, and the Federal government came in and took water out of it and gave it to other provinces, would you argue that it has no affect on the water left in the well for Alberta to drink from?


Yes  because the other have provinces don't have a sales tax.

wait...


ballz said:


> Let's call a spade a spade here, fact is people don't like that Alberta is able to have high income, low taxes, and the same level of services as other provinces. They feel entitled to it, they feel it's not "fair" that they don't have it, without any consideration for the sacrifices many many Albertans make in order to get that high income, such as leaving their family, starting over again from the bottom, switching careers altogether, or doing tough manual labour with ridiculous working hours.


Alberta can do what it pleases, but it shouldnt complain about oil prices effecting it's coffers.


ballz said:


> They can have it all too, by doing the honest thing and making the same sacrifices... or they can use tyranny via majority vote.


Darn democracy.


----------



## McG (28 Sep 2021)

ballz said:


> Let's call a spade a spade here, fact is people don't like that Alberta is able to have high income, low taxes, and the same level of services as other provinces.


Is this true? Isn’t the source of the UCP manufactured debate stemming from an inability of Alberta to afford its current level of services? You whinged earlier in this thread about which provinces were running surpluses and which had deficits. Surely that should not be a relevant benchmark for equalization. Federally, all Canadians are taxed the same. Provincially, Alberta is taxed lower than every other province and that is Alberta’s choice.

The UCP is not asking for the federal government to cut taxes for Albertans, it is asking the federal government to give more money to the provincial government. It is asking for federal tax revenue to subsidize the lowest provincial tax rate in the country to avoid cutting services because the province has decided it will not increase its own revenues.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> Is this true? Isn’t the source of the UCP manufactured debate stemming from an inability of Alberta to afford its current level of services? You whinged earlier in this thread about which provinces were running surpluses and which had deficits. Surely that should not be a relevant benchmark for equalization. Federally, all Canadians are taxed the same. Provincially, Alberta is taxed lower than every other province and that is Alberta’s choice.
> 
> The UCP is not asking for the federal government to cut taxes for Albertans, it is asking the federal government to give more money to the provincial government. It is asking for federal tax revenue to subsidize the lowest provincial tax rate in the country to avoid cutting services because the province has decided it will not increase its own revenues.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> Is this true? Isn’t the source of the UCP manufactured debate stemming from an inability of Alberta to afford its current level of services? You whinged earlier in this thread about which provinces were running surpluses and which had deficits. Surely that should not be a relevant benchmark for equalization. Federally, all Canadians are taxed the same. Provincially, Alberta is taxed lower than every other province and that is Alberta’s choice.
> 
> The UCP is not asking for the federal government to cut taxes for Albertans, it is asking the federal government to give more money to the provincial government. It is asking for federal tax revenue to subsidize the lowest provincial tax rate in the country to avoid cutting services because the province has decided it will not increase its own revenues.


How about governments at all levels do something novel like, growing their various economies, to pay for social programs?


----------



## QV (28 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> How about governments at all levels do something novel like, growing their various economies, to pay for social programs?



You don't want a population to be too successful because you get a different kind of voter with people dependent on social programs vs people who aren't.


----------



## McG (28 Sep 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> How about governments at all levels do something novel like, growing their various economies, to pay for social programs?





McG said:


> There are targeted programs for that: Canada's Regional Development Agencies - Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada


----------



## ArmyRick (28 Sep 2021)

mariomike said:


> Saw this in the news,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 The conservatives had plenty of "non-european descendant" peoples running. The problem is they were running in Liberal strong holds, so not a recipe for their success.


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Sep 2021)

Equalization is paid for by taxpayers, not provinces.  Federal and provincial taxpayers are approximately identical sets.  If equalization ended and the federal government trimmed GST to match, it would leave some "tax points" for provinces, including AB, to use without raising net taxes on taxpayers.  The argument that equalization does not come "from provinces" is true, but uninteresting and useless and obscures things which should be "seen" rather than "unseen".

Ending transfer schemes would aggravate regional economic imbalances; increasing regional imbalances would motivate migration of people from where their output (if any) is less productive to where it is more productive.  I expect it would give a bigger boost to Canada's economic output than subsidized child care schemes.  A rational person who thinks child care subsidies are a good idea because more people will be more productive should be wholly on board with ending equalization.  But I doubt many of them are, because what's at stake is not reason, but rather emotion, partisanship, and a calculation purely of personal benefit.


----------



## Altair (28 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Equalization is paid for by taxpayers, not provinces.  Federal and provincial taxpayers are approximately identical sets.  If equalization ended and the federal government trimmed GST to match, it would leave some "tax points" for provinces, including AB, to use without raising net taxes on taxpayers.  The argument that equalization does not come "from provinces" is true, but uninteresting and useless and obscures things which should be "seen" rather than "unseen".
> 
> Ending transfer schemes would aggravate regional economic imbalances; increasing regional imbalances would motivate migration of people from where their output (if any) is less productive to where it is more productive.  I expect it would give a bigger boost to Canada's economic output than subsidized child care schemes.  A rational person who thinks child care subsidies are a good idea because more people will be more productive should be wholly on board with ending equalization.  But I doubt many of them are, because what's at stake is not reason, but rather emotion, partisanship, and a calculation purely of personal benefit.


Any rational person would also not want to reopen the constitution seeing how poorly it went the last two times Canada tried it, so removing equalization is not really going to happen.


----------



## QV (28 Sep 2021)

In October Alberta is holding a referendum with the following question: _Should section 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 – Parliament and the government of Canada’s commitment to the principle of making equalization payments – be removed from the constitution?_

A 'yes' vote means Alberta will be asking the federal government and provinces to begin discussions for amending the constitution. I'm certain we can all be sure this won't go any further than Alberta's wishful thinking and that no discussions will ensue. But more importantly for Alberta this will be a bellwether on the possibility of secession in the future.


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Sep 2021)

> Any rational person would also not want to reopen the constitution seeing how poorly it went the last two times Canada tried it, so removing equalization is not really going to happen.



I don't care whether no true Scotsman would want to reopen the constitution; there are so many things that were never really going to happen until they happened.  Canada has an unimpressive 1982 result and could stand reopening it.


----------



## Altair (28 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> In October Alberta is holding a referendum with the following question: _Should section 36(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 – Parliament and the government of Canada’s commitment to the principle of making equalization payments – be removed from the constitution?_
> 
> A 'yes' vote means Alberta will be asking the federal government and provinces to begin discussions for amending the constitution. I'm certain we can all be sure this won't go any further than Alberta's wishful thinking and that no discussions will ensue. But more importantly for Alberta this will be a bellwether on the possibility of secession in the future.


I for one look forward to the Alberta Bloc in the house of commons.


----------



## Altair (28 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I don't care whether no true Scotsman would want to reopen the constitution; there are so many things that were never really going to happen until they happened.  Canada has an unimpressive 1982 result and could stand reopening it.


Yeah, but back in reality no federal party is going to open it up.

So any solutions going forward are going to involved _36(2) of the Constitution Act, _aka, equalization.


----------



## QV (28 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I for one look forward to the Alberta Bloc in the house of commons.


Don't hold your breath. The grievances in AB are far different than those in Quebec where having a "federal" party lobby another federal party for favors is working for them. However if there were a secession, you could still be very happy because the outcome would be the same; the LPC would rule the RoC perpetually.


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Sep 2021)

As long as we're cruising fat, dumb, and happy, no-one is going to be looking for solutions to much of anything and the lack of initiative will have nothing to do with the Charter.  Crisis will prompt discussion; discussion will prompt political realignment; political realignment will enable changing black-letter law.  I fully expect "win the argument, then win the election" will apply.  The argument will be won when people are scared.  Recent events have demonstrated that people are easily scared, so I must remember not to be surprised if it happens sooner than I expect.


----------



## Altair (28 Sep 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> As long as we're cruising fat, dumb, and happy, no-one is going to be looking for solutions to much of anything and the lack of initiative will have nothing to do with the Charter.  Crisis will prompt discussion; discussion will prompt political realignment; political realignment will enable changing black-letter law.  I fully expect "win the argument, then win the election" will apply.  The argument will be won when people are scared.  Recent events have demonstrated that people are easily scared, so I must remember not to be surprised if it happens sooner than I expect.


I don't Canadians getting scared enough to have at least seven provinces that approve getting rid of equalization, or anything else really, representing at least 50% of Canada's population.


----------



## Brad Sallows (28 Sep 2021)

COVID scared enough shit out of enough Canadians so as lead to major economic damage.  Foresee what you wish.


----------



## ballz (28 Sep 2021)

McG said:


> Is this true? Isn’t the source of the UCP manufactured debate stemming from an inability of Alberta to afford its current level of services?



You think the equalization debate is "UCP-manufactured?" They're literally trying to keep down those who just want to fully separate, of which there are many. The equalization debate has been going on long before the UCP existed.

No, that's not what it stems from. If it stems from anything, it's that Alberta pays into it in good faith, but then when there's a recession, Alberta doesn't just receive zero help, they receive active attempts by everyone else to stifle them.

Alberta would prefer to just get rid of the welfare trap. But, if you're going to have one, then it should be a fair formula. Not one that favours certain revenue sources over others as a way to deliberately favour certain provinces Not one that encourages some provinces to stay in the welfare trap, at the expense of those that actually do the work.



McG said:


> You whinged earlier in this thread about which provinces were running surpluses and which had deficits. Surely that should not be a relevant benchmark for equalization. Federally, all Canadians are taxed the same. Provincially, Alberta is taxed lower than every other province and that is Alberta’s choice.



A choice that seems to have to be contributing to the strongest economy, even now hmmm.... you might want to rethink the idea of taxing your way out of a recession.

I did not complain about Alberta running a deficit. It's fair unrealistic to think any government is going to run surpluses in perpetuity. Alberta's finances were managed very well, so much so that they've weathered the recent recessions and are still in far better financial shape than any other province. Like I said, Alberta doesn't need financial lessons from the people who they've been subsidizing for decades.



McG said:


> The UCP is not asking for the federal government to cut taxes for Albertans, it is asking the federal government to give more money to the provincial government. It is asking for federal tax revenue to subsidize the lowest provincial tax rate in the country to avoid cutting services because the province has decided it will not increase its own revenues.



When did Alberta ask for that? Other than pointing out the clearly unfair system.

Alberta clearly pays far more into the Federal government than it receives, so that other negative contributors can have gigantic public sectors that drain their own economies and live off the backs of Albertans. Trying to paint this as the Federal government subsidizing Alberta is just shameless.



Brad Sallows said:


> Equalization is paid for by taxpayers, not provinces.  Federal and provincial taxpayers are approximately identical sets.  If equalization ended and the federal government trimmed GST to match, it would leave some "tax points" for provinces, including AB, to use without raising net taxes on taxpayers.  The argument that equalization does not come "from provinces" is true, but uninteresting and useless and obscures things which should be "seen" rather than "unseen".



Yup. Like I said, it's a distinction without a difference. People just don't want to admit they are on the receiving end of the welfare scheme. Trust me folks, it's much more rewarding to stop faking it and to make your own way. Why anyone is trying to blindly hang on to provincial pride makes no sense to me. I get it, I came here from Newfoundland and at first it kinda hurts, but developing a sense of shame is healthy.

On another note, I'm actually in favour of a PST (and a corresponding decrease in income tax so that it's revenue neutral), but not for the same reasons as most of the posters on this thread which are RTFO'er.


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

Equalization was never meant to subsidize large, populous and wealthy provinces like Quebec. It was meant to make sure places like PEI or NB had comparable core services because those places with low populations and low economic power couldn't do it to a comparable level as provinces such as AB, Ont, Que, and BC. 

The present formula (which isn't enshrined in the constitution) allows the federal government to plunder Alberta to buy votes in Quebec.

If the provinces were negotiating confederation with the present day arrangements, there is no way any sensible Alberta government would agree to join.


----------



## brihard (29 Sep 2021)

Edit: hit enter by accident


----------



## KevinB (29 Sep 2021)

I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...

Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states


----------



## dimsum (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...
> 
> Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states


like WA, OR, and CA?

Viva Cascadia!

Might as well get NY into the mix too!


----------



## KevinB (29 Sep 2021)

dimsum said:


> like WA, OR, and CA?
> 
> Viva Cascadia!
> 
> Might as well get NY into the mix too!


WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> I'd just to toss a vote in the ring that IF Alberta wants to secede from Canada - currently there have been discussion about adding more States down here (PR and USVI) and making DC a State - so there is a opening...
> 
> Maybe we could get Alberta in trade a few of our annoying Liberal states



Maybe it should be the United States of *North* America. The state of Mexico would need a bit of cleaning up, but think of how few land border agents you would need to guard that little sliver at the bottom. I can see the savings already!


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.


I like this idea. 

You get all the Albertans, we keep the land, we get all the Californians, you keep the land.


----------



## KevinB (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Maybe it should be the United States of *North* America. The state of Mexico would need a bit of cleaning up, but think of how few land border agents you would need to guard that little sliver at the bottom. I can see the savings already!


Savings and Government never go hand in hand -- larger potential for misappropriation of funds...


----------



## dimsum (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> WA, NY - all of the people in California - sorry need to keep the land.


I had to chuckle a bit - that is an ironic comment the day before Canada's National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

KevinB said:


> Savings and Government never go hand in hand -- larger potential for misappropriation of funds...


Well, we'd roll three fed governments into one so we'd have 1/3 the scandals, at that level anyway.


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Maybe it should be the United States of *North* America. The state of Mexico would need a bit of cleaning up, but think of how few land border agents you would need to guard that little sliver at the bottom. I can see the savings already!


Ah yes, remove the border between the USA and Mexico. I would love to see the results of the free movement of people that results from that.


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Equalization was never meant to subsidize large, populous and wealthy provinces like Quebec. It was meant to make sure places like PEI or NB had comparable core services because those places with low populations and low economic power couldn't do it to a comparable level as provinces such as AB, Ont, Que, and BC.
> 
> The present formula (which isn't enshrined in the constitution) allows the federal government to plunder Alberta to buy votes in Quebec.
> 
> If the provinces were negotiating confederation with the present day arrangements, there is no way any sensible Alberta government would agree to join.


You know who put in the present formula, yes?


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, remove the border between the USA and Mexico. I would love to see the results of the free movement of people that results from that.


You're no fun


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> You're no fun


I think that would be incredibly fun to watch.

How many former Mexicans move over the removed border do you imagine?


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> You know who put in the present formula, yes?


Yes. Can I still disagree with it?

Edit: There are many voters who aren't "all in" on a party or politician.


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Yes. Can I still disagree with it?


I just find it funny how an Alberta guy would set in rules to plunder Alberta.


----------



## QV (29 Sep 2021)

Altair said:


> I just find it funny how an Alberta guy would set in rules to plunder Alberta.


Least worst option?


----------



## Altair (29 Sep 2021)

QV said:


> Least worst option?


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Sep 2021)

The old "someone must have forgot to update my itinerary" on the new National Day for Truth and Reconciliation when everyone will be judged for what they spent the day doing.


*Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is spending the first National Truth and Reconciliation Day on vacation in Tofino, B.C., with his family, despite his official itinerary placing him in private meetings in Ottawa.*








						Trudeau spends 1st Truth and Reconciliation Day in Tofino on vacation, contradicting itinerary - National | Globalnews.ca
					

"Yes the PM is spending time in Tofino with family for a few days," Trudeau's spokesperson wrote, adding that "he is speaking today with residential school survivors."




					globalnews.ca


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Sep 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> The old "someone must have forgot to update my itinerary" on the new National Day for Truth and Reconciliation when everyone will be judged for what they spent the day doing.
> 
> 
> *Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is spending the first National Truth and Reconciliation Day on vacation in Tofino, B.C., with his family, despite his official itinerary placing him in private meetings in Ottawa.*
> ...


----------



## Remius (30 Sep 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


>


You really have to wonder who advises this guy.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (30 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> You really have to wonder who advises this guy.


I think they actually send him out of town sometimes, so he can do less damage.


----------



## dangerboy (30 Sep 2021)

The comments on social media about this are quite interesting, they range from people attacking him to others defending him saying he deserves a holiday to others saying the media is misleading people and while he is in BC he is speaking to survivors.  Very entertaining 🍿


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Sep 2021)

Remius said:


> You really have to wonder who advises this guy.


Assuming he listens to them ....


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 Sep 2021)

> he is speaking to survivors



Thought a major point of the whole thing was to listen to survivors.


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Sep 2021)

Trudeau can get away with anything, the novelty probably runs out after a while. I wonder if gets bored and messes with his staff on purpose.


----------



## McG (30 Sep 2021)

dangerboy said:


> The comments on social media about this are quite interesting, they range from people attacking him to others defending him saying he deserves a holiday to others saying the media is misleading people and while he is in BC he is speaking to survivors.  Very entertaining 🍿


He spoke to survivors over the phone. He might have been in BC, or it might have been how he passed the time while flying to BC.


----------



## Haggis (1 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> He spoke to survivors over the phone. He might have been in BC, or it might have been how he passed the time while flying to BC.


So, how come the Liberal-friendly media hasn't trotted out someone in his defence who spoke with him on the phone?  Or, is this another Chretien style case of speaking with people who don't exist?


----------



## ballz (1 Oct 2021)

Imagine the PM going suring during Remembrance Day and then after getting _caught_, calling a few Veterans... and people trying to pass it off as adequate leadership.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Oct 2021)

He lied on his itinerary until caught and it was clear he had no plans to attend, even the local band. You can see it in his body language.









						Trudeau spends 1st Truth and Reconciliation Day in Tofino on vacation, contradicting itinerary - National | Globalnews.ca
					

"Yes the PM is spending time in Tofino with family for a few days," Trudeau's spokesperson wrote, adding that "he is speaking today with residential school survivors."




					globalnews.ca


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Oct 2021)

Haggis said:


> So, how come the Liberal-friendly media hasn't trotted out someone in his defence who spoke with him on the phone?


Funny that - in face, quite the contrary ...


----------



## ArmyRick (1 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> The old "someone must have forgot to update my itinerary" on the new National Day for Truth and Reconciliation when everyone will be judged for what they spent the day doing.
> 
> 
> *Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is spending the first National Truth and Reconciliation Day on vacation in Tofino, B.C., with his family, despite his official itinerary placing him in private meetings in Ottawa.*
> ...


No surprise. Optics of a situation mean nothing to this clown. And why should they? He still gets votes from his cult regardless of what he does.


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Oct 2021)

Ya know it's bad when readers of the Toronto Star come back with this on the survey so far ....

🍿


----------



## Haggis (1 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Ya know it's bad when readers of the Toronto Star come back with this on the survey so far ....
> View attachment 66657
> 🍿


The reader comments on the  Star article show he is still the Teflon PM.


----------



## OldSolduer (1 Oct 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> No surprise. Optics of a situation mean nothing to this clown. And why should they? He still gets votes from his cult regardless of what he does.


Some Canadians got the PM they deserve. Unfortunately the rest of us are along for the ride in the clown car.


----------



## ueo (1 Oct 2021)

FJAG said:


> So I've done my patriotic chore and voted. I did this solely because I feel its not right to bitch about how stupid politicians are unless you have voted. The choices in my riding were dismal although the CPC support here is so strong that a dead monkey would win for them.
> 
> While I've believed ever since the writ was dropped that this election was nothing more or less than a vanity project for the dumbest Trudeau put on earth and that calling an election in the middle of a pandemic was proof positive that he is the dumbest, I didn't realize the true extent of the stupidity until I actually got to the polls.
> 
> ...


Mail In works really well.


----------



## mariomike (1 Oct 2021)

ueo said:


> Mail In works really well.


At least half the time.

I got my mail-in ballot. My wife did not.

Elections Canada informed us hers was "in the mail".

If it is, we are still waiting for it.


----------



## KevinB (1 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> At least half the time.
> 
> I got my mail-in ballot. My wife did not.
> 
> ...


So you got to figure that a lot of return ballots probably went AWOL too.
   Or someone in a LPC campaign office was busy filling them out...


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Oct 2021)

You all clearly experienced the first National T&R day differently ....


----------



## Remius (1 Oct 2021)

I’m going to go out on a limb here.  I think he isn’t running in the next election.  He knows it and he pretty much doesn’t care.


----------



## Haggis (1 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb here.  I think he isn’t running in the next election.  He knows it and he pretty much doesn’t care.


The one in 12-18 months which the LPC will likley lose or the following one in about 36 months when he comes back as saviour of the LPC?


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Oct 2021)

A 3-gun competitive shooter
A Covid19 virus
Electoral reform
Meng Wanzhou
First Nations Warrior

Canadians want to know, what will the honourable Justin Trudeau dressup as this year for Halloween?



			
				Remus said:
			
		

> I’m going to go out on a limb here.  I think he isn’t running in the next election.  He knows it and he pretty much doesn’t care.


Why wouldn't he want to run and win in the next election?


----------



## Remius (1 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> A 3-gun competitive shooter
> A Covid19 virus
> Electoral reform
> Meng Wanzhou
> ...


I think the people in the background are going to manoeuvre to have him step aside.


----------



## Haggis (1 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> I think the people in the background are going to manoeuvre to have him step aside.


It will be interesting to see where in the Cabinet he places any likley leadership contenders. Will he set them up to succeed or fail?


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m going to go out on a limb here.  I think he isn’t running in the next election.  He knows it and he pretty much doesn’t care.


That depends entirely on the CPC.

They dump O'Toole and put in another Scheer like candidate I think he runs again.



Remius said:


> I think the people in the background are going to manoeuvre to have him step aside.


The people in the background know what the LPC was before Trudeau became leader.


----------



## brihard (2 Oct 2021)

Haggis said:


> It will be interesting to see where in the Cabinet he places any likley leadership contenders. Will he set them up to succeed or fail?


Freeland’s keeping her very prominent role. If there’s an obvious anointed successor for party leadership, it’s her. That’s not to say that’s how it’ll go, of course. But in the wake of a leader whose shine has worn off and whose feminist schtick has flopped, she could neatly neutralize some potential criticism levied against the party on those grounds.


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> I think the people in the background are going to manoeuvre to have him step aside.


I think that if they were, there'd be chirping leaks of that sort of thing already out there.  Didn't take long for one of the national executive to chirp about O'Toole.  

Given the silence, even among non-MSM & commentators who would sing from the mountaintops even the tiniest hint of such dissatisfaction, gotta go with this for now ....


Altair said:


> The people in the background know what the LPC was before Trudeau became leader.


----------



## mariomike (2 Oct 2021)

brihard said:


> The Bread Guy said:
> 
> 
> > Didn't take long for one of the national executive to chirp about O'Toole.


Perhaps a female candidate might have a better chance?

According to Nanos Research.


> It’s like a gender war, battle of the sexes… It’s very striking in terms of the division in our country when we look at ballot support based on gender.











						Conservatives surging with male voters: Nanos data
					

The Liberals are enjoying higher support among female voters while the Conservatives are the most popular party for male voters, according to Nanos Research.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Haggis (2 Oct 2021)

brihard said:


> Freeland’s keeping her very prominent role. If there’s an obvious anointed successor for party leadership, it’s her.


If O'Toole were replaced, a Freeland-Ambrose election campaign would be epic!


----------



## mariomike (2 Oct 2021)

Haggis said:


> If O'Toole were replaced, a Freeland-Ambrose election campaign would be epic!


Do you think Ms. Ambrose ( or Leswyn Lewis, for that matter ) would have stood a better chance than Mr. O'Toole against PMJT in the recent election?

( I understand the question is hypothetical, as is speculation of a future "Freeland-Ambrose election campaign". )


----------



## Remius (2 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Do you think Ms. Ambrose ( or Leswyn Lewis, for that matter ) would have stood a better chance than Mr. O'Toole against PMJT in the recent election?
> 
> ( I understand the question is hypothetical, as is speculation of a future "Freeland-Ambrose election campaign". )


Ambrose yes.  Lewis no.  If Ambrose was leader he (Trudeau) never would have triggered this election in the first place.


----------



## brihard (2 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Do you think Ms. Ambrose ( or Leswyn Lewis, for that matter ) would have stood a better chance than Mr. O'Toole against PMJT in the recent election?
> 
> ( I understand the question is hypothetical, as is speculation of a future "Freeland-Ambrose election campaign". )


Ambrose, yes. Lewis, not a chance. She would have driven away a lot of the centrist votes that O’Toole successfully pivoted the party towards


----------



## daftandbarmy (2 Oct 2021)

Trudeau: "Oh fuddle duddle.... let them eat bannock!"


'Complete letdown': Cindy Blackstock on Trudeau's Tofino trip​

Cindy Blackstock, the executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s trip to Tofino, B.C. on the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation was a “complete letdown.”

In an interview on CTV’s Question Period airing Sunday, Blackstock said the prime minister's actions did not demonstrate that Indigenous Peoples and specifically survivors of the residential school system “are worth his time.”

“The prime minister decides that he can have a vacation day – he could have had the vacation day tomorrow. I support vacation, I know that they work hard, but not on the very first national day when we’re supposed to be spending the [time] doing the duty of reconciliation,” she said.

Despite a public itinerary that noted that Trudeau was in “private meetings” in Ottawa on Thursday, his office later confirmed he had travelled to the West Coast to spend time with his family.

“Yes the prime minister is spending time in Tofino with family for a few days. And, following his participation in last night’s ceremony marking the first National Day for Truth & Reconciliation, he is speaking today with residential school survivors from across the country,” the statement read.

Trudeau received two invitations to spend the day in Kamloops, B.C. with residential school survivors.

Tk'emlups te Secwepemc Chief Rosanne Casimir told an audience on Thursday she had held out hope that Trudeau would make it for the event.

“But I do know that moving forward, it’s really important that he truly uphold those 10 principles, the guiding principles of working with us as First Nations,” she said.









						'Complete letdown': Cindy Blackstock on Trudeau's Tofino trip
					

Cindy Blackstock, the executive director of the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society, says Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's trip to Tofino, B.C. on the first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation was a 'complete letdown.'




					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Blackface

Aga Khan

Costumes in India

SNC lavalin

Ditching electoral reform

Failing to end boil water on first nations

WE scandal


Despite all of these the LPC are still firmly where they were in 2019, and still just over a dozen seats away from a majority government.

I thought the lesson of people just don't hate Trudeau and what he does enough to throw away what the LPC provides would have been learned by now.

Guess not. Please continue with this tofino controversy.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Blackface- racism
> 
> Aga Khan- ethics
> 
> ...





Altair said:


> I thought the lesson of people just don't hate Trudeau and what he does enough to throw away what the LPC provides would have been learned by now.


I can see why it's unimportant to the Liberal base.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I can see why it's unimportant to the Liberal base.


Yes, I would have thought people would learn that issues and policy matter more than individual leaders.

Case in point, Jagmeet Singh is the most popular federal leader, he got 26 seats. O'Toole is a decent fellow, didn't gain any seats.

At the end of the day, issues matter, and policy matters. Expecting people to vote out Trudeau under the assumption he is unpopular is a losing proposition. Providing a clear alternative that Canadians feel comfortable choosing as an alternative should be the priority and thus far every party has failed to do that in one way or another.

NDP still not taken seriously.

CPC still cannot break into urban Canada

Greens were too busy fighting their leader and their leader fighting off attacks from within the green party

PPC cannot concentrate their vote to win a riding.

BQ needed a debate moderator to bring them level with 2019 and still the LPC got more seats in QC than they did.

So as long as those aforementioned points remain relevant, it matters little what trudeau does or doesn't do, and it remains amusing that people imagine what he did or didn't do on september 30th matters at all.


----------



## Remius (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, I would have thought people would learn that issues and policy matter more than individual leaders.
> 
> Case in point, Jagmeet Singh is the most popular federal leader, he got 26 seats. O'Toole is a decent fellow, didn't gain any seats.
> 
> ...


Altair, policy matters little to the base as well.  If you think they care about policy then I think I have a bridge to sell you. Trudeau is an image.  That’s all.  People bought into that image.  I am willing to bet that most of his base are politically illiterate in the grand scheme of things. 

So no, they likely don’t care what happened in Tofino.  But they likely could care less about any real policy or what the policy actually entails either.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, I would have thought people would learn that issues and policy matter more than individual leaders.


I agree. Toronto and Montreal doesn't seem too concerned with issues and policies surrounding racism, ethics, respect for the law, first nations health and well-being. Good stuff.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Altair, policy matters little to the base as well.  If you think they care about policy then I think I have a bridge to sell you. Trudeau is an image.  That’s all.  People bought into that image.  I am willing to bet that most of his base are politically illiterate in the grand scheme of things.


I agree that there is definitely a segment of the population that will always vote liberal same as there is a segment of the population that will never vote liberal. 

But I do think issues and policy matter. There is a reason O'Toole shifted to the center. There is a reason he bled votes in the west and picked up votes in the east (although in not enough numbers to sway the result). People do get swayed by issues. The NDP proposed a very progressive platform and appealed to Quebec nationalists in 2011, and it nearly killed the LPC. The LPC proposed a very progressive platform in 2015 and won back those votes from the NDP in 2015, meanwhile the CPC lost the immigrant/minority vote with their barbaric cultural hotline issues.

Even this election, the CPC flip flop on guns, not opposing vaccine passports and proposing their own carbon tax were issues that shifted the campaign and led to the PPC rising in the polls. 

So this idea that its about the leaders is a theory that doesn't hold water in my opinion. 




Remius said:


> So no, they likely don’t care what happened in Tofino.  But they likely could care less about any real policy or what the policy actually entails either.


If this were the case, the political landscape would never change. Yet the LPC lost their majority in 2019. The bloc has come back and forth from the dead. The NDP have gone from official opposition to 4th party. The CPC went from a party of the west and suburbs to party of the west. Am I to believe that this is mostly due to the leaders? I don't agree with that at all.


----------



## mariomike (2 Oct 2021)

Maybe people seeking moral perfection in this world should turn to religion.

I suspect most voters know what they want, or don't want, and support those who support them.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I agree. Toronto and Montreal doesn't seem too concerned with issues and policies surrounding racism, ethics, respect for the law, first nations health and well-being. Good stuff.


The funny thing here is people in Toronto and Montreal care about those things, and they look at the party as a whole and what they are doing about it, not just the leader.

In terms of racism, which party leader took a knee at the BLM protests? Which party has 30 percent of its caucus be BIPOC? Hint, not the CPC. CPC is 95 percent of European descent. If you consider for a moment that by 2036, Canada will have 30 percent of its population born outside of Canada, with another 20 percent having at least one immigrant parent, that presents a problem for the CPC. Is the CPC racist? No. But will LPC do a better job of reflecting the racial diversity of Canadians, despite what Trudeau did before he was PM? Yes.

In terms of ethics, I have not seen this top the list of Canadians concerns in a long time. But just to be sure, I checked. 









						Canada: voting priorities in 2021 election | Statista
					

The Canadian federal election was held on September 20, 2021, two years ahead of schedule, after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called for the dissolution of Parliament on August 15.




					www.statista.com
				






So at the end of the day, people care more about the following, and wont throw out the party working on these priorities regardless of what any individual leader is up to.

As for first nations health and well being, I heard a lot about how Trudeau failed, I didn't hear much about how anyone would do anything better. Its easy to criticize the LPC on their failings, harder to present an alternative. Doesn't help when O'Toole says things like raise the flags right away in the debates either, because it does allow the LPC to paint them as the party that wont do the bare minimum in terms of reconciliation.

In terms of woman voters, having a party come out and say that they will put forward policies like childcare in order to allow women(and its largely women who stay home to raise children) to re-enter the workforce and grant them some independence (hard to leave certain abusive relationships if a woman needs to both raise a young child and earn enough to live on their own) definitely matters more to them and their day to day lives than the JWR affair and subsequent book, and some allegation that didn't go anywhere from decades ago. Also doesn't help that a majority of the CPC caucus voted in favour of putting more restrictions on abortion in recent memory, especially with the stuff going on in the USA right now.

The problem for the CPC is that they won in 2011. There is a generation of progressive voters who remember what voting NDP is like. It lead to the LPC collapsing, enough centralists being scared of the NDP to go vote CPC, and 4 years of a majority government for Stephen Harper. I doubt you see a majority of progressive voters go vote for the NDP anytime soon, knowing the end result. So the progressive vote will naturally back the LPC so long as the NDP are not a real alternative.

These are the issues that the opposition parties face going forward, not Trudeau per se. So its entertaining to me to watch people continue to make the mistake of jumping on Trudeaus miss steps when their problems go much deeper than Trudeau.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Maybe people seeking moral perfection in this world turn to religion.
> 
> I suspect most voters know what they want, or don't want, and support those who support them.


I spent 10 minutes writing out a big post when you summed it up in two sentences. 

Bravo.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Oct 2021)

All of you give way too much credit to the average Canadian voter.
Most vote because of the names of the parties name and what they think that entails.

Liberal....live and let live folk.
Conservative....old straight stuffy folk.

You switch the names of the parties, and nothing else,  and we'd get almost the same result.


----------



## Remius (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree that there is definitely a segment of the population that will always vote liberal same as there is a segment of the population that will never vote liberal.
> 
> But I do think issues and policy matter. There is a reason O'Toole shifted to the center. There is a reason he bled votes in the west and picked up votes in the east (although in not enough numbers to sway the result). People do get swayed by issues. The NDP proposed a very progressive platform and appealed to Quebec nationalists in 2011, and it nearly killed the LPC. The LPC proposed a very progressive platform in 2015 and won back those votes from the NDP in 2015, meanwhile the CPC lost the immigrant/minority vote with their barbaric cultural hotline issues.
> 
> ...


Jack Layton almost killed the LPC in QC.  not the NDP or any real policy.  Specifically his performance on Tout Le monde En Parle. Quebecers vote with the hearts not their heads.  Happened this time as well after a reporter asked a question they didn’t like. 

2019 was all about leaders.  Specifically Scheer who was very much not liked. 

2015 was the end of a tired gvt.  Trudeau appeared and portrayed a contrast that Canadians wanted.  Policy wasn’t the issue.  If they ran with someone like ignatief or Dion they would have lost.  Don’t kid yourself. 

The leader theory holds plenty of water.  I accept you don’t want to drink it.  But it’s a fact.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Jack Layton almost killed the LPC in QC.  not the NDP or any real policy.  Specifically his performance on Tout Le monde En Parle. Quebecers vote with the hearts not their heads.  Happened this time as well after a reporter asked a question they didn’t like.


The NDP ran jack layton a bunch of times and the only time the NDP made any traction as after they agreed with 50 percent plus 1 after the Sherbrooke conference. That was policy.


Remius said:


> 2019 was all about leaders.  Specifically Scheer who was very much not liked.


Scheer was not liked because of his utter failure to make a coherent response to the abortion issue.


Remius said:


> 2015 was the end of a tired gvt.  Trudeau appeared and portrayed a contrast that Canadians wanted.  Policy wasn’t the issue.  If they ran with someone like ignatief or Dion they would have lost.  Don’t kid yourself.


Canadians could just have easily elected Mulcair, in fact Mulcair was in the lead for a good portion of the campaign. After the LPC said screw it to balanced budgets and ran to the left of the NDP who were trying to appear more responsible under mulcair, and thus more electable, the NDP started to falter. Was Trudeau the right guy to deliver said message? Sure. But lets not pretend that he became leader and overnight the LPC was polling in majority territory. They were still the 3rd place party going into that election, and once there was a clear divergence on issues between them and the NDP, they started their rise.


Remius said:


> The leader theory holds plenty of water.  I accept you don’t want to drink it.  But it’s a fact.


No, its a opinion.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> All of you give way too much credit to the average Canadian voter.
> Most vote because of the names of the parties name and what they think that entails.


So the rise of the PPC was what then?

The collapse of the GRN was what then?

CPC doing better in Ontario and Quebec was what then?

CPC doing worse in the west was what then?

I think enough Canadians are paying attention to the issues, more so than the leaders.


----------



## QV (2 Oct 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> All of you give way too much credit to the average Canadian voter.
> Most vote because of the names of the parties name and what they think that entails.
> 
> Liberal....live and let live folk.
> ...


This is exactly it right here. That’s why the party name matters so much.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> In terms of racism, which party leader took a knee at the BLM protests? Which party has 30 percent of its caucus be BIPOC?


Is that the bar for what racism is and isn't?


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Is that the bar for what racism is and isn't?


It less about a bar than it is about relevancy. Did Trudeau do blackface? Yes. Was it recent? No. Has he shown himself to be racist in recent memory? No. So its not relevant. 

What is relevant is that the LPC has branded itself as the party of immigration, the party of the charter of rights, the party of multiculturalism, it makes it hard to tar them as intolerant racists regardless of what Trudeau did decades ago.


----------



## Kilted (2 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> A 3-gun competitive shooter
> A Covid19 virus
> Electoral reform
> Meng Wanzhou
> ...


Because his party won't let him.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Kilted said:


> Because his party won't let him.


The party has more to lose by a internal leadership battle than by letting him run till he decides he doesn't want to anymore. 

If the party has learned anything from the Martin Chretien years its that.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> In terms of racism, which party leader took a knee at the BLM protests? Which party has 30 percent of its caucus be BIPOC?


same party where the leader had his apparatchiks pressure an indigenous woman to do his bidding to support a party-friendly ethics-challenged company, then kicked her out of caucus when she wouldn’t subvert the justice system; and the same party whose leader paraded a black woman around in front of foreign leaders as a token of his wokeness, then later also jettisoned her from the party for daring to refuse to continue to be used as a virtue-signaling pawn.

Nor does it seem that supporters of that party have any issues with any of that, or they convince themselves that’s not really how such actions were to be experienced by the outcast.


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> It less about a bar than it is about relevancy. Did Trudeau do blackface? Yes. Was it recent? No. Has he shown himself to be racist in recent memory? No. So its not relevant.


Did O'Toole laugh at an indigenous woman who had to scrape together $2000 to get an audience to talk about not having clean water to drink?

No of course not, that would have destroyed him. We know there is a giant double standard when it comes to the low-bar behavior the Liberal party gets away with compared to anyone else. They've successfully branded themselves. Trudeau successfully branded himself.

That's why Trudeau can get a general fired for a sexual misconduct allegation from 30 years ago while he can admit to one himself and the rest of Canada learns a lesson.

Trudeau can get away with anything because his voters let him, not because they give a shit about policies.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> same party where the leader had his apparatchiks pressure an indigenous woman to do his bidding to support a party-friendly ethics-challenged company, then kicked her out of caucus when she wouldn’t subvert the justice system;


You believe this happened because she was indigenous or or regardless of if she was indigenous?


Good2Golf said:


> and the same party whose leader paraded a black woman around in front of foreign leaders as a token of his wholeness, then later also jettisoned her from the party for daring to refuse to continue to be used as a virtue-signaling pawn.


Take this, weight it against all the other things I mentioned and ponder if its enough to undo all of that.


Good2Golf said:


> Nor does it seem that supporters of that party don’t have an issue with any of that, or they convince themselves that’s not really how such actions were to be experienced by the outcast.


Just another sign that policies matter more than the individuals actions.


----------



## Altair (2 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Did O'Toole laugh at an indigenous woman who had to scrape together $2000 to get an audience to talk about not having clean water to drink?


He did not. However, again, you are expecting an individuals actions to overcome all else.


Jarnhamar said:


> No of course not, that would have destroyed him.


I don't know about that, this is the guy caught on camera saying the initial goal of residential schools was to “provide education”, and he apologized and everyone moved on.


Jarnhamar said:


> We know there is a giant double standard when it comes to the low-bar behavior the Liberal party gets away with compared to anyone else. They've successfully branded themselves. Trudeau successfully branded himself.


Yes, which, again, is why I continue to be amused by people putting so much emphasis on the individual actions Trudeau does. 


Jarnhamar said:


> That's why Trudeau can get a general fired for a sexual misconduct allegation from 30 years ago while he can admit to one himself and the rest of Canada learns a lesson.
> 
> Trudeau can get away with anything because his voters let him, not because they give a shit about policies.


I maintain that if O'Toole left daycare alone, left guns alone, left the carbon tax alone, and got every one of his candidates vaccinated he would be PM using the rest of his platform.

Otherwise, if its all on the leader, and we all agree Trudeau is pretty teflon, what makes anyone think he wont continue winning elections going forward? And if that's the case, why would he not run in the next election?


----------



## The Bread Guy (2 Oct 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> ... Most vote because of the names of the parties name and what they think that entails ...


... or for names/faces they know.


----------



## Remius (2 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> The NDP ran jack layton a bunch of times and the only time the NDP made any traction as after they agreed with 50 percent plus 1 after the Sherbrooke conference. That was policy.
> 
> Scheer was not liked because of his utter failure to make a coherent response to the abortion issue.
> 
> ...


Again, you give too much credit to the Canadian Voter.  They are notorious for not wanting change.

Again, Trudeau lucked out due to being the right contrast to Harper and the right time.

No, the NDP policies did not get them elected.  After Layton passed they were wiped out in QC.  Quebec votes with its heart.  Plain and simple.   They liked Jack Layton after his stint on QC television and his debate performances. 

You also discount the voters who vote against rather than for.  

Trudeau is exactly like Trump.  One side of same coin.  Both have supporters who will vote because of whatever superficial reason and couldn’t care less about policy. 

So factor in the percentage of how many people ACTUALLY voted for the LPC.  From that extrapolate how many are die hard LPC.  Then substract the people who vote the same way their family or spouse does or did, then substract the people who don’t like what the others offer, then remove the ones who have no clue how any of policies really work or even care etc etc.  How many does that leave you with that voted for actual policy?    Not a lot and certainly not a majority of Canadians.

You think Canadians vote for policy.  Some do, but not in the numbers you think.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> He did not. However, again, you are expecting an individuals actions to overcome all else.


I'm poitning out the double standard Trudeau armours himself with and how when his guard is down his true self shines through. 


Altair said:


> I don't know about that, this is the guy caught on camera saying the initial goal of residential schools was to “provide education”, and he apologized and everyone moved on.


People made a lot of noise about it. 


Altair said:


> Yes, which, again, is why I continue to be amused by people putting so much emphasis on the individual actions Trudeau does.


Yup. Lots of honour bound suckers out there.



Altair said:


> I maintain that if O'Toole left daycare alone, left guns alone, left the carbon tax alone, and got every one of his candidates vaccinated he would be PM using the rest of his platform.


Daycare was the 2nd least popular thing Canadians were concerned about in the graph you posted up thread. Guns weren't mentioned, carbon tax (climate change) was around the middle.
O'Toole had no chance of winning because the election is decided by Toronto and Quebec.  



Altair said:


> Otherwise, if its all on the leader, and we all agree Trudeau is pretty teflon, what makes anyone think he wont continue winning elections going forward? And if that's the case, why would he not run in the next election?


Agreed. He'll continue to run and continue to win, because he speaks Toronto and Quebec.


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'm poitning out the double standard Trudeau armours himself with and how when his guard is down his true self shines through.


People care less about true self and more about what politicians can do for them.


Jarnhamar said:


> People made a lot of noise about it.


People made a lot of noise about how Trudeau treated that protester.

Point is it didn't sink either of them. 

It's amazing how far an apology will go.


Jarnhamar said:


> Yup. Lots of honour bound suckers out there.


Politics for ya.


Jarnhamar said:


> Daycare was the 2nd least popular thing Canadians were concerned about in the graph you posted up thread. Guns weren't mentioned, carbon tax (climate change) was around the middle.


This is my opinion, take it or leave it, but I think it would have allowed a lot more Canadians be more comfortable with replacing Trudeau with O'Toole if O'Toole left well enough alone.


Jarnhamar said:


> O'Toole had no chance of winning because the election is decided by Toronto and Quebec.


O'Toole, and any conservative can be competitive in Quebec or Toronto if they picked policies popular with Toronto and Quebec.


Jarnhamar said:


> Agreed. He'll continue to run and continue to win, because he speaks Toronto and Quebec.


Cynical. 

Wont complain about that though.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> CPC is 95 percent of European descent.


How does that compare to LPC?


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> How does that compare to LPC?


30 percent of the LPC caucus this time around is BIPOC


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

Rupa Subramanya: Yes, Tofino Trudeau is entitled, but he’s not clueless
					

Trudeau critics who justifiably continue to hammer away at his personal foibles ultimately miss the plot when they stop there




					nationalpost.com
				






> A striking refrain I hear from those who voted for the Liberals this time around is that they don’t particularly like Trudeau’s sense of entitlement or his arrogance, but they still think he and the Liberals are better than the alternative. In particular, despite his pivot to the centre, many seemed unconvinced by Erin O’Toole and fear the regressive right wing of the Conservative party. One particular Liberal supporter described the newly rebranded and likeable Tories as “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. Nor were they impressed by the TikTok antics of Jagmeet Singh, whom they see as a little more than the class clown — entertaining and likeable but light on substance and not someone who could credibly lead the country.
> 
> Trudeau critics who justifiably continue to hammer away at his personal foibles ultimately miss the plot when they stop there. As the last two elections proved beyond any doubt, most Canadians, at least Liberal supporters, don’t give a toss. Nor is the public likely to be moved by the sanctimony of critics who themselves probably enjoyed Thursday as yet another holiday, much as Trudeau did. Certainly on the evidence of the overflowing pubs in downtown Ottawa last Thursday, most average folks were more concerned with enjoying a pint on a patio on one of the last warm days rather than cloistered at home in a state of reflection and reconciliation.
> 
> Most Canadians, I think, are jaded by the competitive sanctimony and self-righteousness of both Trudeau and his critics. And Trudeau knows this. His critics often make the mistake of assuming not just that he’s entitled, which he clearly is, but also that he’s clueless, which he clearly is not. He knows full well that most Canadians are not bothered by the competitive politics of self-righteous symbolism but rather are concerned with pocketbook issues, and many have given Trudeau credit for the safe return of the two Michaels from Chinese captivity.


I could write for the National Post.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I maintain that if O'Toole left daycare alone, left guns alone, left the carbon tax alone, and got every one of his candidates vaccinated he would be PM using the rest of his platform.
> 
> Otherwise, if its all on the leader, and we all agree Trudeau is pretty teflon, what makes anyone think he wont continue winning elections going forward? And if that's the case, why would he not run in the next election?



The Conservatives need a real climate change plan, and they could easily do away with the Carbon tax if they had a actual plan to back it up. For example if they said instead of a carbon tax we are now going to start limiting products made in other countries in environmentally unfriendly ways (or manners that would be illegal here) from being allowed in and sold in Canada. We are also going to create jobs and encourage industry to set up shop in Canada to produce goods in a environmentally friendly manner (or at least friendlier than anywhere else) creating a ton of good paying jobs which don't require extreme amounts of education. You would likely see a bunch of blue collar votes going their way and the NDP losing what blue collar support is left there. 

If the Conservatives left guns alone they would lose rural Canada and those votes would shift to the PPC which would likely end up as the opposition or at least a very credible party. 

The Liberals can also learn a bunch from the Conservatives, they don't have much rural support. The more they continue to pander to the cities and actively hurt rural areas for no actual practical reason the less viable their party shall be in those regions and the more likely they shall never move past a minority government again.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> CPC is 95 percent of European descent.


Altair said:
30 percent of the LPC caucus this time around is BIPOC

For reference to the disussion, 

Percentage of women in the House of Commons:

Liberal 16.6%

Conservative 6.5% 






						Women in the 44th Canadian Parliament - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Oct 2021)

Canadians vote for topics, not policies.  Pretty much every time I look at a list of polled "top concerns" and compare to the policies of the parties and the actual policies of the government, there is little to no useful alignment of the two (eg. firearms control and firearms violence mitigation; almost everything to do with economic measures).  Policies are often wishful thinking born of decades of ideological conviction that ideas hatched in university seminars can be effected in society in the way that the dreamers dream.  Voters do not enforce a connection of efforts to aims; I suspect most voters subscribe to a lot of popular myths about the way the world is, how it got that way, and how it could be changed.

The implication is that all that matters is what is said - speak the correct words; get elected.  Also, meet conventional standards of physical attractiveness and demonstrate habits that are whatever contemporarily passes for "cool".


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> The Conservatives need a real climate change plan, and they could easily do away with the Carbon tax if they had a actual plan to back it up. For example if they said instead of a carbon tax we are now going to start limiting products made in other countries in environmentally unfriendly ways (or manners that would be illegal here) from being allowed in and sold in Canada. We are also going to create jobs and encourage industry to set up shop in Canada to produce goods in a environmentally friendly manner (or at least friendlier than anywhere else) creating a ton of good paying jobs which don't require extreme amounts of education. You would likely see a bunch of blue collar votes going their way and the NDP losing what blue collar support is left there.


One of the easiest ways to show that you have an environmental plan is to reduce emissions and meet or exceed the Paris climate targets.

Nothing you wrote would reduce emissions, in fact by removing the carbon tax I think you would see an increase.

Once other parties started to point that out any CPC climate plan along those lines would be dead in the water.


Eaglelord17 said:


> If the Conservatives left guns alone they would lose rural Canada and those votes would shift to the PPC which would likely end up as the opposition or at least a very credible party.


How much can they afford to lose to the PPC is the calculus they need to make. If they lose 2-5 seats to them in the west and have to fight them for 10 more, does that make up for being competitive in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver?


Eaglelord17 said:


> The Liberals can also learn a bunch from the Conservatives, they don't have much rural support. The more they continue to pander to the cities and actively hurt rural areas for no actual practical reason the less viable their party shall be in those regions and the more likely they shall never move past a minority government again.


The LPC could try to win in rural Canada but they could easily lose urban Canada to the NDP if they do so.

But seeing as the LPC need just a dozen or so seats more they could also just try to get them from the bloc or the NDP. The problem for rural Canada is that they are not exactly open to voting LPC and for that reason the LPC are not courting them. When you look at which parties supporters would vote LPC as a second choice the NDP and BQ are more likely than CPC voters.

That said, I do not mind the age of minority parliaments. One of the perks of PR is that it's very rare for a party to win a majority and they need to work together to make parliament work. Well, 5 of the last 7 elections have resulted in minority parliaments and the with the bloc and PPC potentially cementing themselves in the electoral landscape, its making getting to 36-40 percent of the popular vote needed to secure a majority harder and harder to get.

So maybe parliament needs to stop the gamesmanship and 

A)Stop calling snap elections

B) stop bringing down the minority government when it's politically convenient for the opposition parties.


----------



## McG (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> 30 percent of the LPC caucus this time around is BIPOC


"BIPOC" is probably an overly American lens for the purpose of looking at Canadian politics.  Consider this argument from UoT professor Joseph Heath:


> The term ‘BIPOC’ is a bad fit for the Canadian discourse on race​One of the biggest problems in Canadian politics is that large segments of our population seem to think they live in the United States. How else can one explain the fools running around in MAGA hats and holding demonstrations in support of former U.S. president Donald Trump? Sometimes, I feel like I should shake them by the shoulders and shout, “You live in Canada!”
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, I am beginning to feel the same way toward people who talk about “BIPOC issues,” as though it were normal for Canadians to use that expression. After all, BIPOC (“Black, Indigenous and People of Color”) is an acronym developed in the U.S. to discuss domestic race relations, just as BAME (“Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic”) is used in Britain.
> ...


 
Maybe the same party comes out ahead if we use a Canadian metric but, if we are going to measure and recognize extent of representation in a party's caucus, then we should use a Canadian metric.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Oct 2021)

Colonials victimized by colonialism.  Only in Canada.


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> "BIPOC" is probably an overly American lens for the purpose of looking at Canadian politics.  Consider this argument from UoT professor Joseph Heath:


If you want to piss off black Canadians and completely disregard the existence of anti black racism in Canada, go with this. I'm sure black canadians, a lot of whom live in urban Quebec and Ontario would love  that issues specific to their community just gets lumped in with visible minority.

Great idea. And while we are done telling blacks that their issues are in the same vain as any other visible minority, let's promote the French, and because this author thinks order means anything, let's put them at the front of the line.  Because the present day struggles of the french are in the same league as those the Indigenous people and black people and other people of color.

If the order of things matter so much, just use IBPOC and call it a day. But to use FIVM makes the authors agenda abundantly clear.


McG said:


> Maybe the same party comes out ahead if we use a Canadian metric but, if we are going to measure and recognize extent of representation in a party's caucus, then we should use a Canadian metric.


Using this ridiculous metric, and not willing to go into the linguistic and racial background of every candidate background, let's just do a rough estimate of 10 CPC francos from Quebec and 34 LPC francos from Quebec.

That gives the LPC 51 percent of their caucus using that ridiculous metric compared to 14 percent CPC.

Just to note, this is the first and last time I will be using that ridiculous acronym and metric and will be using BIPOC from now on.


----------



## McG (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> If you want to pass off black Canadians and completely disregard the existence of anti black racism in Canada, go with this. I'm sure black canadians, a lot of whom live in urban Quebec and Ontario would love that issues specific to their community just gets lumped in with visible minority.
> 
> Great idea. And while we are done telling blacks that their issues are in the same vain as any other visible minority, let's promote the French, and because this author thinks order means anything, let's put them at the front of the line. Because the present day struggles of the french are in the same league as those the Indigenous people and black people and other people of color.


Can I infer from your reply that you completely dismiss the merits of a Canadian specific metric, even if it is something other that FIVM? Do you not agree that indigenous communities in Canada are far more disadvantaged? Do your concerns about burying "B" in "VM" not apply to burying "I" in "POC"?


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Oct 2021)

I isn't buried in POC; it's between B and POC.  The author has a point about emphasis, but pretty much ground the head off his axe when he tried to elevate francophones.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Oct 2021)

Like any race/ ethnically categorizing term, there are problems with 'BIPOC':

'BIPOC' Isn't Doing What You Think It's Doing | Opinion​

But there's another danger to BIPOC. If Audre Lorde famously said that there is no hierarchy of oppression, the term BIPOC sets up just such a hierarchy. While we appreciate highlighting the unique experiences of Black and Indigenous folks, what about the histories and realities of Latino Americans and Asian Americans? Their experiences are also foundational to particular parts of the country, namely the Southwest and the West Coast. These racial groups played a vital role as the dominant "Other" in the white imagination as well, such as when the U.S. government crafted its first anti-immigration law, the Chinese Exclusion Act, in 1882, or in the violent takeover of Mexican territories of what we know as The American West under the guise of "Manifest Destiny," and the malevolent stereotypes of both groups in demonizing opium and marijuana in early 20th-century versions of "The War on Drugs."

Even today, we are seeing huge spikes in anti-Asian hate crimes, and the term BIPOC comes across as deeply problematic in that it obscures a group who should be centered at this moment.

Unfortunately, this is built into the acronym itself: BIPOC sets up an "us vs. them" binary. The acronym for Black and Indigenous shifts Asian/Pacific Islander Americans and Latino Americans "over there," reinforcing the idea of inter-racial conflict rather than interracial solidarity.











						'BIPOC' Isn't Doing What You Think It's Doing
					

The advantages of the term POC over BIPOC are numerous, when you start to think about it.




					www.newsweek.com


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> Can I infer from your reply that you completely dismiss the merits of a Canadian specific metric, even if it is something other that FIVM? Do you not agree that indigenous communities in Canada are far more disadvantaged? Do your concerns about burying "B" in "VM" not apply to burying "I" in "POC"?


Black
Indigenous 
People 
Of
Colour

"Buried"

Want a Canadian context?

Indigenous 
Black
People
Of
Colour

Solved.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

Whatever acronym is politically correct,

After Monday's vote, the federal Conservative caucus will be 95 per cent white​


			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conserative-caucus-95-per-cent-white-1.6185707
		




> more than 30 per cent of the Liberal caucus will be MPs who identify as Black, Indigenous or a person of colour.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Oct 2021)

"BIPOC sets up an "us vs. them" binary."

Which "POC" (in contrast to not-POC, or "white") does not.  Those people are beyond parody.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (3 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> "BIPOC sets up an "us vs. them" binary."



BIPOC?  Doesn't that have three elements, Black, Indigenous, and POC?  So, shouldn't it be "ternary"?  Or if using it in juxtaposition to "white" then four elements - quaternary?


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Oct 2021)

I suppose you'll have to take it up with the author.


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Whatever acronym is politically correct,
> 
> After Monday's vote, the federal Conservative caucus will be 95 per cent white​
> 
> ...


Funny how Trudeau can be racist yet attract BIPOC candidates and have people from BIPOC communities to vote for these candidates.

It's almost like BIPOC don't consider him to be a racist.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Percentage of women in the House of Commons:
> 
> Liberal 16.6%
> 
> Conservative 6.5%


I wonder how the two parties compare when it comes to mistreatment of women.



Altair said:


> Funny how Trudeau can be racist yet attract BIPOC candidates and have people from BIPOC communities to vote for these candidates.
> 
> It's almost like BIPOC don't consider him to be a racist.


Except for Celina Caesar-Chavannes who said Prime Minister tokenized her.  And Omer Aziz's claims of the racist environment behind closed curtains.  Maybe some Carolyn Bennett and so on. 


In 2016 Black-Canadians made up 3.5% of the population. Canadians with Asian origins made up 17.7%. Why are they just regulated to being POC and not getting their own letter?   IBAPOC. Or maybe be a little more inclusive with JAMBIPOC+


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> It's almost like BIPOC don't consider him to be a racist.


But, I'm sure you will get an arguement over which acronym is politically correct.

Still won't change the last three elections.


----------



## YZT580 (3 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Altair said:
> 30 percent of the LPC caucus this time around is BIPOC
> 
> For reference to the disussion,
> ...


What percentage candidates?  It is the voters who decided on those percentages that you quote.   more realistic comparison would be the number of candidates that each party ran.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> What percentage candidates?


See Blackadder1916.  Reply #1753:



> LIBERALS
> In this election, 147 Liberal Party candidates are women, 25 candidates identify as Indigenous, and 18 Liberal candidates identify as Black.
> A party spokesperson noted that more than one in five of the party's candidates identify as racialized or persons of colour, and 17 identify as LGBTQ2S+.





> CONSERVATIVES
> As for the Conservatives, they will be running 114 female candidates, which a spokesperson said is the most they’ve ever had. The party is running six Metis candidates and two others who identify as Indigenous.
> The Tories have nominated 14 candidates who identify as Black or African Canadian, and 10 Muslim candidates. And in total, their slate has 74 candidates a spokesperson said don't identitfy as Caucasian.
> They also said the party is also putting forth four LGBTQ2S+ candidates, including its first trans nominee.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (3 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> What percentage candidates?  It is the voters who decided on those percentages that you quote.   more realistic comparison would be the number of candidates that each party ran.











						Advocates disappointed by lack of racial diversity among major parties' candidates
					

Given the racial reckoning that began last year, community organizers and political scientists say it's disappointing that major political parties are still failing to have a diverse slate of candidates.



					www.ctvnews.ca
				





> THE NUMBERS
> The five parties taking part in the debates organized by the Leaders’ Debates Commission were asked to break down the diversity of their candidates across all 338 ridings, including racial identity, if nominees are members of the LGBTQ2S+ community and if they identify as having a disability. The Green Party of Canada and the Bloc Québécois did not provide such data before this article was published.
> 
> LIBERALS
> ...


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I wonder how the two parties compare when it comes to mistreatment of women.


Easy to have less conflict with women when there are less women to have conflict with.

Winning strategy CPC


Jarnhamar said:


> Except for Celina Caesar-Chavannes who said Prime Minister tokenized her.  And Omer Aziz's claims of the racist environment behind closed curtains.  Maybe some Carolyn Bennett and so on.


Voters> CCC


Jarnhamar said:


> In 2016 Black-Canadians made up 3.5% of the population. Canadians with Asian origins made up 17.7%. Why are they just regulated to being POC and not getting their own letter?   IBAPOC. Or maybe be a little more inclusive with JAMBIPOC+


I have no problem with IBAPOC


----------



## Remius (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Easy to have less conflict with women when there are less women to have conflict with


That is dumb.  That’s like saying it’s easier to have less racism when there are less black people to have racism with.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Remius said:
> 
> 
> > That is dumb.  That’s like saying it’s easier to have less racism when there are less black people to have racism with.


It may, or may not, ( there was no sarcasm emoji ) been intended as sarcasm.

Because the next sentence was,

Altair said:
"Winning strategy CPC"

Sounds a little bit sarcastic.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (3 Oct 2021)

Well this is a stupid conversation.....the voters picked who got to the Hill, not the parties.

Now if only white folk ran for the party.....


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Easy to have less conflict with women when there are less women to have conflict with.


With less men in the LPC than the CPC there more mistreatment of women coming out of the LPC Weird.



Altair said:


> Voters> CCC


CCC said it best. Tokenism.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Oct 2021)

Hey look, Trudeau's first post-election apology.  


Trudeau apologizes to First Nation in B.C. for not following up on Truth and Reconciliation Day invite​Link


> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke with the chief of Tk'emlúps Nation yesterday and offered an apology for not following up on invitations to visit her community, the nation confirmed Sunday.
> 
> Kukpi7 (Chief) Rosanne Casimir said this week the Tk'emlúps te Secwépemc Nation had twice written to Trudeau to invite him to join them to mark Canada's first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation Thursday.
> 
> *"I did hold out hope that he would be here," she said Thursday.*




Sorry, he's busy in meetings all day


----------



## Altair (3 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> With less men in the LPC than the CPC there more mistreatment of women coming out of the LPC Weird.


Like I said, winning strategy.


Jarnhamar said:


> CCC said it best. Tokenism.


Voters don't care.


----------



## The Bread Guy (3 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Hey look, Trudeau's first post-election apology.
> 
> 
> Trudeau apologizes to First Nation in B.C. for not following up on Truth and Reconciliation Day invite​Link
> ...


More of the same ...


> The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) has criticized Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to go on a holiday on the same day Canada marked its first National Day of Truth and Reconciliation to honour lost children and survivors of residential schools.
> 
> (...)
> 
> ...


----------



## McG (3 Oct 2021)

To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday. As soon as the day is a stat, the name is window dressing and the day really becomes about everyone’s self. Sure, I expected the PM would lead the observance of at least one iteration of this holiday before following the lowest common denominator. But he didn’t. He did illustrate that a day of solemn reflection will be quickly forgotten over the option of a “me day.”


----------



## brihard (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday. As soon as the day is a stat, the name is window dressing and the day really becomes about everyone’s self. Sure, I expected the PM would lead the observance of at least one iteration of this holiday before following the lowest common denominator. But he didn’t. He did illustrate that a day of solemn reflection will be quickly forgotten over the option of a “me day.”


I think an appropriate observance for him would have been for him to attend and to be seen attending an indigenous-led ceremony or event, but not to speak as part of it. Some sort of separate presser afterwards, sure- but the right call would have been to be seen listening.


----------



## mariomike (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday.


I remember CAF members like my uncle killed in war.

Like many others, I had to work it anyway. So, it also meant,


> If the employee works on the actual holiday the employee will be paid two (2) times his regular rate of pay for the time so worked and in addition shall be paid for the full day or night at his regular rate of pay.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Hey look, Trudeau's first post-election apology.
> 
> 
> Trudeau apologizes to First Nation in B.C. for not following up on Truth and Reconciliation Day invite​Link
> ...



I'll believe it when I see the tears flow...


----------



## Infanteer (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday. As soon as the day is a stat, the name is window dressing and the day really becomes about everyone’s self. Sure, I expected the PM would lead the observance of at least one iteration of this holiday before following the lowest common denominator. But he didn’t. He did illustrate that a day of solemn reflection will be quickly forgotten over the option of a “me day.”


I hear this trotted out, but haven't seen it play out this way.  Remembrance Day ceremonies (up until COVID) are still well attended by the communities I've been in.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday. As soon as the day is a stat, the name is window dressing and the day really becomes about everyone’s self. Sure, I expected the PM would lead the observance of at least one iteration of this holiday before following the lowest common denominator. But he didn’t. He did illustrate that a day of solemn reflection will be quickly forgotten over the option of a “me day.”


I was a big fan when I moved to Ontario when the kids were still in school for Remembrance day; pretty difficult to keep a little kid involved in one of the memorial services at a Cenotaph (especially on a bad weather day), and they do a pretty good job at the school ones of making it meaningful.

Was looking for something similar for the TRC day, but wasn't really anything organized on the day of, outside what was on tv. There was a really good GoC one run during the work day a few weeks ago with some guest speakers, but maybe next year with more time to organize things and COVID restrictions eased up might be something similar. But it's a lot easier to put together a Remembrance Day ceremony, whereas TRC is a lot more complicated.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I'll believe it when I see the tears flow...


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Oct 2021)

Infanteer said:


> I hear this trotted out, but haven't seen it play out this way.  Remembrance Day ceremonies (up until COVID) are still well attended by the communities I've been in.



I agree. Attendance has been increasing at cenotaph events too.

From 2019, Pre-COVID:

Remembrance Day ceremonies likely to see another increase this year​

More and more Canadians are attending Remembrance Day ceremonies every year and it appears this coming Monday, Nov. 11, will be no different.

A new survey suggests that more than 41 per cent of Canadians plan to attend ceremonies honouring fallen service members on Monday.









						Remembrance Day ceremonies likely to see another increase this year
					

More and more Canadians are attending Remembrance Day ceremonies every year and it appears this coming Monday, Nov. 11, will be no different.  A new survey suggests that more than 41 per cent of Canadians plan to attend ceremonies honouring fallen service members on Monday.    That's an increa




					www.rcinet.ca


----------



## Remius (3 Oct 2021)

Infanteer said:


> I hear this trotted out, but haven't seen it play out this way.  Remembrance Day ceremonies (up until COVID) are still well attended by the communities I've been in.


Agreed.  I’ve been at the NWM in Nov 11th most years and the place is packed.  And early.  Regardless of weather.


----------



## McG (3 Oct 2021)

Infanteer said:


> I hear this trotted out, but haven't seen it play out this way.  Remembrance Day ceremonies (up until COVID) are still well attended by the communities I've been in.


I have seen good and bad turn outs for Remembrance Day events, and every major city will have one or two events that draw crowds. But it’s important to keep in mind that a tiny percentage of a very large population is still a big number.  5,000 people would represent only about a half a percent of either the national capital region or Edmonton.

A lot of PPC supporters looked around at crowds attending their rallies and believed the party was on to something popularly supported by Canadians, but they couldn’t see the majority of us were not there with them.

I believe it is important to reflect on the cost of war and to remember our fallen. I have seen the crowds that can come out in cities, but I am aware that those crowds represent only the data points that came out to be seen. I do not believe that the majority of Canadians place remembrance higher than a spa day or family vacation.


----------



## Remius (3 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> I have seen good and bad turn outs for Remembrance Day events, and every major city will have one or two events that draw crowds. But it’s important to keep in mind that a tiny percentage of a very large population is still a big number.  5,000 people would represent only about a half a percent of either the national capital region or Edmonton.
> 
> A lot of PPC supporters looked around at crowds attending their rallies and believed the party was on to something popularly supported by Canadians, but they couldn’t see the majority of us were not there with them.
> 
> I believe it is important to reflect on the cost of war and to remember our fallen. I have seen the crowds that can come out in cities, but I am aware that those crowds represent only the data points that came out to be seen. I do not believe that the majority of Canadians place remembrance higher than a spa day or family vacation.


We also don’t have the gong show Event sales and discount days we see south of the border on days like that.  Every school does something.  Most businesses that are open actually stop at the 11th hour.  I think it’s better than you think.  It isn’t perfect by any means though.


----------



## The Bread Guy (4 Oct 2021)

Another take on the Tofino trip (article opens with a push to subscribe, the meat IS there lower down) ....


> ... To call this an error in judgment fundamentally misunderstands Justin Trudeau’s psychology and what motivates him. As far as we at _The Line_ can tell, the timing of this trip, the location, and the predictable negative reaction, was very deliberate, and is entirely in keeping with the prime minister’s previous behaviour. To put it bluntly, the prime minister is taking a suck attack.
> 
> (...)
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (4 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Another take on the Tofino trip (article opens with a push to subscribe, the meat IS there lower down) ....


Interesting take.


----------



## mariomike (4 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday.


According to our unofficial poll, 62% say it should.








						Remembrance Day:  National holiday?/"Veterans' Day"? (merged)
					

Arbor Memorial video.  https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=remembrance+day+video&&view=detail&mid=4B3D110C8E984DF4DFE44B3D110C8E984DF4DFE4&&FORM=VDRVSR




					army.ca
				




September 30 was a paid stat. holiday for Peel Region employees.


> Region of Peel offices and non-emergency services will be closed in observance of National Day for Truth and Reconciliation on Thursday, September 30 and will reopen Friday, October 1.







__





						Holidays - Region of Peel
					






					www.peelregion.ca
				





Not sure how typical that was for municipal employees in the rest of Canada.


----------



## dimsum (4 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> September 30 was a paid stat. holiday for Peel Region employees.
> 
> Not sure how typical that was for municipal employees in the rest of Canada.


It wasn't where I was...at least I don't think so.  It was pretty busy with people going to/from work.


----------



## Altair (4 Oct 2021)

Party platforms were heaviest influence on how Canadians voted in federal election: poll
					

A new poll suggests that Canadians rely heavily on a political party’s platform when deciding who to vote for, and that young voters are more likely to be influenced by online exchanges than others.




					bc.ctvnews.ca
				






> A new poll suggests that Canadians rely heavily on a political party’s platform when deciding who to vote for, and that young voters are more likely to be influenced by online exchanges than others.
> 
> 
> As Canadians come to terms with the results of the most recent federal election, the Research Co. poll found that 59 per cent of Canadians felt a party’s platform was “very influential” or “moderately influential” in their voting decision.
> ...



I'll just leave this here.


----------



## dimsum (4 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> To be fair, this is the reason many veterans don’t believe Remembrance Day should be a statutory holiday. As soon as the day is a stat, the name is window dressing and the day really becomes about everyone’s self.


For another comparison, ANZAC Day is a stat in both Australia and NZ.  

Their services (especially the Dawn Service at...well..dawn) are very well attended.  You pretty much had to be there an hour before the service starts to get anything resembling a standing spot within visual range of the cenotaph.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Oct 2021)

What do we want?

Great leadership!

What do we get?

Trudeau!



KINSELLA: Justin Trudeau irredeemably deserving of outrage​ 
Who gives pious, sanctimonious speeches -- and then lies about where he is, and heads out to check out the waves?


When you’ve worked in politics or journalism for a while, you kind of lose your idealism, you know?

It happens because, in politics and journalism, you get exposed so regularly to the very worst in human nature. Lying, deceit, wrongdoing: You see a lot of it. Too much of it.

So you develop ways to cope. Some drink, some do drugs, some screw around. But most everyone in politics and journalism lose some (or all) of their passion. They get tired, they get cynical.

Most of all, they lose their capacity to feel outrage.

Having dabbled in both politics and journalism, I sometimes feel like that. That — after seeing too many scandals and hearing too many lies — I can’t feel actual outrage anymore.

You know, outrage. The dictionary people all define it as “a feeling of anger and shock.” Not anger or shock. Both.

That’s what I felt when I my colleague Brian Lilley called me, Thursday, to tell me where Justin Trudeau was. I had just gotten off the line with my Indigenous daughter, and I thought Brian was joking, at first. But he wasn’t.

Justin Trudeau was in B.C., on a surfer’s beach. That’s what Brian Lilley told me.

What was astonishing about that was twofold. One, the Office of the Prime Minister had flat-out, bald-faced lied about where he was. They issued an official statement, on PMO letterhead and everything, that said Trudeau was in Ottawa.

He wasn’t. He was four provinces to the West.

But here’s the other reason why it was such a shock, why it has whipped up a tsunami of anger: Justin Trudeau had blown off meetings with Indigenous people to hang out on a beach with surfers. On the very first National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.










						KINSELLA: Justin Trudeau irredeemably deserving of outrage
					

Who gives pious, sanctimonious speeches -- and then lies about where he is, and heads out to check out the waves?




					torontosun.com


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Party platforms were heaviest influence on how Canadians voted in federal election: poll
> 
> 
> A new poll suggests that Canadians rely heavily on a political party’s platform when deciding who to vote for, and that young voters are more likely to be influenced by online exchanges than others.
> ...


Should have left it in the trash where it belonged.....WTF did they expect people to say?   I voted because I like socks???    Seriously stupid....


I'd have asked them after to quote one section of each parties platform,....I'll bet that would have been funny.


----------



## Altair (4 Oct 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Should have left it in the trash where it belonged.....WTF did they expect people to say?   I voted because I like socks???    Seriously stupid....


Yes, so we can expect a uniform response by all the different party supporters.

 75 per cent of People’s Party voters cited the platform as a major influence

 67 per cent of Conservative voters cited the platform as a major influence

 64 per cent of Liberal voters cited the platform as a major influence

64 per cent of NDP voters cited the platform as a major influence

39 per cent of Green voters cited the platform as a major influence

19 per cent of Bloc Québécois voters cited the platform as a major influence

Huh. That didn't work out at all. Seems like some party supporters follow policy more than others. Weird eh?


Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I'd have asked them after to quote one section of each parties platform,....I'll bet that would have been funny.


PPC-Anti lockdown and gun rights

LPC-childcare and environment

CPC-lower taxes and jobs

NDP- Pharmacare, dental care, proportional representation

Greens- environment

Bloc- provincial/Quebec rights.

People likely go with the general party platforms and not verbatim, but just more evidence that people do vote based on platform.


----------



## Remius (4 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes, so we can expect a uniform response by all the different party supporters.
> 
> 75 per cent of People’s Party voters cited the platform as a major influence
> 
> ...


Well, one poll says so.  





__





						Voting Behaviour in Canada
					

The decision to vote for a particular political party is affected by many factors. These include socio-demographic factors, such as gender, 	race, ethnicity, r...




					www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca
				




Electoral behaviours in Canada.  Your premise is based on one factor.  So essentially one dimensional when things are more complex. And yes leaders play a part.  

Maybe refer to this work.









						Voting Behaviour in Canada
					

The recent string of minority governments has reminded Canadians that voting behaviour has serious consequences   on the composition of government as well as on the direction of public policy. Understanding the underlying meaning of election results is a key issue for policy makers and for...



					books.google.ca
				




It’s apparently highly recommended reading for this sort of subject.  I haven’t read it but the excerpts seem to take apart your argument.


----------



## Altair (5 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Well, one poll says so.


If you find another that says otherwise I'll take it under consideration.


Remius said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Leaders play a part, naturally, how big a part is what I've always questioned.


Remius said:


> Maybe refer to this work.


I'm not reading 270 pages to get to the point, if you want to share anything from said book, I'll gladly read it here.


Remius said:


> Voting Behaviour in Canada
> 
> 
> The recent string of minority governments has reminded Canadians that voting behaviour has serious consequences   on the composition of government as well as on the direction of public policy. Understanding the underlying meaning of election results is a key issue for policy makers and for...
> ...


I look forward to you sharing its conclusions.


----------



## Remius (5 Oct 2021)

You are relying on one Poll from Research Co. on CTV ago back your point.

of course you won’t read 270 pages.  Today’s generation does not read.  They want to be spoon fed.  (Like policy ideas) A quick glance at the content though demonstrates that your point and what you went and found is nothing more than confirmation bias on your part.  And you are trying to pass that off as a fait accompli. 

I doubt you look forward to it’s conclusions.  But I can sum it up.  “There is no rule fits all”. 

Glad I could help.


----------



## Altair (5 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> You are relying on one Poll from Research Co. on CTV ago back your point.


I made a point, this backs up my point.


Remius said:


> of course you won’t read 270 pages.  Today’s generation does not read.


I am actually working through 3 books I really want to finish on my kindle and as such, do not have time to read the book you suggested because it really doesn't tickle my fancy.


Remius said:


> They want to be spoon fed.  (Like policy ideas) A quick glance at the content though demonstrates that your point and what you went and found is nothing more than confirmation bias on your part.


I mean, sure, if you want to ignore a poll that runs counter to your point, go ahead. 

No bias on your part, naturally.


Remius said:


> And you are trying to pass that off as a fait accompli.


Did I? I said more evidence that backs up my point, didn't say case closed. 


Remius said:


> I doubt you look forward to it’s conclusions.  But I can sum it up.  “There is no rule fits all”.
> 
> Glad I could help.


Very insightful.


----------



## Remius (5 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I made a point, this backs up my point.
> 
> I am actually working through 3 books I really want to finish on my kindle and as such, do not have time to read the book you suggested because it really doesn't tickle my fancy.
> 
> ...


Like I said.  Glad I could help.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Oct 2021)

The short media-friendly blurbs that are the public face of policy documents are indistinguishable from mood affiliation statements, and ought be treated as such.


----------



## RangerRay (5 Oct 2021)

Former Republican strategist Rick Wilson said he loved it when Democratic candidates put out 300 page policy papers because he could get his team of nerds to go through it to find ten things that would scare the crap out of middle class women. 

I honestly didn’t look at any of the platforms. What I did hear about some of the things from the Tory plan sounded like they were done on the back of a napkin. But I still voted for them because they appeared to be grownups compared to the incumbents.


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Oct 2021)

Is this the assistance with housing Trudeau was promising during the snap election?


While Canada sent hundreds of millions in aid to Jordan, its king grew his collection of luxury homes​








						While Canada sent hundreds of millions in aid to Jordan, its king grew his collection of luxury homes
					

The revelations about King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein’s properties and shell companies are contained in the Pandora Papers, a massive leak of offshore corporate records obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and shared with the Toronto Star and CBC.




					www.thestar.com
				



<<paywall>>


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Is this the assistance with housing Trudeau was promising during the snap election?
> 
> 
> While Canada sent hundreds of millions in aid to Jordan, its king grew his collection of luxury homes​
> ...



Meanwhile...


*Why is Canada sending millions to Communist China?*


Arecent Department of Foreign Affairs Survey found that only 4 percent of Canadians are aware that their government sends millions of dollars of foreign aid to China every year. In 2020, the Canadian government sent out $6.5 billion in foreign aid; $14.2 million, or 0.2 percent, was allocated to China.

All of these millions were sent even while the Chinese government holds two Canadians in prison, former ambassadors Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. These two men were arrested only days after Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada in 2018. The _National Post_ reports that 119 Canadians are currently in Chinese custody.

In 2019, the Canadian government sent a $41 million payment to the China-controlled Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (aiib), which is only part of the $256 million it promised when it joined the bank in 2017. Canada is supposed to make the final two payments in March 2021 and 2022. This on average will cost Canadians $0.25 per day. This capital will be used by the aiib to support infrastructure projects in Asia, or in other words, fund China’s leverage over Third World countries. But aiib contributions are separate from foreign aid.

According to the Canadian International Development Platform website, Canada sent the following amount of foreign aid to China:

2019 – $41.9 million
2018 – $7.1 million
2017 – $8.5 million
2016 – $1.6 million
2015 – $0.1 million
2014 – $9.1 million
2009 – $77 million (peak contribution in data set available)
China has the world’s second-largest economy with a gross domestic product of $14.3 trillion. Why is Canada sending millions of dollars a year to China?

These foreign aid payments flow through various government agencies to various firms, groups and government organizations in China, which makes it difficult to determine what the funds are actually being used for. For example, in 2019, Environment Canada sent $5.8 million of multilateral aid to China. This means those funds were sent to an international organization or government group that favors development in that country. Additionally, Environment Canada sent $6.5 million bilaterally to China, and Environment and Climate Change Canada sent another $3.1 million bilaterally. _Bilaterally_ means the donor selects the specific group that receives the money or has conditions on how it is used.
That is a total of $15.4 million sent from Canadian government agencies to private companies or government-controlled organizations for, we would assume, climate-change measures in China in 2019. The _National Post_ reported that this money is being used to implement the Montreal Protocol, an initiative to reduce the amount of ozone-destroying chemicals put into the atmosphere. That same year, China was criticized for violating the Montreal Protocol (besides being marked as the largest polluter in the world).

Another example of how these funds may be used is the Canada Fund for Local Initiatives (cfli) being launched by the Canadian Embassy in China. This initiative funds local organizations in China that align with Global Affairs Canada’s “thematic priorities.” Here is a list of what the recipients need to be aligned with as listed from the Canadian government website:

gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls;
inclusive governance, including diversity, democracy, human rights and the rule of law;
human dignity, covering health, education and nutrition, including the response of local nongovernmental and not-for-profit organizations to coronavirus (covid-19) disease;
growth that works for everyone, including women’s economic rights, decent jobs and entrepreneurship, investing in the poorest and most vulnerable, and safeguarding economic gains;
environment and climate action focusing on adaptation and mitigation, as well as on water management.
This is in conjunction with Canada’s “Feminist International Assistance Policy to advance gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls as the most effective way to reduce poverty and build a more inclusive, peaceful and prosperous world.”

The cfli has an average budget of $24.6 million per year for countries all over the world. This program was used in China in 2019, 2020 and 2021. Which groups received this money and how effective were they at promoting these themes? We will probably never know. Neither the Chinese government nor the Canadian government make these facts readily available.

However, this foreign aid is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Canada’s economic and political subservience to China.









						Canada Sends Millions in Foreign Aid to China Every Year
					

Why is Canada sending millions to Communist China?



					www.thetrumpet.com


----------



## KevinB (5 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Another example of how these funds may be used is the Canada Fund for Local Initiatives (cfli) being launched by the Canadian Embassy in China. This initiative funds local organizations in China that align with Global Affairs Canada’s “thematic priorities.” Here is a list of what the recipients need to be aligned with as listed from the Canadian government website:
> 
> gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls;
> inclusive governance, including diversity, democracy, human rights and the rule of law;
> ...


So a fail on all of the above and money still flows...


----------



## mariomike (5 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Canada Sends Millions in Foreign Aid to China Every Year
> 
> 
> Why is Canada sending millions to Communist China?
> ...


Never heard of "The Trumpet". Until today.





__





						You searched for the trumpet - Media Bias/Fact Check
					






					mediabiasfactcheck.com


----------



## Blackadder1916 (5 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Meanwhile...
> 
> 
> *Why is Canada sending millions to Communist China?*
> ...



So well less than half of what the USA says they were obliged to give Canada last year in foreign aid ($35.1M) and half what they gave China in 2019.  (_sarcasm_)


----------



## dimsum (5 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Never heard of "The Trumpet". Until today.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Completely unbiased source there...


> The Trumpet is owned and published by the Philadelphia Church of God. Revenue is derived through tithes from the church and donations solicited on the website.


----------



## The Bread Guy (5 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> Completely unbiased source there...


But at least not bought and paid for by _government_, right?  😉


----------



## YZT580 (5 Oct 2021)

dimsum said:


> Completely unbiased source there...


Is the information valid or not?


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Is the information valid or not?



This site, which seems a little more 'respectable', suggests that the 2020 foreign aid payout to China was more along the lines of $7M:









						Canada’s Foreign Aid
					

Canada’s international assistance spending increased by 4.9% to CAD$6.4 billion in 2019, up from CAD$6.1 billion in 2018.




					cidpnsi.ca
				




This (yet another 'slightly right of Atilla the Hun') site claims it's about double that:









						Few Canadians know about aid given to China
					

Federal agencies paid out a total $6.5 billion in foreign aid worldwide in 2020 according to government stats. A total $14.2 million went to China.




					westernstandardonline.com


----------



## CBH99 (6 Oct 2021)

How to make an entire country furious
					

Shannon Proudfoot: Canadians were fed up even before the pandemic. That election didn't help.




					www.macleans.ca
				





I just finished giving this a read, and enjoyed it more than I thought I would.  

To summarize… not many people were happy with the PM for calling an election when he did.  

Nor are people happy with their elected officials in Ottawa.  (Pretty shocking, I know.  I didn’t see that coming.)


----------



## Navy_Pete (6 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> of course you won’t read 270 pages.  Today’s generation does not read.  They want to be spoon fed.  (Like policy ideas)


Woah woah tabernac! Still millions of books actively being sold and read, not a generational thing. It's easier now then ever with libraries stocking e-books, and a lot of people actively hate the 'quick news' and sound bite fad (which isn't new, but really fine tuned with the advent of the radio and then television).

Precis, abstracts, summaries etc aren't new concept, and it's pretty normal if you are going to drop a reference into reinforce your arguement to highlight key facts that support it. No need to start inter-generational feuds. Lots of people across all age spectrums want spoon fed, and is exactly why sometimes platforms target different age groups using specific policies, because a number of people will vote for something in their best interest, regardless of what the rest of the platform is.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Is this the assistance with housing Trudeau was promising during the snap election?
> 
> 
> While Canada sent hundreds of millions in aid to Jordan, its king grew his collection of luxury homes​
> ...


If link doesn't work, text also attached for purposes of research, private study or education under the Fair Dealing provisions of Canada's Copyright Act.


----------



## Altair (6 Oct 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Woah woah tabernac! Still millions of books actively being sold and read, not a generational thing. It's easier now then ever with libraries stocking e-books,



When my wife got me a kindle for Christmas my book reading went from 3-4 a year to 24-36 a year

Hurts the pocketbook more though, but worth it.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (6 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> One of the easiest ways to show that you have an environmental plan is to reduce emissions and meet or exceed the Paris climate targets.
> 
> Nothing you wrote would reduce emissions, in fact by removing the carbon tax I think you would see an increase.
> 
> Once other parties started to point that out any CPC climate plan along those lines would be dead in the water.


Actually what I propose would be the only true way to reduce global emissions. Right now we are playing a shell game, reducing 'emissions' in Canada, well increasing what we are importing from other countries with next to no emission controls so it doesn't count towards our numbers. Not to mention the added environmental costs from shipping across the ocean both ways (as it is mostly made with our natural resources).

Unfortunately for the world, emissions is a global problem not a regional one. By pretending that we are reducing our emissions by closing down Canadian industry well buying lower quality products with higher environmental costs from other countries isn't a real solution it is intensifying it instead.

The solution, make more in Canada or only buy from countries with similar environmental standards. Don't buy products that couldn't legally be made here. Emission controls reduce emissions. Taxes on a element does nothing to change emissions, simply creates a new tax.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Actually what I propose would be the only true way to reduce global emissions. Right now we are playing a shell game, reducing 'emissions' in Canada, well increasing what we are importing from other countries with next to no emission controls so it doesn't count towards our numbers. Not to mention the added environmental costs from shipping across the ocean both ways (as it is mostly made with our natural resources).


The best way to reduce emissions is for all nations to reduce their emissions at the same time.

That's what the Paris agreement was for, a collective effort for all nations to reduce their emmisions.




Eaglelord17 said:


> Unfortunately for the world, emissions is a global problem not a regional one. By pretending that we are reducing our emissions by closing down Canadian industry well buying lower quality products with higher environmental costs from other countries isn't a real solution it is intensifying it instead.


To toss out the carbon tax, to reduce regulations on industry and ramp up industrial production here with more laissez faire regulations while trying to reduce global emissions is playing the exact same shell game, but with even less effectiveness. Canada doesn't have enough weight to bully those with the highest emissions into producing less meanwhile ours would go up.

Terrible plan.


Eaglelord17 said:


> The solution, make more in Canada or only buy from countries with similar environmental standards. Don't buy products that couldn't legally be made here. Emission controls reduce emissions.


Its amusing that you think low wage industry would make a comeback in Canada or any other western country.

but sure, put that plan of yours in place. Im sure people would love empty shelves at Walmart and Costco and spending hundreds of billions to build industry up from scratch and the accompanied supply chain that would be required.

Oh, and only for a market of 38 million Canadians as well, seeing as there is no way that even the lowest wage manufacturing jobs that would be required to fill the sudden gap created by your plan could ever hope to compete with the low wage jobs of those other nations in the export market.








Eaglelord17 said:


> Taxes on a element does nothing to change emissions, simply creates a new tax.


Except the carbon tax is the most simple free market way to change behavior. Companies do not want the extra costs, and will find ways to reduce the carbon output to pay less in taxes.

Even the CPC gets this now and have their own carbon tax plan.

338 MPs sent to Ottawa support one version or another of a carbon tax. I think Canadians have spoken.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Except the carbon tax is the most simple free market way to change behavior. Companies do not want the extra costs, and will find ways to reduce the carbon output to pay less in taxes.
> 
> Even the CPC gets this now and have their own carbon tax plan.
> 
> 338 MPs sent to Ottawa support one version or another of a carbon tax. I think Canadians have spoken.



A tax on carbon will not deter oil/ energy companies. They're used to adjusting operational performance to account for taxes. This will not have the effect of reducing industrial sources of CO2, especially as growing, gigantic industrial economies (India, China etc) continue to boom.

The people it will hurt is the little guy, in North America etc, as per SOP.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> A tax on carbon will not deter oil/ energy companies. They're used to adjusting operational performance to account for taxes. This will not have the effect of reducing industrial sources of CO2, especially as growing economies (India, China etc) continue to boom.
> 
> The people it will hurt is the little guy, in North America etc, as per SOP.


Except that Canadian emmisions growth have been slowing and is about to plateau, at which point we are set to see emmisions drop.

The fastest rate of emmision slowdowns happened once the carbon tax backstop was put in place.

As for hurting the little guy, getting a big chuck of money back come tax time really hurts.

As for international emmisions,  definitely a problem, and something to address, but how the fuck do you tell India and China to reduce their emmisions if we in Canada cannot even do it?

But again, 338 of 338 MPs in parliament are from a party that support a carbon tax, I think a consensus has been reached. If people oppose it that much, they can go vote PPC.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Oct 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Actually what I propose would be the only true way to reduce global emissions. Right now we are playing a shell game, reducing 'emissions' in Canada, well increasing what we are importing from other countries with next to no emission controls so it doesn't count towards our numbers. Not to mention the added environmental costs from shipping across the ocean both ways (as it is mostly made with our natural resources).
> 
> Unfortunately for the world, emissions is a global problem not a regional one. By pretending that we are reducing our emissions by closing down Canadian industry well buying lower quality products with higher environmental costs from other countries isn't a real solution it is intensifying it instead.
> 
> The solution, make more in Canada or only buy from countries with similar environmental standards. Don't buy products that couldn't legally be made here. Emission controls reduce emissions. Taxes on a element does nothing to change emissions, simply creates a new tax.


You mean like…..mmmmm…..China?   And who exports their dirty coal to China?  🤔


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

> Companies do not want the extra costs, and will find ways to reduce the carbon output to pay less in taxes.



Once again, for the hard of thinking: taxes are just a cost, passed on to a) customers (price increases), b) employees (lower compensation increases), c) shareholders/owners (lower dividends).  

Companies might seek ways to reduce carbon output if it's lower-hanging fruit than letting customers/employees/shareholders bear the cost.  This is basically where policy wonks are aiming, but since there are 3 other targets, no-one should be surprised if what mandarins and academics predict/desire is not what happens.

I suppose there's also (d): less reinvestment of capital in the enterprise.  This is of course aligns nicely with the customary desire of government finance types to encourage R&D and re-investment.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Once again, for the hard of thinking:


Nice to know all our parliamentarians, and all elected federal political parties are hard of thinking.

I have good company at least.


Brad Sallows said:


> taxes are just a cost,


they are an expense.


Brad Sallows said:


> passed on to a) customers (price increases)


repayed in rebates.


Brad Sallows said:


> , b) employees (lower compensation increases)


there are many more factors in wage and benefits pressures than a carbon tax


Brad Sallows said:


> , c) shareholders/owners (lower dividends).


The stock market seems fine.


Brad Sallows said:


> Companies might seek ways to reduce carbon output if it's lower-hanging fruit than letting customers/employees/shareholders bear the cost.  This is basically where policy wonks are aiming, but since there are 3 other targets, no-one should be surprised if what mandarins and academics predict/desire is not what happens.


But that's were market based carbon tax policies work the best.

if company A passes the expense to the consumer and company B finds future ways to lower their carbon footprint, and not need to pass the cost on to consumers, then the products of company B are more affordable than company A.

if company A doesnt offer competitive wages because they are passing the expense to employees and company B finds ways to reduce their carbon footprint and not need to pass those costs to the employees, then company A is at risk of losing employees to company B.

if company A has lower dividends than company B, then company B will have a higher stock price in comparison.

This is the beauty of a carbon tax. It lets the market sort itself out, and the more efficient companies are at reducing carbon emmisions the more they are rewarded for it.


Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose there's also (d): less reinvestment of capital in the enterprise.  This is of course aligns nicely with the customary desire of government finance types to encourage R&D and re-investment.


Reduce more carbon, have more to invest in their enterprise.

Or don't, and suffer the consequences compared to those who do.

The weak stagnate or die, the strong grow and prosper. The emmisions go down either way.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Also, LPC picked up another seat today. Up to 160 LPC elected*, this more recent pickup winning by 12 votes after a recount.

10 seats away from a majority, the LPC was oh so close. I wonder what would have happened if that moderator had decided to wake up the day of the English debate and decided not to piss off an entire province.

*drops to 159 MPs after Vuong sits as an independent.


----------



## KevinB (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Nice to know all our parliamentarians, and all elected federal political parties are hard of thinking.


 I think stupid or short sighted would be a better outlook - they know the average Western voter has the attention span of a gnat.



Altair said:


> I have good company at least.
> 
> they are an expense.
> 
> repayed in rebates.


Again where do those rebates come from????
    ah yes - the tax dollars of the populace.



Altair said:


> there are many more factors in wage and benefits pressures than a carbon tax
> 
> The stock market seems fine.
> 
> ...


Yes because company B makes it in a country that does not give a Fuck.



Altair said:


> if company A doesnt offer competitive wages because they are passing the expense to employees and company B finds ways to reduce their carbon footprint and not need to pass those costs to the employees, then company A is at risk of losing employees to company B.


See my above



Altair said:


> if company A has lower dividends than company B, then company B will have a higher stock price in comparison.


See my above


Altair said:


> This is the beauty of a carbon tax. It lets the market sort itself out, and the more efficient companies are at reducing carbon emmisions the more they are rewarded for it.
> 
> Reduce more carbon, have more to invest in their enterprise.
> 
> ...


You are an interesting fellow, one may say naive as well.    Nothing is free, and for Company B to make the same item without using an offshore producer they are clearly spending a bunch of IRD - which will make their product more expensive.
  You just highlighted why the vast majority consumers won't pay that premium above - although you probably where not intending on that .


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Also, LPC picked up another seat today. Up to 160 LPC elected*, this more recent pickup winning by 12 votes after a recount.
> 
> 10 seats away from a majority, the LPC was oh so close. I wonder what would have happened if that moderator had decided to wake up the day of the English debate and decided not to piss off an entire province.
> 
> *drops to 159 MPs after Vuong sits as an independent.


According to you people vote for policy.  So nothing?


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> According to you people vote for policy.  So nothing?


Colour TV shows came out in 1954 yet here you are living in black and white. 

Policy, Issues, Leaders.

That's how I rank the importance of those on the electorate. The debate moderator was a campaign issue. And yet another point against it being all about the leaders. Moderator pissed off Quebec, the Bloc rose in the polls, hurt the LPC.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Hurts the pocketbook more though, but worth it.


Check out newsletters like this or this pointing you to free or cheap-cheap Kindle books.  True, I find most of them not to my taste, but I get 1-2 a week that're worth it to me to spend $2-5 bucks on, even if they end up letting me down.  If you're interested in older stuff, it's all free here & here, too.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> ... Policy, Issues, Leaders.
> 
> That's how I rank the importance of those on the electorate ...


How do you juggle that with some voters' preference for local candidate?  Or is that more "importance" vs. "desire"?


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

KevinB said:


> I think stupid or short sighted would be a better outlook - they know the average Western voter has the attention span of a gnat.


Ah yes, democracy.

democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried.


KevinB said:


> Again where do those rebates come from????
> ah yes - the tax dollars of the populace.


Still works on free market principles.

Individuals who reduce their carbon output spend less on the carbon tax, and get back the same amount, which means more money in their pocket.

Individuals who do not get back what they spent on the carbon tax, less money in their pockets. It behooves people the reduce their carbon output if they want more money come tax time.

So it changes behavior while still not hurting the little guy.


KevinB said:


> Yes because company B makes it in a country that does not give a Fuck.


Your premise if flawed. There are still multinational and local businesses in Canada who this applies to. This situation doesn't make every company in Canada company A, to state otherwise is asinine.


KevinB said:


> See my above


Asinine.


KevinB said:


> See my above


Still asinine.


KevinB said:


> You are an interesting fellow, one may say naive as well.    Nothing is free, and for Company B to make the same item without using an offshore producer they are clearly spending a bunch of IRD - which will make their product more expensive.


There are energy companies that were developing more climate friendly ways of resource extraction before the carbon tax, and they have only accelerated research since the carbon tax.  The energy industry in Canada has made it clear that they want to be amongst the most ethical and green energy extraction companies on the planet. And with many of them still working in Canada, its stupid to say that they offshore their production. And this applies to companies as a whole. You make it sound like the carbon tax went into effect and every company took off to other countries. The carbon tax has been in effect in many provinces since the mid 2000s and guess what? Still multinational and local businesses operating there.

Look to Europe. France, UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Poland are amongst the nations with a carbon tax, and they still have multinational and local businesses working under the same premise. So I reject your notion of companies simply moving away to escape it as a widespread phenomenon.


KevinB said:


> You just highlighted why the vast majority consumers won't pay that premium above - although you probably where not intending on that .


Companies that adapt best to the premium so they do not need to pass it on to consumers will do better than companies that do not. That's how the free market works. And compared to other more interventionist methods of tackling carbon emissions, a carbon tax is amongst the most efficient and simply ways to do it.

Unless you can think of another? But you don't. You shit all over the carbon tax but do not bring any replacement to the fore. You simply say that its useless despite the fact that its already doing what it set out to do. And that's why I don't take it seriously. If there is another way to reduce emissions by 30 to 40 percent by 2030, be my guest and share them, otherwise...


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> How do you juggle that with some voters' preference for local candidate?  Or is that more "importance" vs. "desire"?


Maxime Bernier was a very popular guy in Beauce. His father was an MP and his name recognition there was very high. He made his own party and he hasn't won the seat again to date. 

Maxime Bernier is the same leader. Its the policies of his party that largely changed. Still, a good percentage of people still vote for him. But not nearly as much as the people who vote for the CPC.


----------



## mariomike (7 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> How do you juggle that with some voters' preference for local candidate?


Do local federal candidates have as much influence as they used to?

Party discipline seems to put the brand first.

Local federal politicians these days seem more like trained seals - to me, at least - who vote on command and repeat robotic talking points.

Seems like "caucus cohesion" is the big thing now. Or, perhaps it always was?

I would prefer to see local candidates as fierce defenders of local interest.

Party leaders have the power to veto a candidate's nomination. That puts fear into incumbents hoping to seek re-election. They have to be cheerleaders for the leader.

Seems like it's more about the party label.

That's a generalization, I admit.  Just my opinion about federal party politics.


----------



## lenaitch (7 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Do local federal candidates have as much influence as they used to?
> 
> Party discipline seems to put the brand first.
> 
> ...



I'd have more confidence in the system if caucus was more flowing.  Hash things out behind closed doors but, respectful dissent and all, but once the decision is collectively made, emerge as a unified voice.  I have no problem with that.  The problem I have with the system now is way too much power is concentrated in the PMO and held and exercised by unelected staffers.   They are driving policy, not the folks we elected.


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Colour TV shows came out in 1954 yet here you are living in black and white.
> 
> Policy, Issues, Leaders.
> 
> That's how I rank the importance of those on the electorate. The debate moderator was a campaign issue. And yet another point against it being all about the leaders. Moderator pissed off Quebec, the Bloc rose in the polls, hurt the LPC.


No,  you stated Policy was what most Canadians decided to vote on. Dismissed the others until you didn’t. 

You obviously missed my sarcasm in my response.  

Issues are not policy.  Issues fall under short term motivators when it comes to electoral behaviours.

You yourself voted mainly on a short term factor (strategic voting) and not policy as your primary reason to vote and how you placed it.  You may feel like you voted for policy but you stated here that your vote was to help create a split vote on the right.  That’s short term voting behaviour.   Not policy which is long term.  

That does not mean there isn’t overlap. 

You miss time and again the correlation between a leader’s popularity (or general dislike of) and electoral outcomes.  There is a reason they poll for who would make the best PM.  It’s significant whether you accept that or not.  It was significant enough to keep the LPC from a majority again and significant enough to have 2/3rds of the voters opt for something else. 

My order would be Issues, Leader, Policy if i were to assess the voters.  People often confuse issues with policy so it’s easy to see why they would think policy is a lead driver.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

So carbon taxes are an "expense", which is way of repeating what I said ("cost").  That consumers get rebates is irrelevant to the companies' costs.  That other factors are involved in compensation negotiation is trivially true and irrelevant to the point that costs of the employer are a factor.



> But that's were market based carbon tax policies work the best.



You missed the point entirely, which is that companies are not limited to the course of action that allows carbon taxes to "work the best", so "Companies do not want the extra costs, and will find ways to reduce the carbon output to pay less in taxes" is overoptimistic (wishful) thinking.  Where companies elect to pursue other courses of mitigation, it is not the companies that pay.  The unintended consequences of adding a cost can and will result in burdens that fall on customers, employees, and investors.

All likely effects of a policy change ought be considered, not just the obvious benefits cited by proponents who either deliberately or ignorantly ignore the adverse effects.


----------



## KevinB (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, democracy.
> 
> democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried.


I'm not disagreeing with you there - I was just pointing out reality.


Altair said:


> Still works on free market principles.
> 
> Individuals who reduce their carbon output spend less on the carbon tax, and get back the same amount, which means more money in their pocket.
> 
> ...


In one specific economic theory yes, in others no.
   The end of the day the individual has little choice on carbon tax - they buy what they need/want.
 The supply/manufacturing sector is where the carbon tax issue truly cones into to play.



Altair said:


> Your premise if flawed. There are still multinational and local businesses in Canada who this applies to. This situation doesn't make every company in Canada company A, to state otherwise is asinine.


 You where the one who made the Company A versus B argument initially.
   My point was it was not so black and white - and the true odds where something like a Company C that will defeat the Carbon Tax but manufacturing overseas is a lot more plausible for many industries than you believe.



Altair said:


> Asinine.
> 
> Still asinine.


 Yes you are - but don't feel bad, you are just a representative.



Altair said:


> There are energy companies that were developing more climate friendly ways of resource extraction before the carbon tax, and they have only accelerated research since the carbon tax.  The energy industry in Canada has made it clear that they want to be amongst the most ethical and green energy extraction companies on the planet. And with many of them still working in Canada, its stupid to say that they offshore their production. And this applies to companies as a whole. You make it sound like the carbon tax went into effect and every company took off to other countries. The carbon tax has been in effect in many provinces since the mid 2000s and guess what? Still multinational and local businesses operating there.


 I worked briefly in the Energy sector - I went back to Iraq as the face that companies put on publicly make me sick when I saw what was actually going on - and rather than become an ecoterrorist, I decided to get back to the business of war.



Altair said:


> Look to Europe. France, UK, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Poland are amongst the nations with a carbon tax, and they still have multinational and local businesses working under the same premise. So I reject your notion of companies simply moving away to escape it as a widespread phenomenon.


Certain industries can, and some cannot.   A lot of European countries have exceptionally high tax rates too, I am not sure that is something to want to emulate...


Altair said:


> Companies that adapt best to the premium so they do not need to pass it on to consumers will do better than companies that do not. That's how the free market works. And compared to other more interventionist methods of tackling carbon emissions, a carbon tax is amongst the most efficient and simply ways to do it.
> 
> Unless you can think of another? But you don't. You shit all over the carbon tax but do not bring any replacement to the fore. You simply say that its useless despite the fact that its already doing what it set out to do. And that's why I don't take it seriously. If there is another way to reduce emissions by 30 to 40 percent by 2030, be my guest and share them, otherwise...


I never said it was useless, I pointed out as have others, that the Western nations are not nearly the biggest issue for direct creation - but they are a major issue - as the consumer in the West contributes massively to the carbon emissions of the largest polluters (cough China cough).
   If We as Westerns consumed less, and did more ethical purchases then it would be less of an issue - but gain we go back to my point about the average voter having the attention span of a gnat - and the fact we consume way beyond our own needs.

The two major problems are 1) the indirect creation - and that is something I personally don't have a clue on how to stop - 2) the other problem is global development - and removal of wetland carbon sinks - too many areas are being built up - and it is releasing that carbon, and failing to trap more.  

The end of the day, there needs to be a GLOBAL culture shift to do anything meaningful - a carbon tax in Canada isn't going to do diddly in the grand scheme - and while it can be great to be a roll model - there needs to be pressure on the worst offenders (again see China) before anything that actually means more than a hill of beans.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So carbon taxes are an "expense", which is way of repeating what I said ("cost").  That consumers get rebates is irrelevant to the companies' costs.  That other factors are involved in compensation negotiation is trivially true and irrelevant to the point that costs of the employer are a factor.


Businesses work hard all the time to reduce expenses and increase their profit margin.


Brad Sallows said:


> You missed the point entirely, which is that companies are not limited to the course of action that allows carbon taxes to "work the best", so "Companies do not want the extra costs, and will find ways to reduce the carbon output to pay less in taxes" is overoptimistic (wishful) thinking.


Yet the rate of Canada's carbon emmisions output has been slowing.


Brad Sallows said:


> Where companies elect to pursue other courses of mitigation, it is not the companies that pay.  The unintended consequences of adding a cost can and will result in burdens that fall on customers, employees, and investors.


And if a company can reduce emmisions they are competitive than companies that cannot.


Brad Sallows said:


> All likely effects of a policy change ought be considered, not just the obvious benefits cited by proponents who either deliberately or ignorantly ignore the adverse effects.


Present an alternative.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

KevinB said:


> I'm not disagreeing with you there - I was just pointing out reality.


Agreed.


KevinB said:


> In one specific economic theory yes, in others no.
> The end of the day the individual has little choice on carbon tax - they buy what they need/want.
> The supply/manufacturing sector is where the carbon tax issue truly cones into to play.


The individual can use less gas, drive less, buy a more fuel efficient car, buy electric cars, make their home more energy efficient, there are a bunch of things individuals can do.

But agreed, supply and manufacturing is where the carbon tax really comes into play.


KevinB said:


> You where the one who made the Company A versus B argument initially.
> My point was it was not so black and white - and the true odds where something like a Company C that will defeat the Carbon Tax but manufacturing overseas is a lot more plausible for many industries than you believe.


The carbon tax has been in  place in many jurisdictions for over a decade, and I have not witnessed a stampede of businesses overseas.


KevinB said:


> I worked briefly in the Energy sector - I went back to Iraq as the face that companies put on publicly make me sick when I saw what was actually going on - and rather than become an ecoterrorist, I decided to get back to the business of war.


Thankfully there are many others who see the wisdom in reducing emmisions and protecting the planet.


KevinB said:


> Certain industries can, and some cannot.   A lot of European countries have exceptionally high tax rates too, I am not sure that is something to want to emulate...


The tax will force the strong to adapt and reduce emissions and the weak to die...and still reduce emissions. Win win.


KevinB said:


> I never said it was useless, I pointed out as have others, that the Western nations are not nearly the biggest issue for direct creation - but they are a major issue - as the consumer in the West contributes massively to the carbon emissions of the largest polluters (cough China cough).
> If We as Westerns consumed less, and did more ethical purchases then it would be less of an issue - but gain we go back to my point about the average voter having the attention span of a gnat - and the fact we consume way beyond our own needs.
> 
> The two major problems are 1) the indirect creation - and that is something I personally don't have a clue on how to stop - 2) the other problem is global development - and removal of wetland carbon sinks - too many areas are being built up - and it is releasing that carbon, and failing to trap more.
> ...


Okay, so the world comes together and create the Paris agreement. A multinational agreement to collectively limit the amount of carbon that humanity produces annually. Most every nation signs on to this framework.

And yet, despite this being a multinational agreement that requires every nation to reduce emmisions, you....focus on China.

Well, I agree. China should do more. But you are making it sound as if Canada can afford to do less. I won't stop anyone from ripping into China and their coal powered tomfoolery. But that doesn't absolve Canada and others from doing our part, in fact we should be doing everything in out power to meet our targets so that when we point the finger at China and tell them that they are not meeting the terms of the agreement that they cannot turn back and point to use saying that neither are we.

So again, talk shit about the carbon tax all you like,  and man do people on the right side of the political spectrum love to do that  but until you can present a reasonable alternative it really doesn't matter does it?

Is the carbon tax perfect? No. But just like democracy,  unless you have a better alternative you're stuck with what currently works.

The CPC went down this road since Dion and his green shift plan, demonizing the carbon tax, but at the end of the day they came up with their own because it's the best of a bunch of bad options for reducing carbon emmisions. Other plans have more market disruption or less effectiveness and in many cases, both.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

> Present an alternative.



Expedite exploration, extraction, and export of LNG to Asia (specifically, China).  Potentially huge carbon emission gains for moving their thermal electricity generation capacity away from coal.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> No,  you stated Policy was what most Canadians decided to vote on. Dismissed the others until you didn’t.
> 
> You obviously missed my sarcasm in my response.
> 
> ...


Housing crisis is a issue.

So...price of housing is rising. Who do I vote for knowing that the price of housing is rising? Well, I don't know what Trudeaus Aga Khan trip, bollywood fiasco, SNC Lavalin interference and whatever other ethics scandal is going to do about housing.

I don't know what O'Toole and complaining about a 610 million dollar election is going to do about housing.

I do known Jagmeet Singh is emphatic and he's on tik tok so that's kinda cool, but I don't know how that is going to address housing.

I know Paul couldn't walk her dog around the block without getting into a fight with it, but beyond that I don't know what she would do about housing.

I know Blanchet would only buy a house in Quebec, hopefully with federal money, but beyond that I  don't know what he would do about housing.

I know Bernier wouldn't want the Feds to step in to help housing, hoping that less taxes will somehow help but beyond that I don't know how he would deal with housing.

So I have the issue. I have the leader. Nothing I know about the leader helps me address the issue. Policy. Policy helps.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Expedite exploration, extraction, and export of LNG to Asia (specifically, China)


So the Paris agreement says that all nations need to reduce emmisions and you want to increase ours.


Brad Sallows said:


> .  Potentially huge carbon emission gains for moving their thermal electricity generation capacity away from coal.


Again, zero plan for domestic emmision control.

So yeah, I don't disagree with your course of action, ON TOP of the carbon tax.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Housing crisis is a issue.
> 
> So...price of housing is rising. Who do I vote for knowing that the price of housing is rising?


You should vote for Trudeau.


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> You should vote for Trudeau.


Well, drat.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

> The individual can use less gas, drive less, buy a more fuel efficient car, buy electric cars, make their home more energy efficient, there are a bunch of things individuals can do.



I doubt consumers change their driving or home energy use habits much - in economic terms, those are inelastic.

I have no intention of spending money to make the home more energy efficient - $175.00 worth of carbon taxes on $160.00 worth of gas (tax is also levied on storage and transport).  Not really any savings worth the cost of any worthwhile improvements.

"The individual" will, I expect, mostly react to price changes on other goods and services at several removes from where the tax liability exists.  And in current economic conditions, that's just noise compared to everything else going on.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

> So the Paris agreement says that all nations need to reduce emmisions and you want to increase ours.



The aim is to reduce worldwide emissions.  Contracting our economy a little may not be the best way of achieving the aim.  Activities which increase net emissions here can lower net emissions worldwide.


----------



## Remius (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Housing crisis is a issue.
> 
> So...price of housing is rising. Who do I vote for knowing that the price of housing is rising? Well, I don't know what Trudeaus Aga Khan trip, bollywood fiasco, SNC Lavalin interference and whatever other ethics scandal is going to do about housing.
> 
> ...


And if they actually read the policies and understanding why we actually have a housing crisis, they would realise that no federal gvt policy is actually going to fix the issue.  But they’ll belive the leader they trust more with their one line statements. 

Want to fix your housing issue?  Vote for your local mayor and municipal rep that will actually deal with and advocate for changes to zoning regulations and increase supply.  

So while housing is an issue the policy is toothless and people didn’t actually look at it properly to understand it.  The Liberal plan will increase more potential  buyers and limit sellers options creating an even bigger supply issue.  But the plan sounds good at first glance.  It’s the small print people don’t look at. 

You have the issue and the guy that says he can fix it.  If you trust the guy you’ll look into it.  If you don’t you likely won’t. 

Abortion and LGTB was a created issue last election before this one.  It boiled down to leaders.  There was no policy to look into  about abortion but people believed or didn’t based on the leaders.  So don’t think that way of thinking isn’t  signifiant as a factor.  Do you remember the policies?  Or do you remember Scheer mishandling their messaging?  

You have constantly brought up abortion as being a significant issue that sank the CPC.  Not policy.  You still do.  But the policy is no different that the LPC at its core.  But people will believe one leader or not believe the other.  

Why else did the LPC try to find a wedge issue this time?  They know it works.  Left wing populism is their current strategy.  Don’t kid yourself. 

Like I said even you placed your vote for short term factors and not policy.  Your choice to vote PPC demonstrates that nicely.


----------



## KevinB (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The aim is to reduce worldwide emissions.  Contracting our economy a little may not be the best way of achieving the aim.  Activities which increase net emissions here can lower net emissions worldwide.


This is the biggest take away - What IMHO the Paris Accord fails is to understand/accept that some countries are significantly more efficient with a given carbon footprint.

 Short of me taking over the world - I don't know how one can sort that aspect out Globally -


----------



## Halifax Tar (7 Oct 2021)

Not sure if this was posted before.  From the Sun so bias accepted.









						TERRAZZANO: Canada needs to take Alberta's equalization grievances seriously
					

Alberta’s referendum on equalization is more than a vote on a federal program: it’s an urgently needed conversation about a deep crack in Confederation. So…




					torontosun.com


----------



## RangerRay (7 Oct 2021)

While I agree that the carbon tax may be the best market-based COA, it is based on some huge assumptions. 

It assumes that markets are rational. They are not. The easiest thing for producers to do to counteract the cost of the tax is to increase prices, lower worker wages, etc. Not many will invest in more efficient capital while keeping their prices low and wages high, no matter what the long term savings are. 

It assumes people will use their rebates on more fuel efficient vehicles and furnaces.  I would hazard that for most people, it goes into “General Revenue” to be used on groceries, fuel, heat, bills, etc. 

It assumes the tax will change the behaviour of people’s fuel consumption. While that may be true for wealthier people who can afford a new furnace or car, it’s not enough to help those who own beaters or 40 year old furnaces and can’t afford newer models. 

Until they start making more fuel efficient work vehicles, 4X4’s and heavy equipment, many producers won’t be able to upgrade, even if they are willing to front the extra costs in capital. 

I’m not even going to go into the whole inflationary nature of the tax. 

If I knew of a better solution, other than regulation and technology, I would be rich. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## CBH99 (7 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> When my wife got me a kindle for Christmas my book reading went from 3-4 a year to 24-36 a year
> 
> Hurts the pocketbook more though, but worth it.


I actually very much regret returning my Kindle.  

Years ago, my girlfriend at the time bought me a Kindle as a Christmas present.  It wasn’t the developed platform it is today, back then I thought of it as an ‘iPad that only does books…’

I’ve tried to resist technological change the best I can.  It was only a few years ago my mom got me an iPhone for Christmas after I had resisted getting a smart phone for years.  

I still enjoy a good paper back.  But I feel like I missed the boat on a lot of books that I could have known about, but dont.


----------



## Navy_Pete (7 Oct 2021)

CBH99 said:


> I actually very much regret returning my Kindle.
> 
> Years ago, my girlfriend at the time bought me a Kindle as a Christmas present.  It wasn’t the developed platform it is today, back then I thought of it as an ‘iPad that only does books…’
> 
> ...



On the plus side you can get a tablet with a reasonable sized screen for about $100, and if your local library has ebooks, use one of the cross platform apps to borrow books.

Ottawa public library has that feature, and they've partnered with Hamilton, Burlington and Mississauga, so you can check out books from any of them on the same app. Really easy to put things on hold and grab them when they eventually come available, and usually you only need connectivity to do the actual check out/download, so great for traveling, and doesn't matter if you happen to actually be home either.

I probably have 2-3 books on the go at any one time, with a mix of non-fiction, fiction, and pulp fiction for depending on what I feel like at the time. I like hard copies as well, but this is a lot more portable, and also meant I could read all through COVID, even when the branches were shut down for in-library pickup.

I occasionally buy books that I want to re-read, but have switched almost entirely to ebooks for general reading, as well as for some specialized textbooks that cost a fortune to ship from out of country and have a long lead time. Lose a bit not being able to flip back and forth to cross reference, but saved me hundreds of dollars, so there is that.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I doubt consumers change their driving or home energy use habits much - in economic terms, those are inelastic.
> 
> I have no intention of spending money to make the home more energy efficient - $175.00 worth of carbon taxes on $160.00 worth of gas (tax is also levied on storage and transport).  Not really any savings worth the cost of any worthwhile improvements.
> 
> "The individual" will, I expect, mostly react to price changes on other goods and services at several removes from where the tax liability exists.  And in current economic conditions, that's just noise compared to everything else going on.


I burn about $5.00/month in actual natural gas. I pay $20-25/month, total. The taxes and fees are 400% of the actual good Be consumed. A little excessive, if you ask me.


----------



## lenaitch (7 Oct 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I burn about $5.00/month in actual natural gas. I pay $20-25/month, total. The taxes and fees are 400% of the actual good Be consumed. A little excessive, if you ask me.


Part of it is the way the charges are visibly broken down.  If your jug of milk was posted with product cost, transportation, etc. it would look largely similar.  One benefit might be that the public might come to realize how little/litre the farmer actually gets.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 Oct 2021)

Of course.  But taxing the cost of storage and transport as part of a "carbon tax" seems excessive.  Surely the gas doesn't emit that much CO2 while it's in tanks and pipes.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (7 Oct 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I burn about $5.00/month in actual natural gas. I pay $20-25/month, total. The taxes and fees are 400% of the actual good Be consumed. A little excessive, if you ask me.



My last gas bill was also in the neighbourhood of $5.00 in actual natural gas.  While the "taxes and fees" are high, higher than yours apparently, most of that doesn't go to taxes.

Energy Charge                          $5.20
Admin Charge                            6.54
Transaction Fee                           1.91
Delivery Charges   ATCO Gas
Fixed Charge                             22.85
Variable Charge                          1.56
Rate Rider                                   5.46
Municipal Franchise Fee             4.03
Federal Carbon Tax                     4.06

The big winner is ATCO Gas.  They are not my gas provider, they just own the pipes in Calgary.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Oct 2021)

KevinB said:


> The end of the day, there needs to be a GLOBAL culture shift to do anything meaningful - a carbon tax in Canada isn't going to do diddly in the grand scheme - and while it can be great to be a roll model - there needs to be pressure on the worst offenders (again see China) before anything that actually means more than a hill of beans.




Chinese coal consumption and US Steel production - quite the contribution. Regardless, although the COVID crisis is responsible for huge drops in industrial activity and CO2 emissions it's only likely to be temporary.

At this rate the 'climate pearl clutchers' are going to need a few new strings.


Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement​The estimated decrease in daily fossil CO2 emissions from the severe and forced confinement of world populations of –17% (–11 to –25%) at its peak are extreme and probably unseen before. Still, these only correspond to the level of emissions in 2006. The associated annual decrease will be much lower (–4.2 to –7.5% according to our sensitivity tests), which is comparable to the rates of decrease needed year-on-year over the next decades to limit climate change to a 1.5 °C warming32,33. These numbers put in perspective both the large growth in global emissions observed over the past 14 years and the size of the challenge we have to limit climate change in line with the Paris Climate Agreement.

Furthermore, most changes observed in 2020 are likely to be temporary as they do not reflect structural changes in the economic, transport or energy systems. The social trauma of confinement and associated changes could alter the future trajectory in unpredictable ways34, but social responses alone, as shown here, would not drive the deep and sustained reductions needed to reach net-zero emissions. Scenarios of low-energy and/or material demand explored for climate stabilization explicitly aim to match reduced demand with higher well-being34,35, an objective that is not met by mandatory confinements. Still, opportunities exist to set structural changes in motion by implementing economic stimuli aligned with low carbon pathways.










						Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement - Nature Climate Change
					

COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns have altered global energy demands. Using government confinement policies and activity data, daily CO2 emissions have decreased by ~17% to early April 2020 against 2019 levels; annual emissions could be down by 7% (4%) if normality returns by year end (mid-June).




					www.nature.com


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Check out newsletters like this or this pointing you to free or cheap-cheap Kindle books.  True, I find most of them not to my taste, but I get 1-2 a week that're worth it to me to spend $2-5 bucks on, even if they end up letting me down.  If you're interested in older stuff, it's all free here & here, too.


I will take a look at this for sure.

I'm reading a bunch of older stuff that I'm catching up on and re reading and new stuff that is currently coming out, so either way, I'm sure this will be beneficial to me. Many thanks


----------



## Altair (7 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The aim is to reduce worldwide emissions.  Contracting our economy a little may not be the best way of achieving the aim.  Activities which increase net emissions here can lower net emissions worldwide.


Yeah, I'm not sure on the branding there.

Canada: let us pollute more so that you can pollute less. 

Collaborative is collaborative. Let China work on its own emmisions and let us work on our own. We have a goal, 30 percent less emmisions, let's just buckle down and do it. 

So again, unless you can think of another way to drop emmisions in Canada by 30 percent that doesn't include a carbon tax, then a carbon tax it is. I've Waite years to see how the CPC would round that square peg only for them to come up with their own carbon tax which goes to show that there is one best course of action with that goal in mind.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Global coal consumption: China 51.7% - India 11.8% - US 7.2% (link p.48)Chinese coal consumption and US Steel production - quite the contribution. Regardless, although the COVID crisis is responsible for huge drops in industrial activity and CO2 emissions it's only likely to be temporary.


Don’t forget India…

Global coal consumption: China 51.7% - India 11.8% - US 7.2%  

The top three countries rollin’ coal burn 70.3% of the entire globe’s coal.  Throw in Japan and its high-grade steel production at 4.9% and that’s 3/4 of the world’s coal compared to the remaining 185 countries.

Canada is a relatively minor dirty emissions player at 0.6% coal, so it would take A LOT of carbon tax, no doubt pushed down to the consumer for the lost part, to have little more than a tiny scratch in the emissions contribution…


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Don’t forget India…
> 
> Global coal consumption: China 51.7% - India 11.8% - US 7.2%
> 
> ...



Meanwhile, we can't get any of our almost bottomless supply of LNG - which is a lower carbon option than coal - out the door to the world because the enviro-trash are (ironically) too busy protesting about it.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Meanwhile, we can't get any of our almost bottomless supply of LNG - which is a lower carbon option than coal - out the door to the world because the enviro-trash are (ironically) too busy protesting about it.


Yup…see how much LNG (blue line) is exported from Canada to the world? (Same BP link). To quote Jean ‘EH-101’ Chretien….”zero…zip…zilch…nada…”. So much for growing the economy AND helping others “do better” towards the 2050 Paris Accord goals… 😞


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup…see how much LNG (blue line) is exported from Canada to the world? (Same BP link). To quote Jean ‘EH-101’ Chretien….”zero…zip…zilch…nada…”. So much for growing the economy AND helping others “do better” towards the 2050 Paris Accord goals… 😞
> View attachment 66746



OMG....


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Oct 2021)

> Yeah, I'm not sure on the branding there.



I'll just add yours to the growing set of data points that disprove "climate change is a crisis".  It's not a crisis if people are worried about the "branding" and unwilling to be relentlessly objective in the quest to reduce total worldwide emissions.


----------



## Altair (8 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I'll just add yours to the growing set of data points that disprove "climate change is a crisis".  It's not a crisis if people are worried about the "branding" and unwilling to be relentlessly objective in the quest to reduce total worldwide emissions.


Reducing global emmisions is simple.

Everyone reduce it by 30 percent. Solved.

If Canada does that  followed by France  and USA, and Germany, and Japan, and South Africa, and Brazil, and everyone else, guess what happens? Global emmisions are reduced by 30 percent. 

Woooooo!

Math is hard, I know.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Oct 2021)

> Everyone reduce it by 30 percent. Solved.



So you prefer to wish the problem away.  Good luck with that.  King Canute has a demonstration for you.  Just interpret "nature" as "demos".

We know that substitution of natural gas for coal reduces net emissions, because it has been done.

Discouraging a proven solution - which rigid quotas based on political boundaries does - is stupid to the bone.


----------



## Altair (8 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So you prefer to wish the problem away.  Good luck with that.  King Canute has a demonstration for you.  Just interpret "nature" as "demos".
> 
> We know that substitution of natural gas for coal reduces net emissions, because it has been done.
> 
> Discouraging a proven solution - which rigid quotas based on political boundaries does - is stupid to the bone.


I guess the Paris accord, signed by 191 nations,  is stupid then.


----------



## KevinB (8 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I guess the Paris accord, signed by 191 nations,  is stupid then.


Yes - because it simply wasn't going to happen.

Goals are great - but realistic goals are more important - and even more important are realistic enforceable goals.


----------



## Altair (8 Oct 2021)

KevinB said:


> Yes - because it simply wasn't going to happen.
> 
> Goals are great - but realistic goals are more important - and even more important are realistic enforceable goals.


Paris agreement- everyone reduce emmisions!

Army.ca- everyone but Canada reduce emmisions!


----------



## Remius (8 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Paris agreement- everyone reduce emmisions!
> 
> Army.ca- everyone but Canada reduce emmisions!


There are several alternatives to the Paris Accord that might offer real effects.

https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/2016-10_paris-agreement-beyond_v4.pdf

P. 75 to 79 if you want to skip the rest.

So focusing on bi lateral or small group efforts. As opposed to trying to get everyone on board with zero enforcement.

Also the concept of “climate clubs”.


----------



## QV (8 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Paris agreement- everyone reduce emmisions!
> 
> Army.ca- everyone but Canada reduce emmisions!


Wrong

Paris Accord: everyone reduce emissions except China

Everyone else: yay! Ok!

Trump: We‘re out.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Oct 2021)

A goal without a plan is just a wish.
          - Antoine de Saint-Exupéry


----------



## Altair (8 Oct 2021)

QV said:


> Wrong
> 
> Paris Accord: everyone reduce emissions except China
> 
> ...


Biden:we're back in!

Regardless,  I think China goes from runaway emmisions to maintaining current levels, only because per capita, they still produce less than the Americans by half.

So the Paris accord would still get us to where we need to be to keep global emmisions down and limit the global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees.

But not with nonsense like let everyone else cut their emmisions and forget about Canada because we can make LNG.

Also, time that could be spent getting towards the Paris target will be spent bickering on making a new framework during which time no progress is being made.

So again, back to politics at hand, there is one way to show that parties have a credible climate plan,reach the Paris accord. And every party is now on board with a carbon tax. Some more aggressive than others, but 338 mps have been elected to a party that supports a price on carbon. Every party agrees with reaching the Paris goal as a bare minimum.

So people here can shit on the carbon tax, shit on Paris accord, but it seems like the political parties have moved past both of these points.

Unless you're a PPC voter like me.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Unless you're a PPC voter like me.


You keep pointing this out, how come?


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> You keep pointing this out, how come?


I feel like people think I'm a LPC voter and need to defend everything Trudeau does


----------



## KevinB (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I feel like people think I'm a LPC voter and need to defend everything Trudeau does


I think because most of us truly believe you are a LPC voter - if not one of JT's PR folks - which you kind of are even if unpaid


----------



## Remius (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I feel like people think I'm a LPC voter and need to defend everything Trudeau does


I think you are a partisan liberal supporter.  How you vote is a different thing. 

I get accused of being an LPC supporter and CPC supporter.  Seems to support my middle position.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Yup…see how much LNG (blue line) is exported from Canada to the world? (Same BP link). To quote Jean ‘EH-101’ Chretien….”zero…zip…zilch…nada…”. So much for growing the economy AND helping others “do better” towards the 2050 Paris Accord goals… 😞
> View attachment 66746


Some of our NG makes it overseas, via American LNG terminals, with them making the profit. Hopefully LNGCanada continues and starts operating.








						LNG Canada Project Surpasses 50% Completion
					

Three years after our joint venture participants reached a successful final investment decision, we’re proud to share that work across the LNG Canada project has just surpassed the 50% completion mark. Read more.




					www.lngcanada.ca


----------



## brihard (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I feel like people think I'm a LPC voter and need to defend everything Trudeau does


Because you literally told us you voted PPC specifically to contribute to splitting the right. i guess your riding was already a lock or something. You've been a pretty die hard partisan in favour of the LPC for as long as I can remember you talking politics on this site. That's completely fine, everyone gets their views. but a strategic vote for a PPC spoiler doesn't change your enthusiastic and vociferous defence of the liberals pretty much any time anything comes up.


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Oct 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Some of our NG makes it overseas, via American LNG terminals, with them making the profit. Hopefully LNGCanada continues and starts operating.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No agency I know of attributes secondary flow to energy commodities, per se, but your point is a good one.  Just look at Canada’s NG (piped) export to the US then see that the US exports that amount+ and half again as LNG beyond at a high price.  It is in the US’ own interests to keep energy flow options from Canada restricted so it shapes a permanently discounted market for our energy, especially if Camada proves it is effectively incapable of exporting energy for its own good.


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> No agency I know of attributes secondary flow to energy commodities, per se, but your point is a good one.  Just look at Canada’s NG (piped) export to the US then see that the US exports that amount+ and half again as LNG beyond at a high price.  It is in the US’ own interests to keep energy flow options from Canada restricted so it shapes a permanently discounted market for our energy, especially if Camada proves it is effectively incapable of exporting energy for its own good.


Coastal gaslink comes online in 2023, so we should get export capacity from kitimat BC then.

Official numbers say 2.1 billion cubic feet per day, with possibily of expansion to 5 billion.

I'm not going to lie, I don't know if 2.1-5 billion cubic feet is big or small when it comes to LNG.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I feel like *people think I'm a LPC voter* and need to defend everything Trudeau does


Why on earth wouldn't people believe that though? You've been broadcasting support for the LPC and Trudeau for years. You appear to take pleasure in "wins" for Trudeau (which is totally fine) but with a healthy dose of _in your face_.

You were so upset at Trudeaus treatment at the last election (by yours truly suggesting the LPC would utilize the rock throwing incident to their advantage, I believe) that you had to take a time out from posting for the whole election so you wouldn't get banned for your responses. That's serious stuff.

Now out of the blue it seems important to you to broadcast you're a PPC voter. Strange, but I'm probably just overly sensitive 🦚


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Why on earth wouldn't people believe that though? You've been broadcasting support for the LPC and Trudeau for years. You appear to take pleasure in "wins" for Trudeau (which is totally fine) but with a healthy dose of _in your face_.
> 
> You were so upset at Trudeaus treatment at the last election (by yours truly suggesting the LPC would utilize the rock throwing incident to their advantage, I believe) that you had to take a time out from posting for the whole election so you wouldn't get banned for your responses. That's serious stuff.
> 
> Now out of the blue it seems important to you to broadcast you're a PPC voter. Strange, but I'm probably just overly sensitive 🦚


Well, I've stated my reasons for voting PPC, even though my preferred party preferences lies elsewhere, but I did figure that one benefit of being a PPC voter would be not needing to defend every little thing the LPC does as I am not a LPC voter.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Coastal gaslink comes online in 2023, so we should get export capacity from kitimat BC then.
> 
> Official numbers say 2.1 billion cubic feet per day, with possibily of expansion to 5 billion.
> 
> I'm not going to lie, I don't know if 2.1-5 billion cubic feet is big or small when it comes to LNG.



I'm glad you're so optimistic about those timelines.



TC Energy warns CGL pipeline work could be halted​As the LNG Canada project enters its third year of construction, the consortium behind it recently noted some key milestones that have been reached.

But while construction of the LNG terminal itself in Kitimat continues apace, the related Coastal GasLink project that will supply it with natural gas is running into both delays and escalating costs.

TC Energy (TSX:TRP), which is responsible for building the pipeline, recently warned that it may suspend construction activity, if it can’t resolve a dispute it is having with LNG Canada over the project’s escalating costs.


“If a resolution is not reached in the near term, Coastal GasLink may be required to suspend certain key construction activities but would continue with work required for safety reasons and compliance with regulatory requirements.”








						TC Energy warns CGL pipeline work could be halted
					

LNG Canada, TC Energy in a dispute over pipeline’s escalating costs




					biv.com


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> I'm glad you're so optimistic about those timelines.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Better late than never is what my mother always says.


----------



## Remius (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Well, I've stated my reasons for voting PPC, even though my preferred party preferences lies elsewhere, but I did figure that one benefit of being a PPC voter would be not needing to defend every little thing the LPC does as I am not a LPC voter.


No one is forcing you to defend every little thing the LPC does.  Not sure where the “need” part comes from lol.


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Weinie said:


> Altair must be panicking and trying to figure out how he can spin this.





Remius said:


> There is no spinning that.  It’s pretty black and white





Remius said:


> No one is forcing you to defend every little thing the LPC does.  Not sure where the “need” part comes from lol.


Uh huh.


----------



## QV (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Biden:we're back in!
> 
> Regardless,  I think China goes from runaway emmisions to maintaining current levels, only because per capita, they still produce less than the Americans by half.
> 
> ...


I’m not surprised you criticize the suggestion Canada not need reduce emissions but you are completely silent that China the worlds worst polluter gets a pass while everyone else doesn’t.


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

QV said:


> I’m not surprised you criticize the suggestion Canada not need reduce emissions but you are completely silent that China the worlds worst polluter gets a pass while everyone else doesn’t.


Because it's slightly more nuanced than that.

Per capita, the west are still the worst.

In terms of total emmisions China is the worst.

If every individual Chinese polluted as much as each individual American for example, china's current emmisions would be FOUR times higher than they currently are.

So the compromise was China maintain their current level. The west would drop.

But that's just the politics behind the deal, the reality is its too late in the game to rip up the current playbook and start a new one from scratch.

Which is why every party in parliament agrees with reaching the Paris accord targets.

Fait accompli mon ami.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Not sure where the “need” part comes from lol.


_Need_ and _want_ can be easily confused.


----------



## Weinie (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Well, I've stated my reasons for voting PPC, even though my preferred party preferences lies elsewhere, but I did figure that one benefit of being a PPC voter would *be not needing to defend every little thing the LPC does as I am not a LPC voter.*


Sigh, your posting history has been a litany of defending everything that the LPC has done. I will not re-post them here. But your post above defies credulity.


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Weinie said:


> Sigh, your posting history has been a litany of defending everything that the LPC has done. I will not re-post them here. But your post above defies credulity.


@Jarnhamar this is why I must continue to reiterate that I am a PPC voter


----------



## Remius (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Uh huh.


I did say there was no spinning that.  Your choice to defend them or not.  I was fine with no answer.


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> I did say there was no spinning that.  Your choice to defend them or not.  I was fine with no answer.


Aye, I added you as additional context to weinie


----------



## Weinie (9 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Aye, I added you as additional context to weinie


Yes, because my post from August 31'st required additional context. Sigh...................

Please put me on  "Ignore"


----------



## Altair (9 Oct 2021)

Weinie said:


> Yes, because my post from August 31'st required additional context. Sigh...................
> 
> Please put me on  "Ignore"


Nah, I like you.

Remius said I nobody is asking me to defend the LPC, I posted what you wrote on Aug 31st as proof that sometimes that does happen.

No need to ignore people over that.


----------



## mariomike (10 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Like any race/ ethnically categorizing term, there are problems with 'BIPOC':
> 
> ​


Whatever the politically correct acronym is, this National Post article may, or may not, be of interest to party strategists when planning for the next Federal election,



> Of the 41 ridings in Canada where more than half the population is racialized, the Conservatives won just one in the 2021 election — Calgary Forest Lawn.











						As Tories review election loss, weak support in immigrant communities a crucial issue
					

Of the 41 ridings in Canada where more than half the population is racialized, the Conservatives won just one in the 2021 election — Calgary Forest Lawn




					nationalpost.com
				




Future projections 2016 - 2036:








						Demographics of Canada - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Regarding Indigenous candidates in the 2021 election,



> The NDP said it has 29 Indigenous candidates.





> The Liberal party said it has 25 Indigenous candidates.





> The Green party said it has 11 Indigenous candidates.





> The Conservative party said it has eight Indigenous candidates.





> The People's Party of Canada said it has four.











						Record number of Indigenous candidates running in federal election
					

A record number of Indigenous candidates are running in the federal election this year with what they say is a goal of advancing meaningful change in Canada's relationship with First Nations, Inuit and Metis.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Altair (10 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Whatever the politically correct acronym is, this National Post article may, or may not, be of interest to party strategists when planning for the next Federal election,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Long gone are the days of Jason Kenney running around to every IBAPOC riding during election time doing outreach.

Now Jason Kenney is just blading the CPC a few days before election night.


----------



## daftandbarmy (10 Oct 2021)

Did anyone watch ‘At Issue’ on CBC news last night?

They slaughtered the CAF, skewered the PM and are predicting/ hoping ‘The Architect’ will be next on the altar.

The new Cabinet positions will be interesting.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Did anyone watch ‘At Issue’ on CBC news last night?
> 
> They slaughtered the CAF, skewered the PM and are predicting/ hoping ‘The Architect’ will be next on the altar.


Not bad for biased, bought-and-paid-for media  😉


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Not bad for biased, bought-and-paid-for media  😉


Although, perfectly normal for an unscrupulous, morally bereft organization willing to trade their integrity for cash. Like the common thief, they have no favourites when it comes to whom they wish to screw/serve.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Oct 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> ... *they have no favourites* when it comes to whom they wish to screw/serve.


Nice of you to admit there's no real bias, then, as long as they're happy having someone to dump on


----------



## brihard (10 Oct 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Although, perfectly normal for an unscrupulous, morally bereft organization willing to trade their integrity for cash. Like the common thief, they have no favourites when it comes to whom they wish to screw/serve.


So are they morally bereft because they skewered the PM, or did they skewer the PM because they’re morally bereft?


----------



## Eaglelord17 (10 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> The best way to reduce emissions is for all nations to reduce their emissions at the same time.
> 
> That's what the Paris agreement was for, a collective effort for all nations to reduce their emmisions.
> 
> ...


Who said I supported lowering our environmental standards? You are completely missing my point. I never said any new jobs would create a huge amount of low wage industry, with modern technology there will still be a ton of jobs but no where near the manufacturing lines of the 50s and earlier. 

If we buy products made without the same or similar environmental standards used in Canada we are subsidizing other nations businesses well adding tons of cost to ours. We are also increasing the environmental impact of those goods as for example if a steel plant in Canada closes down, guess what we still need steel so where do we get it from? China? India? Any number of nations who don't follow any emission standards and dump it all into the atmosphere? Great job, they just increased production to account for the new customers, and the planet is worse off.

Maybe we should figure out how much carbon is being produced from goods made overseas and apply a carbon tax to that. Watch the price of cheap goods skyrocket to account for their actual outputs and allow Canadian companies to actually be able to compete. 

Our emissions measuring system is broken. If it only accounts for what is produced in Canada instead of what is consumed, we aren't fairly accounting for what we are actually doing. If we started to develop the actual numbers as to what individuals actually use in regards to products made in foreign places our emissions would increase dramatically. 

Like I said we are playing a shell game currently. Oh China is so evil because of their emissions, meanwhile we are taking in all those dirty products without a complaint because they are cheap. Much like the drug cartels, they are only a issue because the West keeps consuming the product. 

Net results of my policy would be a increase in local jobs, a increase in the cost of goods, a likely increase in the quality of goods (so as to not require replacement as often), a reduction in global emissions, and a increase in our self-sustainability as a nation. Not all products need to be produced inhouse, hence free trade with those following similar standards, but those without shouldn't be allowed to sell here or if they do it should be after a equivalent tariff to manufacturing it in Canada is applied.


Altair said:


> Yeah, I'm not sure on the branding there.
> 
> Canada: let us pollute more so that you can pollute less.
> 
> ...


Carbon tax really doesn't drop emissions. It closes down business in Canada, hurts individuals, and is essentially subsidizing products made in foreign countries at the detriment of Canadians. It is a disgusting policy which hurts all Canadians and only pretends to deal with the actual problem. Again if you want to reduce emissions you ban or regulate how much emissions can be made by a product by tightening environmental controls. This allowing dirty products to be sold in Canada without penalty well clean products get driven out of business with ever increasing taxes is what you call stupidity. 


Altair said:


> Reducing global emmisions is simple.
> 
> Everyone reduce it by 30 percent. Solved.
> 
> ...


Such a simple view of the world, unfortunately the world isn't that simple.


----------



## Altair (10 Oct 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> Carbon tax really doesn't drop emissions. It closes down business in Canada, hurts individuals, and is essentially subsidizing products made in foreign countries at the detriment of Canadians. It is a disgusting policy which hurts all Canadians and only pretends to deal with the actual problem. Again if you want to reduce emissions you ban or regulate how much emissions can be made by a product by tightening environmental controls. This allowing dirty products to be sold in Canada without penalty well clean products get driven out of business with ever increasing taxes is what you call stupidity.


The 5 parties in parliament representing 338 MPs have all come to the conclusion that this is the best way forward.

You haven't and that's okay. If you don't believe in the program that works. If you don't believe in the Paris accord and targets, that's also okay.

The political parties have moved on and that is what matters.


----------



## YZT580 (10 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> The 5 parties in parliament representing 338 MPs have all come to the conclusion that this is the best way forward.
> 
> You haven't and that's okay. If you don't believe in the program that works. If you don't believe in the Paris accord and targets, that's also okay.
> 
> The political parties have moved on and that is what matters.


the 5 parties are chasing votes not solutions.  We are being played for suckers by those who see a buck to be earned.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (10 Oct 2021)

Votes and taxes.......politician crack.


----------



## Altair (10 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> the 5 parties are chasing votes not solutions.  We are being played for suckers by those who see a buck to be earned.


It's okay if you believe that.

Seems like the Canadian populace and political parties have come to a different conclusion.

Let's revisit this in 2030 and see if emmisions went down by the Paris target amounts.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Oct 2021)

Just another ingredient in the "getting China to get a grip on its carbon emissions" stew ...


> Factories in at least ten Chinese provinces have either cut output or closed temporarily this month, after government-imposed power cuts to curb carbon emissions.
> 
> By Friday, at least 10 publicly listed companies told the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges their factory output had been hit by the power cuts, and their 2021 earnings could be adversely affected ...


... which leads to ...


> ... China’s energy crisis is shaping up as the latest shock to global supply chains as factories in the world’s biggest exporter are forced to conserve energy by curbing production.
> 
> The disruption comes as producers and shippers race to meet demand for everything from clothing to toys for the year-end holiday shopping season, grappling with supply lines that have been upended by soaring raw material costs, long delays at ports and shortages of shipping containers ...


----------



## Altair (11 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Just another ingredient in the "getting China to get a grip on its carbon emissions" stew ...
> 
> ... which leads to ...


Yes, it's known that even China is taking steps to reach their Paris targets.

Meaning that if China is doing it, Canada sure as hell can.


----------



## Altair (11 Oct 2021)

Oh, and line 3 completed.

370k barrels of oil per day export capacity online.

Not bad for a country some say cannot build pipelines.


----------



## YZT580 (11 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Oh, and line 3 completed.
> 
> 370k barrels of oil per day export capacity online.
> 
> Not bad for a country some say cannot build pipelines.


Good deal but it was built in Minnesota not Canada.  It was proposed in 2015 and completed 4 months ago.  On the other hand, the transmountain request started processing in 2013 and is still years from completion.  Kittimat is still being blocked and if you want to ship oil from Alberta to Halifax you had better plan on tankers at some point.  China is still building coal generators at a prodigious rate and one of the main reasons for the slowdown is the lack of fuel to power their existing capacity due to their on-going tiff with Australia.


----------



## Altair (11 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Good deal but it was built in Minnesota not Canada.  It was proposed in 2015 and completed 4 months ago.  On the other hand, the transmountain request started processing in 2013 and is still years from completion.  Kittimat is still being blocked and if you want to ship oil from Alberta to Halifax you had better plan on tankers at some point.  China is still building coal generators at a prodigious rate and one of the main reasons for the slowdown is the lack of fuel to power their existing capacity due to their on-going tiff with Australia.


It was refurbished in Canada though, so there was some work done on it here. 

Transmountain had a lot more regulatory issues, including the need to consult indigenous communities. Still, I wouldn't say years away, its scheduled to be in service by dec 2022, which means the actual completion should be a few months before that.


----------



## YZT580 (11 Oct 2021)

lots of indigenous in Minnesota but not quite so much money to fund their protests.  But I sure hope you are right re: 2022 for Trans.  It certainly hasn't been easy to date.


----------



## Altair (11 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> lots of indigenous in Minnesota but not quite so much money to fund their protests.  But I sure hope you are right re: 2022 for Trans.  It certainly hasn't been easy to date.


They just don't have the legal avenues for their grievances in the USA. First nations in Canada have treaties with the Crown that need to be respected. The USA has no crown, and treaties are not treated as law down there, so far easier to ram through projects despite any objections.

As for transmountain, (calling it Trans seems weird), thats the scheduled date. I haven't heard of any protestor delays as of right now. Which makes sense, seeing as there are only so many environmental protestors in BC and they seem busy at fairy creek.


----------



## The Bread Guy (11 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> ... Meaning that if China is doing it, Canada sure as hell can.


That's true, but I was trying to point out the pain at this end for the gain at that end.  All has be thrown into the calculus, no?


----------



## Altair (11 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> That's true, but I was trying to point out the pain at this end for the gain at that end.  All has be thrown into the calculus, no?


Yes, you are right, it does.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

> I guess the Paris accord, signed by 191 nations,  is stupid then.



Yes.  No realistic hope of being achieved.  It's just eye candy for the people who like to hear the right words.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

> In terms of total emmisions China is the worst.



Unfortunately, it's total emissions that drive the problem.  Per capita measures are a political distraction for the weak-minded.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

> The 5 parties in parliament representing 338 MPs have all come to the conclusion that this is the best way forward.



Suddenly politicians are capable of solving a problem which requires a realistic appreciation of economics and physics.  We know they are correct because they are in agreement.  Sure, sure.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes.  No realistic hope of being achieved.  It's just eye candy for the people who like to hear the right words.


There is a more realistic chance of meeting the Paris climate targets before 2030 than getting 191 nations around the table again for a completely new framework and reduce emissions before 2030.


Brad Sallows said:


> Unfortunately, it's total emissions that drive the problem.  Per capita measures are a political distraction for the weak-minded.


And China argues that first world nations use more per capita carbon than developing nations and since they want to ascend to first world status it would be unfair to kneecap them. Now agree or disagree, but finding a compromise is better than having one if the biggest polluters on the planet not be part of the agreement at all and driving up emissions while the rest of the world is trying to lower them.


Brad Sallows said:


> Suddenly politicians are capable of solving a problem which requires a realistic appreciation of economics and physics.  We know they are correct because they are in agreement.  Sure, sure.


Just like with gay marriage, eventually everyone gets on the same page and it ceases to be a topic of discussion amongst political parties.

I think we reached that point now and its pretty awesome that every party in parliament agrees with a carbon tax and the one that did not won zero seats.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

> There is a more realistic chance of meeting the Paris climate targets before 2030 than getting 191 nations around the table again for a completely new framework.



I doubt there is any political hope at all of getting to any meaningful framework that will make a useful difference.  The Paris Accords are a stage show for the consumption of fools who need reassurance, performed by people who will continue to exert large carbon footprints as they have done throughout the life of the "climate emergency".  And some of the fools will doubtless make excuses for those who exempt themselves from feeling any of the pain.  Animal Farm, but with emissions in lieu of liquor and other consumption goods.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I doubt there is any political hope at all of getting to any meaningful framework that will make a useful difference.  The Paris Accords are a stage show for the consumption of fools who need reassurance, performed by people who will continue to exert large carbon footprints as they have done throughout the life of the "climate emergency".  And some of the fools will doubtless make excuses for those who exempt themselves from feeling any of the pain.  Animal Farm, but with emissions in lieu of liquor and other consumption goods.


_You_ _fight climate change with the accord you have_, _not the accord you_ might _want_ or _wish_ to _have_ at a later time.'.

~Donald Rumsfeld, circa 2000 or something.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

The accord isn't the "army"; the accord is just one CoA.  Try harder.

Those who have agreed to pinch the Canadian economy to achieve no useful emissions reduction will undoubtedly follow through and pinch the economy.  That will reduce resources to deal with that and all other problems.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The accord isn't the "army"; the accord is just one CoA.  Try harder.
> 
> Those who have agreed to pinch the Canadian economy to achieve no useful emissions reduction will undoubtedly follow through and pinch the economy.  That will reduce resources to deal with that and all other problems.


Okay, again, if you have another CoA that will reduce domestic emissions 30 percent or higher that doesn't involve a price on carbon, please share with the class.

Bonus points if you can do this without mentioning China.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Okay, again, if you have another CoA that will reduce domestic emissions 30 percent or higher that doesn't involve a price on carbon, please share with the class.
> 
> Bonus points if you can do this without mentioning China.



The inconvenient truth that guy on the ladder conveniently forgot to mention:

Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined​
*China emits more greenhouse gas than the entire developed world combined, a new report has claimed.*

The research by Rhodium Group says China emitted 27% of the world's greenhouse gases in 2019.
The US was the second-largest emitter at 11% while India was third with 6.6% of emissions, the think tank said.
Scientists warn that without an agreement between the US and China it will be hard to avert dangerous climate change.
China's emissions more than tripled over the previous three decades, the report from the US-based Rhodium Group added.









						Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined
					

The country is responsible for 27% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to a new report.



					www.bbc.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The inconvenient truth that guy on the ladder conveniently forgot to mention. A global climate accord is useless. Some kind of agreement between the three largest emitters would be a better option:
> 
> Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined​
> *China emits more greenhouse gas than the entire developed world combined, a new report has claimed.*
> ...


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> The inconvenient truth that guy on the ladder conveniently forgot to mention:
> 
> Report: China emissions exceed all developed nations combined​
> *China emits more greenhouse gas than the entire developed world combined, a new report has claimed.*
> ...


I wont for a second say China doesn't have a big part to play in this.

But China unfortunately has a point. 

If first world nations simply burn more carbon to enjoy a first world lifestyle, is it fair to force countries trying to achieve first world status to stop all their emissions?

And is it fair to consider total emissions which is unfair to nations with bigger populations when emissions per capita show China far behind?

Canada 

18.58675,918,61036,382,944

Australia

17.10414,988,70024,262,712

USA

15.525,011,686,600323,015,995

China

7.3810,432,751,4001,414,049,351

Those at the Paris conference decided to compromise, and bring down western nations emissions while telling China to slow and stop emission growth.  China and the rest of the west will meet somewhere in the middle by 2030 is the hope I think.

Again, come up with any agreement that doesn't take this calculus into effect and China walks and the accord falls apart. 

So unless someone else thinks that there can be a consensus of all nations on a climate plan that can achieve results before 2030 then its moot as to whether the Paris accord is the best way forward. Its the plan humanity has and its too late in the game to rip up and change the playbook now.


----------



## mariomike (12 Oct 2021)

> The 5 parties in parliament representing 338 MPs have all come to the conclusion that this is the best way forward.



Whatever team one supports, nice to see they are on the same page.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

Imposing unnecessary limitations is foolish.

China will move to cheaper fuels if those fuels are cheaper and sufficiently abundant.

China will move to less polluting fuels to mitigate air quality.

China is the global low-hanging fruit - an obvious place to concentrate efforts to mitigate total emissions.  Transportation by sea is the most cost-effective mode we have, and an ocean is all that separates Canada from China.

None of these factors involves or requires accords or quotas.  Canada should disregard accords, and go full bore on LNG exploitation.  If some of the contributors here are to be believed, not all people working high in governments and other agencies are mediocrities; those capable of empiricism will at least quietly understand and applaud even if the official positions of governments are derogatory.

[Add: there are security benefits, for those who care.  China will not like dependency on foreign LNG supplies any more than it likes dependency on Australian coal.  But if Chinese energy consumption costs fall, the people are happier.  If air quality improves, the people are happier.  If the people are happier, domestic political stress is mitigated.  That and dependence on continued and increased international trade give China two incentives to be less bellicose.]


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Imposing unnecessary limitations is foolish.
> 
> China will move to cheaper fuels if those fuels are cheaper and sufficiently abundant.
> 
> ...



Exactly... do whatever it takes to help China cut emissions (because they're making stuff mainly for us).


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

mariomike said:


> Whatever team one supports, nice to see they are on the same page.


Yeah, and that's what I like. It will cease being an issue going forward if everyone is on the same page.

Granted, there will be some individuals who continue to try to make this an issue, same way certain individuals continue to try to make abortion an issue, but all the parties are in lockstep and that's all that I really care about.


----------



## YZT580 (12 Oct 2021)

lockstep indeed, just like lemmings heading for the cliff.  All a tax does is cost the taxpayer.  It doesn't do a damn thing to reduce emissions.   To do that requires either ceasing production or finding a more efficient way to use the fuel we have now because except for hydro, none of the choices are viable.  Europe in the last month is proof positive of that.  I am not counting nuclear because the greenies have made it too big an issue.  All our tax does is drive industry to a less costly locale: such as China, but it is only a for instance.  The job market in Oshawa, Windsor, Oakville, St. Catharines stands as testimony.  Every significant electiric rate hike has been accompanied by the loss of at least one production line.  Oil is 80 a barrel yet petrol is over 1.40.  The vast majority of that is tax.  So I pay more for fuel.  I have the same destinations so I have to cut back on other items such as vacations or entertainment (my prime discretionary costs).  That means I don't support local theatre and concert venues and there is a vacancy at the lodge we normally  frequent.  Tell me please in simple terms how taking money out of the economy is saving the planet?  Most of my car is manufactured in China because the parts lines that used to support domestic production have been re-located to China.  Again, tell me how supporting their carbon output so Ford can avoid carbon costs in Ontario has done one thing for the environment?


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

Carbon tax can contribute to reduced emissions, if the response to the incentive (increased cost) is to reduce fuel consumption.  But there are other courses of action for reducing costs.  I'm sure some estimators take this into account; I'm skeptical that proponents of taxes are sufficiently pessimistic (ie. I expect the results to fall short of their forecasts).

Internalizing externalities (which is what is being attempted) means someone has to pay the cost.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> lockstep indeed, just like lemmings heading for the cliff.


Like I said, I'm more than okay with individuals being against it so long as all the parties are for it. 

Because you'll either accept that the CPC will put in their own carbon tax and accept it or go vote for the PPC. I'm cool either way.


----------



## YZT580 (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Like I said, I'm more than okay with individuals being against it so long as all the parties are for it.
> 
> Because you'll either accept that the CPC will put in their own carbon tax and accept it or go vote for the PPC. I'm cool either way.


So in very simple terms, it doesn't matter to you if the economy goes to hell in a hand basket, your neighbour is unemployed and the breadline extends clear around the block as long as we have reached this decision via consensus.  Wow


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> or go vote for the PPC. I'm cool either way.



Do you still find the PPC is the far right, anti immigration, anti foreigner fringe party?


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So in very simple terms, it doesn't matter to you if the economy goes to hell in a hand basket, your neighbour is unemployed and the breadline extends clear around the block as long as we have reached this decision via consensus.  Wow


In very simple terms, I don't believe any of that is going to happen. The Carbon tax has been in place for almost 3 years and employment growth is growing. Emissions growth is slowing.

The end of the world you describe is not happening thus I discard what you write as hyperbole.

But at the end of the day, what are anti carbon tax people going to do? Vote PPC or vote for one of the 5 parties that support a carbon tax?


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Do you still find the PPC is the far right, anti immigration, anti foreigner fringe party?


It doesn't matter what I believe the PPC is.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

No point attaching too much hope to carbon taxes yet.  COVID mitigation is wildly skewing all evidence, and there are other mitigating factors in play.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> It doesn't matter what I believe the PPC is.


Why not?


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> No point attaching too much hope to carbon taxes yet.  COVID mitigation is wildly skewing all evidence, and there are other mitigating factors in play.


Cool. Can we use the carbon taxes that have been in place before the federal backstop then?


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Oct 2021)

Sure.  Good luck separating the contributions of all the factors tending to mitigate CO2 emissions.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Why not?


Because I am of the belief that the PPC with its decentralized organization and its all are welcome philosophy is both everything and nothing of what people think it is.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Because I am of the belief that the PPC with its decentralized organization and its all are welcome philosophy is both everything and nothing of what people think it is.


But you also believe they are a far right party who are anti-immigration and anti-foreigner.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But you also believe they are a far right party who are anti-immigration and anti-foreigner.


I don't think I've ever said that about the PPC here.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I was hoping the PPC would be the fiscally conservative party with socially liberal views.
> 
> It was a shame that it turned into the* anti immigration, anti foreigner fringe party it did*, glad it fizzled out the way it did.





			
				Altair said:
			
		

> I was hoping the PPC could be fiscally responsible and socially liberal,  but sadly they ended up as fiscally conservative,  and* socially far right.*





			
				Altair said:
			
		

> Dude, the _PPC_ are all about free speech and morals as well



In 2019 you considered them anti-immigration, anti-foreigner and socially far-right but you must have voted for them, since you voted twice for the PPC.


----------



## Altair (12 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> In 2019 you considered them anti-immigration, anti-foreigner and socially far-right but you must have voted for them, since you voted twice for the PPC.


Oh I did, with the same reasoning in mind as for why I did in 2021.

Regardless, I didn't remember posting that in 2019. Good catch. As it stands, their political views are the polar opposite of mine. I still don't think it matters what I think of them.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Oh I did, with the same reasoning in mind as for why I did in 2021.
> 
> Regardless, I didn't remember posting that in 2019. Good catch. As it stands, their political views are the polar opposite of mine. I still don't think it matters what I think of them.



Why would you vote for a party with political views the polar opposite of yours ?


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Why would you vote for a party with political views the polar opposite of yours ?


I believe they serve a useful function.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> I believe they serve a useful function.



Which is ?


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Which is ?


Doing to the CPC what the NDP and Greens and to some extent the bloc do the the LPC.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Doing to the CPC what the NDP and Greens and to some extent the bloc do the the LPC.


I love the Canadian voter mentality. Instead of voting for the party they think will be best for the country, they will vote anyone to deny the party they dislike, the win. It's no wonder our system is such an absolute farce. It's not strategic voting, it's pure, ignorant, personal spitefulness and selfishness. And the whole country is affected and weighed down by the stupidity of the exercise.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Doing to the CPC what the NDP and Greens and to some extent the bloc do the the LPC.



What a sad state of affairs.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

People can vote any way they want.  Welcome to the free world.  Vote for, vote against, vote strategic, etc etc.

No one has a say or is right about how anyone decides to vote.  

I suspect many are offended because people didn’t vote their way.  Get over it. 

Ignorance is not accepting that someone might actually vote differently than you for a variety of reasons.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> People can vote any way they want.  Welcome to the free world.  Vote for, vote against, vote strategic, etc etc.
> 
> No one has a say or is right about how anyone decides to vote.
> 
> ...









Dude, its a discussion forum.  If one shares information one should expect discussion and comment.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> I love the Canadian voter mentality. Instead of voting for the party they think will be best for the country, they will vote anyone to deny the party they dislike, the win. It's no wonder our system is such an absolute farce. It's not strategic voting, it's pure, ignorant, personal spitefulness and selfishness. And the whole country is affected and weighed down by the stupidity of the exercise.


Maybe if we didn't have first past the post I would care about voting more in line with my actual beliefs.

But we do have first past the post. My LPC candidate was always going to get between 45 and 55 percent of the vote in my riding. So I might as well have some fun with my vote, ya?


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> What a sad state of affairs.


Yeah, it is sad that the conservatives in this country get a united vote behind one party while the progressive vote is split between anywhere from 2 to 4 different parties.

Which is why I voted PPC and convinced anyone mad about vax stuff to and guns to vote for them as well. 

Just doing my small part to prop up that party so they can fulfill their role as spoiler.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Dude, its a discussion forum.  If one shares information one should expect discussion and comment.


Of course.  And I commented on the discussion Dude.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Maybe if we didn't have first past the post I would care about voting more in line with my actual beliefs.
> 
> But we do have first past the post. My LPC candidate was always going to get between 45 and 55 percent of the vote in my riding. So I might as well have some fun with my vote, ya?



I don't know but I think we may share in our contempt for our FPTP system. 



Remius said:


> Of course.  And I commented on the discussion Dude.








That's what you were doing... Ok


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't know but think we may share ground in  our contempt for our FPTP system.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry if it confused you.  I commented on those comments and discussions disparaging Altair’s voting behaviour.  I hope that clears it up.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I don't know but I think we may share in our contempt for our FPTP system.


It's a silly system. 

I'm treating it with the seriousness it deserves. AKA, not much.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> It's a silly system.
> 
> I'm treating it with the seriousness it deserves. AKA, not much.



In that context I fully empathize with your motivation.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

Would you be more for a proportional voting system or something like a hybrid of FPTP/proportional.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> Would you be more for a proportional voting system or something like a hybrid of FPTP/proportional.


Mixed for sure. We already kind of have it when you think about it. 

Any CPC candidate in rural Alberta is akin to someone on a party list, same as a LPC candidate in Toronto or Montreal. Safe ridings=Party lists

So make it formalized, have regional representation and ridings for some MPs and party lists based on popular vote for others. 

Then I would actually need to vote for who I support and not walk into my ridings elections Canada building knowing who wins the riding before I cast a vote.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Oct 2021)

The whole underpinning of representative democracy - as opposed to the kind where everyone votes on everything - is that the representative is directly accountable to those represented.  So, no party lists.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> *Ignorance is not accepting that someone might actually vote differently *than you for a variety of reasons.


Negative.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The whole underpinning of representative democracy - as opposed to the kind where everyone votes on everything - is that the representative is directly accountable to those represented.  So, no party lists.


Not sure that is feasible in large democracies.  City politics sort of works that way.


----------



## Remius (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Mixed for sure. We already kind of have it when you think about it.
> 
> Any CPC candidate in rural Alberta is akin to someone on a party list, same as a LPC candidate in Toronto or Montreal. Safe ridings=Party lists
> 
> ...


So seats that would be dedicated FPTP type seats based regionally and a certain amount based on popular vote.  It’s sort of what I would prefer myself.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> So seats that would be dedicated FPTP type seats based regionally and a certain amount based on popular vote.  It’s sort of what I would prefer myself.


Best of both worlds. Lets people vote their conscience and allows for MP accountability to the regions they are elected.

But so long as 60 percent of ridings in Canada are considered safe ridings, and I live in one, I wont take my vote seriously, because it isn't.


----------



## lenaitch (13 Oct 2021)

Remius said:


> So seats that would be dedicated FPTP type seats based regionally and a certain amount based on popular vote.  It’s sort of what I would prefer myself.


So, much larger ridings, or a whole lot more politicians.  Maybe if we got rid of Senate I could get on board.

The one problem I have with PR is the creation of a block of MPs who's only direct constituency is their party (I realize people are rolling in the aisles at the though of riding MPs being accountable to their voters).  Where do these MPs come from?  Do I vote for them?

If nothing else, FPTP is simple for the average (unengaged?) voter to figure out.  You vote: the person with the most votes wins.  I remember when PR was proposed in Ontario the explanation and rules seemed akin to having to vote with my left hand during a full moon.  

I prefer ranked ballot myself.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Oct 2021)

Party list has a couple of variations.  Try to imagine politicians not selecting the one that allows a party to select people it wants to protect who could not win in a riding (ie. top of the list are "safe seats").


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

lenaitch said:


> So, much larger ridings, or a whole lot more politicians.  Maybe if we got rid of Senate I could get on board.
> 
> The one problem I have with PR is the creation of a block of MPs who's only direct constituency is their party (I realize people are rolling in the aisles at the though of riding MPs being accountable to their voters).  Where do these MPs come from?  Do I vote for them?
> 
> ...


There are party lists today. Parties parachute star candidates into "safe" ridings all the time.


----------



## lenaitch (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> There are party lists today. Parties parachute star candidates into "safe" ridings all the time.


For sure, but I get to participate in the final say. If a party wins x% of the popular vote, where to these folks come from.  Are they 'elected' or 'appointed'?


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

lenaitch said:


> For sure, but I get to participate in the final say. If a party wins x% of the popular vote, where to these folks come from.  Are they 'elected' or 'appointed'?


"participate"

Bow River
CON: Martin Shields -_*_35,435
PPC: Jonathan Bridges- 5,097
NDP: Michael MacLean-4,726
LIB: Getu Shawile-3,928
MAV: Orrin Bliss-1,362

Saint Laurent
LIB: Emmanuella Lambropoulos _*-_22,056
CON: Richard Serour-6,902
NDP: Nathan Devereaux-4,052
BQ: Florence Racicot-2,973
PPC: Gregory Yablunovsky-1,183

Avignon-La Mitis

BQ: Kristina Michaud _*-_19,776
LIB: Louis-Éric Savoie-7,095
CON: Germain Dumas-2,912
NDP: Christel Marchand-1,521
PPC: Eric Barnabé-969
FPC: Mélanie Gendron-826


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Oct 2021)

> Parties parachute star candidates into "safe" ridings all the time.



"star" is kind of an opposite to "could not get elected in a riding".  I don't care about leaders and other reasonably electable luminaries being dropped into ridings, where the voters still have a very specific say.  I would object to party functionaries being rewarded with top slots on a party list so they can accumulate 6 (or whatever) pensionable years.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> "star" is kind of an opposite to "could not get elected in a riding".  I don't care about leaders and other reasonably electable luminaries being dropped into ridings, where the voters still have a very specific say.  I would object to party functionaries being rewarded with top slots on a party list so they can accumulate 6 (or whatever) pensionable years.


its a distinction without a difference.


----------



## lenaitch (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> "participate"
> 
> Bow River
> CON: Martin Shields -_*_35,435
> ...


Well, ya.  Any of us are but a smidgeon of the 27.4Mn eligible.  I suppose our individual vote might seem more impactful if we had 1000 ridings.

I'm not getting what you are saying from the three ridings cited.  Are you trying to say that in each of them, the winner not only won the majority but also the popular vote.  Do they get two votes in the House?  Or are you saying that the losers should be reflected in a corresponding proportion of seats?  If so, I'm not getting the math you're trying to represent.

One other complication of PR is the BQ.  How would they apportion the popular vote since they only run candidates in - or care about - one province?


----------



## RangerRay (13 Oct 2021)

The chattering classes love to pump up PR, but anytime the people get to vote on it, they have rejected it.

Several years ago in BC, a hybrid PR/transferable vote system that retained local representation was put to referendum. I thought it sounded like a better system and voted for it, but it was narrowly defeated. Most people couldn’t understand it.

Four years later was another referendum on the same system, but the details were more fleshed out. They actually had a riding map with how many MLA’s each one received. I was shocked that rather than combine my central interior riding with the other one and having 2 MLA’s, my riding was going to encompass a quarter of the province with 7 MLA’s. There was no guarantee that my MLA would be from a community less than 3 hours drive from me. In other words, local representation was a farce under this system.   This time, I voted against it and it went down to a not so close defeat.

More recently, there was a referendum on straight PR. It also went down in overwhelming defeat.

Until those in favour of electoral reform can figure out a system that maintains local representation and is simple, FPTP isn’t going anywhere.

I remember hearing years ago that most Likud voters in Israel wanted to vote Likud but not for Bibi Netanyahu. However since he was at the top of the list, he was guaranteed to get elected.

Canada is a far more diverse country than Israel, and look the dogs’ breakfast that the Knesset is!


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Well, ya.  Any of us are but a smidgeon of the 27.4Mn eligible.  I suppose our individual vote might seem more impactful if we had 1000 ridings.



You could take a large part of rural alberta and mash it into one riding and not change a damn thing.


lenaitch said:


> I'm not getting what you are saying from the three ridings cited.  Are you trying to say that in each of them, the winner not only won the majority but also the popular vote.  Do they get two votes in the House?  Or are you saying that the losers should be reflected in a corresponding proportion of seats?  If so, I'm not getting the math you're trying to represent.


I'm saying a dead dog could get elected for the winning parties there, so say that we participate in what amounts to FPTP party lists is farcical 


lenaitch said:


> One other complication of PR is the BQ.  How would they apportion the popular vote since they only run candidates in - or care about - one province?


Quebec wouldn't be getting less seats, they would still be winning in regions and winning a percentage of the popular vote.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

RangerRay said:


> The chattering classes love to pump up PR, but anytime the people get to vote on it, they have rejected it.


True. Using FPTP to reinforce FPTP. No shit.


RangerRay said:


> Several years ago in BC, a hybrid PR/transferable vote system that retained local representation was put to referendum. I thought it sounded like a better system and voted for it, but it was narrowly defeated. Most people couldn’t understand it.


I maintain that legislature should change it, run it for 1 election and after that get people to pick the one they like best.



RangerRay said:


> More recently, there was a referendum on straight PR. It also went down in overwhelming defeat.


Straight PR is garbage.


RangerRay said:


> Until those in favour of electoral reform can figure out a system that maintains local representation and is simple, FPTP isn’t going anywhere.


If you use FPTP to rule on whether FPTP stays naturally you get FPTP.


RangerRay said:


> I remember hearing years ago that most Likud voters in Israel wanted to vote Likud but not for Bibi Netanyahu. However since he was at the top of the list, he was guaranteed to get elected.
> 
> Canada is a far more diverse country than Israel, and look the dogs’ breakfast that the Knesset is!


I love this argument.

Look everyone at the worst case scenario and imagine it happening here.

Meanwhile

Number of general elections since 1945-2017

Norway-Proportional-19

Germany-Proportional-19

Ireland-Proportional-19

France-Winner take all-19

Finland-Proportional-20

UK-Winner take all-20

Sweden-Proportional-21

Netherland-Proportional-22

Belgium-Proportional-22

Canada- Winner take all-23

Denmark-Proportional-27

Australia-Winner take all- 28


----------



## RangerRay (13 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> True. Using FPTP to reinforce FPTP. No shit.
> 
> If you use FPTP to rule on whether FPTP stays naturally you get FPTP.


Not sure what you mean by this. When you have a binary “yes” “no” vote, FPTP is a perfect system. 

The first referendum, while getting a majority provincially, did not get the required 60% for referenda to pass. Subsequent referenda were not even close, with a substantial majority voting against. 

Voters in other provinces have also rejected PR-type systems. 

In my opinion, one shouldn’t be radically changing the electoral system without giving the voters a say.   They would probably see it as a cynical ploy by the governing party to rig the system in their favour. 

Despite all the chin-wagging on the subject, the voters have stated loud and clear that they’re not interested.


----------



## Altair (13 Oct 2021)

RangerRay said:


> Not sure what you mean by this. When you have a binary “yes” “no” vote, FPTP is a perfect system.
> 
> The first referendum, while getting a majority provincially, did not get the required 60% for referenda to pass. Subsequent referenda were not even close, with a substantial majority voting against.
> 
> ...


I mean, I get it and its fine. FPTP isn't going anywhere. That's fine. I'll continue to treat my individual vote as the joke that it is. Or not vote. The system functions as designed either way.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Oct 2021)

> When you have a binary “yes” “no” vote, FPTP is a perfect system.



Sometimes the obvious eludes some people.  Maybe some kind of ranked vote should be adopted for such choices.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Maybe if we didn't have first past the post I would care about voting more in line with my actual beliefs.
> 
> But we do have first past the post. My LPC candidate was always going to get between 45 and 55 percent of the vote in my riding. So I might as well have some fun with my vote, ya?


I'm glad that you consider a vote on the direction our country is going to take is such a lark that you think your vote is a joke to amuse yourself with. Tell you what. You send me your registration card every election and I'll send you a ticket for Just for Laughs.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> I'm glad that you consider a vote on the direction our country is going to take is such a lark that you think your vote is a joke to amuse yourself with. Tell you what. You send me your registration card every election and I'll send you a ticket for Just for Laughs.


Yes, it is a joke. Either the candidate in my riding wins by 21,603 votes or 21,604 votes. Oh boy, have I ever made a difference.

 And if its a joke, why not get a laugh out of it? PPC to the moooon


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Oct 2021)

lenaitch said:


> One other complication of PR is the BQ.  How would they apportion the popular vote since they only run candidates in - or care about - one province?



Finally their vote percentage would be  accurately reflected in parliament.  

They are an obstructionist party who's sole goal is the disruption of our legislative and executive branches.  I would argue they are a reason our governments are so ineffective. 

I never understood federal separatist parties.  They should be kept at the provincial level.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Finally their vote percentage would be  accurately reflected in parliament.
> 
> They are an obstructionist party who's sole goal is the disruption of our legislative and executive branches.  I would argue they are a reason our governments are so ineffective.
> 
> I never understood federal separatist parties.  They should be kept at the provincial level.


Mixed Member Proportional, MMP would not see any provinces get less seats.

The regional seats, even if halfed, would likely still have have the bloc getting around 1/3 of of available seats, so around 16 as opposed to 32.

Of the PR seats allocated they would be getting 32 percent instead of the 41 percent that FPTP gets them, so 12-13.

So the bloc goes from 32 seats to 28-29

In other words, MMP doesn't kill the bloc as a political force.

It would also similarly shrink the LPC

Their regional wins would remain the the same range, so 35 seats goes to 17.5 and their PR portion would be based on their 33.2 percentage of the popular vote, so 13 seats.

The LPC goes from 35 seats in FPTP to 30-31

Biggest winners are PPC getting 1 seat via PR and the NDP getting 5 seats,4 via PR  1 via regional, and the CPC getting 12 seats, 5 via regional, 7 via PR.

Final Quebec results under MMP

LPC 31

BQ 29

CPC 12

NDP 5

PPC 1

Compared to FPTP

LPC 35

BQ 32

CPC 10

NDP 1

So MMP leaves the bloc as a force with more representation from the PPC, NDP and CPC. Tell me that isn't more fair and representative.

As for party lists, simply give the losing candidates who got the highest percentage of the popular vote in the province the they ran in the spots. There. Solved our elections.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Oct 2021)

FPTP is the most fair, in that it gives every candidate the same theoretical chance of election out of the gate. PR would disadvantage small parties and independents as they would likely not accumulate the required number of votes to be awarded a seat.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> FPTP is the most fair, in that it gives every candidate the same theoretical chance of election out of the gate. PR would disadvantage small parties and independents as they would likely not accumulate the required number of votes to be awarded a seat.


Of course, we wouldn't want to go from 0 independents and small parties elected under FPTP to the 0 independents and small parties elected under MMP


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Oct 2021)

You're focusing on the outcome, not the opportunity.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> You're focusing on the outcome, not the opportunity.


It's a distinction without a difference


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Oct 2021)

How is participating in a system where you might be successful, the same as participating in a system where you won't be successful?


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> How is participating in a system where you might be successful, the same as participating in a system where you won't be successful?


It's the same picture.

Are Independents elected in any significant numbers? Who was the last? JWR? And she was a former cabinet minister with a massive profile.

So yes, of course, let's keep the same system in place that takes the boots to actual small parties like the greens, NDP and PPC for the off chance a Independent wins a riding one of these days, making up all of 0.002 percent of Parliament.

Fair my ass.

MMP, independents can still win a local riding, it would just be harder because the ridings would be bigger. But they aren't winning right now anyways so I don't really see a difference.

The pros outweighs the cons you bring up.


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Oct 2021)

Yes, equality of opportunity is so unfair.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Yes, equality of opportunity is so unfair.


If you are a fan of the system that had the LPC 16k votes  in the right places away from a majority government while winning just over 32 percent of the popular vote, have at it.

You're the lucky one. FPTP isn't going anywhere.

But don't give me the "think of the independents" thing, I'm not buying it. Would MMP reduce independents chances of winning? Yes. It would go from a 0.002 percent chance of seeing an independent winning a seat in parliament to 0.001 percent chance of seeing an independent winning a seat in parliament.


----------



## Altair (14 Oct 2021)

Food for though on FPTP

Liberals needed 10 more seats to hit 170.

1
Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headingley

CPC 17,336-LPC 17,312=34

2
NL
Coast of Bays-Central-Notre Dame

CPC 14,925-LPC 14,661= 264

3
Châteauguay-Lacolle

BQ 18,368-LPC 17,762=602

4
King-Vaughan

CPC 22,529-LPC 21,457=1022

5
Longueuil-Saint-Hubert

BQ 23,579-LPC 21,930=1,649

6
South Surrey-White Rock

CPC 24,176-LPC 22,164=2,012

7
Edmonton Mill Woods

CPC 18,248- LPC 16,499=1,749

8
South Shore-St. Margarets

CPC 20,444- LPC 18,527=1,917

9
Peterborough-Kawartha

CPC 27,301-LPC 24,564=2,737

10
Niagara Falls

CPC 23,650-LPC 23,650=3,160

34+264+602+1,022+1,649 +2,012+1,749+1,917 +2,737+3,160= 15,146 to tie the winner of these riding. 1 more each to win it.

15156 votes away from 170 seats. All the LPC technically needed was their percentage of the popular vote to go from 32.6 to 32.7 and they are in government for 4 years. And don't think for a second the LPC doesn't know this. They will be targeting these ridings with everything they have next election.

FPTP. Fair. Ha.


----------



## RangerRay (14 Oct 2021)

Some analysis that suggests the PPC didn’t significantly affect the Tories. 









						Matt Gurney: The PPC surge was real, but it didn't hurt O'Toole (at least not much)
					

The PPC's rise is worth studying on its own merits, as a political and social movement. But it wasn't an election spoiler.




					theline.substack.com


----------



## McG (14 Oct 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> FPTP is the most fair, in that it gives every candidate the same theoretical chance of election out of the gate.


Should “fair” be measured from the perspective of candidates competing for office, or from the perspective of voters who want to be represented in parliament?


----------



## ModlrMike (15 Oct 2021)

I would think the two are the same, if measured from "could" be represented perspective.


----------



## Altair (15 Oct 2021)

Opinion | We’re about to find out how many new seats there will be in Parliament. Then the fighting starts
					

On Friday, Elections Canada will announce the number of new seats each province will be allocated in the House of Commons, Althia Raj writes.




					www.thestar.com
				




New seats!

Fun!

I know Alberta is due to get more, lets see how the rest break down


----------



## Altair (15 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> Opinion | We’re about to find out how many new seats there will be in Parliament. Then the fighting starts
> 
> 
> On Friday, Elections Canada will announce the number of new seats each province will be allocated in the House of Commons, Althia Raj writes.
> ...


So Alberta gets 3 more seats, Ontario gets 1, BC gets 1,Quebec loses 1.

So

ON-122

QC-77

BC-43

AB-37

MB-14

SK-14

NS-11

NB-10

NL-7

PE-4

YK-1

NT-1

NV-1

Total=342


----------



## Altair (16 Oct 2021)

Federal Politics: Three-in-five Canadians would have preferred outcome of election held using proportional distribution - Angus Reid Institute
					

Majority of each party’s voter base say their leaders should maintain position heading into next election October 15, 2021 – In an election where little changed, Canadians have been left




					angusreid.org
				






> For many, the election result would have provided more satisfaction had it been under a different seat allocation method. When shown the seat distribution under first-past-the-post (FPTP)  proportional representation (PR) systems, three-in-five (61%) say they preferred the hypothetical makeup of the House under the latter.
> 
> 
> Although a majority of Canadians (61%) would prefer the outcome of the 2021 election were it held under a proportional representation system, there are clear partisan differences. A majority of Liberal (70%) and Bloc Québécois (55%) supporters say they prefer the current seat distribution, compared with eight-in-ten CPC (78%) and NDP (80%) voters who say they prefer the opposite.



3 of 5 Canadians like PR more than FPTP and that's just with a binary FPTP vs PR and not a better system like MMP which merges the two.

But let's stick with FPTP. Why not.


----------



## The Bread Guy (16 Oct 2021)

Altair said:


> 3 of 5 Canadians like PR more than FPTP ....


Based on Angus Reid, 3 out of 5 _would have liked the results _the other system would have led to, not necessarily the other system. 

People wanting a different result =/= people wanting a different way of doing things. I notice the question "what system of election do you prefer?" wasn't asked on this round.

Although the 3/5 want a different mix speaks volumes.


----------



## Altair (16 Oct 2021)

The Bread Guy said:


> Based on Angus Reid, 3 out of 5 _would have liked the results _the other system would have led to, not necessarily the other system.
> 
> People wanting a different result =/= people wanting a different way of doing things. I notice the question "what system of election do you prefer?" wasn't asked on this round.
> 
> Although the 3/5 want a different mix speaks volumes.


A fair point.

As you said though, 3/5 liking the results of PR does speak volumes.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Oct 2021)

How the left sees the new Cabinet 








						Trudeau's no longer waiting for Alberta to get the memo on climate change
					

If there's one clear message to come out of Trudeau's latest cabinet announcement, it's that Ottawa is preparing to press ahead on climate change, writes columnist Max Fawcett.




					www.nationalobserver.com
				




_The recent federal election may have returned a status quo Parliament, but the government’s new cabinet is anything but. Veteran ministers Marc Garneau and Jim Carr are out, new faces like Kamal Khera and Sean Fraser are in, and rising stars like Anita Anand and Mélanie Joly have been promoted into higher-profile positions on the government’s front bench. But if there’s one message that emerges most clearly from this changing of the guard, it’s that the Trudeau government is preparing to press ahead on climate change._


----------



## dapaterson (27 Oct 2021)

If rumours of Garneau being named as Ambassador to France pan out, it creates an opening for a star candidate in a safe Liberal riding in the resulting byelection.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Oct 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> How the left sees the new Cabinet
> 
> 
> 
> ...



'Green Jesus'.... he's coming for you Alberta 



Bell: Trudeau's Green Jesus on offence, Kenney scrambles in scandal​

The man once tagged as the Green Jesus of Montreal flogs his full-out fight against climate change undisturbed by a battered, bruised and unpopular Alberta government.

Steven Guilbeault, a.k.a. The Green Jesus of Montreal, so nicknamed by a newspaper in that city, a pull-out-all-the-stops green warrior, is a big man in our world.

He is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s new point man on the environment and climate change.

This is the dude who scaled Toronto’s CN Tower to hang a banner declaring Canada and former U.S. prez George W. Bush climate killers.

This is the dude who was part of a Greenpeace stunt to get up on the roof of then-premier Ralph Klein’s house in Calgary and hang signs and put on solar panels, succeeding in getting a lot of free ink for the cause.

This is the dedicated soldier against pipelines and Alberta oil.

This is a guy Premier Jason Kenney thinks might bring in a radical agenda causing mass unemployment. So the premier tells us Tuesday.











						Bell: Trudeau's Green Jesus on offence, Kenney scrambles in scandal
					

It is clear Trudeau and his folks consider they hold a much better hand than Kenney, who's clearly floundering.




					calgarysun.com


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Oct 2021)

McG said:


> Should “fair” be measured from the perspective of candidates competing for office, or from the perspective of voters who want to be represented in parliament?


That would also depend on whether voters want a certain _individual_ representing their "in their backyard" interests in the House versus whether voters want to pick the _party_ that steers the ship until the next election. Some critics of FPTP say you get the former, but not the latter.


----------



## QV (29 Oct 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> 'Green Jesus'.... he's coming for you Alberta
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What they do to Alberta will have a detrimental effect nationwide. One of these days most people will finally get that.


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Oct 2021)

In other news, BoC has been talking about 3 rate hikes next year, and energy prices are one of the militating factors.

Good news for people with mortgages.


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Oct 2021)

QV said:


> What they do to Alberta will have a detrimental effect nationwide. One of these days most people will finally get that.



The narrative seems pretty straightforward, and potentially explosively divisive:

Hub Explainer: Alberta’s $600-billion federal contribution leaves fairness in the eye of the beholder​The feds raise more revenue from taxpayers in Alberta than elsewhere and also spends less

“Today our country is facing a national unity crisis,” said Conservative Party of Canada leader Erin O’Toole during an early July speech in Alberta. “It’s time for the unfairness to end. Since 1967, Albertans have contributed more than $600 billion to the rest of Canada … [and] even as your economy suffered with massive reductions in resource revenues, you as Albertans continued to pay more than your fair share.” 

Provincial leaders in Alberta couldn’t agree more. “Alberta has been the engine of Canada’s prosperity in recent decades,” said Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney in a July 15 press conference. “We have contributed through our federal taxes over $600 billion to the rest of Canada… but what we find very frustrating is a system that finds us contributing on average $20 billion a year net through our federal taxes to other provinces even while we have been living through a prolonged recession.” 










						Alberta’s $600-billion federal contribution leaves fairness in the eye of the beholder - The Hub
					

Concerns around federal redistribution are neither new nor unique to Alberta conservatives. Grievances like these even pre-date Canada.




					thehub.ca


----------



## Jarnhamar (30 Oct 2021)

Know who doesn't look crazy? Our minister of environment and climate change.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Oct 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Know who doesn't look crazy? Our minister of environment and climate change.
> 
> View attachment 66942



Now, where have I seen that look before? Oh, I know....


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Oct 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> In other news, BoC has been talking about 3 rate hikes next year, and energy prices are one of the militating factors.
> 
> Good news for people with mortgages.


I don't know of any big projects that have started in the West since Bill C-69 came into force in 2019, the north of the Province is running on the projects approved under the CPC time and still under construction.


----------



## daftandbarmy (1 Nov 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I don't know of any big projects that have started in the West since Bill C-69 came into force in 2019, the north of the Province is running on the projects approved under the CPC time and still under construction.



I follow the fortunes of the ill fated LNG industry in BC.

It's a sad tale of continually dashed hopes. They've got some staying power though... very plucky chaps!


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Nov 2021)

The Asian countries can always burn coal in their thermal plants.  The important thing is that BC shaves off some fraction of total global CO2 emissions several places to the right of a decimal point.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Nov 2021)

Yes i am hoping that if LNG Canada succeeds, it will invigorate someone to revive one of the projects. At one point I was reviewing 9 LNG projects simultaneously. In fact in Prince Rupert we arranged it so the Working Group sat for a day while 3 different proponents presented their project for the local area all in the same day.
Just one project (PNW LNG) alone was 36 Billion dollars.


----------



## Altair (1 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The Asian countries can always burn coal in their thermal plants.  The important thing is that BC shaves off some fraction of total global CO2 emissions several places to the right of a decimal point.


Must be hard to vote come election time when every party in parliament supports a carbon tax.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Must be hard to vote come election time when every party in parliament supports a carbon tax.


I suspect no more difficult than someone voting for a party after stating the party is full of bad people and they're glad the party fizzled out.


----------



## Altair (1 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I suspect no more difficult than someone voting for a party after stating the party is full of bad people and they're glad the party fizzled out.


My opinion on the PPC has changed and I am most happy they are around getting around 5 percent of the vote


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Nov 2021)

> Must be hard to vote come election time when every party in parliament supports a carbon tax.



Every party has foolish planks.  The aim of emissions mitigation is to reduce global emissions, not necessarily local emissions.


----------



## Altair (2 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Every party has foolish planks.  The aim of emissions mitigation is to reduce global emissions, not necessarily local emissions.


You're right.

I fully support PM Trudeau in calling for taxes added on to products produced in countries with no carbon tax.


----------



## Brad Sallows (2 Nov 2021)

Yeah, you and all like you win the virtue war.  Enjoy the feeling; it's all you're going to get.

He might as well call for magical transmutation of methane to dollar bills.  Apparently the US hit its reduction target for 2025 sometime last year (ie. 5 years early), substantially on exploiting natural gas.  Whatever is going on at the conference is wishful thinking.   It's fortunate there isn't really a crisis.


----------



## YZT580 (2 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yeah, you and all like you win the virtue war.  Enjoy the feeling; it's all you're going to get.
> 
> He might as well call for magical transmutation of methane to dollar bills.  Apparently the US hit its reduction target for 2025 sometime last year (ie. 5 years early), substantially on exploiting natural gas.  Whatever is going on at the conference is wishful thinking.   It's fortunate there isn't really a crisis.


not here maybe but other countries aren't so lucky.  A few days of minus five and calm wind conditions this winter and England is in for a whole lot of hurt


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

That's not a climate crisis; that's a politically-engineered crisis.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's not a climate crisis; that's a politically-engineered crisis.


When you have some virtue-signaling politicians pretend to take cold showers for a few days while a few Exawatts of power in global reserve circulation daily, it’s definitely politically engineered.


----------



## daftandbarmy (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> When you have some virtue-signaling politicians pretend to take cold showers for a few days while a few Exawatts of power in global reserve circulation daily, it’s definitely politically engineered.



I guess Russia and China left the bath running. No matter, a good old self-righteous scolding by the 'Leader of the World of Free' should help, right?

COP26: Biden attacks China and Russia leaders for missing summit​
In a speech on Tuesday night, Mr Biden said climate was "a gigantic issue" and China "walked away" - adding it was the "same thing with Russia and Putin".

Neither Russian President Vladimir Putin nor Chinese leader Xi Jinping are at the summit.

Both countries however have sent delegations to the talks, which are due to run for two weeks until 14 November.

China is the world's largest emitter of carbon dioxide, followed by the US. Russia is the fifth largest after the EU and India.

More than 120 leaders turned up at the conference in Scotland's largest city.











						COP26: Biden attacks China and Russia leaders for missing summit
					

The US president calls the Chinese leader's absence from the Glasgow summit a "big mistake".



					www.bbc.com


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yeah, you and all like you win the virtue war.  Enjoy the feeling; it's all you're going to get.
> 
> He might as well call for magical transmutation of methane to dollar bills.  Apparently the US hit its reduction target for 2025 sometime last year (ie. 5 years early), substantially on exploiting natural gas.  Whatever is going on at the conference is wishful thinking.   It's fortunate there isn't really a crisis.


Oh, of course pumping carbon into the atmosphere faster than it can be filtered out will have no consequences on the environment,  on climate and on rising temperatures. 

Of course, what are those silly scientists thinking. All the carbon just magically disappears with no ill effects. Doesn't contribute to the warming of the planet at all.

But of course, if it does, it's all china's fault.

But thankfully it's not china's fault because it isn't really a crisis.

/sarcasm.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Oh, of course pumping carbon into the atmosphere faster than it can be filtered out will have no consequences on the environment,  on climate and on rising temperatures.
> 
> Of course, what are those silly scientists thinking. All the carbon just magically disappears with no ill effects. Doesn't contribute to the warming of the planet at all.
> 
> ...


 
Funny enough the people who think that climate armageddon is upon us are a mirror image of what you scorn above. Nothing is China's fault somehow, and crushing Canadians under new taxes to reduce our negligible (in the global context) carbon emissions is going to somehow save the world.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Funny enough the people who think that climate armageddon is upon us are a mirror image of what you scorn above. Nothing is China's fault somehow, and crushing Canadians under new taxes to reduce our negligible (in the global context) carbon emissions is going to somehow save the world.


You forgot tp mention while flying around in planes designed to hold 100's of passengers......


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Funny enough the people who think that climate armageddon is upon us are a mirror image of what you scorn above.


Maybe, but at least they acknowledge the problem.

not say things like "there isn't really a crisis"


LittleBlackDevil said:


> Nothing is China's fault somehow,


China has a very big role to play, but to lay it all at their feet is to ignore the fact that the west spent the last 150 years of the industrial revolution to cement their place in the first world and subsidize our high standards of living with high carbon output per capita and simply telling others too bad, so sad, we are ahead now and we will implement these climate restrictions so that you can never catch up won't lead to a global consensus that everyone can agree on.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> and crushing Canadians under new taxes to reduce our negligible (in the global context) carbon emissions is going to somehow save the world.


"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.”

~Edmund Burke

Canada has always been a middle power. That didn't stop us from participating in WW1 or WW2. It didn't stop us from playing a part in Afghanistan. Were we more than 2 percent of allied soldiers at the time?* That didn't mean we didn't do our part.

This fallacy that we should do nothing because we are small is such hogwash. How dare we ask others, including China to stop their emmision growth if we cannot do it ourselves? What kind of next level hypocrisy is that? Or to put it another way, how can we a first world nation with the technological and fiscal capacity to go more green ask the developing world in China, India, to some extent Russia, to cut their emmisions if we cannot with every advantage we have?

Will Canada save the world by itself? No, we never have, and likely never will. Should we do our part to collaboratively save the world? We always have and we always should.

* some arse is going to drag out that we had the 3rd largest navy after ww2 to which I say sure, but our army was still puny in comparison to everyone else so my point is still valid.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> Oh, of course pumping carbon into the atmosphere faster than it can be filtered out will have no consequences on the environment,  on climate and on rising temperatures.



Of course it has consequences.

A warmer climate will most likely be a net benefit.  Longer growing seasons, more precipitation (more water vapour, which can't just hang around in the sky indefinitely - it circulates).  Also, more CO2 is good for plants.  Deforested and de-vegetated lands will recover more quickly.

We are living during an interglacial (period between massive glaciations) of an ice age.  A warmer climate might be a helpful buffer to stall the resumption of extensive glaciation.

All the bullshit from people clamouring because they are suffering from erosion, land subsidence, water shortages, etc due to mismanagement of land and waters has to be squarely set aside under "politically engineered crises".  Then the pros and cons of whatever is left over can reasonably be debated.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> simply telling others too bad, so sad, we are ahead now and we will implement these climate restrictions so that you can never catch up



Yes, but we should help them to burn cleaner fuels (eg. LNG) instead of giving ourselves an economic wedgie and militating true global emissions reduction.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Of course it has consequences.


So you do see that carbon emmisions have an effect, good.


Brad Sallows said:


> A warmer climate will most likely be a net benefit.


oh boy, not really.


Brad Sallows said:


> Longer growing seasons,


with less rain.


Brad Sallows said:


> more precipitation (more water vapour, which can't just hang around in the sky indefinitely - it circulates).


One of the sad things about increased global temperatures is the melting of glaciers and snow peaks on mountains, which usually filter into rivers and underground aquifers.

Now with lower temperatures these used to bounce back every cold season or winter , but not so much anymore. It's going to lead to a lot more of the water that should be stored inland ending up in rivers flowing into the ocean. As you know, water in the ocean does little good for people living inland. It also does little good for people living closer to the oceans. Increased sea levels threatens to completely submerge cities, island nations, and a large amount of low lying areas of the globe. Netherlands, Florida,  New Orleans, Virginia, New York city, the Po Valley of Italy, including Venice, Bangladesh,  the Mekong delta of Vietnam and Myanmar, the yellow river valley of China, the Nile River delta,all are around sea level.

So unless you think needing to find New homes for 1 billion people is a net benefit to humanity....


Brad Sallows said:


> Also, more CO2 is good for plants.  Deforested and de-vegetated lands will recover more quickly.


Good for the plants, but they already have enough carbon. It's like giving someone stuffed at dinner a 4th course. It doesn't do them much good.


Brad Sallows said:


> We are living during an interglacial (period between massive glaciations) of an ice age.  A warmer climate might be a helpful buffer to stall the resumption of extensive glaciation.


A lot of the world's glaciers are dying as we speak. The same glaciers that fuel our rivers.


Brad Sallows said:


> All the bullshit from people clamouring because they are suffering from erosion, land subsidence, water shortages, etc due to mismanagement of land and waters has to be squarely set aside under "politically engineered crises".  Then the pros and cons of whatever is left over can reasonably be debated.


The world gets warmer, the droughts get worse, rivers and lakes dry up as glaciers melt away, sea levels rise, lowland regions get flooded and submerges, longer and more deadly heat waves, and warmer water leads to more destructive hurricanes and storms.

What is good about any of that?


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes, but we should help them to burn cleaner fuels (eg. LNG) instead of giving ourselves an economic wedgie and militating true global emissions reduction.


And then China takes our LNG, opens more factories, pollutes even more  and when we complain their emmisions haven't gone down, they point at us and say ours have not either, and humanity suffers.

Good plan.

As someone who wants a habitable planet for the 50 or so years I may have left and for the 80 or so years my children may have, this plan is not so great, but for the economy of LNG producing nations its going to be a great few decades before climate change really kicks into gear and causes massive social upheaval


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> You forgot tp mention while flying around in planes designed to hold 100's of passengers......


Oh, the beauty of focusing on the miniscule amount of emissions from world leaders flying to a climate summit to deal with the far more troubling 99.999 percent of emissions humanity creates.

I guess if they didn't fly to the climate summit climate change would be solved overnight.

Just asinine.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> with less rain.



More heat in the atmosphere causes more water to evaporate at the boundary between water and atmosphere.  Increased evaporation increases the mass of water vapour in the atmosphere.  Because the atmosphere is not already saturated, the net mass of water vapour can increase.  Water vapour will not magically adopt a pattern of evenly distributing itself so that it does not locally saturate more frequently.  When water vapour concentrations reach saturation, precipitation occurs.  More water vapour mass in the atmosphere means more local pockets of saturation, hence precipitation (rain).

Don't confuse "heat" with "desert".  Desertification occurs where there is little or no precipitation.  A desert can be a very cold place as well as a very hot one.


----------



## QV (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Of course it has consequences.
> 
> A warmer climate will most likely be a net benefit.  Longer growing seasons, more precipitation (more water vapour, which can't just hang around in the sky indefinitely - it circulates).  Also, more CO2 is good for plants.  Deforested and de-vegetated lands will recover more quickly.
> 
> ...


You would have to be paying attention to history to understand warmer climates are more beneficial to life, just as during periods of global cooling the world saw widespread famine and disease.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> Increased sea levels threatens to completely submerge



Sea level increase has two primary causes: increase of water volume (for which the source is ice), and land subsidence.  The estimates of sea level rise due to loss of ice caps that I come across consistently report 2 to 3 mm per year.  Estimates of land subsidence I've read range from a few mm to amounts exceeding 10 cm.  Higher numbers tend to be found in regions where people are drawing water out of the ground faster than it is replaced.  More rainfall due to atmospheric warming can mitigate some of that, but not all of it.  Cities at risk are in that predicament because they draw too much water out of the ground or out of the rivers that supply the large river delta cities, complicated by erosion due to man-made interruption of natural soil replenishment patterns.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> More heat in the atmosphere causes more water to evaporate at the boundary between water and atmosphere.  Increased evaporation increases the mass of water vapour in the atmosphere.  Because the atmosphere is not already saturated, the net mass of water vapour can increase.  Water vapour will not magically adopt a pattern of evenly distributing itself so that it does not locally saturate more frequently.  When water vapour concentrations reach saturation, precipitation occurs.  More water vapour mass in the atmosphere means more local pockets of saturation, hence precipitation (rain).
> 
> Don't confuse "heat" with "desert".  Desertification occurs where there is little or no precipitation.  A desert can be a very cold place as well as a very hot one.


And don't confuse storms with rain.

You're right that there will be increased evaporation. That will fuel storms. Coastal regions in storm tracks will get increased precipitation.  That does little for a farmer in Kansas or Saskatchewan. 

And there is also the fact that we don't know if places will get more rain overall or just the same amount of rain faster. If that's the case, we have more flooding, and over saturation.

I also like how you ignored every other negative that goes with increased global temperatures to say "but more rain"


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> The same glaciers that fuel our rivers.



Glaciers are just temporary storage.  Ultimately, it's precipitation and ground water that feed rivers.  More rainfall due to increased atmospheric warming will increase net water flows.  Yes, that will mean more flooding.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> Good for the plants, but they already have enough carbon.



Generally, plants in resource-rich areas thrive more than plants in resource-poor areas.  Higher atmospheric concentrations of CO2 mean more rapid and healthier plant growth.  This is useful for reforestation, re-vegetation, and agriculture.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Glaciers are just temporary storage.  Ultimately, it's precipitation and ground water that feed rivers.  More rainfall due to increased atmospheric warming will increase net water flows.  Yes, that will mean more flooding.


Incorrect.









						Learn
					

Quick facts, basic science, and information about snow, ice, and why the cryosphere matters The cryosphere includes all of the snow and ice-covered regions across the planet.




					nsidc.org
				






> Glacier retreat, melt, and ablation result from increasing temperature, evaporation, and wind scouring. Ablation is a natural and seasonal part of glacier life. As long as snow accumulation equals or is greater than melt and ablation, a glacier will remain in balance or even grow. Once winter snowfall decreases, or summer melt increases, the glacier will begin to retreat. Some biological processes, such as microbes on the surface of a glacier, can reduce the glacier's ability to reflect sunlight back into space. These bioalbedo processes can hasten glacier retreat.



It's telling that glaciers have been around in more or less constant form until the last 100 years or so, when they have all started to retreat. Since the ice age until recently. From 11700 years ago until the last 100 years.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> The world gets warmer



Yes.



> the droughts get worse



Occasionally locally, yes, but on net, no.



> rivers and lakes dry up as glaciers melt away



Occasionally locally, yes, but on net, no.



> sea levels rise



Yes, but cities at risk will be fucked by poor land use long before they could potentially be fucked by sea level rise due to ice melt.



> more destructive hurricanes and storms.



Increased atmospheric heat retention == increased energy, so yes,  potentially more energetic events.  However, the cost of "destructive" depends on what people are building and where.  The problem with destructive weather events is that people persist in building in high-risk locations.  When a bunch of shoreline millionaires lose their mansions, it's not a tragedy.  The "destruction" could be reduced by removing incentives to build in risky areas, by not subsidizing losses.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Generally, plants in resource-rich areas thrive more than plants in resource-poor areas.  Higher atmospheric concentrations of CO2 mean more rapid and healthier plant growth.  This is useful for reforestation, re-vegetation, and agriculture.


This is great news for plants.

The rising temperatures are not great for humanity and many ecosystems.

And I don't think plants are exactly starving for carbon.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> Incorrect.



No, I'm entirely correct.  Glaciers are just accumulated precipitation.

I appreciate that you work so hard at being obtuse, because it gives me an opportunity to preach some facts and ideas for the benefit of others who might usefully absorb the information, assuming they are not so zealously ignorant because of their politics.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yes.


Yes.


Brad Sallows said:


> Occasionally locally, yes, but on net, no.


Hotter temperatures lead to increased evaporation,  which leads to dryer soil, which does play a part in more droughts.

You keep saying more rain, but that rain isn't going to be equally distributed across the globe.


Brad Sallows said:


> Occasionally locally, yes, but on net, no.


Up to 50 percent of some rivers are glacier melt. Take away the glaciers, and rivers have up to 50 percent less water flowing through them. 


Brad Sallows said:


> Yes, but cities at risk will be fucked by poor land use long before they could potentially be fucked by sea level rise due to ice melt.


The two compound the issue.


Brad Sallows said:


> Increased atmospheric heat retention == increased energy, so yes,  potentially more energetic events.  However, the cost of "destructive" depends on what people are building and where.  The problem with destructive weather events is that people persist in building in high-risk locations.  When a bunch of shoreline millionaires lose their mansions, it's not a tragedy.  The "destruction" could be reduced by removing incentives to build in risky areas, by not subsidizing losses.


I like how you equate all low lying areas as shoreline millionaires.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> No, I'm entirely correct.  Glaciers are just accumulated precipitation.
> 
> I appreciate that you work so hard at being obtuse, because it gives me an opportunity to preach some facts and ideas for the benefit of others who might usefully absorb the information, assuming they are not so zealously ignorant because of their politics.


They are accumulated precipitation, but they are not temporary.

Glacier mass has been more or less constant for millennial, only melting at this rate due to the increase in global temperatures.

And while you're right that that precipitation will occur regardless, precipitation is not constant, so rivers will dry up some without glaciers constantly feeding them. Around 1/3 of the world's rivers do not have enough continental runoff to continue without glacier melt.

Now let's say we take away 1/3 of humans water supply, to say nothing of the ecosystems involved. How would you say thats not a crisis?

How can you even say that's poor planning? Rivers that existed for thousands of years suddenly go dry, how does one plan for that? 

The rise in global temperatures should be slowed down and stopped, as soon as possible without throwing us back into the stone age. 1.5 degrees is the best bet. 2 degrees is bad, but manageable(expensive)

2.7+ if humanity does nothing and continues as if it's not a problem will lead to massive problems that we are not at all prepared to deal with.

And this shouldn't be political. We should be treating this as if we noticed a comet coming to smack into earth. If we noticed a comet coming to smack into earth we wouldn't be be talking about the politics of letting it happen or not, if it was real or not, the benefits of it or the cons, or it being a left versus right thing, we would be focused on saving the planet as we know it, and we wouldn't care much about the costs.

This is a slow moving disaster but a disaster none the less.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

Stop peddling hysterical suppositions and bullshit as if they were real threats.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Stop peddling hysterical suppositions and bullshit as if they were real threats.


It's not hypothetical.

Glaciers that have been around since the end of the ice age are disappearing. That's a fact.

Glaciers feed rivers. That's a fact.

1/3rd of the world's rivers do not have enough continental runoff to survive without glaciers. That's a fact.

Global temperatures are continuing to rise at an increasing pace. That's a fact.

Increasing global temperatures bring with it climate change. That's a fact.

CO2 Emissions contribute to the warming of the planet. That's a fact.

The warming of the planet has negative consequences for billions of people. That's a fact.

We should be doing whatever we can to lower emissions and slow the warming of the planet. Not a fact, but just an obvious course of action.

I know am asking much considering the members of one of the parties in parliament cannot even come to the conclusion that climate change is real, but at least 64 percent of the seats allocated to parliament belong to a party that does believe climate change is real.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

The catastrophes that you imagine (that will not actually happen) can't be mitigated anyways by the inadequate policies that you insist on adhering to.  Stop worrying.


----------



## QV (3 Nov 2021)

When you say "climate change" you're playing games and so are the politicians. Of course the climate is changing, it always has and always will. 

When you say glaciers have been receding, yes they have slightly ever since we left the Little Ice Age about 400 years ago.

This is a manufactured crisis.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The catastrophes that you imagine (that will not actually happen) can't be mitigated anyways by the inadequate policies that you insist on adhering to.  Stop worrying.


The catastrophes that scientists are saying may come to pass can be mitigated by reducing emissions. Reducing emissions slows the rate at which the planet is heating up.  As for current policies, globally, they may just do the job. But that's so long as everyone works together to make it happen. Which is why global summits like COP26 happen. If they don't, and the scientists are correct, we are in for a world of hurt. So I fully support policies like the carbon tax, and I think its a good idea to start imposing extra costs on those who do not put a price on carbon themselves. Especially if the EU is on board, and it sounds like they may be, putting a minimum price on carbon globally may force other nations to address their carbon output or find their economies suffer from other countries putting addition taxes on what they produce. 

Its a good idea to bring the fight to bring down emissions to the global stage. Far better than you're do nothing or forget our emissions, our emissions are fine, lets just focus on everyone else emissions, those are the bad emissions and of course not every country is going to take the same outlook as that, of course not, "plan".


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> When you say "climate change" you're playing games and so are the politicians. Of course the climate is changing, it always has and always will.
> 
> When you say glaciers have been receding, yes they have slightly ever since we left the Little Ice Age about 400 years ago.
> 
> ...


Oh yes, of course, another one of the humans pumping trillions of tons of CO2 into the air for the past 100 years has had no effect on things, this is just what the planet does, all that carbon just gets turned into fairy dust using magic, crowd.


----------



## QV (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Oh yes, of course, another one of the humans pumping trillions of tons of CO2 into the air for the past 100 years has had no effect on things, this is just what the planet does, all that carbon just gets turned into fairy dust using magic, crowd.


How much does one volcano emit?

But I see you subscribe to the "if I raise taxes I can change the earth's climate" group.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> dare we ask others, including China to stop their emmision growth if we cannot do it ourselves? What kind of next level hypocrisy is that? Or to put it another way, how can we a first world nation with the technological and fiscal capacity to go more green ask the developing world in China, India, to some extent Russia, to cut their emmisions if we cannot with every advantage we have?



Conversely, I'd argue that it is "next level hypocrisy" to crush our own citizens while requiring China to do nothing. China's emissions continue to go up. Worse than that, we subsidize their increased carbon footprint by shipping raw materials over there, where they use their coal-burning energy to turn into things like solar panels, which are then shipped back and this is then somehow "green energy".

I am honestly on the fence whether the whole climate thing is a legitimate and immediate danger or not. The actions of our leaders makes me wonder whether they even believe what they are saying.

Personally my objection is less over whether climate change exists. It's about the fact that the measures taken do very little other than impoverish those citizens of our own least able to afford increased heating and fuel costs, while the rich and Chinese are not impacted in the least.



Altair said:


> Will Canada save the world by itself? No, we never have, and likely never will. Should we do our part to collaboratively save the world? We always have and we always should.



I don't think the WW2 analogy is necessarily accurate though. It's more like a situation where Canada and other minor/middle powers are expected to fight and win the war on their own.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> How much does one volcano emit?
> 
> But I see you subscribe to the "if I raise taxes I can change the earth's climate" group.


Carbon tax is like democracy.

It's the worst solution expect for all the other we have ever tried.

In the absence of any other good solution I will take the least bad solution.

What other solution would you have to reducing our emissions domestically?

Carbon capture plants? Those sound great. Except they need massive amount of power, which may not be green power, and it coats SIX HUNDRED dollars per TON. Who's paying for that? People are balking at a 50-170 dollar per ton carbon tax.

Emission caps? Probably not.

More green energy? Who's forcing provinces to do that?

What pan Canadian alternative is there to a carbon tax? Poo poo the carbon tax all you want, until someone provides a credible alternative, I will take the least bad option.


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> I am honestly on the fence whether the whole climate thing is a legitimate and immediate danger or not.



I admit surprise that anyone can be undecided.  Several "irreversable doom" deadlines have elapsed in the past 20+ years.  What gives the current crop any credibility?  A question any person could pose: what number of failed predictions will it take before I stop heeding more of the same?


----------



## Brad Sallows (3 Nov 2021)

> Carbon capture plants? Those sound great



On this, I agree with you.  A new venture (CO2-to-fuel, meaning ethanol, I suppose) was recently announced in BC.  My back-of-the-envelope calculations based on reported numbers lead me to conclude it's a boondoggle (inefficient use of available mostly-hydro electricity, which may be available in surplus now but will not if fossil fuels are deprecated and electrification accelerates; fiscally non-viable without subsidies).  I predict the private money will stay in long enough to recoup its venture capital plus some profit.  Government contributions will become a dead loss.  The owners of the land will be stuck with a dead factory in a few years.  My guess is they'll go after government for compensation and to do the inevitable cleanup and environmental mitigation.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Conversely, I'd argue that it is "next level hypocrisy" to crush our own citizens while requiring China to do nothing. China's emissions continue to go up. Worse than that, we subsidize their increased carbon footprint by shipping raw materials over there, where they use their coal-burning energy to turn into things like solar panels, which are then shipped back and this is then somehow "green energy".


China held a gun to the planets head and said let me catch up to you before I start reducing emmisions or else I just won't do it.

Hostage diplomacy works.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> I am honestly on the fence whether the whole climate thing is a legitimate and immediate danger or not. The actions of our leaders makes me wonder whether they even believe what they are saying.


Our leaders are beholden to the electorate and citizens at large. Trudeau bought a pipeline because he though it would win him votes in Alberta. 

He brought in a carbon tax to satisfy environmentalists. He pissed off both camps and both hate him, so he had to pick a side. If Alberta went red there would be a very different rethoric from the Feds right now, but but they didn't, so i suspect the Feds are going to be getting a lot tougher on the environmental front.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> Personally my objection is less over whether climate change exists. It's about the fact that the measures taken do very little other than impoverish those citizens of our own least able to afford increased heating and fuel costs, while the rich and Chinese are not impacted in the least.


Quebec and BC had cap and trade and carbon taxes in place before the federal backstop went into place. The federal backstop only went into place in jurisdictions that didn't have their own price on carbon.

And citizens of Quebec and BC don't get a check come tax time giving them a break on their carbon tax either. This complaining is really something else when you think about it that way. 

Citizens of Quebec and BC pay their carbon tax, don't go running off to court to stop it, and get on with life.

Citizens of Alberta and Ontario pay their carbon tax, get a rebate, and complain about how life is so darn expensive.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> I don't think the WW2 analogy is necessarily accurate though. It's more like a situation where Canada and other minor/middle powers are expected to fight and win the war on their own.


The EU is stepping up.

The Americans are back on board.

We need to push China, Russia, India and Australia to get their asses in gear, but that's still the bulk of the global economy right there.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Oh, the beauty of focusing on the miniscule amount of emissions from world leaders flying to a climate summit to deal with the far more troubling 99.999 percent of emissions humanity creates.
> 
> I guess if they didn't fly to the climate summit climate change would be solved overnight.
> 
> Just asinine.


Whoa, wait a minute, didn't you just quote Edmund Burke as saying "Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.”

In your own words, should not our leaders do their part to collaboratively save the world? 

Furthermore, I think the jet setting of our leaders rather underscores that they don't actually believe in climate change themselves. Or at best, they expect everyone else to make the sacrifices to "save the world" while they are unwilling to do anything which is not exactly the leadership needed to win people over to "do their part to collaboratively save the world".

The thing is Canadians could go back to the Stone Age and it wouldn't solve climate change. So either everyone needs to do a small part or not. I don't understand why you completely absolve the leadership. I'd think that a person concerned about the climate would be outraged by the blatant hypocrisy at minimum.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I admit surprise that anyone can be undecided.  Several "irreversable doom" deadlines have elapsed in the past 20+ years.  What gives the current crop any credibility?  A question any person could pose: what number of failed predictions will it take before I stop heeding more of the same?



I completely ignore the media because they can't be trusted on anything.

But there are reasonable and intelligent people who accept climate change is a thing. I honestly haven't researched it enough and don't know much about climatology so while it all sounds like a bunch of rubbish to me, I'm not going to decide definitively. 

That said I do remember well the dire prognostications about an ice age when I was a teenager, not that many years ago. And then we had global warming which didn't quite pan out so now it's "climate change". I'm highly skeptical but for the aforementioned reasons don't feel I can be fully decided.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> On this, I agree with you.  A new venture (CO2-to-fuel, meaning ethanol, I suppose) was recently announced in BC.  My back-of-the-envelope calculations based on reported numbers lead me to conclude it's a boondoggle (inefficient use of available mostly-hydro electricity, which may be available in surplus now but will not if fossil fuels are deprecated and electrification accelerates; fiscally non-viable without subsidies).  I predict the private money will stay in long enough to recoup its venture capital plus some profit.  Government contributions will become a dead loss.  The owners of the land will be stuck with a dead factory in a few years.  My guess is they'll go after government for compensation and to do the inevitable cleanup and environmental mitigation.


After the electricity costs, plant construction, and the cost of just running the place, 600 dollars a ton may be the floor. It could easily reach 1000 a ton.

And if we are talking about the high capacity ones taking out 1 megatons (megaton being 1 million tons) of carbon from the air a year, and canada needing to drop about 200-300 megatons, we need about 200 of these across the country at the cost of about 120billion a year at the low price of 600 dollars a ton.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> And citizens of Quebec and BC don't get a check come tax time giving them a break on their carbon tax either. This complaining is really something else when you think about it that way.


I'm not complaining for myself. I make enough money that honestly the carbon taxes, while I don't like them, don't impact me much. I make enough money that I can absorb the increased cost of living.

My concern is for the segments of our population least able to bear the financial burden, the people barely getting by who may have to decide between groceries and heating their home very soon as these prices go up and up. I have a good friend who had to go to the food bank for the first time this Thanksgiving because of how much more expensive it is to heat his house and car which are the same house and car he's had for years.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> Whoa, wait a minute, didn't you just quote Edmund Burke as saying "Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could only do a little.”


Firefighters use fire to fight fires.

I view this the same way.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> In your own words, should not our leaders do their part to collaboratively save the world?
> 
> Furthermore, I think the jet setting of our leaders rather underscores that they don't actually believe in climate change themselves. Or at best, they expect everyone else to make the sacrifices to "save the world" while they are unwilling to do anything which is not exactly the leadership needed to win people over to "do their part to collaboratively save the world".
> 
> The thing is Canadians could go back to the Stone Age and it wouldn't solve climate change. So either everyone needs to do a small part or not. I don't understand why you completely absolve the leadership. I'd think that a person concerned about the climate would be outraged by the blatant hypocrisy at minimum.


I'm a pragmatist.

I really don't care how world leaders find a path to net zero so long as they do find a path to net zero.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> I'm not complaining for myself. I make enough money that honestly the carbon taxes, while I don't like them, don't impact me much. I make enough money that I can absorb the increased cost of living.
> 
> My concern is for the segments of our population least able to bear the financial burden, the people barely getting by who may have to decide between groceries and heating their home very soon as these prices go up and up. I have a good friend who had to go to the food bank for the first time this Thanksgiving because of how much more expensive it is to heat his house and car which are the same house and car he's had for years.







__





						Federal Carbon Charge | Enbridge Gas
					

As part of the federal government’s carbon pricing program, a carbon charge applies to fossil fuels sold in Ontario, including natural gas.



					www.enbridgegas.com
				






> The federal carbon charge has been included on customers' bills since August 2019 and shows as a separate line item. It's forecasted that for the average Ontario household, the federal carbon charge will add about $172-$188 to your annual natural gas bill between April 2021 and March 2022 (depending on your location).



If 200 bucks is enough to make them go to a food bank, while sympathetic I think it might have happened anyways.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's just heating though.

Carbon tax also impacts fuel, which in turn impacts everything we buy since so much is imported or at least transported by a truck from somewhere to the stores nowadays. Therefore the Carbon Tax has increased the cost of living in all aspects of life. I'm sure someone somewhere has crunched the numbers on the total impact. Of course people drive themselves also.


----------



## LittleBlackDevil (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm a pragmatist.
> 
> I really don't care how world leaders find a path to net zero so long as they do find a path to net zero.



I guess I'm an idealist because I find this free pass for the elite and different rules for different people odious.

On a practical level, I think that such blatant hypocrisy and the enabling of such hypocrisy by the true believers in climate change will backfire. People don't like hypocrisy and it will be much harder to get them onboard when they see their leaders living large while only they are expected to sacrifice.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> I guess I'm an idealist because I find this free pass for the elite and different rules for different people odious.


If they all got together and decided that if they all dumped a bag of coal each into a brand new coal fired power plant once a year but as a result china, American, Australia closed 20 each year as a result I call that progress.


LittleBlackDevil said:


> On a practical level, I think that such blatant hypocrisy and the enabling of such hypocrisy by the true believers in climate change will backfire. People don't like hypocrisy and it will be much harder to get them onboard when they see their leaders living large while only they are expected to sacrifice.


The good thing about top down climate change implementation is that it matters little if people are onboard or not. 

And every party in the Canadian parliament supports a carbon tax in one form or another and everyone who doesn't can go vote PPC.


----------



## Weinie (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If they all got together and decided that if they all dumped a bag of coal each into a brand new coal fired power plant once a year but as a result china, American, Australia closed 20 each year as a result I call that progress.
> 
> The good thing about top down climate change implementation is that it matters little if people are onboard or not.
> 
> And every party in the Canadian parliament supports a carbon tax in one form or another and everyone who doesn't can go vote PPC.


"Climate change" today is like the McCarthyism of the 1950's, it seized a voluble minority, and generated discussions and headlines  but ultimately was proved to be sheer nonsense.

If we are not all completely submerged by the melting of the ice caps in 30 years, based on your predictions, you can humbly seek some sort of groveling re-admittance to this forum.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Weinie said:


> "Climate change" today is like the McCarthyism of the 1950's, it seized a voluble minority, and generated discussions and headlines  but ultimately was proved to be sheer nonsense.
> 
> If we are not all completely submerged by the melting of the ice caps in 30 years, based on your predictions, you can humbly seek some sort of groveling re-admittance to this forum.


Ah yes, the strawman shows up. 

Unless you can point to where I said we are all going to be submerged in 30 years unless humanity did something.


I'll wait.


----------



## QV (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Carbon tax is like democracy.
> 
> It's the worst solution expect for all the other we have ever tried.
> 
> ...



One pan Canadian alternative would be Energy East, where ethically sourced resources are sent across the country in a safe pipe rather than shipping it in rusty tankers across the ocean from the ME where they DGAF about the environment.

This one example tells me this government doesn't actually give a hoot about the environment at all.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> One pan Canadian alternative would be Energy East, where ethically sourced resources are sent across the country in a safe pipe rather than shipping it in rusty tankers across the ocean from the ME where they DGAF about the environment.
> 
> This one example tells me this government doesn't actually give a hoot about the environment at all.


Okay, please elaborate,  how much would emissions drop nationally if that was done?

10 percent?

20 percent?

30 percent, the Paris target?

40 percent, the new Trudeau target?

Or would they drop at all?

Would they rise since there is no more disincentive to emit pollution?

Does it go up 10 percent?

20 percent?

Very cute plan there QV, very little substance to it, but very cute.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Nov 2021)

LittleBlackDevil said:


> I guess I'm an idealist because I find this free pass for the elite and different rules for different people odious.
> 
> On a practical level, I think that such blatant hypocrisy and the enabling of such hypocrisy by the true believers in climate change will backfire. People don't like hypocrisy and it will be much harder to get them onboard when they see their leaders living large while only they are expected to sacrifice.


Now now…I’m sure the PM and his entourage’s cold showers more than made up for the 222,780 kg*…heck, let’s just call it *223 TONNES of CO2* that CANFORCE 1 will have spewed into the atmosphere going from Ottawa to Glasgow for COP26, and back.

Congratulations Mr. Environmentally Conscientious PM, you just created almost *1/4 MILLION KG of CO2* when you could have vTC’d your wokeness to Glasgow.



* 4,700kg kerosene/flight hour of a CC-150/A310 x 7.5 hours each way YOW-GLA x 2 ways out and back YOW-GLA-YOW x 3.16 kg CO2/kg kerosene burned = 222,780 kg


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Now now…I’m sure the PM and his entourage’s cold showers more than made up for the 222,780 kg*…heck, let’s just call it *223 TONNES of CO2* that CANFORCE 1 will have spewed into the atmosphere going from Ottawa to Glasgow for COP26, and back.
> 
> Congratulations Mr. Environmentally Conscientious PM, you just created almost *1/4 MILLION KG of CO2* when you could have vTC’d your wokeness to Glasgow.
> 
> ...


I'm sure the 0.00005575 percent of pollution the PM contributed over the 2 days he flew to Canadian emissions might be offset if he made even the slightest bit of headway in the fight against global emissions.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Nov 2021)

🤣 

Hilarious!!!   

1 tonne credit for every virtuous word he uses in his self-congratulatory official statement!!!


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> 🤣
> 
> Hilarious!!!
> 
> ...


I guess he should have skipped the G20 that happened in Rome just days before as well, which happens to be a short flight away from Scotland?

People are so very petty.

Canada pumped out 2 million tons of co2 today, let's focus on the 223 that the PM used.

Then again, people attack him about his hair and nice socks as well so I guess this is par for the course, eh?


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I guess he should have skipped the G20 that happened in Rome just days before as well, which happens to be a short flight away from Scotland?
> 
> People are so very petty.
> 
> ...


Ah, so we don’t all have to do our parts then?  A cold shower was enough signaling, but don’t crimp the style of the bourgeoisie and their cling-ons? Nice. 

Carry on fawning…


----------



## Weinie (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Ah yes, the strawman shows up.
> 
> Unless you can point to where I said we are all going to be submerged in 30 years unless humanity did something.
> 
> ...


I don't know whether to laugh or to sigh.............You have been the harbinger of doom on this topic, Your prescriptions, predictions and predilections are both tiresome and, unfortunately, anticipated. I'll wait......to see if your predictions turn true. Until then, you are just one of the postulating masses.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Ah, so we don’t all have to do our parts then?  A cold shower was enough signaling, but don’t crimp the style of the bourgeoisie and their cling-ons? Nice.
> 
> Carry on fawning…
> View attachment 67004


2021.

The year that people attack the PM for flying.

Well, I guess he's doing a pretty good job if that's all ya got.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Weinie said:


> I don't know whether to laugh or to sigh.............You have been the harbinger of doom on this topic, Your prescriptions, predictions and predilections are both tiresome and, unfortunately, anticipated. I'll wait......to see if your predictions turn true. Until then, you are just one of the postulating masses.


Hopefully countries reduce emissions and limit the global rise in temperature and we never need to find out.


----------



## Good2Golf (3 Nov 2021)

Weinie said:


> I don't know whether to laugh or to sigh.............You have been the harbinger of doom on this topic, Your prescriptions, predictions and predilections are both tiresome and, unfortunately, anticipated. I'll wait......to see if your predictions turn true. Until then, you are just one of the postulating masses.


Shhhh Weinie…you’re going to draw greater attention to him, then someone will point out that the logic he used to excuse the PM’s carbon footprint compared to all Canada is the exact same logic that could excuse Canada relative to the far greater emissions of China.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Shhhh Weinie…you’re going to draw greater attention to him, then someone will point out that the logic he used to excuse the PM’s carbon footprint compared to all Canada is the exact same logic that could excuse Canada relative to the far greater emissions of China.


The PM needs to travel for work!

More at 11!


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

I wonder if PM O'Toole would be getting flak for flying to COP26


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm sure the 0.00005575 percent of pollution the PM contributed over the 2 days he flew to Canadian emissions might be offset if he made even the slightest bit of headway in the fight against global emissions.


So the PM gets a free pass? Have you EVER heard of the Principles of Leadership? Honestly the double standard you preach.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> Of course So the PM gets a free pass? Have you EVER heard of the Principles of Leadership? Honestly the double standard you preach.


He went to a summit.

Honestly, are you going to do a deep dive into O'Toole for flying during the federal election?

If he won, would you be on him for flying to COP26 and the G20 summit?


----------



## OldSolduer (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> He went to a summit.
> 
> Honestly, are you going to do a deep dive into O'Toole for flying during the federal election?
> 
> If he won, would you be on him for flying to COP26 and the G20 summit?


We have tech to do this virtually, so why isn't it done that way? Give me an effing break.

CAF leaders are told to to it virtually and cut travel costs. Lead by example - got it?

FYI in case your behind on the news O'Toole isn't the PM. Nice try.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

OldSolduer said:


> We have tech to do this virtually, so why isn't it done that way? Give me an effing break.
> 
> CAF leaders are told to to it virtually and cut travel costs. Lead by example - got it?
> 
> FYI in case your behind on the news O'Toole isn't the PM. Nice try.


Right.

So are you going to slam O'Toole for flying in his party jet during the election? Going to praise Blanchet and Paul for not flying?


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Nov 2021)

But what about Harper?


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But what about Harper?


He has nice hair.


----------



## Weinie (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Hopefully countries reduce emissions and limit the global rise in temperature and we never need to find out.


Or we accept that climate change is a politically manufactured construct and that anthropogenic diatribes are based on fallacies.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Weinie said:


> Or we accept that climate change is a politically manufactured construct and that anthropogenic diatribes are based on fallacies.


You can live in fairy tale land where putting trillions of tons of CO2 in the air has no consequences, but I shall live in reality along with every party in parliament.


----------



## Weinie (3 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> You can live in fairy tale land where putting trillions of tons of CO2 in the air has no consequences, but I shall live in reality along with every party in parliament.


Ummmmm..................       I live in the real world, where every imaginary construct, which has no real basis in reality, has unfortunate consequences for me and my family.  I act accordingly.


----------



## Altair (3 Nov 2021)

Weinie said:


> Ummmmm..................       I live in the real world, where every imaginary construct, which has no real basis in reality, has unfortunate consequences for me and my family.  I act accordingly.


You act accordingly? You voted PPC? You moved to a country without a carbon tax? Please, pray tell, how did you act accordingly?


----------



## YZT580 (3 Nov 2021)

Follow the money.  China is not a developing nation.  Its military and scientific developments are right up there with the west.  It produces a large percentage of our goods as any trip to Canadian Tire, Walmart, Costco, or Home Hardware will show.  They even gave us COVID.  Every time our electricity rates go up, their GDP goes up as well because we simply purchase more goods from them while closing another factory.  Drive through Welland or St. Catharines or Trenton and look at the shuttered factories.  Those products are now made overseas, not because our labour costs were too high but because our production costs became exhorbitant.  Try Mercedes: they are primarily manufactured elsewhere than Germany.  The same applies to VW and most other "European autos".  Give your heads a shake.  We are giving our future away chasing something that may or may not even be true.

According to predictions, the Northwest Passage was supposed to be ice free five years ago.  The New Jersey coast is supposed to be underwater now, the Maldives as well yet they have actually increased in size.  There is a castle in Wales with an access that was built at the foot of the hill upon which it stands so that supplies could be brought in by ship in the event of a siege.  That gate is more than a half mile from the sea.  Two years ago Toronto Island flooded in the spring.  Blamed on global warming.  This year Ontario water levels are at the lowest level in years (global warming).   Every single prediction the wamists have made has failed to materialize yet you still believe them.  Jimmy Jones would have loved to have you in his congregation


----------



## YZT580 (3 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Ah, so we don’t all have to do our parts then?  A cold shower was enough signaling, but don’t crimp the style of the bourgeoisie and their cling-ons? Nice.
> 
> Carry on fawning…
> View attachment 67004


And how many tons did he burn for his surfing trip to Tofino?


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Follow the money.  China is not a developing nation.  Its military and scientific developments are right up there with the west.  It produces a large percentage of our goods as any trip to Canadian Tire, Walmart, Costco, or Home Hardware will show.  They even gave us COVID.


except their gdp per capita says otherwise. They are not earning first world wages, are they now?


YZT580 said:


> Every time our electricity rates go up, their GDP goes up as well because we simply purchase more goods from them while closing another factory.


well, a carbon tax on their good is a good idea now isn't it?


YZT580 said:


> Drive through Welland or St. Catharines or Trenton and look at the shuttered factories.  Those products are now made overseas, not because our labour costs were too high but because our production costs became exhorbitant.  Try Mercedes: they are primarily manufactured elsewhere than Germany.  The same applies to VW and most other "European autos".  Give your heads a shake.  We are giving our future away chasing something that may or may not even be true.


of course jobs never moved to China and other before the carbon tax, eh?


YZT580 said:


> According to predictions, the Northwest Passage was supposed to be ice free five years ago.


Very close to that actually.


YZT580 said:


> The New Jersey coast is supposed to be underwater now, the Maldives as well yet they have actually increased in size.


never heard these.


YZT580 said:


> There is a castle in Wales with an access that was built at the foot of the hill upon which it stands so that supplies could be brought in by ship in the event of a siege.  That gate is more than a half mile from the sea.  Two years ago Toronto Island flooded in the spring.  Blamed on global warming.  This year Ontario water levels are at the lowest level in years (global warming).


Ah yes, arguing in my favour, a confusing tactic but I like it.


YZT580 said:


> Every single prediction the wamists have made has failed to materialize yet you still believe them.  Jimmy Jones would have loved to have you in his congregation


Ever stop to think about what happens if they are right?

Or is it easier to bury your head in the sand and assume that they will never be right and thus we are all safe?


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> I'm sure the 0.00005575 percent of pollution the PM contributed over the 2 days he flew to Canadian emissions might be offset



Ah, so excusing a few emissions in order to reduce a greater amount of emissions is negotiable.

I propose expediting LNG exploration, extraction, and export, which will increase our CO2 emissions, in order to allow Asian countries to replace coal-burning thermal plants with cleaner LNG-burning thermal plants in order to reduce a greater amount of net worldwide emissions...


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> And how many tons did he burn for his surfing trip to Tofino?


Actually a bit more…since he sent the Airbus back to Ottawa for the weekend.  Probably closer to 300 tonnes. (2 X 5.0 hrs, twice).


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Ah, so excusing a few emissions in order to reduce a greater amount of emissions is negotiable.


The PM travels.

O'Toole would travel too ya know, the other carbon tax guy.


Brad Sallows said:


> I propose expediting LNG exploration, extraction, and export, which will increase our CO2 emissions, in order to allow Asian countries to replace coal-burning thermal plants with cleaner LNG-burning thermal plants in order to reduce a greater amount of net worldwide emissions...


Your plan would work if other nations worked on the premise that Canada could increase emissions to save the planet with clean LNG.

Seeing how they wouldn't accept that premise, your plan sucks.

China would take the LNG and still run coal fired plants and run a ton of polluting factories and now you have Canadian emissions up, Chinese emissions up, no Paris agreement so everyone emissions are going up, and nothing got accomplished.

Your plan sucks.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

You're right, it sucks.  It worked for the US, could probably work for Europe if Germany weren't so determined to make up for its shortfall by burning coal, but it sucks because others are...I dunno, stupid in their genes or something.  China will just build more factories (and make what, using whose money, in the middle of this little fiscal crisis they're having, one wonders?) that they weren't going to build and run on coal-fueled electricity anyways, instead of replacing coal plants - they like their pungent SO2-laden air.  The one time I was in Kaohshiung, Taiwan, I learned what a joy it is to have air that you can see, and almost feel.  The people would complain if they didn't have that.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You're right, it sucks.  It worked for the US, could probably work for Europe if Germany weren't so determined to make up for its shortfall by burning coal,


The US and Europe have the same targets as Canada, drop 30 percent.

But I guess the narrative in your head is comforting, so go with that over reality I guess.


Brad Sallows said:


> but it sucks because others are...I dunno, stupid in their genes or something.  China will just build more factories (and make what, using whose money, in the middle of this little fiscal crisis they're having, one wonders?) that they weren't going to build and run on coal-fueled electricity anyways, instead of replacing coal plants - they like their pungent SO2-laden air.  The one time I was in Kaohshiung, Taiwan, I learned what a joy it is to have air that you can see, and almost feel.  The people would complain if they didn't have that.


I don't like China but if they do top out in 2050 as is the plan we meet the targets. We meet the targets and we limit the warming of the planet.

It's shit simple, even the conservative party can understand it. Everyone does their part, everyone wins, not everyone does their part but Canada, we drive up our emissions to save the world and get rich doing so. That's not a plan, it's wishful thinking and it's which no one,  not a single party in parliament is dumb enough to say what you are saying out loud. 

There is one party that is saying it though, are you voting for them?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Nov 2021)

You can ignore his emissions. He'll  use the money he stole in carbon taxes to make the taxpayer buy carbon credits to cover his carbon emissions.


----------



## ArmyRick (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> After the electricity costs, plant construction, and the cost of just running the place, 600 dollars a ton may be the floor. It could easily reach 1000 a ton.
> 
> And if we are talking about the high capacity ones taking out 1 megatons (megaton being 1 million tons) of carbon from the air a year, and canada needing to drop about 200-300 megatons, we need about 200 of these across the country at the cost of about 120billion a year at the low price of 600 dollars a ton.


 Carbon Capture plants are a complete waste of time. What I do for a living is regenerative farming and the proper maintenance of ecosystems using grasslands and agroforestry sequesters huge amounts of carbon and has beneficial food, materials, etc.


----------



## ArmyRick (4 Nov 2021)

One of the things that drives people crazy, or in my experience drive a whole platoon crazy or at least to a point of reaching civil tolerance, is that ONE guy who has answers for EVERYTHING. 

In my experience, that individual actually has no real knowledge or experience in anything they speak of. And it shows. Using google? Wow. I could probably google all the information I "technically" need to steer an aircraft carrier into a harbour. However without REAL WORLD experience to back it up, its all just theory. And believe me, it would drastically show if I actually tried it with my present experience levels. 

When talking about politics at every level, its a very complex matter to discuss and much of it is damned if you do and damned if you don't. 

My advice for some here (or maybe one of you) is to stop replying with an "I know the solution or what about" counter to every Valid point brought up.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> One of the things that drives people crazy, or in my experience drive a whole platoon crazy or at least to a point of reaching civil tolerance, is that ONE guy who has answers for EVERYTHING.
> 
> In my experience, that individual actually has no real knowledge or experience in anything they speak of. And it shows. Using google? Wow. I could probably google all the information I "technically" need to steer an aircraft carrier into a harbour. However without REAL WORLD experience to back it up, its all just theory. And believe me, it would drastically show if I actually tried it with my present experience levels.
> 
> ...


I have stated many a time for people to come up with better solutions.

People have failed every time.

I have said repeatedly that the carbon tax is the least bad option, not that it was great.

You know what is annoying though? People repeatedly complaining about something without presenting any valid alternatives. It's always been my motto that before someone complains about a program or course of action, they had better have a valid replacement.

People here just deny climate change is a thing so they don't have to do that. I don't have all the answers but some people don't even acknowledge that there is a question.


----------



## Remius (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I have stated many a time for people to come up with better solutions.
> 
> People have failed every time.
> 
> ...


I’m not denying climate change is a thing.  But I don’t think what they are doing now is going to work the way they think it will.  

I’ve posted before that bilateral agreements and climate “clubs” are the way to go.  That way you can better adapt to each region’s particular issues and challenges.   Trying to create one standard for the planet won’t work in my opinion.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m not denying climate change is a thing.  But I don’t think what they are doing now is going to work the way they think it will.
> 
> I’ve posted before that bilateral agreements and climate “clubs” are the way to go.  That way you can better adapt to each region’s particular issues and challenges.   Trying to create one standard for the planet won’t work in my opinion.


They didn't create one standard.  They gave the first world a faster deadline than the developing world.

The also allocated,  or are supposed to allocate, money to the third world.

That's 3 different frameworks right there.

As for clubs and bilateral agreements there are 195ish nations on the planet. Depending on what you mean here that's a lot of countries talking to other countries trying to come to agreements. It would take many decades to go that route, no?


----------



## Remius (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> They didn't create one standard.  They gave the first world a faster deadline than the developing world.
> 
> The also allocated,  or are supposed to allocate, money to the third world.
> 
> ...


No.  Because you would not just be dealing with one on one groups.  The G7, G20, Commonwealth, trading blocks etc etc are all examples of groups that can effect more efficient change and add conditions when working with others.  Groups that can actually sanction their own members within the framework of their own organisations.  

Ah, yes, money allocated to the third world.  Think about that. Historically how has that worked?  Either the money never gets allocated or the money gets spent on “other” things.  So, no offence, but I am always sceptical that money allocated to the third world actually gets to where it needs to.


----------



## ArmyRick (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I have stated many a time for people to come up with better solutions.
> 
> People have failed every time.
> 
> ...


I have one of the major solutions (as do so many others and most global governments ignore it) to our Carbon overload in the atmosphere. I have presented it before and in fact put it in your face. REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE. Argue with me on this at your own peril. And sunshine, I have a much larger handle on sources of atmospheric carbon than you probably ever will. 

On many of the other issues discussing here, you continue to reinforce my point. You have THEORIES. That's all. Untested, untried and unknown. Hindsight is 20/20.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I have stated many a time for people to come up with better solutions.
> 
> People have failed every time.
> 
> ...


3 simple things we could do to limit climate change (though would have disastrous effects in other areas).

1) No taxes on used items, start encouraging recycling and reusing items. Canadians are very entitled in the way we shop, very few look at used items as something worth buying and if something is out of style or unwanted we tend to garbage it instead of trying to send it on for someone else to use. 

2) Stop allowing products which don't meet a similar environmental standard to products made in Canada from being sold in Canada. How does it make sense that we have such high standards to meet in our country, yet we can import products which were made without those standards with no issue?

3) Stop shipping raw resources to countries which we know are going to use them to produce items in environmentally unfriendly ways. 

Carbon tax is a joke, simply creating a new tax and trying to convince people that somehow a tax which doesn't get put into environmental initiatives helps the planet. I wouldn't say the Conservatives are behind it, they are simply not for getting rid of it because the unwashed masses like the idea.

We have all sorts of replacements for the carbon tax in place, such as environmental controls and limits. Its not like the carbon tax is doing much other than driving business out of Canada (which actually might be the intended goal). We can now buy products made with lower standards, have them shipped from over seas, the net result being we create significantly more emissions for a similar product. Great job carbon tax, you hurt Canadian business, created more global emissions, and gave our politicians a way to pretend we are actually doing something.


----------



## YZT580 (4 Nov 2021)

Science is all about doing repeatable experiments in an attempt to prove that a theory is wrong.  If the results of the experiment show a flaw in the theory than the theory is wrong and needs to be re-written.  Climate science is not a science.  It is not possible to conduct a physical experiment to either prove or disprove the notion that measured increases in temperature are the result of human intervention.  Mathematical formulas don't constitute climate science simply because there is no way to disprove them.  They are designed to provide the desired answer.  Few if any of the many climate programmes out there can replicate historical records: they always read too high.  So what we are doing is wasting our money pursuing something that may or may not be true in the hope that we can stop the tide.


----------



## RangerRay (4 Nov 2021)

What about nuclear power?  It’s clean, efficient and much safer today. Previous disasters were because of poor (Soviet) technology, building them on fault lines, poor safety protocols and a culture of gaslighting in totalitarian regimes. Done properly, nuclear power plants could easily replace more carbon intensive energy sources.  The nuclear power industry needs to hire some better PR types.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Nov 2021)

RangerRay said:


> What about nuclear power?  It’s clean, efficient and much safer today. Previous disasters were because of poor (Soviet) technology, building them on fault lines, poor safety protocols and a culture of gaslighting in totalitarian regimes. Done properly, nuclear power plants could easily replace more carbon intensive energy sources.  The nuclear power industry needs to hire some better PR types.



Your tax dollars are at work in this arena:

Canada’s Small Modular Reactor Action Plan​Small Modular Reactors: the next wave of nuclear innovation​Innovation in the nuclear sector plays a critical role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and delivering good, middle-class jobs as Canada moves toward a low-carbon future.

Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) could be the future of Canada’s nuclear industry, with the potential to provide non-emitting energy for a wide range of applications, from grid-scale electricity generation to use in heavy industry and remote communities.

Canada is well-positioned to become a global leader in the development and deployment of SMR technology. With over 60 years of science and technology innovation, a world-class regulator and a vibrant domestic supply chain, Canada's nuclear industry is poised to be a leader in an emerging global market estimated at $150 billion a year by 2040.





__





						Canada’s Small Modular Reactor Action Plan
					






					www.nrcan.gc.ca


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> People have failed every time.



No, you have just asserted that everything except the exact solution of which you approve is politically impossible, or put down some figment of your imagination (the Chinese will just build more factories!) as an objection.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> Science is all about doing repeatable experiments in an attempt to prove that a theory is wrong.



Not entirely, or even mostly.  Experiments look for things theories predict.  If a prediction is wrong/contradicted, the theory is wrong or incomplete (requires modification).

For example, suppose a climate model (which is not a theory, but its internal workings are at least based on some bits of theories) predicts a future value of some defined measure (eg. a temperature).  The only practical experiment is a natural one - to wait and measure (and it can't be repeated, except as a set of natural experiments - start with many predicted values for different locations and different times and later measure them all).  If a measure doesn't match a prediction, the model is wrong, and has to be modified.

Predictions will often have ranges of uncertainty, and computer model outputs will with very, very few exceptions have ranges of uncertainty, so failure to match exactly is not disproof.  The go-to excuse when a measure fails to confirm a prediction closely is that the measure falls within the range of uncertainty of the prediction (which is legitimate, if it does).  
[Snark begins here.]

Climate models have a remarkably consistent history of predicting temperatures higher than what are subsequently measured, with large uncertainties.  The modellers and theorists seem to be having difficulty adjusting theories and models so that measured values tend to fall on either side of predicted values, with narrower ranges of uncertainty.  The models aren't comprehensive, and the masses of data that people should be gathering to put into them, no-one seems very interested in gathering to the point of doing all that hard work themselves.  Instead, they excitedly jump into the policy arena, and here we are.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The models aren't comprehensive, and the masses of data that people should be gathering to put into them, no-one seems very interested in gathering to the point of doing all that hard work themselves.  Instead, they excitedly jump into the policy arena, and here we are.



We must be more Spock, less McCoy


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Not entirely, or even mostly.  Experiments look for things theories predict.  If a prediction is wrong/contradicted, the theory is wrong or incomplete (requires modification).
> 
> For example, suppose a climate model (which is not a theory, but its internal workings are at least based on some bits of theories) predicts a future value of some defined measure (eg. a temperature).  The only practical experiment is a natural one - to wait and measure (and it can't be repeated, except as a set of natural experiments - start with many predicted values for different locations and different times and later measure them all).  If a measure doesn't match a prediction, the model is wrong, and has to be modified.
> 
> ...


It's an issue of time.

If the time it takes to perfect the modeling cuts into the time needed to address the issue then no matter how perfect the modeling is it's all for not.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> f the time it takes to perfect the modeling cuts into the time needed to address the issue



If a model is insufficiently accurate, it neither proves nor disproves that an issue exists which needs to be addressed.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If a model is insufficiently accurate, it neither proves nor disproves that an issue exists which needs to be addressed.


So that's it then. You view the modelling as insufficiently accurate, thus in your opinion it cannot prove or disprove whether human activity is leading to global temperature rising.

What is your conclusion? Do nothing then?

* Not at all agreeing with your opinion here in the least.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> What is your conclusion? Do nothing then?



If all we have is crude untrustworthy oversimplified models based on sparse data and assumed fudge-factor parameters, yes.  There are other problems to be confronted, and climate alarmism is probably sucking too much time and effort away from them.

There is a compelling reason for mitigating emissions (which I first read expressed by JE Pournelle): we are effectively conducting an uncontrolled experiment by pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

A less compelling reason, which requires the assumption that warming is a net negative (or we should welcome it), is empirical: we are able to observe gradual warming over the past couple of hundred years.

Neither of those necessarily supports courses of action which might precipitate severe economic contraction.  Economic contraction reduces resources available to mitigate any kind of problem.  Expenditure of resources mitigating climate change reduces resources available to mitigate any other kind problems.  The consequences of energy crises and increased costs will fall hardest on the people least able to bear them.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If all we have is crude untrustworthy oversimplified models based on sparse data and assumed fudge-factor parameters, yes.  There are other problems to be confronted, and climate alarmism is probably sucking too much time and effort away from them.
> 
> There is a compelling reason for mitigating emissions (which I first read expressed by JE Pournelle): we are effectively conducting an uncontrolled experiment by pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.
> 
> ...


This is a perfect summary of the situation we find ourselves in and a piss poor response as to what we should do about the situation we find ourselves in.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

Without a great deal of punitive economic pressure, the US has managed to reduce emissions.  (Set aside the fact the current administration is determined to throw sand in the gears as being a temporary failure.)  Why is that a piss poor response?


----------



## Remius (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> This is a perfect summary of the situation we find ourselves in and a piss poor response as to what we should do about the situation we find ourselves in.


People don’t care about the environment when it affects their wallet.  Or ability to eat and pay for the necessities of life.


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> People don’t care about the environment when it affects their wallet.  Or ability to eat and pay for the necessities of life.


China certainly doesn’t…


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Without a great deal of punitive economic pressure, the US has managed to reduce emissions.  (Set aside the fact the current administration is determined to throw sand in the gears as being a temporary failure.)  Why is that a piss poor response?


So you suggest we do reduce emissions?


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

Environmental degradation appears to follow a U-shaped curve: increases as a society develops, then decreases as a society becomes more prosperous.  Hypothesis: well-off people, having fewer basic worries, start to care about their water and air quality.  Obvious conclusion: promote prosperity, and at all costs avoid reducing it.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> So you suggest we do reduce emissions?



For value of "we" equal to "total global", yes.


----------



## Remius (4 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> China certainly doesn’t…


The good thing is that China is going to face a reckoning at some point as it’s middle class starts to grow.  But yes.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> For value of "we" equal to "total global", yes.


Why? You said climate projections cannot be proven or disproven, why cut emissions for something you say may not exist?


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> The good thing is that China is going to face a reckoning at some point as it’s middle class starts to grow.  But yes.


Agree, but may be significantly after citizens of unicorn-land see a disproportionate and material drop in quality of life….AND get the big cloud of CO2 from mainland China parking itself overhead as well…


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

You're a real piece of work.  I wrote that an inaccurate model can't prove or disprove anything.  (Strictly speaking, even an accurate model isn't proof or disproof; it's an indicator of where to look for evidence.)

We can measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations directly and understand whether they are increasing or decreasing.  Although I suspect a warmer climate is a more hospitable one, there's nothing wrong with not pushing it.  Since carbon sequestration requires a lot of energy, the easier path is to throttle back on emissions.


----------



## Altair (4 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You're a real piece of work.  I wrote that an inaccurate model can't prove or disprove anything.  (Strictly speaking, even an accurate model isn't proof or disproof; it's an indicator of where to look for evidence.)
> 
> We can measure atmospheric CO2 concentrations directly and understand whether they are increasing or decreasing.  Although I suspect a warmer climate is a more hospitable one, there's nothing wrong with not pushing it.  Since carbon sequestration requires a lot of energy, the easier path is to throttle back on emissions.


I don't know why it takes so much mental gymnastics to get to this simple point. 

It doesn't matter that my reasons for ending up at this point are different than your reasons for ending up at this point, so long as we agree on that point. Now we disagree on the best practice for throttling back emissions, but at least being on the same page that its something that must be done leaves room for discussion.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

> I don't know why it takes so much mental gymnastics to get to this simple point.



We never left it, unless you're confused by my divergence into the discussion of whether a warmer climate is necessarily bad.  The discussion has otherwise always been about methods.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Nov 2021)

All this angst for "we should pollute less?".   Where's G2G and a slow golf clap meme???


----------



## Good2Golf (4 Nov 2021)




----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> The PM needs to travel for work!
> 
> More at 11!


Except he dragged about an extra 150-200 hangers on and syncophants with him. The largest delegation by far, at the conference. So you can add that into the total carbon footprint he laid down. All for vanity and payback for favours rendered. Granted there was likely a couple to take care of his needs, so they weren't  all tourists.


----------



## Brad Sallows (4 Nov 2021)

Policy can't be developed by correspondence, even in the middle of a pandemic; we haven't the technology.  It involves a lot of documents and time spent pondering things, so it has to be done face-to-face.  Also, there's luncheons and cocktail parties and banquets.  Think of it as a mirror of the Res F: showing up to work together and going to the mess afterwards.  Finally, without well-off people who need to buy carbon credits, what are the poor people who make sacrifices to provide the offsets going to do for money?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Nov 2021)

Sounds legit....


----------



## YZT580 (4 Nov 2021)

So without any concrete proof that the efforts we are making will matter one iota we are setting about to destroy our economy and return to 19th century living standards except that we won't have coal to use to warm our houses.  We are taking steps to keep poorer nations poorer and we are ensuring that those in our own country who are less well off can't afford their heating and lighting costs.  We are farming out our industry to one or two central polluters (China, India and others in the east) so that we can earn bragging rights about how much we have saved the environment except that we don't even know if it needs saving.  We are doing our utmost to shut down the region that has footed the bill for much of our economic wellbeing (oil provinces) and blocked them from making a livelihood selling a product which will be on the market for the next several decades regardless of what Kool-Aid you want to drink at the same time we are raising the costs of just about everything in all of the other regions in the name of a tax on a natural and generally beneficial gas that has been unjustly branded a pollutant.  The tax will do nothing except drive up prices and drive out jobs.  Want proof?  Name the best selling automobiles in N.A.  Further proof?  Ontario pays ridiculously high sin taxes.  Every time government wants something they up the tax on beer and cigarettes.  I haven't met a single person who has reduced his consumption of either product.  those around here simply drive to the nearest reservation to save a few cents.  Now if the price of gas doesn't drive people into a Mazda 3 or Honda CVCC (do they still make them) what makes you think the co2 tax is going to have any effect on our habits?  As for driving out jobs, it is already happening.  That is the prime reason why Trudeau was pushing for a globally equalized carbon tax; to reduce those fleeing our borders. 

Rant off.  We owe it to ourselves and our children to pollute less and that is where we should be spending our money.  Clean up the water for drinking, fishing and making a decent cup of coffee.  Go for mini-nukes rather than windmills.  encourage business to install filters and change them regularly and let the environment take care of itself.  It has a marvelous ability to adapt.  Add greenhouse gas and you will raise temperature.  Raise temperature and you will increase the amount of water in the atmosphere.  Increase atmospheric water and you will increase cloud cover.  Guess what, increased cloud cover shields the sun and reduces temperature.


----------



## RangerRay (4 Nov 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Except he dragged about an extra 150-200 hangers on and syncophants with him.


Actually it was 277 that I heard…down from 300+ at the last shindig.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 Nov 2021)

Neil Oliver has a few good thoughts on the current goings on.


----------



## Remius (5 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> So without any concrete proof that the efforts we are making will matter one iota we are setting about to destroy our economy and return to 19th century living standards except that we won't have coal to use to warm our houses.  We are taking steps to keep poorer nations poorer and we are ensuring that those in our own country who are less well off can't afford their heating and lighting costs.  We are farming out our industry to one or two central polluters (China, India and others in the east) so that we can earn bragging rights about how much we have saved the environment except that we don't even know if it needs saving.  We are doing our utmost to shut down the region that has footed the bill for much of our economic wellbeing (oil provinces) and blocked them from making a livelihood selling a product which will be on the market for the next several decades regardless of what Kool-Aid you want to drink at the same time we are raising the costs of just about everything in all of the other regions in the name of a tax on a natural and generally beneficial gas that has been unjustly branded a pollutant.  The tax will do nothing except drive up prices and drive out jobs.  Want proof?  Name the best selling automobiles in N.A.  Further proof?  Ontario pays ridiculously high sin taxes.  Every time government wants something they up the tax on beer and cigarettes.  I haven't met a single person who has reduced his consumption of either product.  those around here simply drive to the nearest reservation to save a few cents.  Now if the price of gas doesn't drive people into a Mazda 3 or Honda CVCC (do they still make them) what makes you think the co2 tax is going to have any effect on our habits?  As for driving out jobs, it is already happening.  That is the prime reason why Trudeau was pushing for a globally equalized carbon tax; to reduce those fleeing our borders.
> 
> Rant off.  We owe it to ourselves and our children to pollute less and that is where we should be spending our money.  Clean up the water for drinking, fishing and making a decent cup of coffee.  Go for mini-nukes rather than windmills.  encourage business to install filters and change them regularly and let the environment take care of itself.  It has a marvelous ability to adapt.  Add greenhouse gas and you will raise temperature.  Raise temperature and you will increase the amount of water in the atmosphere.  Increase atmospheric water and you will increase cloud cover.  Guess what, increased cloud cover shields the sun and reduces temperature.


Good rant lol. 

I agree with a lot of what you say.  Consumption taxes can work to reduce usage but it needs to be paired with other programs to reduce use.  cigarettes (as you mentioned above) though has seen significant decline over time.  A tax was only part of an overall effort to reduce its use.  And that tax goes to health care initiatives if I recall.  

The issue is that gas prices don’t reduce usage.  People still need to drive, goods still need delivering.  People may be more inclined to by fuel efficient vehicles and even get things like electric cars and hybrids as they become more mainstream.  Don’t kid yourself if you think people aren’t shifting that way.  But it is taking a while to get there because of economic factors. 

Until you can make those things affordable, convenient and adaptable, people won’t buy in.  My biggest turn off about an electric car is the time it takes to charge and then availability of rapid charging station as well as the distance I can travel.  So I won’t be getting one any time soon until that happens.   I’m concerned about the environment but again, my wallet is the deciding factor.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2021)

How many people select “redeem additional points to make your trip carbon neutral” option when redeeming a flight with a frequent flyer program?

Thought so.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2021)

Didn’t catch Air Force 1, CANFORCE 1 and a few other big wigs, but you get the idea…


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2021)

Apparently the second tier landed at Prestwick. 

The beautiful people flew direct into Edinburgh…(cameo appearance by CANFORCE 1 as POTUS’ Beast is unloaded from an economical C-17.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Nov 2021)

With so much government borrowing going on, pretending that any tax/fee/whatever revenue goes to a particular program is like pretending that your own house draws only electricity from renewable sources out of the grid.

Many of its proponents have noted that BC's carbon tax didn't seem to cause any economic problems.  But people only really see it on a natural gas bill, at the gas pump, and in the general cost of everything.  The cost of natural gas was falling (my net annual bill is still lower than it was then), oil prices had just started a precipitous drop, and - big difference - the GST was cut from 7% to 5% one month before the carbon tax was introduced.  Three huge offsets moving in the other direction obliterated the impact of the new tax.

I doubt governments can count on any favourable offsetting effects right now or in the immediate future.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> With so much government borrowing going on, pretending that any tax/fee/whatever revenue goes to a particular program is like pretending that your own house draws only electricity from renewable sources out of the grid.
> 
> Many of its proponents have noted that BC's carbon tax didn't seem to cause any economic problems.  But people only really see it on a natural gas bill, at the gas pump, and in the general cost of everything.  The cost of natural gas was falling (my net annual bill is still lower than it was then), oil prices had just started a precipitous drop, and - big difference - the GST was cut from 7% to 5% one month before the carbon tax was introduced.  Three huge offsets moving in the other direction obliterated the impact of the new tax.
> 
> I doubt governments can count on any favourable offsetting effects right now or in the immediate future.


Without the carbon tax, would the price not be lower still and thus consumption even higher?


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Good rant lol.
> 
> I agree with a lot of what you say.  Consumption taxes can work to reduce usage but it needs to be paired with other programs to reduce use.  cigarettes (as you mentioned above) though has seen significant decline over time.  A tax was only part of an overall effort to reduce its use.  And that tax goes to health care initiatives if I recall.
> 
> ...


When younger and dumber the wife and I would go for a drive around town just to see the sights or have the wind in our hair. 

Gas was 90 cents then.

We wouldn't be doing it at 1.50 per litre, I'll tell you that right now.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Apparently the second tier landed at Prestwick.
> 
> The beautiful people flew direct into Edinburgh…(cameo appearance by CANFORCE 1 as POTUS’ Beast is unloaded from an economical C-17.


A quick question. 

What would be the difference between a leader and their staff flying using their nations secure plane, and that leader and all their staff flying commercial?

Are they both not full planes of people going to the same destination?


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

__





						Site verification
					





					www.hilltimes.com
				




Back to actual politics, good look on ya CPC, good look on ya.



> Erin O’Toole’s stance on COVID-19 vaccinations hurt the Conservative Party’s recent election campaign and remains a divisive internal issue as a group of 15 to 30 Conservative MPs and Senators is set to start a new intra-party caucus on Nov. 8 called the “Civil Liberties Caucus” that Conservative MP Marilyn Gladu says will speak up for anti-vaxxers who are losing their jobs for refusing to get the shot.
> 
> The idea to start this caucus came at a social gathering of Parliamentarians early last month in Ottawa, after the first post-election caucus meeting, Ms. Gladu (Sarnia-Lambton, Ont.) told _The Hill Times._ At the time, a number of caucus members expressed concerns about some of their constituents losing their jobs in a variety of professions for refusing to get vaccinated. With House committees seeming unlikely to meet until February, the three-term MP said there’s no parliamentary forum in the interim where MPs can have a serious discussion on this issue. Ms. Gladu said this is the reason “like-minded” MPs and Senators decided to start this caucus.



Yes, please, be very vocal in your support of the anti vaccine people in society. This will go very well.


----------



## QV (5 Nov 2021)

I often wonder, Altair, if you are a paid social media/internet forum influencer for the Trudeau LPC.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I often wonder, Altair, if you are a paid social media/internet forum influencer for the Trudeau LPC.


Same as I wonder if this place is a meeting space for CPC EDAs.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Nov 2021)

> Without the carbon tax, would the price not be lower still and thus consumption even higher?



Discretionary consumption - like a day trip somewhere - would be higher.  Very few people are going to turn a thermostat down below whatever they find comfortable just to save $20 a year.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Discretionary consumption - like a day trip somewhere - would be higher.  Very few people are going to turn a thermostat down below whatever they find comfortable just to save $20 a year.


does that in itself not reduce emissions?


----------



## QV (5 Nov 2021)

Turns out hydropower is not so good for our environment due to emissions... the more you know. 









						Why Québec’s big bet on hydropower is bad news for the climate
					

Hydro-Québec’s goal to be “the battery of North America” recently received a setback in Maine. Some 60 percent of voters in a November 2 referendum in that state decided to protect their forests and environment from the clear-cutting that would be needed to erect a massive hydroelectric...



					canadiandimension.com
				




_In Québec, the flooded trees and soil from the boreal forest decay under water in the reservoirs for decades and continually *release substantial* *methane* and CO2 for 50 years or more. As a greenhouse gas, *methane is dozens of times more detrimental to the climate than CO2*._









						Maine votes to halt construction of Hydro Quebec power line to U.S.
					

The project developer has filed a lawsuit in Maine Superior Court challenging the referendum




					financialpost.com


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Discretionary consumption - like a day trip somewhere - would be higher.  Very few people are going to turn a thermostat down below whatever they find comfortable just to save $20 a year.


True profit from these de-carbonization schemes is realized primarily by the companies and investors that are able to pass on the entire costs to the end-consumer in an essentially unconstrained manner, fully supported by politicians and associates who agreeably set
conditions for the companies’ successes.  

Think US military-industrial profiteering in Iraq in 2003+, but on a global scale, and the enemy is a tenth or two of degrees every year.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Turns out hydropower is not so good for our environment due to emissions... the more you know.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So they took trees, which in “alive mode” pull CO2 from the atmosphere to create oxygen, and switched them to “dead mode” to create CH4 and CO2 to help power all the N.E. US electric vehicles the next few decades. 

Oopsies. 

The irony in all this is that quite possibly the least  overtly impactful energy to the environment will prove to be


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> So they took trees, which in “alive mode” pull CO2 from the atmosphere to create oxygen, and switched them to “dead mode” to create CH4 and CO2 to help power all the N.E. US electric vehicles the next few decades.
> 
> Oopsies.
> 
> ...


Worked for France.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/devin-dreeshen-drinking-allegations-alberta-ucp-1.6237656
		


I hope they get the help they need.

Another headache for the UCP though.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Nov 2021)

> does that in itself not reduce emissions?



Yes, but there are no free lunches.  The people who provide "beer money" goods and services take a haircut.


----------



## Remius (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> When younger and dumber the wife and I would go for a drive around town just to see the sights or have the wind in our hair.
> 
> Gas was 90 cents then.
> 
> We wouldn't be doing it at 1.50 per litre, I'll tell you that right now.


Nice but you miss the point.  People still need to drive to work.  They still need to drive to get groceries and other stuff. Most of my driving is driving to and from work, being a dad taxi for kid’s stuff and occasionally trips to the cottage.  A tax won’t stop that.  What I will cut is ethically sourced foods, environmentally friendly places I can’t get to in favour of more conviennent and cheaper options.  Driving is a necessity in Canada.  A tax won’t stop that.  The hippies that live downtown will be fine except most of those businesses they bike to will likely be shutting down. 

What gets me to stop my driving and even maybe scaling down to one car is working from home.  Not some some tax. The government can get way more innovative in its approach rather than just “tax”.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Nice but you miss the point.  People still need to drive to work.  They still need to drive to get groceries and other stuff. Most of my driving is driving to and from work, being a dad taxi for kid’s stuff and occasionally trips to the cottage.  A tax won’t stop that.  What I will cut is ethically sourced foods, environmentally friendly places I can’t get to in favour of more conviennent and cheaper options.  Driving is a necessity in Canada.  A tax won’t stop that.  The hippies that live downtown will be fine except most of those businesses they bike to will likely be shutting down.
> 
> What gets me to stop my driving and even maybe scaling down to one car is working from home.  Not some some tax. The government can get way more innovative in its approach rather than just “tax”.


With higher prices people cut unnecessary driving.

Will you drive to get groceries? Yes.

Will you take a road trip? Maybe not.

As for businesses shutting down, employment is back to where it was pre pandemic,  the economy is growing, and the carbon that still exists.

BC was a have province before the carbon tax and is still a have province after the carbon tax. This fallacy that a carbon tax leads to mass business failures is just that. A fallacy.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> With higher prices people cut unnecessary driving.


Bullshit,.....I just have to pay more to do it. Which means less spent on something that helps the economy.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Bullshit,.....I just have to pay more to do it. Which means less spent on something that helps the economy.


Not everyone thinks like you methinks.


----------



## brihard (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Same as I wonder if this place is a meeting space for CPC EDAs.


To the best of my knowledge we only have one member here who’s on a CPC EDA, and he’s one of the smartest cats this forum has. Probably why he won’t sully himself in the muck of the politics threads.


----------



## Remius (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Not everyone thinks like you methinks.


No one who owns a trailer is going to stop taking road trips.  In fact trailer sales are up since Covid started.  These people will just spend less on other stuff.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

brihard said:


> To the best of my knowledge we only have one member here who’s on a CPC EDA, and he’s one of the smartest cats this forum has. Probably why he won’t sully himself in the muck of the politics threads.


Could have fooled me.


----------



## Brad Sallows (5 Nov 2021)

> Will you take a road trip? Maybe not.



People who feel like they've been pressured out of the fun things in life tend to get stressed about it.  Then they push back.  Not that anything has happened recently that should teach even the most HUTA politician/bureaucrat the lesson.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> People who feel like they've been pressured out of the fun things in life tend to get stressed about it.  Then they push back.  Not that anything has happened recently that should teach even the most HUTA politician/bureaucrat the lesson.


Fun stuff in life versus reducing emissions.

Tough choice. Thank goodness I'm a homebody


----------



## YZT580 (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> With higher prices people cut unnecessary driving.
> 
> Will you drive to get groceries? Yes.
> 
> ...


Except that, in many cases, the job quality has gone sharply down and people are working longer hours to cover the differences so the quality of family life has also gone down.  You are absolutely correct: I am not taking the road trip that I was planning therefore 7 hotels, 14 restaurants, a dozen or so attractions will do without my business. If, and I say if because I can only speak for myself in this instance, others have made or are making the same decisions that will put one or two other Canadian businesses out of the marketplace.  People are cutting out the fat and that is killing small people oriented businesses.


----------



## daftandbarmy (5 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Except that, in many cases, the job quality has gone sharply down and people are working longer hours to cover the differences so the quality of family life has also gone down.  You are absolutely correct: I am not taking the road trip that I was planning therefore 7 hotels, 14 restaurants, a dozen or so attractions will do without my business. If, and I say if because I can only speak for myself in this instance, others have made or are making the same decisions that will put one or two other Canadian businesses out of the marketplace.  People are cutting out the fat and that is killing small people oriented businesses.



FYI....

Impact of COVID-19 on small businesses in Canada, third quarter of 2021​
Small and medium sized businesses are significant contributors to the Canadian economy. For context, small businesses made up 98.0% of all employer businesses in Canada in 2020,Note employing 9.7 million individuals in Canada - approximately 64% of the total labour force. By comparison, medium-sized businesses employed 3.2 million individuals (21.2% of the labour force) and large businesses employed 2.3 million individuals (14.8% of the labour force).Note As such, small businesses are an important role in employing Canadians and are a significant driver towards economic recovery.

From the beginning of July to early August 2021, Statistics Canada conducted the Canadian Survey on Business Conditions to better understand the ongoing effects of the pandemic on businesses and business expectations moving forward. Based on the results of the survey, while the majority of businesses in Canada expected to be impacted, smaller businesses expected more significant impacts, such as a decrease in profitability and sales. Small businesses were less likely to be able to take on more debt, have the liquid assets to operate, have their workforce primarily telework after the pandemic, outsource tasks, and implement environmental practices. This article provides insights on the expectations of small business as well as the specific realities faced by these businesses during these unprecedented times.






						Impact of COVID-19 on small businesses in Canada, third quarter of 2021
					

By the third quarter of 2021, the Canadian economy had experienced over a full year of COVID-19. With the proportion of small businesses making up nearly all of the employer businesses in Canada, small businesses are an important role in employing Canadians and are a significant driver towards...




					www150.statcan.gc.ca


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> FYI....
> 
> Impact of COVID-19 on small businesses in Canada, third quarter of 2021​
> Small and medium sized businesses are significant contributors to the Canadian economy. For context, small businesses made up 98.0% of all employer businesses in Canada in 2020,Note employing 9.7 million individuals in Canada - approximately 64% of the total labour force. By comparison, medium-sized businesses employed 3.2 million individuals (21.2% of the labour force) and large businesses employed 2.3 million individuals (14.8% of the labour force).Note As such, small businesses are an important role in employing Canadians and are a significant driver towards economic recovery.
> ...


Were you not the one saying that cutting the wage subsidy was a good idea?


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> Except that, in many cases, the job quality has gone sharply down and people are working longer hours to cover the differences so the quality of family life has also gone down.  You are absolutely correct: I am not taking the road trip that I was planning therefore 7 hotels, 14 restaurants, a dozen or so attractions will do without my business. If, and I say if because I can only speak for myself in this instance, others have made or are making the same decisions that will put one or two other Canadian businesses out of the marketplace.  People are cutting out the fat and that is killing small people oriented businesses.


Thank you for helping reduce CO2 emissions and helping to prove my point.


----------



## lenaitch (5 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> So they took trees, which in “alive mode” pull CO2 from the atmosphere to create oxygen, and switched them to “dead mode” to create CH4 and CO2 to help power all the N.E. US electric vehicles the next few decades.
> 
> Oopsies.
> 
> ...


I agree, but there is the waste thing . . .


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Thank you for helping reduce CO2 emissions and helping to prove my point.


What point??  That you're OK so everyone else can suck an egg??   Right now I wish I wasn't a Mod and I'd take the 3 month ban for what I want to say.


----------



## Altair (5 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> What point??  That you're OK so everyone else can suck an egg??   Right now I wish I wasn't a Mod and I'd take the 3 month ban for what I want to say.


That people will cut down on nonessential driving if gas prices are higher.


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

NDP and Liberals in talks to keep minority government in power
					

MPs from both parties are expected to discuss propping up the minority government when the Liberal and NDP caucuses hold separate meetings on Monday




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				






> The federal NDP is holding informal talks with the Liberals to prop up the minority government for two to three years in exchange for action on housing, pharmacare, climate change, compensation for Indigenous children and other issues.



This would be great.


----------



## Remius (6 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> That people will cut down on nonessential driving if gas prices are higher.


Is there evidence of that working?









						When gas prices rise, people drive less, right? Not always, it turns out
					

Several other factors influence how much people drive, including seasonality, economic growth, demographics, congestion, and how many young drivers are getting their licenses.




					www.greencarreports.com
				





And this opinion piece actually makes the argument that higher taxes on energy could lead to a slowing of green initiatives.



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/10/11/energy-crisis-is-driving-prices-up-dont-let-that-stop-transitions-toward-cleaner-fuels/
		


She makes valid points.  Especially about how it easy to shift people’s energy consumption habits.  Leading to discontent, leading to political types being a bit more cautious about keeping people happy.

Look what happens to the Wynn government.  People got fed up with their green energy plans. Especially when their hydro became unaffordable.  The provincial Liberals won’t be back any time soon.


----------



## YZT580 (6 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Thank you for helping reduce CO2 emissions and helping to prove my point.


So ruining someone's livelihood is OK?  Where do they go?  Instead of running their own motel or restaurant they are working for Hilton cleaning rooms or MacDonald's stuffing little paper bags with mass-produced garbage (also incidentally contributing significantly to landfill).  Living in your world is hell


----------



## ArmyRick (6 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> That people will cut down on nonessential driving if gas prices are higher.


No, everyone gets screwed and royally hard. As a livestock farmer, I have a certain amount of fossil fuels I MUST use (unless I plan to raise 3 cows and 4 sheep, not very productive) and carbon tax is a hinderance to my ability to produce food. For people like you and many others to stuff your face with. They don't make electrical tractors.

Don't even think to tell me to be a crop producer, Thats requires far more fossil fuel inputs.


----------



## ArmyRick (6 Nov 2021)

I want to steer this away from "just climate issues" to general poor management at pretty much all levels of our political masters and regardless of their party affiliations.

I have noticed traits like adaptability, flexibility, forecasting situations and assessing situations are terribly lacking in our entire political spectrum. This in my mind leads to far too many poor decisions or reactionary rather than being proactive policies in all areas (economy, security, finance, resource management, climate related, etc)


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 Nov 2021)

Tourism, entertainment, recreation - all non-essential.  All vital to the service tier of the economy, hence vital to government revenues, hence vital to funding whatever it is that greenies hope to achieve.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Nov 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> I want to steer this away from "just climate issues" to general poor management at pretty much all levels of our political masters and regardless of their party affiliations.
> 
> I have noticed traits like adaptability, flexibility, forecasting situations and assessing situations are terribly lacking in our entire political spectrum. This in my mind leads to far too many poor decisions or reactionary rather than being proactive policies in all areas (economy, security, finance, resource management, climate related, etc)


ArmyRick, I recall when Canadians used to smuggly critique American politics for being very short-sighted; essentially looking at issues on a four-year, or even just a two-year (mid-terms) basis.

Arguably, Canada now is even worse than that at present. There is little to no strategic long-term principle by which government (and Parliament) is setting Canada on a practical, solid path forward.  It’s all poll-driven, or minions counting likes on Government/party/politicians’ Tweets and reporting back to the unelected back-room elite advisors of the PM to shape the next virtuous blurb that doesn’t productively advance the country’s interests.  It’s an uninspirational, flailing demise of Canada’s once existential value as a modest, principles middle power. Not helping the situation is an opposition (both official and other parties) that are lest interested in demonstrably holding the existing government to account as best as possible, and rather quibbling over own internal frictions.

It would be nice to see a pan-parliament appreciation of developing a path ahead for Canada that isn’t based on the star/echo-chamber of whatever current government is in power.  Examples au as Australia and its foreign and defense policies that appreciate its place in the region and the globe.

$0.02

Regards
G2G


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Is there evidence of that working?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In the last 2 elections, there were clear anti carbon tax options.

CPC in 2019, PPC in 2021.

Most Canadians did  not flock to these options. I'm guessing there isn't enough discontent then.


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

ArmyRick said:


> No, everyone gets screwed and royally hard. As a livestock farmer, I have a certain amount of fossil fuels I MUST use (unless I plan to raise 3 cows and 4 sheep, not very productive) and carbon tax is a hinderance to my ability to produce food. For people like you and many others to stuff your face with. They don't make electrical tractors.
> 
> Don't even think to tell me to be a crop producer, Thats requires far more fossil fuel inputs.











						Federal budget to offer direct payments to farmers for carbon pricing - AGCanada
					

The federal government’s 2021 budget offers up new spending to support farmers combatting climate change through targeted investments — and, in some cases, direct payments. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland released the budget Monday, showing the majority of new spending will take place over...




					www.agcanada.com
				




Does this not apply to you?


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Tourism, entertainment, recreation - all non-essential.  All vital to the service tier of the economy, hence vital to government revenues, hence vital to funding whatever it is that greenies hope to achieve.


Thankfully people get a rebate at tax time to spend on whatever they please.


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Nov 2021)

Wouldn't it be cheaper not to take it from them in the first place? Clearly there would be no need for more bureaucracy for us to pay for.


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> Wouldn't it be cheaper not to take it from them in the first place? Clearly there would be no need for more bureaucracy for us to pay for.


Cheaper? Yes. 

Would it change peoples emission habits? No.


----------



## RangerRay (6 Nov 2021)

KINSELLA: Split of Conservative politicians a challenge to O'Toole's leadership
					

One political party. When does it lose? When it becomes two political parties.




					torontosun.com
				




Jesus H Christ, do these numpties sit around watching Fox News and drinking their own bath water all day thinking this is the route to defeating Trudeau and the Liberals?  Do they think “These are my people and I am their leader therefore I must follow them!”?  Do they not see the polling that shows this is as popular as syphilis?  If O’Toole doesn’t give these fools an ultimatum to pick the Tory caucus or the anti-vac caucus, he deserves to get spanked by Trudeau again. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## Altair (6 Nov 2021)

RangerRay said:


> KINSELLA: Split of Conservative politicians a challenge to O'Toole's leadership
> 
> 
> One political party. When does it lose? When it becomes two political parties.
> ...


I haven't seen such obvious blading the leader since basic.


----------



## Remius (7 Nov 2021)

Kinsella sure didn’t hold back in that piece.  But he isn’t wrong.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Nov 2021)

Nope.  He doesn’t discriminate against party either, he doesn’t shy away from doling it out to the Grits either.


----------



## ArmyRick (7 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Federal budget to offer direct payments to farmers for carbon pricing - AGCanada
> 
> 
> The federal government’s 2021 budget offers up new spending to support farmers combatting climate change through targeted investments — and, in some cases, direct payments. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland released the budget Monday, showing the majority of new spending will take place over...
> ...


All the ag financial "help" programs are a joke. They are pretty much put out to FCC or ACC to dispense and those two companies have such high stringent standards that nobody can meet them unless your a cash crop producer that does 1,000s of acres or are running very large livestock numbers (read feed operations usually the ones responsible for pollution)

As an example the "Small Beef" feed assistance program requires that a "small beef" producer have a cattle sale income of $150,000-3,000,000. You get about $1,000-1,800 for most steers sold at 6-18 months (commodity market way underpays, thats another complex issue), you do the math.


----------



## Altair (7 Nov 2021)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457472573588086784
This is going to go so well.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457472573588086784
> This is going to go so well.


----------



## Remius (8 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


>


No kidding.  What a gift to the LPC.  Once again members of the CPC manage to shoot themselves in the foot.  I voted for them but starting to think I’m glad they aren’t in charge.  And O’Toole has come out to say he supports the group.  Like he has a choice…


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Nov 2021)

It’s starting to look like the inevitable Reform-PC split is a comin’.  Without Trudeau’s previously promised, now withdrawn election reform, we’re in for one heck of a way-of-life ride with extraGDP debt and all.


----------



## Halifax Tar (8 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> It’s starting to look like the inevitable Reform-PC split is a comin’.  Without Trudeau’s previously promised, now withdrawn election reform, we’re in for one heck of a way-of-life ride with extraGDP debt and all.
> View attachment 67055



I firmly agree with you.  I would say the right side of the political spectrum is more divided and fractured than the left...


----------



## RangerRay (8 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> No kidding.  What a gift to the LPC.  Once again members of the CPC manage to shoot themselves in the foot.  I voted for them but starting to think I’m glad they aren’t in charge.  And O’Toole has come out to say he supports the group.  Like he has a choice…


OMFG. 🤦‍♂️ What is wrong with these people?  I am really going to have to read this book because whatever it is is infecting the right up here too. 






						How the Right Lost Its Mind eBook : Sykes, Charles J.: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store
					

How the Right Lost Its Mind eBook : Sykes, Charles J.: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store



					www.amazon.ca


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Nov 2021)

If you want to understand the American right, don't start there.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Nov 2021)

Consider this though, if people resist getting the vaccine, just where will you draw the line on the amount and type of force being used?


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Nov 2021)

So far it looks like disemployment is as far as it will go, except where disemployment creates problems for the agency/business doing the disemploying.


----------



## Remius (8 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So far it looks like disemployment is as far as it will go, except where disemployment creates problems for the agency/business doing the disemploying.


No it looks like the inmates in the CPC are trying to run the asylum.  O’toole is dropping the ball and these clowns are guaranteeing that the LPC will rule for a generation.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Nov 2021)

So be it.  LPC had a 13-year run from '93 to '06.  They slew the deficit!  After the CPC won, they became the biggest-spending federal government ever (for a time).  No-one wants that again.  Nothing the LPC or LCP+NDP do could possibly be as damaging as a handful of flakes in the CPC.


----------



## Altair (8 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> So be it.  LPC had a 13-year run from '93 to '06.  They slew the deficit!  After the CPC won, they became the biggest-spending federal government ever (for a time).  No-one wants that again.  Nothing the LPC or LCP+NDP do could possibly be as damaging as a handful of flakes in the CPC.


Now you get it.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Nov 2021)

2nd half Chretien and Martin were actually about as centrist as the LPC got.  I wouldn’t mind that, actually.  A Blue Grit government would respect citizens and their well-being and livelihood.  This current thoughtless, pandering swing hard left and screwing our children and grand children with soon to be crippling debt is not any kind of government we want or need….excepting for some beholden to flashy smiles and vapid, meaningless signaling tripe..


----------



## Altair (8 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> 2nd half Chretien and Martin were actually about as centrist as the LPC got.  I wouldn’t mind that, actually.  A Blue Grit government would respect citizens and their well-being and livelihood.  This current thoughtless, pandering swing hard left and screwing our children and grand children with soon to be crippling debt is not any kind of government we want or need….excepting for some beholden to flashy miles and vapid, meaningless signaling tripe..


Who is we?

We just had an election and the Liberals got the most seats and their most likely partners in parliament will likely be as high spending.


----------



## Altair (8 Nov 2021)

__





						Erin O'Toole says COVID-19 vaccine comments by Tory MPs Gladu, Lewis are not helpful
					

OTTAWA — Erin O’Toole sayscomments about COVID-19 vaccines by some members of his caucus are not helpful and are spreading uncertainty about immunization, but…




					nationalpost.com
				






> Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole said comments about vaccines by some members of his caucus are not helpful and are spreading uncertainty about immunization against COVID-19



It’s a good thing that CPC backbencher Erin O’Toole spoke up about this issue. If only the Conservative leader, whoever they are, could do something about this behaviour.


----------



## Navy_Pete (8 Nov 2021)

God, these people are idiots. Not limited to the West though; they re-elected Cheryl Gallant as well here in Ontario.

Not really sure why no one just drops the hammer on them though, the soft touch doesn't seem to be working and MPs like these are exactly why they lost ground in the last few elections. May win a few local seats but loses them much more across the country.

Spend within our means, stay out of peoples bedrooms, and otherwise stay a steady course where people pay reasonable taxes, get the required services, and things work in the short term and plans for a sustainable long term. Seems pretty straightforward, but I can see why some of the big ticket candidates avoided this job with the lunatics pulling these shenanigans.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If you want to understand the American right, don't start there.



You _could _start here if you like:


Erik Prince recruited spy to run honeypot traps against Trump enemies​
Donald Trump's allies were so intent on rooting out a 'deep state' working against him that they employed a British spy to recruit women as 'honeytraps', intent on ferreting out critics of the then-president while on dates at DC restaurants.

The spying scheme was orchestrated in part by Project Veritas, according to The New York Times. It targeted members of the FBI, the State Department and even Trump's national security adviser,  H.R. McMaster. It's unclear if Trump knew about it when it was going on in 2017.




			Erik Prince recruited spy to run honeypot traps against Trump enemies


----------



## QV (8 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If you want to understand the American right, don't start there.


I'd suggest starting here:





__





						Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
					

[get-content name="print-page-left" include-tag="false" /] Note: The following text is a transcription of the Stone Engraving of the parchment Declaration of Independence (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum.) The spelling and punctuation reflects the original.




					www.archives.gov


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Nov 2021)

The point is that a balanced portrait of a political faction is not likely from an enemy.  People fighting for the same followers are usually more bitter toward each other than toward the oppositional factions whose home turf is not an aspirational goal.


----------



## Altair (8 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The point is that a balanced portrait of a political faction is not likely from an enemy.  People fighting for the same followers are usually more bitter toward each other than toward the oppositional factions whose home turf is not an aspirational goal.


Considering that the LPC and NDP are in talks for a supply and confidence agreement, I would say that this is not a very accurate description of the Canadian political parties, at least on the left.


----------



## Weinie (8 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> You _could _start here if you like:
> 
> 
> Erik Prince recruited spy to run honeypot traps against Trump enemies​
> ...


Except that it is according to the New York Times. Their motto is "All the news that's fit to print." (since 1896). Since the early 2000's, the Old Grey Lady's motto should have been changed to "all the news that will generate hits and make us money." They have failed badly in objective reporting. Remember, they were an early and vocal proponent of the Steele Dossier.


----------



## Altair (9 Nov 2021)

Majority support Trudeau’s climate policy pitches made at COP26, poll suggests - National | Globalnews.ca
					

Majority of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies support Canada's recent climate change announcements at COP26.




					globalnews.ca
				






> After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made multiple policy announcements across the pond at the COP26 climate summit in Scotland, a new poll hints at how Canadians feel about those developments.
> 
> Sixty-nine per cent of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies say they support Canada’s announcement at the summit that it will cap and reduce pollution from the oil and gas sector toward net zero by 2050.
> 
> Some 65 per cent of respondents also say they support the government’s new policy to stop exporting coal by 2030, a move which would end the trade abroad of about 36 million tonnes of the resource, currently 60 per cent of what the country produces.


Thankfully, most Canadians seem on board with the Prime Ministers steps to reduce emissions.


----------



## KevinB (9 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Majority support Trudeau’s climate policy pitches made at COP26, poll suggests - National | Globalnews.ca
> 
> 
> Majority of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies support Canada's recent climate change announcements at COP26.
> ...


_Sixty-nine per cent of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies say they support Canada’s announcement at the summit that it will cap and reduce pollution from the oil and gas sector toward net zero by 2050._


Yes because online polls have no inherent biases to them


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Nov 2021)

Anyone who is slightly internet savvy knows that every interest group has a forum and people will post that poll and encourage like minded to vote. tis the way of the modern world. meanwhile big named polling companies peruse the shrinking number of landline owners that will actually not hang up on them to find out how they think. so if you want to influence government policy, own a landline.


----------



## Brad Sallows (9 Nov 2021)

Keep in mind that "net zero" implies pluses and minuses.


----------



## Altair (9 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> _Sixty-nine per cent of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies say they support Canada’s announcement at the summit that it will cap and reduce pollution from the oil and gas sector toward net zero by 2050._
> 
> 
> Yes because online polls have no inherent biases to them





Colin Parkinson said:


> Anyone who is slightly internet savvy knows that every interest group has a forum and people will post that poll and encourage like minded to vote. tis the way of the modern world. meanwhile big named polling companies peruse the shrinking number of landline owners that will actually not hang up on them to find out how they think. so if you want to influence government policy, own a landline.











						COP26 and Climate Change - November 9, 2021
					

What are Canadians’ and Americans’ perspectives on the COP26 discussions and climate change in general? Discover what they think here.




					leger360.com
				




METHODOLOGY​This web survey was conducted from November 5 to November 7, 2021, with 1,565 Canadians and 1,006 Americans, 18 years of age or older, randomly recruited from LEO’s online panel.

For comparison, a probability sample of 1,565 respondents would have a margin of error of ±2.48%, 19 times out of 20, while a probability sample of 1,006 would have a margin of error of ±3.09%, 19 times out of 20.


----------



## KevinB (9 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> METHODOLOGY​This web survey was conducted from November 5 to November 7, 2021, with 1,565 Canadians and 1,006 Americans, 18 years of age or older, randomly recruited from LEO’s online panel.


From their online panel 


Altair said:


> For comparison, a probability sample of 1,565 respondents would have a margin of error of ±2.48%, 19 times out of 20, while a probability sample of 1,006 would have a margin of error of ±3.09%, 19 times out of 20.


 Yes but only if it was a random draw -- a random draw of a fixed populace isn't random.
    That's me doing a "Radom draw" at a Rifle Range, and showing that 100% of random recruited survey respondents are pro gun...


----------



## Altair (9 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> From their online panel
> 
> Yes but only if it was a random draw -- a random draw of a fixed populace isn't random.
> That's me doing a "Radom draw" at a Rifle Range, and showing that 100% of random recruited survey respondents are pro gun...





			https://2g2ckk18vixp3neolz4b6605-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Federal_Politics-Sept.-18th-2021_VF-002.pdf
		


This is the results of their online panel taken september 14th to september 17th. 

CPC 33 percent

LPC 32 percent

NDP 19 percent

Bloc 7 percent

PPC 6 percent

GRN 2 percent

Actual election results

CPC 34 percent

LPC 33 percent

NDP 18 percent

Bloc 8 percent

PPC 5 percent

GRN 2 percent

They had each party within a percentage point. 

So get out of here with the "online bias" nonsense. If that were true then their online polling over the course of the election would have been out to lunch.


----------



## QV (9 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> https://2g2ckk18vixp3neolz4b6605-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Federal_Politics-Sept.-18th-2021_VF-002.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hilarious you think these people can't/don't adjust their "methodology" for their purposes.


----------



## Altair (9 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Hilarious you think these people can't/don't adjust their "methodology" for their purposes.


prove it or shut it.

Until then, Majority support Trudeau’s climate policy pitches made at COP26, poll suggests - National | Globalnews.ca



> After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made multiple policy announcements across the pond at the COP26 climate summit in Scotland, a new poll hints at how Canadians feel about those developments.
> 
> Sixty-nine per cent of respondents to an online survey by Leger and the Association for Canadian Studies say they support Canada’s announcement at the summit that it will cap and reduce pollution from the oil and gas sector toward net zero by 2050.
> 
> Some 65 per cent of respondents also say they support the government’s new policy to stop exporting coal by 2030, a move which would end the trade abroad of about 36 million tonnes of the resource, currently 60 per cent of what the country produces.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Nov 2021)

Good old Rex, raising a few red (and white) flags....

Rex Murphy: On flags and climate, Trudeau rules by fiat​What gave Trudeau the right to decree that the flag shall be relegated to a position of half-mast for months?


It’s probably far too late and likely just useless anyway, given the current state of Canadian governance, but could someone question where the federal government, or Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, get the authority to do so many of the things they have lately taken to doing?

A plain question first: what gave Trudeau the right to decree that the flag shall be relegated to a position of half-mast for months? Is it within the authority of the prime minister himself, and him alone, to effect such a decision? In this particular case, when was the decision actually taken? And where? And who, other than himself, argued for the decision?

There must be a record of such a momentous verdict. A grave matter such as this surely would not be decided on carelessly, would it? A nation’s flag is its highest symbol, representing all its citizens, the honour of its military, the alluring totem to those who chose to immigrate here, the most cherished of all emblems.

So tell us when and who made the decision to leave the Maple Leaf in supplicant mode for five months. Was it made in the Prime Minister’s Office? Did the Liberal caucus have some say in it? Did cabinet get to vote?

This is not a trivial matter, as the flag has been hanging at half-mast and disrespected for five whole months, while the prime minister has been jetting off to international meetings with the leaders of countries whose flags are flying high. Nor can I believe there is not some protocol, some governing precedents, for when, and for how long, this country’s flag can be put in the cupboard as a political gesture.

Similar questions could be raised about all the lofty statements our prime minister has made with such relish of self-satisfaction to the grandees at COP26. Particularly his comments concerning Canada’s energy industry. Because, all western Canadians must know, what happens in Glasgow, doesn’t stay in Glasgow. It lands in Calgary.

Only weeks out from an election call that gave him less than 33 per cent of the national vote, he swept — rather flew, by government jet — into Glasgow, with a series of announcements declaring that Canada was at the front of the line for getting off oil and gas, and thereby determined to purge Alberta of its primary industry.

This was a big decision, affecting one province (for now, at least — Newfoundland is next). My question is:  how much was this decision discussed with the full cabinet? Did Trudeau make even some effort to check on the feelings of the province that was targeted by his decision? Did he not think that the people who stand to lose their livelihoods due to this decision should have some say over it?

I cannot ask whether he had debated the idea in Parliament, since, somewhat in accord with his treatment of the Canadian flag, the Canadian Parliament is almost perpetually vacant these days.

Parliament is bypassed and the flag is down. The country is masked and a minority government leader is stirring great turbulence in Confederation with what appears to be a minimum of discussion and debate. And he’s doing so with an inexplicable, shameful absence of comment or protest from the opposition parties. In particular, the Conservatives, of whom we may ask: where have you gone?

These are very serious questions. Who is making these decisions? Is it just a cadre of the PMO influencers chanting “we agree” when Trudeau outlines his grand choices? Is there never any real argument? Does he really have the authority, or the jurisdictional competence, to rewrite the national agenda?

This is a much stranger time than many realize. It appears to be a time when the preferences, fixations and whims of one man are reordering the nature of the federation, and simultaneously diminishing the prestige and character of the nation’s sacred symbols.

These are matters calling for deep reflection, and spurring justifiable anxiety about our country’s future.









						Rex Murphy: On flags and climate, Trudeau rules by fiat
					

What gave Trudeau the right to decree that the flag shall be relegated to a position of half-mast for months?




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Nov 2021)

Outrage over an airline CEO not speaking french. Love that politicans are getting involved.


C'est terrible








						Sabrina Maddeaux: Freeland's appalling demand that Air Canada CEO improve French is typical Liberal overreach
					

Controversy over Michael Rousseau's language skills is ludicrous




					nationalpost.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Outrage over an airline CEO not speaking french. Love that politicans are getting involved.
> 
> 
> C'est terrible
> ...



Well, when Air Canada takes money from the (arrogant, messicanic, hubris infused Liberal) government, you might expect some preaching:

Air Canada, Canadian government reach agreement in $5.9-billion 'liquidity program'​
OTTAWA -- Air Canada and the federal government have reached an agreement on a $5.9-billion aid package that the company says will speed up customer refunds, protect industry jobs and return service to some communities that were shuttered due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In a news release, Air Canada said the $5.879-billion liquidity agreement is provided through the government’s Large Employer Emergency Financing Facility (LEEFF) program and includes $4 billion in loans, a $500-million investment in Air Canada stock and a separate $1.4-billion loan to help facilitate customer refunds.

“I'm confident this agreement sets a standard for how such interventions should be designed with the interests of Canadians and workers coming first,” Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland told reporters in French on Monday evening. “This is a good and fair deal for Canada and Canadians.”









						Air Canada, Canadian government reach agreement in $5.9-billion 'liquidity program'
					

Air Canada and the federal government have reached an agreement on a $5.9-billion aid package that the company says will speed up customer refunds, protect industry jobs and return service to some communities that were shuttered due to the COVID-19 pandemic.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## Altair (9 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> Well, when Air Canada takes money from the (arrogant, messicanic, hubris infused Liberal) government, you might expect some preaching:
> 
> Air Canada, Canadian government reach agreement in $5.9-billion 'liquidity program'​
> OTTAWA -- Air Canada and the federal government have reached an agreement on a $5.9-billion aid package that the company says will speed up customer refunds, protect industry jobs and return service to some communities that were shuttered due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
> ...




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1456055007921410050








						NDP calls for resignation of Air Canada CEO
					

OTTAWA - Today, the NDP called for the resignation of Air Canada's CEO Michael Rousseau following his contemptuous remarks to a reporter regarding the French language on Wednesday night.




					www.ndp.ca
				






> OTTAWA - Today, the NDP called for the resignation of Air Canada's CEO Michael Rousseau following his contemptuous remarks to a reporter regarding the French language on Wednesday night.
> 
> "Mr. Rousseau is spitting in the face of Quebecers and all members of French-speaking communities across the country," said NDP Deputy Leader Alexandre Boulerice. "The French fact is threatened, and here we have the CEO of a federal company, subject to the Official Languages Act, who boasts of having a French-speaking mother and wife, but who has never lifted a finger to learn a word in French! You should do it! He should be ashamed. He should never have been put in that position.


----------



## The Bread Guy (10 Nov 2021)

Team Blue reveals its opposition posts - some highlights (links are to bios) ....


> Shadow Minister for National Defence – Hon. Kerry-Lynne Findlay
> Shadow Minister for Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister for National Defence – Frank Caputo
> Shadow Minister for Public Services and Procurement – Pierre Paul-Hus (both English and French bio are in French)


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Nov 2021)

> They had each party within a percentage point.



Means nothing.  I follow a lot of election results in Canada and the US, and there are often at least a couple of polls which manage to predict the final result in a race closely.  If all a person sees is that, he might think the pollsters are awesome.  But if he sees beyond that, he realizes there are a lot of darts, only a few land near the bullseye, and those aren't consistently from the same players.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Nov 2021)

Any bets on where Air Canada will relocate their HQ to? It's like a flashback to the 80s when overnight dozens of HQs and billions in assets moved out of Montreal because the PQ was talking about taxing companies on international revenues if they had an HQ in QC (and why I grew up in Ontario instead).


----------



## QV (10 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Any bets on where Air Canada will relocate their HQ to? It's like a flashback to the 80s when overnight dozens of HQs and billions in assets moved out of Montreal because the PQ was talking about taxing companies on international revenues if they had an HQ in QC (and why I grew up in Ontario instead).



Always welcome out west.  









						Alberta is on the verge of another boom — will it be more sustainable this time around?
					

Province with deepest economic contraction of 2020 on pace to post biggest expansion of 2021 and carry gains into next year




					financialpost.com


----------



## dangerboy (10 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Any bets on where Air Canada will relocate their HQ to? It's like a flashback to the 80s when overnight dozens of HQs and billions in assets moved out of Montreal because the PQ was talking about taxing companies on international revenues if they had an HQ in QC (and why I grew up in Ontario instead).


They can't move their HQ, in the Air Canada Public Participation Act it states "(e) provisions specifying that the head office of the Corporation is to be situated in the Montreal Urban Community".  Air Canada Public Participation Act


----------



## mariomike (10 Nov 2021)

Whatever the politics, we are happy my son-in-law is back at Air Canada after the pandemic layoff.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

dangerboy said:


> They can't move their HQ, in the Air Canada Public Participation Act it states "(e) provisions specifying that the head office of the Corporation is to be situated in the Montreal Urban Community".  Air Canada Public Participation Act


I was going to post that, thanks.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Means nothing.


It means this isn't some random poll anyone can participate in or with a insane amount of bias built into it. 

Its a respected polling company putting out a poll using a methodology that is accepted, and has gotten decent results in recent memory. 


Brad Sallows said:


> I follow a lot of election results in Canada and the US, and there are often at least a couple of polls which manage to predict the final result in a race closely.  If all a person sees is that, he might think the pollsters are awesome.  But if he sees beyond that, he realizes there are a lot of darts, only a few land near the bullseye, and those aren't consistently from the same players.


Is this dart completely accurate? Maybe, maybe not. But lets not compare it with random polls hosted by news sites like CTV that get bandwagoned by one side or another. If this poll says that 69 and 65 percent of people support the emissions ban and coal export ban then it can reasonably be assumed that the true number is at least in the neighborhood of that.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Nov 2021)

> Its a respected polling company putting out a poll using a methodology that is accepted, and has gotten decent results in recent memory.



Still means nothing.  All sorts of respected polling companies put out polls using proper methodologies and end up with predictions outside or barely inside margins of error.  A polling company can be reliable (always correctly employs methods) and still be frequently inaccurate because the final poll is the entire sample of people (eg. voters who cared to vote) taken at the moment they actually made a final decision (voted).


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Still means nothing.  All sorts of respected polling companies put out polls using proper methodologies and end up with predictions outside or barely inside margins of error.  A polling company can be reliable (always correctly employs methods) and still be frequently inaccurate because the final poll is the entire sample of people (eg. voters who cared to vote) taken at the moment they actually made a final decision (voted).


So are you saying that a respected polling company that using accepted methodology that just put out a poll saying 69 percent of Canadians support emission caps and 65 support stopping coal exports means nothing because all polls mean nothing?


----------



## Eaglelord17 (10 Nov 2021)

If you want accurate answer do what the Swiss do and have referendums on topics. 

Polls aren't accurate, they can give a idea but they aren't always right. Brexit is a great example of the polls being completely wrong in recent memory.


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Nov 2021)

> So are you saying that a respected polling company that using accepted methodology that just put out a poll saying 69 percent of Canadians support emission caps and 65 support stopping coal exports means nothing because all polls mean nothing?



Without seeing the question, I don't know what the answers mean.  Example:

Q: Do you favour emissions caps?

Q: Do you favour emissions caps if it will cost you, personally, 10% or more of your income?


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Without seeing the question, I don't know what the answers mean.  Example:
> 
> Q: Do you favour emissions caps?
> 
> Q: Do you favour emissions caps if it will cost you, personally, 10% or more of your income?





			https://2g2ckk18vixp3neolz4b6605-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Legers-North-American-Tracker-November-8th-2021.pdf
		


Canada currently mines about 60 million tonnes of coal and exports over 60% of that amount abroad. At the Climate Change Summit in Scotland—COP26, Canada announced a new policy to stop exporting coal by 2030 at the latest. Do you support or oppose this policy?

Strongly support-33 percent

Somewhat support-32 percent

Somewhat oppose-10 percent

Strongly oppose- 8 percent

Don't know- 17 percent

CTC848. At the Climate Change Summit in Scotland—COP26, Canada announced it will be the first major oil-producing country capping and reducing pollution from the oil and gas sector to net zero by 2050. Do you support or oppose this policy? Base: All respondents (n=1,565)

Strongly support-34 percent

Somewhat support-35 percent

Somewhat oppose-9 percent

Strongly oppose- 10 percent

Don't know- 13 percent

I mean, its a fairly standard question without leading the person answering and the results are not close. Thing is with echo chambers (like this place) of you only hear from the 18-20 percent of people who oppose emission caps and other environmental measures like carbon tax and what not, ones can think that they are the majority. 

Polls like this show why the LPC, NDP, Bloc win as many seats as they do while the CPC are stuck around 33-34 percent of the popular vote, a large chunk of that isolated to places that oppose environmental measures.


----------



## KevinB (10 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I mean, its a fairly standard question without leading the person answering and the results are not close. Thing is with echo chambers (like this place) of you only hear from the 18-20 percent of people who oppose emission caps and other environmental measures like carbon tax and what not, ones can think that they are the majority.


Not leading?  I mean everyone would answer yes if they didn't understand the impacts to them...



Altair said:


> Polls like this show why the LPC, NDP, Bloc win as many seats as they do while the CPC are stuck around 33-34 percent of the popular vote, a large chunk of that isolated to places that oppose environmental measures.


No it shows how many voters are totally uninformed.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Not leading?  I mean everyone would answer yes if they didn't understand the impacts to them...


Well, here's the thing. If it were fair leading I would have "less" of a problem with it. If the question is do you support emissions caps, you get the answer you see above.

If you added do you support emissions caps if it cut your own income 10 percent. You get less people supporting it

if you added If you added do you support emissions caps if it cut your own income 10 percent, but it cuts emissions by (whatever amount) you get more still. And back and forth one goes.

its better to not lead a all than have a convoluted question that goes back and forth trying to cram as much information into the question as possible.


KevinB said:


> No it shows how many voters are totally uninformed.


I agree, the 18-20 percent opposed are uninformed, but democracy allows them to vote so why not poll them?


----------



## Halifax Tar (10 Nov 2021)

I miss him... 









						GOLDSTEIN: Stephen Harper is the adult in the room on climate change
					

It’s always refreshing to have an adult walk into the room when talking about Canada’s energy and climate change polices.




					torontosun.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Nov 2021)

> I mean, its a fairly standard question without leading the person answering



No, it's the typical way in which questions are posed with insufficient information.  Most benefits have a cost.  The misleading way to ask about the popularity of a benefit is to neglect to mention the probable cost.


----------



## KevinB (10 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Well, here's the thing. If it were fair leading I would have "less" of a problem with it. If the question is do you support emissions caps, you get the answer you see above.
> 
> If you added do you support emissions caps if it cut your own income 10 percent. You get less people supporting it


Duh



Altair said:


> if you added If you added do you support emissions caps if it cut your own income 10 percent, but it cuts emissions by (whatever amount) you get more still. And back and forth one goes.


Do you really?



Altair said:


> its better to not lead a all than have a convoluted question that goes back and forth trying to cram as much information into the question as possible.


It is better to have an educated panel/voter base - but hey whatever


Altair said:


> I agree, the 18-20 percent opposed are uninformed, but democracy allows them to vote so why not poll them?


Aren't you the guy bitching about his housing costs?
    How do you think this will go?

I mean seriously dude - you are like JT's fluffer around here - as soon as he goes soft - you are right tin there.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> No it shows how many voters are totally uninformed.



I bet the majority of those polled don't even know what people do with coal.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> I mean seriously dude - you are like JT's fluffer around here - as soon as he goes soft - you are right tin there.


Glad I was just drinking coffee and not good whisky. That was poignantly hilarious.🤣


----------



## dapaterson (10 Nov 2021)

In a coal-free future, what will Santa give the infantry for Christmas?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> In a coal-free future, what will Santa give the infantry for Christmas?


Wood. The do it yourself coal kit


----------



## Brad Sallows (10 Nov 2021)

Looking forward to the decrease in emissions as people faced with increasing natural gas prices do the obvious and dust off their fireplaces and woodburning heaters.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> I bet the majority of those polled don't even know what people do with coal.


good thing its coal exports.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> In a coal-free future, what will Santa give the infantry for Christmas?


good thing its coal exports


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Looking forward to the decrease in emissions as people faced with increasing natural gas prices do the obvious and dust off their fireplaces and woodburning heaters.


Yup. Just got a load of wood in for the Man Cave.


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> In a coal-free future, what will Santa give the infantry for Christmas?


Edible crayons?

I like the triangular ones; they don't roll around.


----------



## dapaterson (10 Nov 2021)

Ironic that you mentioned edible crayons on the birthday of the USMC...


----------



## KevinB (10 Nov 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Yup. Just got a load of wood in for the Man Cave.


Wood fires apparently don't cause emissions according to the Liberals...


----------



## OldSolduer (10 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Ironic that you mentioned edible crayons on the birthday of the USMC...


Crayons??? Where ? Red ones??


----------



## Navy_Pete (10 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> Ironic that you mentioned edible crayons on the birthday of the USMC...


Maybe Crayola should release a Semper Fi edition that only has camo themed colours (and maybe the dress blues?). Plus a bonus red crayon to give to the new Lt to mark up their map for night nav.

I think that would be a big seller, if only for a joke gift for Marines.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Duh


It is obvious 


KevinB said:


> Do you really?


Why else would people be supporting this on the first place, yes really.


KevinB said:


> It is better to have an educated panel/voter base - but hey whatever


ask a question without leading and not be accused of bias


KevinB said:


> Aren't you the guy bitching about his housing costs?
> How do you think this will go?


Do I think emission caps on the energy sector effects my home price? No.


KevinB said:


> I mean seriously dude - you are like JT's fluffer around here - as soon as he goes soft - you are right tin there.


Only because everyone here gets a hard on attacking the Liberals for everything from sunburn to world hunger.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Wood fires apparently don't cause emissions according to the Liberals...


It's a good thing it's a coal export ban.

Talk about uninformed


----------



## KevinB (10 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> It's a good thing it's a coal export ban.


So if they don't get coal from Canada what do you think happens to:
 People who where using coal?  Do they just not use coal, or use wood? or get coal from somewhere else?
 Coal workers in Canada? The spin offs from that?

 I get you fully believe this is a good thing, but the secondary and tertiary effects of this will ripple for some time -- it is unlikely to do a shred of good on the export front - because well people still need heat - or industries need heat.

 The price of coal in Canada will drop due to the glut on the market - and more folks will use Coal inside Canada...
   If they don't - well the coal worker is now looking for a new job (and I understand the the work sucks - a buddies Dad was one in Pennsylvania - and it seems to be a terrible job -- but it is a job - and when folks need work and can't get it - they become desperate.




Altair said:


> Talk about uninformed


Talk about ignoring 80% of the issue.


----------



## KevinB (10 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Only because everyone here gets a hard on attacking the Liberals for everything from sunburn to world hunger.


I generally hate all Politicians - the Liberals just have no substance to their "policies" the fact that people still seem to vote for them because the Right Wing boogeyman is laughable at this point.

 I'm fine with policies that have a solid base and a way forward -- I just don't see the Canadian actions to make a great deal of sense - and I see them generally hurting Canadians as a whole.

 IF the Liberal Emission plan was forthright about the costs - and explained the ways forward with some clarity - then I wouldn't be as harsh on it -- but right now it is just going to kick Canadian in the junk - and not do a spit of difference in the worldwide situation.

I'd rather see Wetlands rehabilitations projects - as they reduce an Ass ton more carbon that other greenery - plus it would create jobs.
   But it doesn't cry out as visibly that one has cut emissions - so it gets ignored and more wetlands are trashed putting one in a worse state than now even with emissions cuts.

People are incredibly stupid - and listen to morons from movies instead of Scientists for information these days.


----------



## Altair (10 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> So if they don't get coal from Canada what do you think happens to:
> People who where using coal?  Do they just not use coal, or use wood? or get coal from somewhere else?
> Coal workers in Canada? The spin offs from that?


They get it from elsewhere. Russia has a lot, as does Mongolia


KevinB said:


> I get you fully believe this is a good thing, but the secondary and tertiary effects of this will ripple for some time -- it is unlikely to do a shred of good on the export front - because well people still need heat - or industries need heat.


China can get their coal from other sources. And the emissions from coal mines in canada goes down. And with 8 years of lead time, that is more than enough time for the effects to be mitigated. 


KevinB said:


> The price of coal in Canada will drop due to the glut on the market - and more folks will use Coal inside Canada...


How many people are going to make the switch from gas to coal? especially with the carbon tax going to 170 dollars a ton? Not many. 


KevinB said:


> If they don't - well the coal worker is now looking for a new job (and I understand the the work sucks - a buddies Dad was one in Pennsylvania - and it seems to be a terrible job -- but it is a job - and when folks need work and can't get it - they become desperate.


8.


Years.


KevinB said:


> Talk about ignoring 80% of the issue.


Its a export ban. If people want to use coal with a 170 dollar a ton carbon tax on it, they can go ahead. Its not my fault people here are acting like coal is suddenly contraband.


KevinB said:


> I generally hate all Politicians - the Liberals just have no substance to their "policies" the fact that people still seem to vote for them because the Right Wing boogeyman is laughable at this point.


You could have fooled me. I don't think you have said one negative thing against folks like O'Toole or Scheer. 


KevinB said:


> I'm fine with policies that have a solid base and a way forward -- I just don't see the Canadian actions to make a great deal of sense - and I see them generally hurting Canadians as a whole.


You are entitled to you opinion. I really don't share it.


KevinB said:


> IF the Liberal Emission plan was forthright about the costs - and explained the ways forward with some clarity - then I wouldn't be as harsh on it -- but right now it is just going to kick Canadian in the junk - and not do a spit of difference in the worldwide situation.


the paris targets are about reducing domestic emissions, they are trying to do that.


KevinB said:


> I'd rather see Wetlands rehabilitations projects - as they reduce an Ass ton more carbon that other greenery - plus it would create jobs.
> But it doesn't cry out as visibly that one has cut emissions - so it gets ignored and more wetlands are trashed putting one in a worse state than now even with emissions cuts.


You can build as many wetlands as you can, if you continue to increase emissions, its all for nothing. There has to be a combination of emission reduction and carbon capturing (by natural sources)


KevinB said:


> People are incredibly stupid - and listen to morons from movies instead of Scientists for information these days.


I hope you don't think this is limited to one side of the political spectrum.

So all things being equal, dumb people on both sides of the issue, its a wash. And it doesn't make the poll any less valid. Most canadians are on board with this plan. The one party that is likely to make the biggest stink about it will then complain it doesn't win elections. I wonder why?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (10 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Maybe Crayola should release a Semper Fi edition that only has camo themed colours (and maybe the dress blues?). Plus a bonus red crayon to give to the new Lt to mark up their map for night nav.
> 
> I think that would be a big seller, if only for a joke gift for Marines.











						Edible Crayons | Chocolate Candy Crayons | Crayons Ready to Eat
					

The first ever, truly colorable, edible crayon in the world. Our chocolate candy crayons make the perfect gift.




					crayonsreadytoeat.com
				




. . .  6 colors. One for each branch of United States Military service

Jarhead Red™ - Marines
Squid Blue™ - Navy
Dawg Face Green™ - Army
Flyboy Yellow™ -Air Force
Puddle Pirate Orange™ - Coast Guard
Space Cadet White™ - Space Force


----------



## Halifax Tar (11 Nov 2021)

She gone...









						Annamie Paul sends notice of resignation to Greens, quits party
					

Outgoing Green Party Leader Annamie Paul says she has officially sent in her notice of resignation to the Green Party of Canada on Wednesday.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## SeaKingTacco (11 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> She gone...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That Party is pure poison…


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Nov 2021)

Bernier loses his lawsuit against Kinsella, who called him racist, misogynist and xenophobic. Bernier didn't meet the burden of proof.









						Bernier loses defamation fight against columnist who called him racist
					

Maxime Bernier has lost his defamation fight against a controversial columnist who repeatedly portrayed the People's Party of Canada leader as racist, misogynist and anti-Semitic during the run-up to the 2019 federal election.



					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## RangerRay (11 Nov 2021)

Re: The Greens:


Without the personality it’s hard to maintain a cult.


----------



## OldSolduer (11 Nov 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> That Party is pure poison…


With Flavor Aid.


----------



## Remius (11 Nov 2021)

SeaKingTacco said:


> That Party is pure poison…


Definitely some internal issues there.


----------



## KevinB (11 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> They get it from elsewhere. Russia has a lot, as does Mongolia


So nothing towards actual climate help  - yup



Altair said:


> China can get their coal from other sources. And the emissions from coal mines in canada goes down. And with 8 years of lead time, that is more than enough time for the effects to be mitigated.


Again - the point - or do you not live on the same planet as the rest of us?



Altair said:


> How many people are going to make the switch from gas to coal? especially with the carbon tax going to 170 dollars a ton? Not many.


 So you have decided that the coal industry in Canada needs to go...



Altair said:


> Its a export ban. If people want to use coal with a 170 dollar a ton carbon tax on it, they can go ahead. Its not my fault people here are acting like coal is suddenly contraband.








						Coal facts
					






					www.nrcan.gc.ca
				



  The prices of Canadian steel will rise - as well anything else that uses Coking Coal to fire their furnaces...



Altair said:


> You could have fooled me. I don't think you have said one negative thing against folks like O'Toole or Scheer.


 They do a pretty good job themselves.
    But quite frankly their biggest issues seem to be they aren't naturally as full of shit as JT and don't deftly deflect or blatantly lie to folks.
 They have some poor platform issues - but their main issues are they don't come across as comfortable.


Altair said:


> You are entitled to you opinion. I really don't share it.


  You seem to ignore all the tertiary affect for Canadians and Canadian Industries with this - while I admit that reducing ones dependance on Coal and other Fossil fuels in a good idea - putting a x3 the price "tax" on it is not exactly slowly moving towards other energy sources.



Altair said:


> the paris targets are about reducing domestic emissions, they are trying to do that.


 No it is not - your have to be as dumb as a post to believe that.
   If you export coal - you are not the producer of the emissions - whomever burns the coal is - the fact that everyone has neatly decided to ignore -- the Paris agreement is chock so full of garbage it is revolting.


Altair said:


> You can build as many wetlands as you can, if you continue to increase emissions, its all for nothing. There has to be a combination of emission reduction and carbon capturing (by natural sources).


  Who said increase - I am all for decreasing emissions - but I think the Paris guidelines are poorly constructed and the Coal export ban by Canada wasn't well thought out.


Altair said:


> I hope you don't think this is limited to one side of the political spectrum.


Not at all


Altair said:


> So all things being equal, dumb people on both sides of the issue, its a wash. And it doesn't make the poll any less valid. Most canadians are on board with this plan. The one party that is likely to make the biggest stink about it will then complain it doesn't win elections. I wonder why?


 People are not one issue voters on this - the poll was absolute tripe - my 12 year old son has had to come up with better ones for his 7th Grade Civics class.


----------



## Remius (11 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> So nothing towards actual climate help  - yup
> 
> 
> Again - the point - or do you not live on the same planet as the rest of us?
> ...


I’m on the same page as you.  I want something done in regards to climate change.  But I don’t think anything happening now is addressing the issue.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (11 Nov 2021)

Well, since both the airline industry and automobiles are major sources of Carbon Dioxide, we should shut down any manufacturing associated with both of them…I am certain neither Quebec nor Ontario will much  mind, since their citizens are committed to saving the planet.

Or are they only committed to saving the planet, as long as the industries being targetted for shutdown exist in Provinces other than Ontario and Quebec?


----------



## brihard (11 Nov 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Bernier loses his lawsuit against Kinsella, who called him racist, misogynist and xenophobic.* Bernier didn't meet the burden of proof.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not really. The burden of proof refers to arriving at a determination of the facts; what actually happened. A burden of proof determination would have been a failure to convince the judge that the alleged happenings actually happened, on a balance of probabilities (more likely than not).

More precisely, in this case, the judge had to rule between the gravity of real harms against the desire to preserve the public right to free expression in the context of politically contentious opinions. This is explained in the article.

The judge did find that Kinsella made claims defensible in fact based on things Bernier has actually said, and that certainly undermined Bernier's case as to the potential harm to his reputation.

Basically, this was an anti-SLAPP ruling. Kinsella's expressions weren't markedly different and worse from a lot of other things being said about Bernier from others; tough to say that Kinsella specifically would have had much or any defamatory impact on Bernier's rep.

Those who wish to see more protection of free speech in criticizing political figures should be happy with this ruling. Though such sentiments may vary by who's being criticized, who's doing the criticism, and where one falls politically in comparison to an individual case.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> So nothing towards actual climate help  - yup


What other countries do is up to them. If Russia can get their emissions down while exporting coal, or mongolia, and if countries like China can stop growing their emissions while burning coal, that is all up to them. We can control what we do, and our emission targets. 


KevinB said:


> Again - the point - or do you not live on the same planet as the rest of us?


Just because we cannot control what Mongolia, Russia or China does doesn't mean we cannot control what we do. If those countries miss their targets I hope their is a reckoning they face for that, but that's on them.


KevinB said:


> So you have decided that the coal industry in Canada needs to go...


We have been closing coal power plants for the better part of a decade. We are now stopping exports. Just a natural progression imho.


KevinB said:


> Coal facts
> 
> 
> 
> ...


lol. First you say that the price of coal will drop. Now you are saying the price of steel will rise. I admit to having trouble following your logic.


KevinB said:


> They do a pretty good job themselves.
> But quite frankly their biggest issues seem to be they aren't naturally as full of shit as JT and don't deftly deflect or blatantly lie to folks.
> They have some poor platform issues - but their main issues are they don't come across as comfortable.


I'm just saying that it seems disingenuous to say you hate all politicians and only attack one side of the political spectrum. 


KevinB said:


> You seem to ignore all the tertiary affect for Canadians and Canadian Industries with this - while I admit that reducing ones dependance on Coal and other Fossil fuels in a good idea - putting a x3 the price "tax" on it is not exactly slowly moving towards other energy sources.


the carbon tax is rising incrementally.  Seems slow enough to me. 


KevinB said:


> No it is not - your have to be as dumb as a post to believe that.
> If you export coal - you are not the producer of the emissions - whomever burns the coal is - the fact that everyone has neatly decided to ignore -- the Paris agreement is chock so full of garbage it is revolting.


You seem to forget that mining coal has emissions related to it as well. A very carbon intensive activity actually. 


KevinB said:


> Who said increase - I am all for decreasing emissions - but I think the Paris guidelines are poorly constructed and the Coal export ban by Canada wasn't well thought out.


Its what we have. For all the hate the Paris targets get, its better than what we had before, which was nothing, and what we would have if we got rid of it, which would be nothing. 


KevinB said:


> Not at all


We are in agreement then


KevinB said:


> People are not one issue voters on this - the poll was absolute tripe - my 12 year old son has had to come up with better ones for his 7th Grade Civics class.


Seemed very straightforward. Do you support this? Yes, no, don't know. 

The results are what they are. I doubt you would be complaining if the results were saying the opposite.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> I’m on the same page as you.  I want something done in regards to climate change.  But I don’t think anything happening now is addressing the issue.


If the scientists say it will work, that's good enough for me.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If the scientists say it will work, that's good enough for me.


People say the same about medical advice about Covid from people in the medical fields until said people say something they don't agree with then they're just quacks and conspiracy nuts.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> People say the same about medical advise about Covid from people in the medical fields until said people say something they don't agree with then they're just quacks and conspiracy nuts.


In this case, I go with the consensus.


----------



## Remius (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If the scientists say it will work, that's good enough for me.


The scientists actually say more needs to be done.  Most are saying that without a robust regulatory framework that goals will likely not be met.  I don’t doubt that it can work, the issue is that something more effective needs to be done. 

Speeches and accords with no teeth or incentives are all feel good and politically easy things but rarely achieve their intended goals because that gets punted down the road for someone else to deal with.

Do you have the latest report card on how many countries have reached their emmsisions goals?  Because going into COP26 not one single country was on track to meet its emission goals.


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Do you have the latest report card on how many countries have reached their emmsisions goals?  Because going into COP26 not one single country was on track to meet its emission goals.




Shocking!

Maybe if everybody doubles their promises, things will improve?

Yet demonstrable and measurably bad things that continue to destroy the ecosystem and direct capacity of the environment to process CO2 continue, like global deforestation. 🦗 🦗 🦗 #notonthewokeagemda


----------



## Retired AF Guy (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> We have been closing coal power plants for the better part of a decade. We are now stopping exports. Just a natural progression imho.


While energy production from wind/solar power has increased in the last ten years, coal still produces three times more energy then wind and solar power combined. And wind/solar energy production is miniscue compared to our main energy producers (Natural gas, oil, hydro and nuclear respectively) Heck, even biowaste and fuel produces three times more energy than wind/solar power. 

Source: IEA


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> View attachment 67081
> 
> Shocking!
> 
> ...




'Buying stuff' is the biggest driver of climate change, it seems. Good luck trying to change that behaviour.

Oh, and Happy Black Friday!


How Buying Stuff Drives Climate Change​
In fact, our consumer habits are actually driving climate change. A 2015 study found that the production and use of household goods and services was responsible for 60 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Not surprisingly, wealthy countries have the most per capita impact. A new U.N. report found that the richest one percent of the global population emit more than twice the amount than the poorest 50 percent; moreover, the wealthier people become, the more energy they use. A typical American’s yearly carbon emissions are five times that of the world’s average person. In 2009, U.S. consumers with more than $100,000 in yearly household income made up 22.3 percent of the population, yet produced almost one-third of all U.S. households’ total carbon emissions.

As more people around the world enter the middle class and become affluent, the problem is worsening.










						How Buying Stuff Drives Climate Change
					

Consumerism causes a large chunk of our carbon emissions. Here are a few ideas for healthier habits during the holidays and beyond.




					news.climate.columbia.edu


----------



## KevinB (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> What other countries do is up to them. If Russia can get their emissions down while exporting coal, or mongolia, and if countries like China can stop growing their emissions while burning coal, that is all up to them. We can control what we do, and our emission targets.


Except everyone lives on the same planet.


Altair said:


> Just because we cannot control what Mongolia, Russia or China does doesn't mean we cannot control what we do. If those countries miss their targets I hope their is a reckoning they face for that, but that's on them.


 Everyone will see that same reckoning - that is the problem.


Altair said:


> We have been closing coal power plants for the better part of a decade. We are now stopping exports. Just a natural progression imho.


Except no one has a really good solution (well other than Nuclear - and the tree huggers hate it more that coal) 


Altair said:


> lol. First you say that the price of coal will drop. Now you are saying the price of steel will rise. I admit to having trouble following your logic.


 Coal has gone down in price - however Canada's taxes on it are skyrocketing - thus shortly coal won't be cheaper to get in Canada -- 


Altair said:


> I'm just saying that it seems disingenuous to say you hate all politicians and only attack one side of the political spectrum.


 No I am just attack morons sitting in office -- there is no point in attacking morons not in office.



Altair said:


> the carbon tax is rising incrementally.  Seems slow enough to me.
> 
> You seem to forget that mining coal has emissions related to it as well. A very carbon intensive activity actually.


 Do you make your own clothes, food, own a car?   Everything has emissions related to it.
   The main issue I see with coal, is Canada (and the US and most other nations) don't have effective replacements on line for replacement of it at this point in time.
   I see it more like closing a few lanes on the Highway because in three years you are going to repave it.



Altair said:


> Its what we have. For all the hate the Paris targets get, its better than what we had before, which was nothing, and what we would have if we got rid of it, which would be nothing.


No one seems to be following it - so I don't actually think it is doing much.


Altair said:


> We are in agreement then
> 
> Seemed very straightforward. Do you support this? Yes, no, don't know.


The problem is people statistically never admit to ignorance - and don't know respondents are always underrepresented.



Altair said:


> The results are what they are. I doubt you would be complaining if the results were saying the opposite.


You don't know me very well then


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Except everyone lives on the same planet.


If Mongolia doesn't have oil extraction for example, they might be able to afford to keep their coal mines open and meet their targets meanwhile Canada with stuff like oil and gas extraction doesn't have that luxury. Just one made up example, as I don't know Mongolia's economic makeup and I really don't care enough to learn, but thats how paris is meant to work.


KevinB said:


> Everyone will see that same reckoning - that is the problem.



Yes, either we solve this or global temperatures rise 4 or 5 degrees and say goodbye to life as we know it.


KevinB said:


> Except no one has a really good solution (well other than Nuclear - and the tree huggers hate it more that coal)


Tree huggers or no, there has been a lot of work put into SMRs recently.


KevinB said:


> Coal has gone down in price - however Canada's taxes on it are skyrocketing - thus shortly coal won't be cheaper to get in Canada --


I don't see how a ban on thermal coal exports by 2030 have anything to do with Metallurgical coal and the carbon tax, but sure, whatever.


KevinB said:


> No I am just attack morons sitting in office -- there is no point in attacking morons not in office.


There is a point in attacking the morons not in office because they have the potential of being in office or propping up the morons in office if its a minority parliament. 


KevinB said:


> Do you make your own clothes, food, own a car?   Everything has emissions related to it.


but some more than others. 


KevinB said:


> The main issue I see with coal, is Canada (and the US and most other nations) don't have effective replacements on line for replacement of it at this point in time.
> I see it more like closing a few lanes on the Highway because in three years you are going to repave it.


80 percent of the Canadian energy grid is from non GHG emitting sources. Getting that next 20 percent is not the struggle you seem to think it is.

USA is another story with 40 percent of their/your energy coming from non GHG emitting sources but that's not the situation in Canada.


KevinB said:


> No one seems to be following it - so I don't actually think it is doing much.


Well, its the best shot we got. Its too late in the game to come up with a entirely new framework that every country is going to sign up for and agree on. So its this or bust. And if its bust and the climate scientists are anywhere close to being right, well, humanity had a good run.


KevinB said:


> The problem is people statistically never admit to ignorance - and don't know respondents are always underrepresented.


Plays both ways so it doesn't really matter.


KevinB said:


> You don't know me very well then


Who really knows anyone on a online forum?


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Retired AF Guy said:


> While energy production from wind/solar power has increased in the last ten years, coal still produces three times more energy then wind and solar power combined. And wind/solar energy production is miniscue compared to our main energy producers (Natural gas, oil, hydro and nuclear respectively) Heck, even biowaste and fuel produces three times more energy than wind/solar power.
> 
> Source: IEA


Coal could produce 5 times more energy and I wouldn't give a damn, its one of the biggest polluting sources of energy. Coal makes up 6 percent of our energy grid and still responsible for 63 percent of emissions from power generation in Canada. Replace it with natural gas, and then as more renewables come online, replace natural gas.


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Nov 2021)

> 80 percent of the Canadian energy grid is from non GHG emitting sources. Getting that next 20 percent is not the struggle you seem to think it is.



Good for us.  The problem isn't the remaining 20% of current use, it's the fraction of future use (moving the transportation economy off hydrocarbon fuels).  Don't leave that out and pretend we're doing well.


----------



## daftandbarmy (12 Nov 2021)

Reports of coal's inevitable demise are either over-optimistic, or dangerously delusional: take your pick. We'd better get used to it:


The Future of Coal: Options for a Carbon-Constrained World, an interdisciplinary MIT study

An interdisciplinary MIT faculty group examined the role of coal in a world where constraints on carbon dioxide emissions are adopted to mitigate global climate change. This follows _The Future of Nuclear Power_ which focused on carbon dioxide emissions-free electricity generation from nuclear energy and was published in 2003. This report, the future of coal in a carbon-constrained world, evaluates the technologies and costs associated with the generation of electricity from coal along with those associated with the capture and sequestration of the carbon dioxide produced coal-based power generation. Growing electricity demand in the U.S. and in the world will require increases in all generation options (renewables, coal, and nuclear) in addition to increased efficiency and conservation in its use. *Coal will continue to play a significant role in power generation and as such carbon dioxide management from it will become increasingly important. *This study, addressed to government, industry and academic leaders, discusses the interrelated technical, economic, environmental and political challenges facing increased coal-based power generation while managing carbon dioxide emissions from this sector.





__





						The Future of Coal: Options for a Carbon-Constrained World, an interdisciplinary MIT study | MIT Global Change
					






					globalchange.mit.edu


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Nov 2021)

The Koch brothers are still investing in coal.
Meanwhile, Warren Buffet is buying up LNG.
Lastly, if your wondering what is replacing everything, Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are building a huge nuclear plant in Wyoming. Bet there'll be no tree huggers boycotting that build.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Good for us.  The problem isn't the remaining 20% of current use, it's the fraction of future use (moving the transportation economy off hydrocarbon fuels).  Don't leave that out and pretend we're doing well.


I agree.

We should be doing much more.

It's shame people, including some here, think we should be doing less.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree.
> 
> We should be doing much more.
> 
> It's shame people, including some here, think we should be doing less.


What you're saying is, it's a shame other have different opinions to yours.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> What you're saying is, it's a shame other have different opinions to yours.


If that opinion leads to the destruction of the environment and life as we know it, ya.


----------



## KevinB (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If Mongolia doesn't have oil extraction for example, they might be able to afford to keep their coal mines open and meet their targets meanwhile Canada with stuff like oil and gas extraction doesn't have that luxury. Just one made up example, as I don't know Mongolia's economic makeup and I really don't care enough to learn, but thats how paris is meant to work.


Except we all breathe the same air - so it doesn't matter if Canada is trying


Altair said:


> Yes, either we solve this or global temperatures rise 4 or 5 degrees and say goodbye to life as we know it.


 That was my point above - Canadian use or export of Coal is <1% of the Worldwide Coal emissions.


Altair said:


> Tree huggers or no, there has been a lot of work put into SMRs recently.


Honestly I am not sure if I like the idea of a lot more smaller reactors - or ore larger ones.
   While not the environmental blight of Coal plants (and Hydro - due to flooding etc - those pesky wetland issue again) they do raise local water temps - and aren't very sightly 


Altair said:


> I don't see how a ban on thermal coal exports by 2030 have anything to do with Metallurgical coal and the carbon tax, but sure, whatever.


 They all are related to mining of coal - but to your point Canada's coal exports are 95% metallurgical coal (2019) so yes your are correct it probably won't affect that much on that end - but cocking coal seems to be more highly refined - and slightly more expensive.
  * I will admit when I read the Coal Export Ban, I had not noticed it glossed over it was simply a thermal coal export ban - your point had me go back and re-read - which I suspect the "feel good" nature of it was crafted in a way that most took it at face value a ban of all Canadian coal exports.   
    It reads "nicer" that way - but the economic impact to Canada with removal of exports of thermal coal is minor.
  I think if it had been a little more transparent it wouldn't get such adverse reactions (but also not get as much praise too) 




Altair said:


> There is a point in attacking the morons not in office because they have the potential of being in office or propping up the morons in office if its a minority parliament.


Right now the Conservative party doesn't know what it wants to be when it grows up - they don't have a cohesive plan to attract voters.   But frankly I can't figure Canadian politics out - I can't see why anyone in their right mind would vote for the LPC or NDP.



Altair said:


> but some more than others.
> 
> 80 percent of the Canadian energy grid is from non GHG emitting sources. Getting that next 20 percent is not the struggle you seem to think it is.


7.4% of energy is from Coal - significantly decreased - but you will need to get CANDU's into Alberta and Sask to make any more significant reductions.  They use ~85% of the thermal coal for energy in Canada.



Altair said:


> USA is another story with 40 percent of their/your energy coming from non GHG emitting sources but that's not the situation in Canada.


It is a major State issue here -- we have Nuclear plants in Virginia - but a lot of states are committed to Coal.


Altair said:


> Well, its the best shot we got. Its too late in the game to come up with a entirely new framework that every country is going to sign up for and agree on. So its this or bust. And if its bust and the climate scientists are anywhere close to being right, well, humanity had a good run.


I'm not considerably worried about the temperature issues - the world will go on - we are still in an Ice Age - but the long term issues of so much carbon in the atmosphere isn't good - we will probably poison ourselves off before temperature problems wipe us out.



Altair said:


> Plays both ways so it doesn't really matter.
> 
> Who really knows anyone on a online forum?


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> In this case, I go with the consensus.





Altair said:


> I agree.
> 
> We should be doing much more.
> 
> It's shame people, including some here, think we should be doing less.





But didn't you vote for these guys?



> The People's Party does not accept the science behind human-caused global warming and simply promises to cancel all climate-related policies and pull out of the Paris Agreement on climate change so it was not included in the analysis.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If that opinion leads to the destruction of the environment and life as we know it, ya.


In your opinion.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But didn't you vote for these guys?


I certainly did. The more they exist the less chance the party with the less effective climate plan gets into office.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I certainly did. The more they exist the less chance the party with the less effective climate plan gets into office.


Ah my mistake then. I thought I recalled you talking about voting for local candidates you supported and not strategically.


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Ah my mistake then. I thought I recalled you talking about voting for local candidates you supported and not strategically.


Doesn't make a darn lick of difference when someone in your riding is willing by 15k votes


----------



## Brad Sallows (12 Nov 2021)

Coal in Canada is a sideshow.

All figures "roughly", from 2019 sources (ie. before the COVID economic contraction).  (Me getting round-ish numbers from various charts and graphs, sometimes just eyeballing them.)

75% of Canada's energy consumption is from hydrocarbons (eg. oil, natural gas, coal).  Coal accounts for less than 0.5% of the total.  The remaining 25% is hydro (overwhelmingly), nuclear, and other sources.  "Other" is 3%, and includes wind and solar (so, both of those, in the big picture, are inconsequential).

For those to whom it might not be clear, the 1/5th of electrical energy generation that depends on hydrocarbons is dwarfed by other uses of hydrocarbons.

People fixated on the fly-shit-in-pepper amounts are not to be taken seriously.  To really deal with the consumption of hydrocarbons in Canada means, in crude terms*, moving the dial up from 25% (ie. tripling would get us to 75%).   (Imagine the infrastructure to triple the amount of electricity generated in Canada.  Imagine the litigation over dams, nuclear plants, wind and solar farms.)

*A lot of assumptions are in play, the biggest one of which is that the amount of energy consumed doesn't change with the technology.  For example, an EV might be able to move a given mass M for less energy expenditure than a vehicle powered by an IC engine.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (12 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Doesn't make a darn lick of difference when someone in your riding is willing by 15k votes


Or the voter has no morals??


----------



## Altair (12 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Or the voter has no morals??


It matters not.


----------



## RangerRay (13 Nov 2021)

> I see it more like closing a few lanes on the Highway because in three years you are going to repave it.


Hey, that’s what they do in Manitoba!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Coal in Canada is a sideshow.
> 
> All figures "roughly", from 2019 sources (ie. before the COVID economic contraction).  (Me getting round-ish numbers from various charts and graphs, sometimes just eyeballing them.)
> 
> ...


The majority of BC coal is to good to be used as thermal coal and the majority goes to coking. About 3-5% of the deposits up near Tumbler ridge are high enough quality to be used for filters.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Nov 2021)

Colin Parkinson said:


> The majority of BC coal is to good to be used as thermal coal and the majority goes to coking. About 3-5% of the deposits up near Tumbler ridge are high enough quality to be used for filters.


…and shows that Canada really isn’t full-on serious in reducing coal too much.  Good quality or not, the metallurgical coal still has significant emissions, but: a) brings in money to federal coffers through taxes, and b) the government counts on mouth-frothing greenies to not note the details that 2030 will only cut thermal coal (and ~70% of AB’s electrical generation) and not touch the metallurgical coal. (I think the GoC is actually right in the assessment of b) to be honest…)

G2G


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> …and shows that Canada really isn’t full-on serious in reducing coal too much.  Good quality or not, the metallurgical coal still has significant emissions, but: a) brings in money to federal coffers through taxes, and b) the government counts on mouth-frothing greenies to not note the details that 2030 will only cut thermal coal (and ~70% of AB’s electrical generation) and not touch the metallurgical coal. (I think the GoC is actually right in the assessment of b) to be honest…)
> 
> G2G


There are technologies coming online to replace coke in the steel making process.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Nov 2021)

There are technologies already on line to do all sorts of things, up to and including using chemistry to remove harmful compounds.  What matters is economic viability.


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> There are technologies already on line to do all sorts of things, up to and including using chemistry to remove harmful compounds.  What matters is economic viability.


30 percent of steel produced today is produced using electric arc furnaces.

As coal gets more expensive via carbon tax electric arc furnaces become more viable.

See, carbon tax works.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> 30 percent of steel produced today is produced using electric arc furnaces.
> 
> As coal gets more expensive via carbon tax electric arc furnaces become more viable.
> 
> See, carbon tax works.


False equivalence fallacy. Taxing older technologies out of existence, doesn't make their replacement necessarily cheaper.


----------



## YZT580 (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> 30 percent of steel produced today is produced using electric arc furnaces.
> 
> As coal gets more expensive via carbon tax electric arc furnaces become more viable.
> 
> See, carbon tax works.


True, except for the minor problem of reliable electric supply.  It won't come from wind or solar.


----------



## KevinB (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> 30 percent of steel produced today is produced using electric arc furnaces.
> 
> As coal gets more expensive via carbon tax electric arc furnaces become more viable.
> 
> See, carbon tax works.


The electricity for those forges comes from where?


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> The electricity for those forges comes from where?


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

YZT580 said:


> True, except for the minor problem of reliable electric supply.  It won't come from wind or solar.





Good2Golf said:


> View attachment 67094





KevinB said:


> The electricity for those forges comes from where?












I cannot find a gif for natural gas.


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

ModlrMike said:


> False equivalence fallacy. Taxing older technologies out of existence, doesn't make their replacement necessarily cheaper.


Cheaper, no. Viable, yes.


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Nearly two-thirds of Canadians support oil and gas emissions cap, even if it puts jobs at risk: poll
					

Sixty-three per cent of respondents to a Nanos Research poll said they agree or somewhat agree that Canada should immediately limit emissions from the oil and gas sector and curtail them over time




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				






> Almost two-thirds of Canadians support immediately capping greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands – even if it puts jobs at risk, according to a new poll.
> 
> Sixty-three per cent of respondents to a Nanos Research poll said they agree or somewhat agree that Canada should immediately limit emissions from the oil and gas sector and curtail them over time. Thirty-four per cent said they either disagree or somewhat disagree, and 3 per cent said they are unsure.


I'll just prepare for everyone hear to slam a second pollster, Nanos, rather than acknowledge the poll having similar results to the Leger online poll.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I'll just prepare for everyone hear to slam a second pollster, Nanos, rather than acknowledge the poll having similar results to the Leger online poll.





> Almost two-thirds of Canadians support immediately capping greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands – *even if it puts jobs at risk, *according to a new poll.





> The poll, conducted for The Globe and Mail, also shows the country is “fundamentally divided” between the Prairie provinces and the rest of Canada,



So people whose jobs aren't at risk support capping greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands even though it might cost other people their jobs? Okay.


----------



## Halifax Tar (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Nearly two-thirds of Canadians support oil and gas emissions cap, even if it puts jobs at risk: poll
> 
> 
> Sixty-three per cent of respondents to a Nanos Research poll said they agree or somewhat agree that Canada should immediately limit emissions from the oil and gas sector and curtail them over time
> ...



2/3rds of anyone supporting anything doesn't mean its right.  History is rife with examples of majorities being lead off of the proverbial cliffs.  

This seems to be the foundation of your beliefs though, "might makes right", some would argue a very conservative position.


----------



## Good2Golf (13 Nov 2021)

I suppose when Alberta stops using coal and keeps its NG for itself to be an über-clean electricity producer, and the pipeline-hating Easterners freeze their asses off in the winter, they’ll be overflowing with thanks for Alberta cleaning up its electrical generation.  

Some people down East should be identified as being at the front of the thank-you parade…they know who they are.


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 2/3rds of anyone supporting anything doesn't mean its right.  History is rife with examples of majorities being lead off of the proverbial cliffs.
> 
> This seems to be the foundation of your beliefs though, "might makes right", some would argue a very conservative position.


This is less might makes right than it is the right thing to do and it happens to be popular.

Also people who support a cap on emissions will likely vote for parties who support a cap on emissions, and if one party will predictably be against it, we'll I suppose 2 out of 3 Canadians will be less likely to vote for that 1 party.

Good politics and environmental policy all wrapped into 1, seems like a good week for the LPC.


----------



## Navy_Pete (13 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> I suppose when Alberta stops using coal and keeps its NG for itself to be an über-clean electricity producer, and the pipeline-hating Easterners freeze their asses off in the winter, they’ll be overflowing with thanks for Alberta cleaning up its electrical generation.
> 
> Some people down East should be identified as being at the front of the thank-you parade…they know who they are.


Canada/US NG distribution is tightly integrated, with a huge portion of the eastern supply coming from the US. Can't find exactly how much but generally looks like Alberta exports dropped off both US and Eastern Canada because it's cheaper/shorter to use the US Marcellus source.

A lot of the Alberta NG is actually used by the oil sands now to generate power/steam to extract the oil.

It's a finite resource, so at some point we'll all need to convert off it, but Eastern Canada won't freeze if AB turns off the NG pipepline..

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/e85...wnload/18-Albertas-natural-gas-production.pdf


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Canada/US NG distribution is tightly integrated, with a huge portion of the eastern supply coming from the US. Can't find exactly how much but generally looks like Alberta exports dropped off both US and Eastern Canada because it's cheaper/shorter to use the US Marcellus source.
> 
> A lot of the Alberta NG is actually used by the oil sands now to generate power/steam to extract the oil.
> 
> ...


Shhh.

Don't let the reality ruin the fantasy of Alberta turning off the taps in some sort of weird revenge.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (13 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> 'Buying stuff' is the biggest driver of climate change, it seems. Good luck trying to change that behaviour.
> 
> Oh, and Happy Black Friday!
> 
> ...



It is true, look at the quality of products made today vs. older products. I can go to antique store or garage sale, buy a tool which is 100+ years old and usually with a small amount of cleaning and maintenance it does exactly what it was designed to do 100 years later effectively. We buy so much items which aren't needed. From remodelling our houses every decade or two (not talking about maintenance rather oh this kitchen is dated time to gut the thing and put in all new things), to buying new appliances every decade, to buying crappy cheap items which last only a few years at best, to replacing our phones every year or two. We don't do so much repairing anymore, only replacing. 



Altair said:


> 30 percent of steel produced today is produced using electric arc furnaces.
> 
> As coal gets more expensive via carbon tax electric arc furnaces become more viable.
> 
> See, carbon tax works.



Electric Arc Furnaces are not the solution. You cannot make steel with a electric arc furnace, only recycle it. And the quality of steel is only low to mid grade at best. So far the only option which might be viable for actual steel production in the future is hydrogen, which Sweden is doing amazing work on, but we shall have to see if it is feasible particularly for higher grade steels and if it shall work out (I personally hope it shall). Otherwise the Blast Furnaces which environmentalists hate so much are here to stay. 

Those higher grades of Steel are also more critical at the moment than ever as we want fuel economy, which means we want lighter steels, which means they need to have higher strength to get the same effect for less weight. 

It is easy to point at something and go, look it uses less, until you do some research and find out it isn't viable for the future. Our carbon tax only means that steel shall be produced by blast furnaces outside of Canada with no environmental controls and then shipped overseas which is also environmentally costly. Net result is Canada pretending it helped reduce global emissions by increasing them by a larger amount somewhere else (most likely India or China). Simple example of the Carbon Tax screwing the environment and Canadians.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (13 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> Canada/US NG distribution is tightly integrated, with a huge portion of the eastern supply coming from the US. Can't find exactly how much but generally looks like Alberta exports dropped off both US and Eastern Canada because it's cheaper/shorter to use the US Marcellus source.
> 
> A lot of the Alberta NG is actually used by the oil sands now to generate power/steam to extract the oil.
> 
> ...


back in 2000 I was reviewing a project in Kitimat to import LNG as Canada was running out. Thanks to fracking, in 10 years we had a 70 year supply of exportable LNG on top of our domestic needs. (Requirement of a NEB export licence is domestic supply must be guaranteed)


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> It is true, look at the quality of products made today vs. older products. I can go to antique store or garage sale, buy a tool which is 100+ years old and usually with a small amount of cleaning and maintenance it does exactly what it was designed to do 100 years later effectively. We buy so much items which aren't needed. From remodelling our houses every decade or two (not talking about maintenance rather oh this kitchen is dated time to gut the thing and put in all new things), to buying new appliances every decade, to buying crappy cheap items which last only a few years at best, to replacing our phones every year or two. We don't do so much repairing anymore, only replacing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Natural gas can be used to make iron and EAF can be used to make steel.

Doing that would cut emissions in steel making in half. So EAF can be part of the solution.


----------



## Kat Stevens (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Shhh.
> 
> Don't let the reality ruin the fantasy of Alberta turning off the taps in some sort of weird revenge.


----------



## Altair (13 Nov 2021)

@Kat Stevens  not typically, but I don't live in Alberta so that may have something to do with it.


----------



## Kat Stevens (13 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> @Kat Stevens  not typically, but I don't live in Alberta so that may have something to do with it.


Lucky for you.  And us.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Nov 2021)

> Almost two-thirds of Canadians support immediately capping greenhouse gas emissions from the oil sands – even if it puts jobs at risk, according to a new poll.



Without a supplementary question identifying the 2/3 of people willing to lose jobs as being the same people whose jobs would be lost, it's just another example of people willing to trade someone else's costs for their own benefits.  Polling on social/political/policy questions is full of that kind of useless bullshit.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

If Governments were serious about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, they would embark on ambitious infrastructure projects like Government used to do in the 60s and 70s.  Massive Hydro-electric projects, Waterworks, Interstate Highways, Nuclear Power.  All were at one time manageable projects for Governments.  They were headed by Politicians who were actual visionaries and got stuff done.  

Unfortunately the political class lack the stones for that sort of thing today.


----------



## Infanteer (14 Nov 2021)

Why I changed my mind about nuclear power | Michael Shellenberger | TEDxBerlin
					

Michael Shellenberger is co-founder and Senior Fellow at the Breakthrough Institute, where he was president from 2003 to 2015, and a co-author of the Ecomodernist Manifesto.  Over the last decade, Michael and his colleagues have constructed a new paradigm that views prosperity, cheap energy and...




					www.ted.com


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Nov 2021)




----------



## Altair (14 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Without a supplementary question identifying the 2/3 of people willing to lose jobs as being the same people whose jobs would be lost, it's just another example of people willing to trade someone else's costs for their own benefits.  Polling on social/political/policy questions is full of that kind of useless bullshit.


Yeah, but in terms of politics, that matters little, no?

If enough of those 2/3 won't vote CPC who I assume would be up in arms about a emissions cap, then isn't that the CPCs ceiling? And if that's the ceiling  doesn't the LPC continue on with sizeable minorities or small majorities?


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Nov 2021)

Countries strike deal at COP26 climate summit after last-minute compromise on coal​11th hour sneaky.

It's too bad the Honourable Prime Minister Trudeau couldn't put on an interpretative dance for the delegates from India to explain the dangers of coal.


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> This is less might makes right than it is the right thing to do and it happens to be popular.
> 
> Also people who support a cap on emissions will likely vote for parties who support a cap on emissions, and if one party will predictably be against it, we'll I suppose 2 out of 3 Canadians will be less likely to vote for that 1 party.
> 
> Good politics and environmental policy all wrapped into 1, seems like a good week for the LPC.



Its hard for you to say someone else it right eh ?  

Its the right thing to do only because 2/3rds of the people say so.  

Only time will tell.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Countries strike deal at COP26 climate summit after last-minute compromise on coal​11th hour sneaky.
> 
> It's too bad the Honourable Prime Minister Trudeau couldn't put on an interpretative dance for the delegates from India to explain the dangers of coal.


Given that Canada has essentially pledge only to eliminate half its coal exports (thermal/energy only, not metallurgical coal), we would in no position to be arrogantly explain/preach to India why they must eliminate coal entirely.

Mind you, that would be exactly the style of PMJT to lecture India from a position of hypocrisy…


----------



## Altair (14 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Its hard for you to say someone else it right eh ?
> 
> Its the right thing to do only because 2/3rds of the people say so.
> 
> Only time will tell.


Lowering emissions is good.

This will lower emissions.

Thus this is good.

It also so happens to be supported by 2 out of 3 Canadians.

All in all, good. I'm proud of Canadians.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Lowering emissions is good.
> 
> This will lower emissions.
> 
> ...


I would personally like to see us invest in Nuclear Power in a big way.  We already are the second largest producer of Uranium in the World and hold vast Reserves.  Nuclear Power is by far the most efficient form of Power and we have a mature industry in this Country with a proven safety record.  

IMO, any Green Energy initiative in this Country must consider Nuclear Energy given our competitive advantages in this market.


----------



## Altair (14 Nov 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I would personally like to see us invest in Nuclear Power in a big way.  We already are the second largest producer of Uranium in the World and hold vast Reserves.  Nuclear Power is by far the most efficient form of Power and we have a mature industry in this Country with a proven safety record.
> 
> IMO, any Green Energy initiative in this Country must consider Nuclear Energy given our competitive advantages in this market.


Sure, it works for france, it would work here.

Nuclear, geothermal, hydroelectric,  tidal, wind, solar, get them all online.


----------



## suffolkowner (14 Nov 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I would personally like to see us invest in Nuclear Power in a big way.  We already are the second largest producer of Uranium in the World and hold vast Reserves.  Nuclear Power is by far the most efficient form of Power and we have a mature industry in this Country with a proven safety record.
> 
> IMO, any Green Energy initiative in this Country must consider Nuclear Energy given our competitive advantages in this market.


I'm not convinced by Nuclear yet, maybe see how Pickering, Darlington and Bruce work out. There's a lot of work to be done there, a lot of expensive work


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> I'm not convinced by Nuclear yet, maybe see how Pickering, Darlington and Bruce work out. There's a lot of work to be done there, a lot of expensive work


They have already refurbished a Nuclear Plant in NB.  It cost approximately $2.5 Billion to refurbish Point Lepreau which is a 660MW Nuclear Reactor.  A lot of mistakes were made during that refurb and it went about $1 Billion over budget but considering it was a first, a lot was learned and I have little doubt AECL will do a far better job the next time they have to refurb a CANDU.  

Considering the initial cost of Lepreau was $1.4 Billion though, $2.5 billion seems pretty freaking good to keep a plant running for an additional 27 years which is more than double it's expected life cycle.

There is also the fact that Lepreau makes money for the Province, due to the cheap cost of Uranium vs other fuels and the fact that Nuclear Power provides near constant power supply.  Lepreau is a small reactor but generates enough continuous electricity to power 300,000 homes with a near 90% efficiency.

Compare this to the Ontario Government's Green Energy Boondoggle:

Boondoggle: How Ontario's pursuit of renewable energy broke the province's electricity system

And you can see how the big numbers thrown around for Nuclear Refurbishment all of a sudden become a little more grounded in reality.  The point being, Power Generation is an expensive business.


----------



## lenaitch (14 Nov 2021)

Ya, with current technology, the upfront and refurb costs scare off a lot of politicians, not to mention the waste disposal issue which has yet to be solved.  Besides, environmental groups lose their collective minds at the mere mention of it.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Ya, with current technology, the upfront and refurb costs scare off a lot of politicians, not to mention the waste disposal issue which has yet to be solved.  Besides, environmental groups lose their collective minds at the mere mention of it.


Yet they think nothing of pissing $100s of billions down the drain with unproven technologies.



> One of the most consistent critics of the political takeover of the system has been the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers (OSPE). The society’s central message: “There does not appear to be any entity other than the ministry itself that has overall planning ownership of the electrical grid.”
> 
> Paul Acchione, an OSPE engineer with long experience in the electricity industry, said the government was “hiring political scientists and environmentalists because they thought they were the experts.” As a result, the government has issued more than 100 ministerial directives that ignored the dramatic decline in demand and the realities of managing an electrical grid where new expensive supply was mushrooming all over the province.











						Boondoggle: How Ontario's pursuit of renewable energy broke the province's electricity system
					

The Ontario green electricity regime is a monumental failure. The costs to consumers are prohibitive and damaging the economy




					financialpost.com
				




This is what happens when Politicians ignore actual experts and instead seek advice from experts in Basket Weaving and Kabuki Theatre.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

lenaitch said:


> Ya, with current technology, the upfront and refurb costs scare off a lot of politicians, not to mention the waste disposal issue which has yet to be solved.  Besides, environmental groups lose their collective minds at the mere mention of it.


Lets not pretend the waste disposal issues are bigger than they are though.  The actual issues are really quite miniscule and are overinflated.  Case in point, here is a picture of Lepreau's Nuclear Waste Storage Area:



It's about 1km in distance total around the perimeter.  

Just Victoria BC's landfill is around 4x the size.  



All Nuclear Waste Disposal requires is a space that can be climate controlled and properly guarded and regulated.  The actual size of that space is really quite small, of course the Government will drag their heels on it because it's a political hot potato.


----------



## brihard (14 Nov 2021)

There are also different fuel cycles that produce less troublesome waste products.

Longer term, within a generation we’ll probably see nuclear fusion reach deployability. That will be a total game changer for the entire energy industry.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Nov 2021)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Lets not pretend the waste disposal issues are bigger than they are though.  The actual issues are really quite miniscule and are overinflated.  Case in point, here is a picture of Lepreau's Nuclear Waste Storage Area:
> 
> View attachment 67156
> 
> ...


Ironically, nuclear power is the only power generation method where the waste product can be 100% contained.  Even solar, the panels post-use have to be addressed somehow (only EU has an explicit requirement to address post-use recycling of the panels).


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Ironically, nuclear power is the only power generation method where the waste product can be 100% contained.  Even solar, the panels post-use have to be addressed somehow (only EU has an explicit requirement to address post-use recycling of the panels).


Aye,

I used to work at a Coal Generating Station as a labourer prior to joining the CAF.  You want to see a landfill, you should see the Ash Landfills that Coal Plants produce .  Luckily, the companies usually keep them out of sight of people by planting large tree forests around them so nobody can see them (out of sight out of mind right).  They are also developing new technology to recycle that Ash for use in Concrete and Wallboard.


----------



## Good2Golf (14 Nov 2021)

Current government Greenpeace Environment Minister can’t help show his pre-Government roots and damn by faint praise the nuclear industry which will have to “prove itself” vice get any substantive government support.

Liberals leaving nuclear’s future to the market while other countries bet big


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (14 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Current government Greenpeace Environment Minister can’t help show his pre-Government roots and damn by faint praise the nuclear industry which will have to “prove itself” vice get any substantive government support.
> 
> Liberals leaving nuclear’s future to the market while other countries bet big


The Government will continue to do nothing and Canada will continue to bleed whatever engineering excellence we once had in a key industry.  Chalk River Laboratories is a shadow of its fomer self. 

It seems the only thing Canadians are good at is sipping lattés on Bay Street, pouring money in to Real Estate, while a small portion show some initiative by being able to rip Natural Resources out of the ground for others to do something productive with.

On that note though, CAMECO is doing quite well this year:


----------



## Eaglelord17 (15 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Natural gas can be used to make iron and EAF can be used to make steel.
> 
> Doing that would cut emissions in steel making in half. So EAF can be part of the solution.


EAF cannot make steel, it can only recycle it. If you could make steel from scratch with a EAF no one would run a Blast Furnace as the costs for a Blast Furnace are significantly higher. 

There have been a few studies already that if people keep switching to EAFs by about 2035 we will not have enough scrap steel in the world to supply the EAFs and will have to build more Blast Furnaces (unless Hydrogen produced steel can succeed). This is a reality not a wish, I personally hate Coke and the byproducts from Steel Making (I refurbish equipment used in the process regularly), but until there is some serious advancement in Steel Manufacturing, we are stuck with the current process.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Nov 2021)

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are set to build their first large nuclear power plant in Wyoming. If things run true to form, the politicians will fall in line behind them. These guys won't  be doing this on a lark. There has to be a follow on plan to expand their portfolios.








						Bill Gates, Warren Buffett building nuclear reactor in coal-rich Wyoming
					

Nuclear reactor design company TerraPower, and power company PacifiCorp, are partners on the Natrium nuclear reactor pilot project, the companies said.




					nypost.com
				












						Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are building a $1 billion next-generation nuclear reactor in Wyoming
					

Bill Gates said the advanced nuclear reactor would perform better and cost less than a traditional nuclear power plant.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Nov 2021)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Bill Gates and Warren Buffet are set to build their first large nuclear power plant in Wyoming. If things run true to form, the politicians will fall in line behind them. These guys won't  be doing this on a lark. There has to be a follow on plan to expand their portfolios.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And it will all - probably - be managed by a Canadian accountant from Alberta because those gajillionaire Yanks know what they're doing 






						Greg Abel - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Altair (15 Nov 2021)

brihard said:


> There are also different fuel cycles that produce less troublesome waste products.
> 
> Longer term, within a generation we’ll probably see nuclear fusion reach deployability. That will be a total game changer for the entire energy industry.


I hope so, but I feel like I've heard about fusion for at least 15 years now being "just around the corner"


----------



## Altair (15 Nov 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> EAF cannot make steel, it can only recycle it. If you could make steel from scratch with a EAF no one would run a Blast Furnace as the costs for a Blast Furnace are significantly higher.
> 
> There have been a few studies already that if people keep switching to EAFs by about 2035 we will not have enough scrap steel in the world to supply the EAFs and will have to build more Blast Furnaces (unless Hydrogen produced steel can succeed). This is a reality not a wish, I personally hate Coke and the byproducts from Steel Making (I refurbish equipment used in the process regularly), but until there is some serious advancement in Steel Manufacturing, we are stuck with the current process.


EAF cannot make steel, but natural gas can be used in place of coal to create direct reduced iron. EAF can use direct reduced iron to create steel. High quality steel too if I remember correctly.

This cuts the amount of carbon used in steel production in half. And once this process in in place its all to easy to make the switch from hydrogen created by natural gas to create direct reduced iron to switch to hydrogen created by renewable like the plant in Sweden is trying to do.

We could make this switch within the year if there was the will to do so.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Nov 2021)

daftandbarmy said:


> And it will all - probably - be managed by a Canadian accountant from Alberta because those gajillionaire Yanks know what they're doing



Well, Canada’s official position now, according to Environmental Minister Guilbault, is to let the market decide nuclear’s future, as noted earlier upthread.  Of course, that is, until things develop as you portend, and Alberta and Saskatchewan become the secondary source of the North American nuclear wave…then Ottawa will likely “re-imagine” the NEP to ensure that control and profits are appropriately re-directed back to the Laurentian Elites…


----------



## Scott (15 Nov 2021)

I believe Lepreau has the site engineering done for a second rector. Been that way since construction, apparently. I used to spend a lot of time on their fire training ground and had a couple of decent tours of the place. I have never been in a cleaner and better cared for generating plant.


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Nov 2021)

Scott said:


> I believe Lepreau has the site engineering done for a second rector. Been that way since construction, apparently. I used to spend a lot of time on their fire training ground and had a couple of decent tours of the place. I have never been in a cleaner and better cared for generating plant.


You should see Bruce.  And their NRT (nuclear response team) is world-class.


----------



## daftandbarmy (15 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Well, Canada’s official position now, according to Environmental Minister Guilbault, is to let the market decide nuclear’s future, as noted earlier upthread.  Of course, that is, until things develop as you portend, and Alberta and Saskatchewan become the secondary source of the North American nuclear wave…then Ottawa will likely “re-imagine” the NEP to ensure that control and profits are appropriately re-directed back to the *Laurentian Elites*…



You mean the 'NGP', right?  









						Opinion: The Conservative dilemma: The Liberals are still the natural governing party
					

In their political orientation, Canadians are predominantly progressive. It is evident in almost every election, wherein the combined vote of centre-left parties easily surmounts that of the conservative vote




					www.theglobeandmail.com


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

And here comes the official challenge to O’toole’s leadership.



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-senator-oust-erin-otoole-1.6249440


----------



## dapaterson (15 Nov 2021)

She may be off O'Toole's Christmas card list for this stunt, but she's probably just got herself on to Trudeau's...


----------



## Altair (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> And here comes the official challenge to O’toole’s leadership.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-senator-oust-erin-otoole-1.6249440


Smart that it comes from a senator.

O'Toole cannot indirectly or directly punish her.

And she makes a good point.



> Erin O’Toole lost this election by every measure. Our party lost half a million votes, won fewer seats, and received a lower popular vote than in 2019. We lost ethnically diverse MPs, female MPs, and MPs in the GTA, Alberta, and in Vancouver’s suburbs. In the GTA alone, O’Toole lost 80,000 votes compared to 2019. O’Toole’s inability to communicate or connect with female voters created an even wider gender gap.


----------



## Altair (15 Nov 2021)

Good news for Alberta parents.









						Alberta, Ottawa ink $3.8 billion child-care deal to lower cost to average of $10-a-day, create 40,000 new spaces
					

Under the agreement, more than 40,000 new not-for-profit child-care and early learning spaces will be created in the province.




					edmontonjournal.com
				






> Alberta and the federal government have reached a five-year $3.8 billion childcare agreement using the federal funding to create more than 40,000 new childcare and early learning spaces and bring the average cost for children under six down to $10-a-day.
> 
> “Now, I think people know that the provinces and the federal government don’t always get along on everything. And there’s always going to be points of disagreement. But I am really, really pleased to be here today with Premier Kenney and the Government of Alberta to demonstrate that on the things that matter most to citizen, on the things that matter to the people that we serve, we can get big things done,” Trudeau said.
> 
> “That’s exactly what we’ve been able to do here today with Alberta on moving forward with a historic agreement on childcare.”


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Smart that it comes from a senator.
> 
> O'Toole cannot indirectly or directly punish her.
> 
> And she makes a good point.


It’s no accident. I wouldn’t be shocked if “others”are behind this and using her as the mouth piece. 

While I agree that she makes a point about the CPC running a more liberal campaign, it’s what was needed.  If they turf 
O’toole they’ll get into another divisive leadership run and the fringe elements will come up out of their holes.  I don’t think these people really want to govern.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> It’s no accident. I wouldn’t be shocked if “others”are behind this and using her as the mouth piece.
> 
> While I agree that she makes a point about the CPC running a more liberal campaign, it’s what was needed.  If they turf
> O’toole they’ll get into another divisive leadership run and the fringe elements will come up out of their holes.  I don’t think these people really want to govern.



Personally I can't stomach a further move right by the party.  Perhaps it's time for us red cons to migrate to the Liberals and try to drag them back towards the center.  I would love to see a PC party again but we would be to centerist for most I think.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Personally I can't stomach a further move right by the party.  Perhaps it's time for us red cons to migrate to the Liberals and try to drag them back towards the center.  I would love to see a PC party again but we would be to centerist for most I think.


Sadly I think you are right.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Nov 2021)

> Perhaps it's time for us red cons to migrate to the Liberals



"Exit" or "Voice".  "Exit" helps the LPC.  People who do that will basically end up looking like a version of NeverTrumpers.  Not going to convince the people who stay behind.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> "Exit" or "Voice".  "Exit" helps the LPC.  People who do that will basically end up looking like a version of NeverTrumpers.  Not going to convince the people who stay behind.


I doubt they can be convinced.


----------



## The Bread Guy (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> ... Not going to convince the people who stay behind.


Any chance of enough people being convinced to go a titch more progressive in the current mix?  If there was, I suspect it would have happened.  Or are we talking generational change?


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Nov 2021)

Conservatives aren't progressives.  Most Canadian conservatives have already adjusted to essentially lock in things like SSM.  Accentuating the holdouts doesn't change the general trend.  If you're willing to support the LPC or NDP over whichever hot button issue it is for you that puts CPC beyond the pale - and especially if it involves some unlikely unicorn like a majority of Canadian ridings electing social conservatives - then charitably you've probably moved away from conservativism, and uncharitably - if you do that and the progressives are happy to accept your support without doing much of anything for that support - you're what used to be called a "useful idiot".


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Conservatives aren't progressives.  Most Canadian conservatives have already adjusted to essentially lock in things like SSM.  Accentuating the holdouts doesn't change the general trend.  If you're willing to support the LPC or NDP over whichever hot button issue it is for you that puts CPC beyond the pale - and especially if it involves some unlikely unicorn like a majority of Canadian ridings electing social conservatives - then charitably you've probably moved away from conservativism, and uncharitably - if you do that and the progressives are happy to accept your support without doing much of anything for that support - you're what used to be called a "useful idiot".


Progressive Conservatives were and are still a thing.  There has always been red Tories and blue liberals.  They can cycle and have cycled between the two main parties when the values and policies shifted in various directions.  Capturing that vote is the tricky part,  O’toole at least tried.  I would argue Harper did as well to an extent.  

And don’t kid yourself.  This isn’t about O’toole’s leadership.  I am convinced that this is about resistance to moving closer to the centre.  

I want a moderate centrist option.  More specifically two.  

The current state of the CPC though is showing it’s political immaturity.  It is showing an unwillingness to want to govern and keeps shooting itself in the foot.  We really don’t have a serious moderate right of center party.

If it takes those red Tories to shift to the LPC and move that party more to the centre then so be it.  Halifax Tar’s comments represent a common feeling within the center right. 

I’ve said it before.  The CPC will ensure that the LPC will rule for a generation.


----------



## Halifax Tar (15 Nov 2021)

100%  This party cannot see the trees for the forest.  

Wanna know why the Liberals keep winning ?  Here's a hint, it has nothing to do with Liberals.


----------



## KevinB (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Progressive Conservatives were and are still a thing.  There has always been red Tories and blue liberals.  They can cycle and have cycled between the two main parties when the values and policies shifted in various directions.  Capturing that vote is the tricky part,  O’toole at least tried.  I would argue Harper did as well to an extent.
> 
> And don’t kid yourself.  This isn’t about O’toole’s leadership.  I am convinced that this is about resistance to moving closer to the centre.
> 
> ...


Frankly the CPC is a centralist party - the Reform movement dragged it briefly to the Right - and then it has drifted back further to the left.

 Canada is the Boiling Frog of Conservatism - the change has been slow that most Conservatives still think they are actually conservatives - not Liberals...

Meanwhile people fear monger the incredibly uninformed electorate into thinking the bogeyman exists in the CPC, and the corruption party wins again.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Nov 2021)

The LPC knows its main turf fight is with the NDP.  That's where it's going to move.

If you want a centrist conservative party, the best place to start is the nominally conservative party.  You're outnumbered by the centre-left and left in the LPC.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Frankly the CPC is a centralist party - the Reform movement dragged it briefly to the Right - and then it has drifted back further to the left.
> 
> Canada is the Boiling Frog of Conservatism - the change has been slow that most Conservatives still think they are actually conservatives - not Liberals...
> 
> Meanwhile people fear monger the incredibly uninformed electorate into thinking the bogeyman exists in the CPC, and the corruption party wins again.


The problem is that the conservatives played a major role in enabling that boogey man reputation.  Scheer did no one any favours in that regard.  Full credit to O’toole for managing to minimise that this time around.  Not completely, his gun flip flop didn’t help but at least it wasn’t as bad as the last guy.


----------



## KevinB (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You're outnumbered by the left and far left in the LPC.


FIFY


----------



## KevinB (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> The problem is that the conservatives played a major role in enabling that boogey man reputation.  Scheer did no one any favours in that regard.  Full credit to O’toole for managing to minimise that this time around.  Not completely, his gun flip flop didn’t help but at least it wasn’t as bad as the last guy.


Oh I totally agree - some of the CPC MP's and Candidates act like they intentionally want to lose as they say the most outlandish things - some stuff that even I as a right wing guy wonder WTF they are thinking.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The LPC knows its main turf fight is with the NDP.  That's where it's going to move.
> 
> If you want a centrist conservative party, the best place to start is the nominally conservative party.  You're outnumbered by the centre-left and left in the LPC.


If they can stop beating themselves up with their own hands maybe.  I won’t hold my breath.  The latest shenanigans aren’t inspiring confidence.


----------



## Brad Sallows (15 Nov 2021)

> The problem is that the conservatives played a major role in enabling that boogey man reputation.



Yeah, the argument in the press goes something like this:

"You're racists".

"No, we're not."

"Aha! Denial is the first sign of racism."

Doesn't matter if the CPC has firstly said that it won't take up policy "X" if the topic is raised, and secondly has not taken up policy "X" when the topic is raised.

The LPC, meanwhile, can have its shenanigans right in the middle of governing.


----------



## KevinB (15 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> If they can stop beating themselves up with their own hands maybe.  I won’t hold my breath.  The latest shenanigans aren’t inspiring confidence.


It reminds me of Trump pondering to the base -- the base is going to vote that way anyway - the swing voters the important ones.  Alienating them is a guaranteed loss


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The LPC knows its main turf fight is with the NDP.  That's where it's going to move.
> 
> If you want a centrist conservative party, the best place to start is the nominally conservative party.  You're outnumbered by the centre-left and left in the LPC.


And tell the entire caucus, “okay, no more private member bills bringing shades of abortion control to the fore…”  That doesn’t do anything to convince people you aren’t anti-reformation.  I get it that there was some reasonably arguable logic for some of the bills, but it was very poorly presented externally, and the LPC spin-machine did Yoeman service making the Cons look like they wanted to abolish abortion or worse…


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Yeah, the argument in the press goes something like this:
> 
> "You're racists".
> 
> ...


O’toole took lessons from how Scheer mishandled the abortion and LBGTQ questions.  He handled both well and it was a non issue despite attempts by the LPC to do so.   

Scheer and others were and are just as much to blame as the media and the LPC that shaped the discussion.  It’s why he lost to a corrupt party.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> And tell the entire caucus, “okay, no more private member bills bringing shades of abortion control to the fore…”  That doesn’t do anything to convince people you aren’t anti-reformation.  I get it that there was some reasonably arguable logic for some of the bills, but it was very poorly presented externally, and the LPC spin-machine did Yoeman service making the Cons look like they wanted to abolish abortion or worse…


Yep. They aren’t doing themselves any favours.


----------



## Remius (15 Nov 2021)

This all being said,  I hope O’toole survives this and comes out stronger for it.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (16 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Frankly the CPC is a centralist party - the Reform movement dragged it briefly to the Right - and then it has drifted back further to the left.
> 
> Canada is the Boiling Frog of Conservatism - the change has been slow that most Conservatives still think they are actually conservatives - not Liberals...
> 
> Meanwhile people fear monger the incredibly uninformed electorate into thinking the bogeyman exists in the CPC, and the corruption party wins again.


I cannot believe how effective the fearmongering is on the CPC. One guy I know even though he hates Trudeau and what the Liberals are doing (he is more towards what the Liberal Party was 20 years ago), voted for the Liberals because the Conservatives 'were going to take away public health care'. 

The fact that such a crock of BS is able to work at all, much like the abortion fearmongering, or the 'they are going to let anyone run around with full auto machine guns' fearmongering, is insane. It blows my mind how vapid most Canadians actually are.


----------



## KevinB (16 Nov 2021)

Politics really comes down to compromise - Parties need to find a way to attract enough voters to their side while not totally betraying their "cause"
   I am very right on social issues - but I am a realist (or enough of one) to know that hard line on abortion and a few other issues is not politically achievable at this point.


----------



## QV (16 Nov 2021)

Eaglelord17 said:


> I cannot believe how effective the fearmongering is on the CPC. One guy I know even though he hates Trudeau and what the Liberals are doing (he is more towards what the Liberal Party was 20 years ago), voted for the Liberals because the Conservatives 'were going to take away public health care'.
> 
> The fact that such a crock of BS is able to work at all, much like the abortion fearmongering, or the 'they are going to let anyone run around with full auto machine guns' fearmongering, is insane. It blows my mind how vapid most Canadians actually are.


Everyone continues to ignore the biased and corrupt media establishment's role in all of this. Once you understand this and you see the "news" for what it is, you wouldn't feel the same way about the LPC or the CPC that is being portrayed in the media. The voting outcome would be far different. But the crooked politicians know that an uninformed electorate can be easily manipulated. A clear example of this is how Trudeau has escaped all of his scandals relatively unscathed. There is not a right leaning politician on the planet that would have survived half of those scandals, the media would have beat that drum endlessly (like they did to Trump) until their mission was accomplished.


----------



## Altair (16 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Everyone continues to ignore the biased and corrupt media establishment's role in all of this. Once you understand this and you see the "news" for what it is, you wouldn't feel the same way about the LPC or the CPC that is being portrayed in the media. The voting outcome would be far different. But the crooked politicians know that an uninformed electorate can be easily manipulated. A clear example of this is how Trudeau has escaped all of his scandals relatively unscathed. There is not a right leaning politician on the planet that would have survived half of those scandals, the media would have beat that drum endlessly (like they did to Trump) until their mission was accomplished.


If the Conservatives got their house in order the media would be a non issue.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Nov 2021)

We need a manifesto of Armyrick emoji.....


----------



## QV (16 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If the Conservatives got their house in order the media would be a non issue.


This is a complete and unequivocally false statement and you know it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If the Conservatives got their house in order the media would be a non issue.



If the Conservatives found a cure for cancer the Liberals would find a way to accuse Conservatives of taking jobs away from female and POC health care workers while defunding charities.


----------



## Altair (16 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> This is a complete and unequivocally false statement and you know it.


It's not. So long as the opposition with the best chance of winning the election, in this case the Conservatives, are off base with the majority of Canadians, the 65 out of 100 that vote LPC NDP and BQ then it matters little what Trudeau does or doesn't do.

Progressives learned the lesson of the Harper years, which are no matter much we may dislike the LPC and whatever scandal they get themselves wrapped up in, we like it better than the CPC in power. That has much less to do with the media and more with the CPC not being a viable alternative for Progressive voters.


----------



## Altair (16 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> If the Conservatives found a cure for cancer the Liberals would find a way to accuse Conservatives of taking jobs away from female and POC health care workers while defunding charities.


The LPC found a way to catch up and surpass the USA in terms of vaccinations, I didn't hear the CPC congratulate them.

Welcome to politics I guess.


----------



## RangerRay (16 Nov 2021)

I only wish the media covered Liberal scandals like they did Tory scandals ( $16 OJ, Chief-of-Staff paying back money to taxpayers).


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

While I would love to talk about how much the media is biased, I really don't care and real politics is happening. 









						O'Toole boots senator who challenged his leadership out of Conservative caucus
					

Erin O'Toole kicked Sen. Denise Batters out of the Conservative caucus Tuesday -- one day after she challenged his leadership.




					www.ctvnews.ca
				






> OTTAWA -- Erin O'Toole kicked Sen. Denise Batters out of the Conservative caucus Tuesday -- one day after she challenged his leadership.
> 
> "As the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, I will not tolerate an individual discrediting and showing a clear lack of respect towards the efforts of the entire Conservative caucus, who are holding the corrupt and disastrous Trudeau government to account," O'Toole said in a brief statement released late Tuesday.





> But she signalled in a Twitter post that she has no intention of backing off her petition, even though the party's president has said it's invalid.
> 
> "Tonight, Erin O'Toole tried to silence me for giving our .CPC members a voice. I will not be silenced by a leader so weak that he fired me VIA VOICEMAIL. Most importantly, he cannot suppress the will of our Conservative Party members! Sign the petition," she tweeted.


Batters is 51 years old, she's going to be on the hill and in the senate long after O'Toole is gone, so kicking her out does very little fundamentally to her. 

Either way.


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> While I would love to talk about how much the media is biased, I really don't care and real politics is happening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He needs to kick out a few more.  This sends a strong signal.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> The LPC found a way to catch up and surpass the USA in terms of vaccinations, I didn't hear the CPC congratulate them.


Could be that thousands of people were still dying and the Conservatives thought it wouldn't be tactful. Especially after our _afraid to upset China, travel bans are racist_ start out of the gate.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> He needs to kick out a few more.  This sends a strong signal.


Our senators aren't elected and holding a position like that for life is bullshit.


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> Our senators aren't elected and holding a position like that for life is bullshit.


Agreed but she’s no longer a member of the party or the caucus.   It isn’t much but at least he’s doing something to rein in the trouble makers.  Hopefully he can get rid of a few MPs that are likely behind this.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Agreed but she’s no longer a member of the party or the caucus.   It isn’t much but at least he’s doing something to rein in the trouble makers.  Hopefully he can get rid of a few MPs that are likely behind this.


Maybe the Conservatives should do the same as the Liberals did with senators?  Delink them from the party (in name, at least)


----------



## QV (17 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> Agreed but she’s no longer a member of the party or the caucus.   It isn’t much but at least he’s doing something to rein in the trouble makers.  Hopefully he can get rid of a few MPs that are likely behind this.


O'Toole's lurch to the left lost them seats and support compared to the previous election. What makes you think going harder like that will help them?


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> O'Toole's lurch to the left lost them seats and support compared to the previous election. What makes you think going harder like that will help them?


There are few more factors than that that cost him seats.  It isn’t about going harder it’s about going smarter.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> O'Toole's lurch to the left lost them seats and support compared to the previous election. What makes you think going harder like that will help them?


Interesting that things that used to be a solid part of the PC platform are now considered a “lurch to the left.”  What we were seeing could also have been described as greater inclusion of the originally merged pan-PC/Alliance policy space. 

If one re-defines the center to be the left side of the hard right’s socially conservative comfort space, then everything other than the old-school Reform/Alliance platform space is to be considered ‘left’.

Good luck with ever having any meaningful conservative presence in parliament if that’s the goal.


----------



## QV (17 Nov 2021)

Why do we continue to ignore Harpers time? Have the Liberals been that scandal free and the CPC so riddled with scandal that this couldn't happen again? There is always a lot of talk on this site that the majority of Canadians are left leaning. I disagree and the election of mostly conservative provincial governments for the last few years supports that. The middle can be swayed either way. The LPC win the media battle and control the narrative, that is 100% why the CPC struggle today. 

O'toole did worse than Scheer. I don't know how the CPC could keep O'toole after that.


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Why do we continue to ignore Harpers time? Have the Liberals been that scandal free and the CPC so riddled with scandal that this couldn't happen again? There is always a lot of talk on this site that the majority of Canadians are left leaning. I disagree and the election of mostly conservative provincial governments for the last few years supports that. The middle can be swayed either way. The LPC win the media battle and control the narrative, that is 100% why the CPC struggle today.
> 
> O'toole did worse than Scheer. I don't know how the CPC could keep O'toole after that.


This is the misplaced reasoning that some conservatives have.  A majority of Canadians are progressives.  The facts bear that out.  Provincial elections and parties are not always a reflection of federal sentiment.  So no, that does not support your theory that a majority are right leaning.  At the provincial level, some conservative governments have been able to balance their approach and attract voters by appealing to them as a viable option to other side.  Right now the federally is not.  

The media while slanted is just an easy excuse the right keeps using.  Time to adult up and show Canadians they can govern.  Right now they are a hot mess. 

Until true blue conservatives understand this, they will struggle.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Nov 2021)

Just FYI the NS PC party won a land slide electoral victory by running a more Liberal campaign platform than the Liberals.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> There is always a lot of talk on this site that the majority of Canadians are left leaning. I disagree and the election of mostly conservative provincial governments for the last few years supports that.


Really?  So ON and NS makes Canada ‘mostly conservative’ provincial governments?

ON was clear, the electorate was fed up with decades of post-NDP McGuinty-Wynne screw overs, simple as that. Little to do with the Fed circus. NS happened because the PC provincially remain PC, not hard right (stealth-Reform) CPC types.


----------



## Halifax Tar (17 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Really?  So ON and NS makes Canada ‘mostly conservative’ provincial governments?
> 
> ON was clear, the electorate was fed up with decades of post-NDP McGuinty-Wynne screw overs, simple as that. Little to do with the Fed circus. NS happened because the PC provincially remain PC, not hard right (stealth-Reform) CPC types.



And Alberta, Sask, Manitoba and NB all have conservative governments.  I think.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Nov 2021)

I've always found it odd that the generally profligate spending of Alberta governments is characterized as conservative.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

dapaterson said:


> I've always found it odd that the generally profligate spending of Alberta governments is characterized as conservative.


Alberta isn't that conservative anyways. In the two big cities, progressive mayors keep winning. The NDP are a threat to win any given provincial election.

Federally Albertans vote for oil politics and that's what is keeping them voting CPC, but on their politics on a whole, they are becoming more progressive as well.


----------



## Good2Golf (17 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> And Alberta, Sask, Manitoba and NB all have conservative governments.  I think.


True - I was adding the most recent changes from previous Liberal governments, which I understood was the point being made about change.  That said, I suppose Albertans revising their previous socialist leftist leanings (although significantly far more left-wing than Liberals) should probably be included in the big-change to Conservative category.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Why do we continue to ignore Harpers time? Have the Liberals been that scandal free and the CPC so riddled with scandal that this couldn't happen again? There is always a lot of talk on this site that the majority of Canadians are left leaning. I disagree and the election of mostly conservative provincial governments for the last few years supports that. The middle can be swayed either way. The LPC win the media battle and control the narrative, that is 100% why the CPC struggle today.
> 
> O'toole did worse than Scheer. I don't know how the CPC could keep O'toole after that.


I'm on a lot of other political groups, and forums. Something that left leaning voters continue to harp on is how they wish they could vote NDP, but they don't want to risk the CPC winning. Everyone looks at the 2011 election and the lessons learned from it.

I remember growing up and generations saying they would never vote NDP provincially because of Boe Ray,  or vote liberals federally because of PET, and how long that stuck with people. It seems like there are progressives who will never not vote LPC because they view the alternative as being worse.

I'm  not saying that the CPC can never win again, but I am saying that so long as they remain "scary" to the 60-65 percent of Canadians who vote for a left leaning party, those in urban ridings and the suburbs then they will find their path to victory being very hard indeed.

A lot of progressive voters think Trudeau is doing too little in fighting climate change. The CPC say the LPC is doing too much. That's scary.

A lot of progressive voters think Trudeau is moving too slowly to address things like childcare and pharmacare.  The CPC says the LPC is doing too much. That's scary.

80 percent of Canadians say that MPs should be vaccinated. CPC campaigned against vaccine mandates, and made a fuss about MPs having to be vaccinated and now have a mini caucus about the rights of the unvaccinated. That's scary.

A lot of progressives say Trudeau needs to do more to address gun violence, including restricting access to firearms. The CPC is saying that the LPC is doing too much. That's scary.

And for new immigrants, there is still talk of that barbaric hotline from 2015, and God only knows how long that black cloud will hang over the heads of the CPC.

This is all just anecdotes gleamed from those politically active enough to chat about it online, but polls bear that out as well.









						Leger's North American Tracker - March 30, 2021
					

DOWNLOAD THE FULL REPORT AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE We survey Canadians and Americans to explore their perspectives on COVID-19 and other current events. Stay up to date on the latest trends and discover our most recent results below. This survey is conducted in collaboration with the...




					leger360.com
				













						Majority of Canadians support MP vaccination: poll
					

The survey found that 75.2 per cent of respondents say all MPs should be vaccinated against COVID-19




					www.theglobeandmail.com
				






> The survey, conducted by Nanos Research for The Globe and Mail, found that 75.2 per cent of respondents said they agree and 8 per cent said they somewhat agree with the statement “All members of Parliament should be vaccinated for COVID-19.” Just 11.1 per cent said they disagree and 3 per cent said they somewhat disagree with the statement.











						Climate conference cynicism: Vast majority have little faith leaders will make meaningful progress at COP26 - Angus Reid Institute
					

Most take pessimistic view of efforts to reverse warming, feel it’s “probably” too late November 9, 2021 – The COP26 climate change summit has been billed as “make or break”




					angusreid.org
				















						Child Care in Canada: Little consensus over best approach to assist parents of little children - Angus Reid Institute
					

Majority support government investment in child care; divisions over how and where to allocate funding March 3, 2021 – It is one of the most stressful and demanding aspects of




					angusreid.org
				






So I don't think the conditions that lead to Harper winning in 2011 are able to be repeated. There won't be a surge of the NDP leading to a decline of the LPC. That was the lesson learned from 2011.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Nov 2021)

I suppose most people only know about what they read in the news.


----------



## QV (17 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose most people only know about what they read in the news.


I rest my case.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose most people only know about what they read in the news.


Regardless, these people believe what they believe and the CPC is not reflective of what they believe in large part.

Gun control, climate change and the environment,  covid 19 vaccine mandates, childcare, abortion in some cases, the CPC is so off base in those subjects that it doesn't matter what Trudeau does, they will not vote CPC. And the last time progressives tried to vote NDP Harper won a majority.

So we will be stuck with the LPC until this changes.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Nov 2021)

You assume that the CPC has to change.  Consequences of other policies can change voters' minds.  For example, if the LPC takes the same line as the current US administration and tries to blow off price inflation and sporadic shortages, people might not say, "oh, more of that, please".  Governments in Canada mostly change because people are tired of the old team, not because another team has awesome new ideas.


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You assume that the CPC has to change.  Consequences of other policies can change voters' minds.  For example, if the LPC takes the same line as the current US administration and tries to blow off price inflation and sporadic shortages, people might not say, "oh, more of that, please".  Governments in Canada mostly change because people are tired of the old team, not because another team has awesome new ideas.


It does not have to change.  And you have a point about being tired of the old team.

This current team is 7 years in.  With three victories.  In two years we might see another election.  That will be 9 years with this team.  

The other team though needs to tackle what Canadians want or offer alternatives.  I believe that there are alternatives to the current climate plan.  Admitting that there is one is the first step.  Proposing a viable pan to tackle it is the next one.  The problem is that there is a segment of the CPC that isn’t happy about even acknowledging that there is a problem.  

The two biggest policy issues that had Canadians concerned was climate change and COVID.  They flubbed on both.  But they are at least keeping their base happy.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> You assume that the CPC has to change.  Consequences of other policies can change voters' minds.  For example, if the LPC takes the same line as the current US administration and tries to blow off price inflation and sporadic shortages, people might not say, "oh, more of that, please".  Governments in Canada mostly change because people are tired of the old team, not because another team has awesome new ideas.


If the CPC wants to wait around for the voters to tire of the LPC that is their prerogative.

I do hope they don't complain if they continue to lose though.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> It does not have to change.  And you have a point about being tired of the old team.
> 
> This current team is 7 years in.  With three victories.  In two years we might see another election.  That will be 9 years with this team.
> 
> ...


I think the NDP LPC supply agreement will be for at least 3 years.


----------



## QV (17 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> The problem is that there is a segment of the CPC that isn’t happy about even acknowledging that there is a problem.
> 
> The two biggest policy issues that had Canadians concerned was climate change and COVID.  They flubbed on both.  But they are at least keeping their base happy.



And there is a segment in the LPC/NDP coalition that would see the entire 1st world burn in the name of climate change. How do you reconcile supporting that segment of the left by voting LPC? 

And let's not pretend the present government handled the COVID situation well from the get go. The CPC would have handled that no worse but with less divisiveness.


----------



## Remius (17 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> And there is a segment in the LPC/NDP coalition that would see the entire 1st world burn in the name of climate change. How do you reconcile supporting that segment of the left by voting LPC?
> 
> And let's not pretend the present government handled the COVID situation well from the get go. The CPC would have handled that no worse but with less divisiveness.


I didn’t vote LPC.  I’ve already voiced my displeasure at the current LPC plan.  I think there are more viable solutions that I believe I’ve mentioned before.  The issue though is a segment of the CPC and that base don’t even want to acknowledge the issue to begin with and are not happy with O’toole’s direction on this. 

You miss the point on the CPC and their stance on COVID and more specifically vaccinations.  O’toole’s critical mistake in the last election was associating himself with Kenney.  That and refusing to mandate vaccines or status of his own party.  And with the current Glaidu “caucus” thing, they haven’t really helped their cause.


----------



## Brad Sallows (17 Nov 2021)

> This current team is 7 years in.  With three victories.  In two years we might see another election.  That will be 9 years with this team.



Harper had 3 victories and 9 years, and historically Liberals have governed for more time than Conservatives.  Too early to be wringing hands or ringing bells.


----------



## mariomike (17 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> I suppose most people only know about what they read in the news.



I'm old-fashioned and still subscribe to a major Canadian newspaper.

Maybe that puts me in the minority these days.


----------



## Altair (17 Nov 2021)

Conservative infighting costing the party Nanos says, as O'Toole support drops post-campaign
					

Continued Conservative infighting over whether Erin O'Toole should continue leading the party is a signal to voters that the Official Opposition is “not ready to govern,” says Nanos Research's Nik Nanos. 'If a party does not support its leader or a party is divided, it basically is a big signal...



					www.ctvnews.ca
				






> If the narrative continues that the Conservatives are divided, they don't have any chance of forming for example a majority government, or even a government… Because if a party does not support its leader or a party is divided, it basically is a big signal to average voters that that party is not ready to govern,” Nanos said in the latest episode of CTV News’ podcast Trend Line.
> 
> The latest question of O’Toole’s leadership comes as new polling data indicates that the percentage of Canadians who view O’Toole as their preferred prime minister has taken a post-campaign hit, dropping the most of all party leaders since the federal election.
> 
> ...


----------



## Altair (18 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> He needs to kick out a few more.  This sends a strong signal.


Thinking back on this, I do find it curious. 

MPs going to create a pro anti vax caucus, crickets.

Anyone who challenges his leadership, they get the boot. 

Priorities.


----------



## Remius (18 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Thinking back on this, I do find it curious.
> 
> MPs going to create a pro anti vax caucus, crickets.
> 
> ...


He’s being tested.  Gladu came out after and retracted a lot of the weirder stuff she said.  Guaranteed she was told to do that or else.  And she and others were kept out of critic positions.   I see this as an escalation.  Don’t be surprised if someone else gets the boot at some point.


----------



## RangerRay (18 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Why do we continue to ignore Harpers time?


I recall Mr. Harper putting a lid on the far-right fringe with an iron glove. He knew if he didn’t, the Liberals would govern for another generation. Social conservatives were apoplectic that he didn’t ban abortions on day one of his first minority and that he invited David Emerson to join his cabinet. His leadership makes O’Toole look like a warm and fuzzy camp councillor.  

Unfortunately, he made mistakes that made him less appealing than Trudeau in 2015.


----------



## Halifax Tar (18 Nov 2021)

RangerRay said:


> I recall Mr. Harper putting a lid on the far-right fringe with an iron glove. He knew if he didn’t, the Liberals would govern for another generation. Social conservatives were apoplectic that he didn’t ban abortions on day one of his first minority and that he invited David Emerson to join his cabinet. His leadership makes O’Toole look like a warm and fuzzy camp councillor.
> 
> Unfortunately, he made mistakes that made him less appealing than Trudeau in 2015.



I maintain Harper is one our best modern PMs. 

Hated by the media of course, but an excellent PM.


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Nov 2021)

RangerRay said:


> I recall Mr. Harper putting a lid on the far-right fringe with an iron glove. He knew if he didn’t, *the Liberals would govern for another generation.* Social conservatives were apoplectic that he didn’t ban abortions on day one of his first minority and that he invited David Emerson to join his cabinet. His leadership makes O’Toole look like a warm and fuzzy camp councillor.
> 
> Unfortunately, he made mistakes that made him less appealing than Trudeau in 2015.



So what your saying is that Harper did such a good job the Liberals have been in power since 2015, and will likely stay there until 2023 at least: 8 years.

Damning with faint praise, indeed!


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Nov 2021)

Harper's chief unforgivable sin was to eliminate a hockey sock of nickel-and-dime niche programs ("rice bowls").  Not far behind was setting objectives that did not match the public service's view of the world.  He lacked panache.  Harper and Flaherty working together were particularly adept during the 2008 recession and recovery.  Good grey government is not as popular as flash and style and comforting words.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (18 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Harper's chief unforgivable sin was to eliminate a hockey sock of nickel-and-dime niche programs ("rice bowls").  Not far behind was setting objectives that did not match the public service's view of the world.  He lacked panache.  Harper and Flaherty working together were particularly adept during the 2008 recession and recovery.  Good grey government is not as popular as flash and style and comforting words *lies.*


FTFY


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

Hard to see how this party is not turning into a shyte show. 









						Conservative senators defy O'Toole on expulsion of senator who challenged leadership
					

Sen. Denise Batters may no longer be welcome in the Conservatives' national caucus but she's still a member of the party's Senate caucus.    Conservative senators have chosen to keep Batters in their fold, notwithstanding party leader Erin O'Toole's decision Tuesday to kick her out of the...




					www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

I'm glad to see the whole party doesn't fold to the whim of the leader over the suggestion of a leadership review.


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I'm glad to see the whole party doesn't fold to the whim of the leader over the suggestion of a leadership review.


On the flip side, do you really need a leadership review when the party is continually undermining the party message to support fringe elements?

People don't trust the official party line on pro-choice, climate change and some other key issues specifically because of vocal support for the opposite of that by seniour people and significant segments of the base. No one really trusts politicians, but when even the party is internally inconsistent, it's not really helping your cause, and loses all kinds of swing voters. None of the partie's core base is enough to form a government, but the current CPC is pretty adept at actively alienating anyone on the fence.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

And O'Toole's flip flops are helping that how? Seems like a good time for a leadership review.

Edit to add: a solid leader would face this review head on and win (or lose). Not banish and treat like dissidents those who raised the issue.


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I'm glad to see the whole party doesn't fold to the whim of the leader over the suggestion of a leadership review.


To an extent I can agree with this.  It’s a valid argument. 

However it certainly seems like she was just being used as a mouthpiece for others given her relative secure position as a senator.  Instead of being cowards the real people behind this should come out and state their case.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Nov 2021)

Probably about time to just pull off the bandaid and reverse the 2003 Alliance and PC deal, and just move forward as the progressive and SOCON entities separately…


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> And O'Toole's flip flops are helping that how? Seems like a good time for a leadership review.
> 
> Edit to add: a solid leader would face this review head on and win (or lose). Not banish and treat like dissidents those who raised the issue.


A leadership review automatically happens at their next party convention.  Why the early review and challenge?


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> A leadership review automatically happens at their next party convention.  Why the early review and challenge?


Perhaps the party constitution is considered by some to be just a suggestion when it suits?


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Probably about time to just pull off the bandaid and reverse the 2003 Alliance and PC deal, and just move forward as the progressive and SOCON entities separately…


I would like more choices. I'd be interested to see how a libertarian (PPC), a progressive conservative (CPC), and a SOCON (re-newed Alliance?) party would work together in a coalition to govern.


----------



## Good2Golf (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> I would like more choices. I'd be interested to see how a libertarian (PPC), a progressive conservative (CPC), and a SOCON (re-newed Alliance?) party would work together in a coalition to govern.


It would depend heavily on how such a structure would attract the Blue Liberals to the fold.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Nov 2021)

Navy_Pete said:


> On the flip side, do you really need a leadership review when the party is continually undermining the party message to support fringe elements?
> 
> People don't trust the official party line on pro-choice, climate change and some other key issues specifically because of vocal support for the opposite of that by seniour people and significant segments of the base. No one really trusts politicians, but when even the party is internally inconsistent, it's not really helping your cause, and loses all kinds of swing voters. None of the partie's core base is enough to form a government, but the current CPC is pretty adept at actively alienating anyone on the fence.



100%

We don't seem to realize there are more votes up for grabs around the center than further into the right.  

I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.  Why is that so hard  ?  Stay out of my bedroom and concentrate on being effective and economical.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100%
> 
> We don't seem to realize there are more votes up for grabs around the center than further into the right.
> 
> I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.  Why is that so hard  ?  Stay out of my bedroom and concentrate on being effective and economical.


That's the PPC.


----------



## YZT580 (19 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100%
> 
> We don't seem to realize there are more votes up for grabs around the center than further into the right.
> 
> I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.  Why is that so hard  ?  Stay out of my bedroom and concentrate on being effective and economical.


if you want what you say you want then you do not want pro lgbtq but rather a totally neutral position where our existing laws on prejudice and discrimination can work.  Conservatives don't necessarily have an anti stance they simply want the government to butt out. If the party had simply taken a pro gun (with a carefully written and clear explanation as to what that meant), a pro small government and a pro balanced budget and clearly stated their position on the hot button issues that were predictable right from the start they could easily have attracted a larger number of votes. It was no wonder that O'Toole lost; there was no difference between his and the liberals stance so people simply stayed with the status quo.  That is where Altair's position makes perfect sense.  Might just as well have re-named the PC's the Me-Too party


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100%
> 
> We don't seem to realize there are more votes up for grabs around the center than further into the right.
> 
> I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.  Why is that so hard  ?  Stay out of my bedroom and concentrate on being effective and economical.


I’ve said this before.  The CPC could easily drop the anti abortion discussion and come up with a real pro life position.  Accept a the pro choice position but create and craft as many laws as they can to encourage pro life decisions.  So more funding and tax breaks for single moms, childcare options, education grants etc etc.  Get behind actual pro life legislation that would encourage women to see their babies come to term. and just drop the whole abortion thing outright.


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Remius said:


> I’ve said this before.  The CPC could easily drop the anti abortion discussion and come up with a real pro life position.  Accept a the pro choice position but create and craft as many laws as they can to encourage pro life decisions.  So more funding and tax breaks for single moms, childcare options, education grants etc etc.  Get behind actual pro life legislation that would encourage women to see their babies come to term. and just drop the whole abortion thing outright.


Honestly the moral issues on Abortion are a tough pill for some to swallow.
As far as a middle ground move you are right that the best option there is encouragement and programs to encourage non abortion solutions.
 I wouldn't necessarily work it as Pro-Life, but Pro Educated and Responsible Choice.
  You can also backdoor more life begins at conception education in schools, and provide better contraceptive options for the sexually active members of society who are not yet ready to have a baby.

 Additionally as noted before you don't have to be Pro LBGTQ+XYZCVX whatever - just leave it alone - don't attempt to do anything to address it at all - leave the issue and refer people back to the ubiquitous rights of everyone.

Will some hardliners be annoyed - sure, but they aren't one issue voters most likely - and you are better off finding more middle of the road slightly right leaning voters, than trying to appease small subsets of the population.

  The problem is the squeaky wheel gets the grease - and a lot of small more extreme view point issues squeak a lot.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Honestly the moral issues on Abortion are a tough pill for some to swallow.
> As far as a middle ground move you are right that the best option there is encouragement and programs to encourage non abortion solutions.
> I wouldn't necessarily work it as Pro-Life, but Pro Educated and Responsible Choice.
> You can also backdoor more life begins at conception education in schools, and provide better contraceptive options for the sexually active members of society who are not yet ready to have a baby.
> ...



I get your point.  Trying to keep everyone happy.  

Not sure it's effective in today's world.  Leaving any room for the opposition to create boogymen is showing to be detrimental.  

The opposition will be able to continue to use things like LGBTQ+ and abortion to paint the party as it wishes until the party unequivocally puts those issues to bed.  This includes allowing their debate in internal politics.  

Canada has decided it's position on these.  It's over, we grasp that and move on or get left behind.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Nov 2021)

> I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.



The CPC can/should easily fit the last 3.  It's not going to get much past neutral on the first 2, which happens to approximately be its official position.  That's good enough for me.  I don't care about the cranks; I tolerate them.  Some people additionally require a conservative party to actively suppress or evict those cranks as the price of a vote, but the conservative party that does that can't win enough seats to form government (voters peel off regardless whether two or more actual parties form).  I weight points 4 and 5 much more strongly than purity of thought on points 1 and 2.  I see some truth in "government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it away".


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> I get your point.  Trying to keep everyone happy.
> 
> Not sure it's effective in today's world.  Leaving any room for the opposition to create boogymen is showing to be detrimental.
> 
> ...


You can address it: We are committed to the current laws in Canada, and rights of the individuals in respect to those issues, and have no plans to change them.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> You can address it: We are committed to the current laws in Canada, and rights of the individuals in respect to those issues, and have no plans to change them.


The CPC's one major and fatal problem is they haven't fully recognized the legacy media is not their friend. Once this has been fully accepted, they can strategize how to defeat or at least properly counter the onslaught of negative media that will portray them as anti-abortion/anti-immigration etc. The CPC needs a far more effective PR wing to successfully communicate the kinds messages you and Remius suggest.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> 100%
> 
> We don't seem to realize there are more votes up for grabs around the center than further into the right.
> 
> I want a party that's firmly pro choice, pro LGBTQ+, pro gun, pro small government and pro balanced budgets.  Why is that so hard  ?  Stay out of my bedroom and concentrate on being effective and economical.


Pro gun when cities are more and more anti gun? And there are more and more Canadians living in cities?

Good luck!


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Pro gun when cities are more and more anti gun? And there are more and more Canadians living in cities?
> 
> Good luck!


The gun issue is a red herring.

 No one wants rampant firearms access for criminals - while urban areas don't always understand that having a firearm doesn't mean you have the intent to go mow down the neighborhood, simply as the majority these days have not been around sporting usage of firearms - in either competition or hunting.

The difference is some believe that disarming a populace is a way to passivate it, and they hedge their platform on public safety.
  Instead of actually dealing with mental health issues, and criminal gang violence, and on the far right, they are often to deadlocked on individual rights to acknowledge with rights come responsibilities.

Legals guns are not the issue in Canada - so further repressing firearms owners in Canada is just a way to disarm the populace - not actually do anything with crime, but it is sold to the uneducated as "Safety".


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Pro gun when cities are more and more anti gun? And there are more and more Canadians living in cities?
> 
> Good luck!


How many cities have banned hand guns?


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> The gun issue is a red herring.


Yes.


KevinB said:


> No one wants rampant firearms access for criminals - while urban areas don't always understand that having a firearm doesn't mean you have the intent to go mow down the neighborhood, simply as the majority these days have not been around sporting usage of firearms - in either competition or hunting.


Urban areas don't understand that, but it's urban areas that are dealing with the brunt of gun violence and they want concrete solutions.

Gun bans are straightforward.


KevinB said:


> The difference is some believe that disarming a populace is a way to passivate it, and they hedge their platform on public safety.
> Instead of actually dealing with mental health issues, and criminal gang violence, and on the far right, they are often to deadlocked on individual rights to acknowledge with rights come responsibilities.


A lot of this is coming from the bottom up. 7 out of 10 canadians believe in more restrictions on firearms. Best of luck to the political party willing to go against 7 out of 10 people.


KevinB said:


> Legals guns are not the issue in Canada - so further repressing firearms owners in Canada is just a way to disarm the populace - not actually do anything with crime, but it is sold to the uneducated as "Safety".


The populace wants this. Political parties are shift their policies to the reality on the ground. It's telling that the CPC immediately did a 180 on their gunnpolicy when questioned about it on the campaign trail.

They know the math as well as any other.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

A misinformed population wants a gun ban. A misinformed population is exactly what the LPC needs.


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Yes.
> 
> Urban areas don't understand that, but it's urban areas that are dealing with the brunt of gun violence and they want concrete solutions.
> 
> Gun bans are straightforward.


Well yes - but it won't change gun violence - none of the Major Cities in Canada have crimes to any significant % being conducted with legal firearms.
   90% are with firearms already prohibited in Canada - so the ban won't do SFA


Altair said:


> A lot of this is coming from the bottom up. 7 out of 10 canadians believe in more restrictions on firearms. Best of luck to the political party willing to go against 7 out of 10 people.
> 
> The populace wants this. Political parties are shift their policies to the reality on the ground. It's telling that the CPC immediately did a 180 on their gunnpolicy when questioned about it on the campaign trail.
> 
> They know the math as well as any other.


It isn't math - it's the fact Liebrals love to misconstrue the story - anyone honest and semi intelligent looking at the firearms crime in Canada can see that further restrictions aren't going to change anything.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> A misinformed population wants a gun ban. A misinformed population is exactly what the LPC needs.


The populace is the populace. 

I suppose the CPC could try to educate the populace and hope that urban Canadians see things the way rural Canadians do, or they can accept the fact that 71 percent of Canadians in a most recent poll wants more restrictions on firearms. 

Best of luck if they choose the former. Meanwhile the Bloc, NDP and LPC can continue to get the lions share of the vote from those who want the more restrictions. But seeing as the CPC very quickly changed their platform to get onside with the majority of Canadians, I am of the opinion that they are not going to do that.

But the PPC exists, right?


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

Again, how many cities have enacted hand gun bans?  My understanding is they can now.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Well yes - but it won't change gun violence - none of the Major Cities in Canada have crimes to any significant % being conducted with legal firearms.
> 90% are with firearms already prohibited in Canada - so the ban won't do SFA


Maybe, maybe not. But its a very visible way of showing that they are doing something.


KevinB said:


> It isn't math - it's the fact Liberals love to misconstrue the story - anyone honest and semi intelligent looking at the firearms crime in Canada can see that further restrictions aren't going to change anything.


7 out of 10 Canadians want more restrictions on firearms. That's math. Gun owners can cry about this all they like, but if 7 out of 10 people believe something, you had better believe that the political parties will shift to accommodate that. The fact that the LPC is able to use this as a wedge issue only makes things worse for the CPC. Its easy to paint the CPC as the party willing to remove restrictions on guns when everyone who opposes restrictions on guns vote for the CPC, making it so the 7 out of 10 who want more restrictions on guns feels uneasy about the CPC being in power.

This is repeated across the board.

Abortion, vaccine mandates, childcare, the environment. 

Until the CPC is willing to get onside with the 65-70 percent of progressive voters in the country they are pretty much going to need to hang around until people tire of the LPC  enough to give them a chance. And even then, they will need to be non threatening enough to have progressives stomach them in government, otherwise the LPC will use the standard scare tactics to get enough progressives to vote for them to keep the CPC out. 

How the CPC does that without completely alienating their base is the golden question. O'Toole seems to be trying. He's pro choice, he wants a carbon tax, he tossed gun owners under the bus during the campaign, I can imagine him just going along with a established Childcare system. But for all his effort he seems to be facing significant dissent from his own ranks.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

Altair's argument can be summed up as the CPC need to be just like the LPC to win.

The fact is the CPC need a better PR/media campaign to win. Countering the LPC/legacy media misinformation is all they need to do. This will be tough because of who's in bed with who when it comes to controlling the national media.

Edit to add: Tough but not impossible. Now more than ever before people are waking up to what complete bull shitters the legacy media are. The internet and social media allow the mechanisms to counter them.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> Altair's argument can be summed up as the CPC need to be just like the LPC to win.
> 
> The fact is the CPC need a better PR/media campaign to win. Countering the LPC/legacy media misinformation is all they need to do. This will be tough because of who's in bed with who when it comes to controlling the national media.


Just like? No. But the uncomfortable truth might be that the LPC are much closer to what Canadians overall want than what the CPC is. This has been the case for generations, not just now. The fact that the CPC came from a right of center merger of parties deciding that the only way they stood a chance was to have a united right against a fragmented left and they only achieved 1 majority government in the 18 years since is rather telling.

But I look overseas to the UK to see a conservative party doing things the right way.

UK conservatives.

Very big on climate change.

Very pro labour. 

Raising taxes to fund social programs and the NHS. 

Big spending government.

And by doing all of this voters gave him a majority government.


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Maybe, maybe not. But its a very visible way of showing that they are doing something.
> 
> 7 out of 10 Canadians want more restrictions on firearms. That's math. Gun owners can cry about this all they like, but if 7 out of 10 people believe something, you had better believe that the political parties will shift to accommodate that. The fact that the LPC is able to use this as a wedge issue only makes things worse for the CPC. Its easy to paint the CPC as the party willing to remove restrictions on guns when everyone who opposes restrictions on guns vote for the CPC, making it so the 7 out of 10 who want more restrictions on guns feels uneasy about the CPC being in power.



What Canadians want is a safe and security society.  That is a no brainer.
  But what does more restrictions mean -
The LPC and some other parties are trying to make a public show out of banning more guns, and eventually criminalizing personal firearm ownership in Canada.
   Given it is not clearly shown on any media about firearms crime data, a blanket statement saying that Canadian want more restriction is being done in a vacuum.


Any party (CPC etc) that wants to address the firearm issue will need to tackle it with detailed data - and show the data coming out of Totronto, Vancouver, Montreal etc - which shows that the guns used in crimes are already banned.
   They come in from either the US, or via Ports -- years ago VPD seized a ConEx box full of Chinese AK's - select fire guns have been prohibited since '79 - so clearly they where not being imported legally for sale...
   Heck the Natives at Oka had a Milan ATGM and some M2 HMG's - yet they where allowed to fly them out with no drama.

Getting tough on crime, and enforcing the laws on the books with better mental health screening and assistance will do a lot more good again gun crime than attempting to ban more guns.

It doesn't take a great deal of efforts to put in research for a comprehensive policy - and communicate it effectively - the CPC just doesn't seem to have any competency in that respect - and lets the LPC fear monger the populace that everyone will be able to get an AK at the 711...


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Nov 2021)

> Raising taxes to fund social programs and the NHS.



But under Harper, the CPC kept and extended Paul Martin's "fix for a generation".  And under O'Toole they promised to do something similar.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> What Canadians want is a safe and security society.  That is a no brainer.
> But what does more restrictions mean -
> The LPC and some other parties are trying to make a public show out of banning more guns, and eventually criminalizing personal firearm ownership in Canada.
> Given it is not clearly shown on any media about firearms crime data, a blanket statement saying that Canadian want more restriction is being done in a vacuum.
> ...


This may all be true. Probably is. But at the end of the day, Canadians 6-7 out of 10 of them want more restrictions on firearms. 

That's the math at the end of the day.

The why this is matter less than the fact that it is. 

So I say what I said in the beginning, best of luck to the party that tries to go against 66 percent of the population.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> But under Harper, the CPC kept and extended Paul Martin's "fix for a generation".  And under O'Toole they promised to do something similar.


He did, but he undid his good work on that front by saying he wanted increased privatization without explaining what that meant. 

Without a clear understanding of what that meant, people assumed a more American style healthcare system, which is kryptonite in Canada.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Nov 2021)

Sure, so back to the underlying truth: people find excuses to justify the way they really want to vote.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> Sure, so back to the underlying truth: people find excuses to justify the way they really want to vote.


This "outcomes are predetermined and nothing any leader does can change it" narrative is very boring. 

Campaigns matter, policies matter. If the CPC could get rid of the faction of that party holding it back and offer a socially progressive and financially conservative alternative, I think they form government. 

If the CPC came out and said they will not allow any votes on abortion and kick out anyone anti abortion candidates, they would be closer to government. 

if they came out and said that more needs to be done to tackle climate change, including more aggressive targets, they would be closer to government. 

if they came out and said that they would restrict access to assault rifles (not hunting rifles, assault rifles) they would be closer to government. 

If they had a better childcare plan than just tossing tax credits at folks, they would be closer to government.

Because every one of these seem to be where the average Canadian voter is, minus the 30-35 percent who feel otherwise. The fact that the LPC is on the right side of all of these polls and the CPC isn't shows why Canadians are still voting for the LPC. The biggest challenge to the LPC is that enough progressives think they are not moving fast enough on these issues and thus they might just vote NDP in protest. 

The CPC needs to find a way to get more people voting for their party, but they put a artificial ceiling on their party by holding these positions.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Nov 2021)

If only the CPC could get more votes than the LPC in an election, eh?


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> If only the CPC could get more votes than the LPC in an election, eh?


More votes don't mean squat.

The NDP have less seats than the BQ despite having 1.7 million more votes.

The PPC have less seats than the GRN despite having 440k more votes.

But hey, congrats to the CPC on the participation medal.


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> This may all be true. Probably is. But at the end of the day, Canadians 6-7 out of 10 of them want more restrictions on firearms.
> 
> That's the math at the end of the day.
> 
> ...


Leadership, is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.
    Any Leader who wants to address a 'unpopular' topic that is an issue with their base needs to do the math - and the research - and find a way to appease the base - while still growing those who are neutral or mildly negative to their cause on some issues, but responsive to a majority of others.

I am absolutely disgusted in the CPC for their woeful platforms.
   It seems half of them where thrown at a wall to see if they stuck.
They also don't seem to understand that when one has some key party platform that are easy attacked - they need to have rock solid data and a crisis management team on 24/7 to deal with those issues when they arise - either due to opposing parties/candidates putting out misinformation or from bonehead imbeciles in their own party wanting some air time.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Leadership, is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.
> Any Leader who wants to address a 'unpopular' topic that is an issue with their base needs to do the math - and the research - and find a way to appease the base - while still growing those who are neutral or mildly negative to their cause on some issues, but responsive to a majority of others.


With that logic, Maxime Bernier would be Prime Minister. 

Just needs more leadership!

I happen to think that parking your policies where the majority of Canadians naturally reside is far easier than trying to convince them that they are wrong. 


KevinB said:


> I am absolutely disgusted in the CPC for their woeful platforms.
> It seems half of them where thrown at a wall to see if they stuck.
> They also don't seem to understand that when one has some key party platform that are easy attacked - they need to have rock solid data and a crisis management team on 24/7 to deal with those issues when they arise - either due to opposing parties/candidates putting out misinformation or from bonehead imbeciles in their own party wanting some air time.


Their platforms suck because they try to appease the base while trying to be palpable to the general public. In the end, it satisfies neither.


----------



## KevinB (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> With that logic, Maxime Bernier would be Prime Minister.


Not really because they don't have a platform that anyone would stomach.


Altair said:


> Just needs more leadership!
> 
> I happen to think that parking your policies where the majority of Canadians naturally reside is far easier than trying to convince them that they are wrong.


 I think if the CPC put effort into tackling climate change in a rational manner, addressing cost of living issues, crime, taxes, child care from a defensibly researched standpoint that would benefit the majority of Canadians - that selling a clearly researched firearms policy would be cake.
   The current Canadian guns laws are absolutely trash - and make no sense in how some firearms have been classified - 
 But pushing folks further will create more issues in Canada - I for one will welcome our next State of Alberta...



Altair said:


> Their platforms suck because they try to appease the base while trying to be palpable to the general public. In the end, it satisfies neither.


They don't really do either anymore - the amount of double talk and retractions daily on the campaign trail was mind-blowing - which annoyed everyone but Liberal voters.  However they used to, Brian Mulroney era did a good job, and Harper was popular enough for a while.
   The CPC just doesn't think about the effects of certain platforms.


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

KevinB said:


> Not really because they don't have a platform that anyone would stomach.


You said leadership is the art of getting people to do what they don't want to do.

Thus it shouldn't matter if a platform is stomachable, its up to those with leadership to get those who don't support it to support it, no?

If that's not the case, then wouldn't it make more sense for the CPC to make a policy that is more in line with 6-7 out of 10 Canadians?


KevinB said:


> I think if the CPC put effort into tackling climate change in a rational manner, addressing cost of living issues, crime, taxes, child care from a defensibly researched standpoint that would benefit the majority of Canadians - that selling a clearly researched firearms policy would be cake.
> The current Canadian guns laws are absolutely trash - and make no sense in how some firearms have been classified -


You're right. There should be even more restrictions on firearms, like the general public seems to think.


KevinB said:


> But pushing folks further will create more issues in Canada - I for one will welcome our next State of Alberta...


I don't see Alberta as the conservative bastion that you do. The two biggest cities just elected progressive mayors, the provincial NDP are surging, and the LPC and NDP are starting to win in the cities despite 1 leader wanting to shut down the oil industry tomorrow and the other being the son of Pierre Elliot Trudeau.


KevinB said:


> They don't really do either anymore - the amount of double talk and retractions daily on the campaign trail was mind-blowing - which annoyed everyone but Liberal voters.  However they used to, Brian Mulroney era did a good job, and Harper was popular enough for a while.
> The CPC just doesn't think about the effects of certain platforms.


It took a once in a generation level scandal to kneecap the LPC for a decade. If the CPC is hoping for a repeat of that they may be waiting for a long time.


----------



## Jarnhamar (19 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> More votes don't mean squat.


But you agree whoever gets the most votes_ should_ win, right?


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But you agree whoever gets the most votes_ should_ win, right?


That's not exactly how MMP works, so no.


----------



## QV (19 Nov 2021)

The CPC need to sway about 5% of the voters. That’s it. They can do that if they recognize and start to control the message.


----------



## Remius (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> The CPC need to sway about 5% of the voters. That’s it. They can do that if they recognize and start to control the message.


The need to sway 5% of the right kind of voters.  Vote efficiency and distribution is key.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2021)

Jarnhamar said:


> But you agree whoever gets the most votes_ should_ win, right?


In each riding, the one with the most votes _does_ win.  Problem is, there's no single national choice on ballots for all voters to answer "who so you want as PM?"

Prop Rep could give people more choice to vote the party they want nationally as well as the individual they want locally, depending on how it's set up.  Then again, that system's not perfect, either, so .....


----------



## Altair (19 Nov 2021)

QV said:


> The CPC need to sway about 5% of the voters. That’s it. They can do that if they recognize and start to control the message.


5 Percent?

So everyone who voted LPC, NDP and PPC in Alberta votes CPC and they win?

Sounds to me like they need to start winning in urban canada


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Nov 2021)

…and people complain about American gerrymandering…

There’s a reason that Trudeau’s promise of electoral reform was just hollow-worded BS.


----------



## mariomike (20 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> …and people complain about American gerrymandering…



Opinions vary...



Navy_Pete said:


> Gerrymandering is a pretty weak excuse for long term poor performance, not backed up by any actual evidence. We don't have the same political interference in the Elections Canada process that you see regularly in the US.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> …and people complain about American gerrymandering…
> 
> There’s a reason that Trudeau’s promise of electoral reform was just hollow-worded BS.



I was one duped into voting for the LPC because of his promise for electoral reform.  

I wish I had been smart enough to see he meant only if the new system would guarantee us Liberal governments until the return of Jesus.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> That's not exactly how MMP works, so no.


Ah, true true. It's tricky figuring out when to support something "because the majority thinks so" and when it doesn't count.


----------



## suffolkowner (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> 5 Percent?
> 
> So everyone who voted LPC, NDP and PPC in Alberta votes CPC and they win?
> 
> Sounds to me like they need to start winning in urban canada


Well maybe 5% from the 905. I voted Conservative this election for the first time since Mulroney 1. But I think the number of people that can or will switch their votes between the Liberals and the Conservatives is shrinking and I think that this is a bad thing for our democracy


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> Well maybe 5% from the 905. I voted Conservative this election for the first time since Mulroney 1. But I think the number of people that can or will switch their votes between the Liberals and the Conservatives is shrinking and I think that this is a bad thing for our democracy



You're 100% right.  Bread and circuses have been a vote getter since way before a Centurion was a tank.


----------



## suffolkowner (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> You're 100% right.  Bread and circuses have been a vote getter since way before a Centurion was a tank.


but how come I never seem to get any bread or circuses for myself!?! I'm bribeable too!


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

suffolkowner said:


> but how come I never seem to get any bread or circuses for myself!?! I'm bribeable too!



The bread has raisins and liberal spice and the circuses went out of favor decades ago


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Nov 2021)

mariomike said:


> Opinions vary...


Facts don’t, though.  Canada’s 2021 election saw a government (re)formed with the lowest popular vote in recent times — 32.6% (5,556,629) and 1.1% (190,781) lower than the 2nd place party at 33.7% (5,747,410).

Using the Gallagher Index (Least squares of difference - LSq) of assessing vote proportionality, ie. how close representation came to the proportionality of the overall vote, Canada actually is quantitatively worse (and worsening) compared to the United States.

In 2015, Canada’s 42nd Election had a GI of 12.02.  In 2016, in the United States the Presidential vote has a GI of 9.34 and the Congress a GI of 5.25. (Ref: the art’s .pdf below, with embedded links to related refs.)

So in 2016, the Canadian parliamentary Special Committee on Electoral Reform assesses that a fairer electoral system should have a GI of 5 or less.  Buuuut…PMJT & Co. do the math and realize that the higher the GI the more likely they stay in power because they benefit from disproportionate representation (ie. Getting WAY more seats than #2, even though they had lower popular vote).  Worsening GI of 12.01 in 2015 (Majority), then 12.74 (Minority) in 2019, then even less proportional in 2021 - 13.4.

At this rate of LPC ensconcement, I don’t think we’ll ever see electoral reform. The Liberals
 have it too good, and the Conservatives continue to help them with their inability to increase vote effectiveness.


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Good2Golf said:


> Facts don’t, though.  Canada’s 2021 election saw a government (re)formed with the lowest popular vote in recent times — 32.6% (5,556,629) and 1.1% (190,781) lower than the 2nd place party at 33.7% (5,747,410).
> 
> Using the Gallagher Index (Least squares of difference - LSq) of assessing vote proportionality, ie. how close representation came to the proportionality of the overall vote, Canada actually is quantitatively worse (and worsening) compared to the United States.
> 
> ...


If it was just the LPC against electoral reform I would have hope for electoral reform.

But its not. The CPC isn't on board with it either. I think they know that any move towards a proportional system would all but eliminate majority governments and they would be at the mercy of the 3 other progressive parties for the rest of time. They can't have that. Any move to a ranked ballot would advantage the LPC as they are the more obvious second choice of many people and they cannot have that. So what's left for the CPC to support? They are vague on the topic other than to say



> The Conservative Party believes the discussion of possible changes to the electoral system is valuable in a healthy democracy. In reviewing options for electoral reform, we believe the government should not endorse any new electoral system that will weaken the link between Members of Parliament and their constituents, that will create unmanageably large ridings, or that will strengthen the control of the party machinery over individual Members of Parliament. 4 A national referendum must be held prior to implementing any future electoral reform proposal.


This is from 2018 but they have said precious little else on the subject since, so its the best I have to go on. MMP has party lists and larger ridings so that's out. And referendums are code words used to kill any potential changes. The bloc uses the term referendum as well when talking about electoral reform, knowing full well that the only reason they carry the strength that they do is because of FPTP and their concentrated vote. 

So the 3 biggest parties, the LPC, the CPC and the BQ are all against it. That's why I have no hope of it ever coming to pass.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (20 Nov 2021)

But didn't only one major  party run on this issue?


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> But didn't only one major  party run on this issue?


Mais ouais!!!


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> But didn't only one major  party run on this issue?


If you consider the NDP a major party, they run on it all the time.

As for the LPC, they ran on it and backtracked. 

And the CPC is happy with the status quo. 

So it the BQ.

I mean, its a minority government. If all the opposition parties ganged together and voted for MMP then the LPC would have a hard time shutting that down. But you wont see that. The 3 biggest parties all have a vested interest in making sure it doesn't happen. And at that point, it doesn't matter if the LPC is against electoral reform. They have a lot of help in that regard. 312 MPs against electoral reform, its never happening.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> If you consider the NDP a major party, they run on it all the time.
> 
> As for the LPC, they ran on it and backtracked.
> 
> ...



Sooooooo... yes then ?


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Sooooooo... yes then ?


Yes to what?


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> But didn't only one major  party run on this issue?





Altair said:


> Yes to what?



The the quote above yours.


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> The the quote above yours.


Yes, one major party ran on it and backtracked.

Does this give the BQ and CPC a pass on never supporting it? No.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (20 Nov 2021)

I may be mistaken but I do believe he had a majority when he/they ran on that....


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I may be mistaken but I do believe he had a majority when he/they ran on that....



By golly I think you're right!



Altair said:


> Yes, one major party ran on it and backtracked.
> 
> Does this give the BQ and CPC a pass on never supporting it? No.


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> I may be mistaken but I do believe he had a majority when he/they ran on that....






Halifax Tar said:


> By golly I think you're right!



I agree. But I'm not living in 2015.

I'm living in 2021. Who is supporting electoral reform NOW?

Nobody but the NDP?

Okay, I rest my case.


----------



## mariomike (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I'm not living in 2015.



For those still stuck in that bygone era, 53 pages of it,









						Electoral Reform (Senate, Commons, & Gov Gen)
					

Wonder if this counts as a broken promise, or the Liberals coming to their senses?  http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/no-electoral-reform-until-enough-canadians-want-it-monsef-says-1.3177209   No electoral reform until enough Canadians want it, Monsef says  Laura Payton, Ottawa News Bureau Online...




					www.milnet.ca


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> I agree. But I'm not living in 2015.
> 
> I'm living in 2021. Who is supporting electoral reform NOW?
> 
> ...



How about 2020 ? 

Perhaps the parties don't...  Your case is not at rest. 

What do the people say ?









						Canadians want action on electoral reform this fall!
					

National poll by Leger commissioned by Fair Vote Canada September 2020. 74% support a National Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform in the fall plan.




					www.fairvote.ca


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> How about 2020 ?
> 
> Perhaps the parties don't...  Your case is not at rest.
> 
> ...


Its completely at rest. Despite a brief aberration in 2015 where the LPC ran on it, no political party until the 4th place party in parliament wants it. 

Again, if it was JUST the LPC against it, I would have hope. But are you suggesting that if the CPC won we would see them bring in electoral reform? 

Don't piss on my head and call it rain. 

The top two parties in Canada don't want it, regardless of the voters feelings on the subject, so unless those voters are willing to vote for the NDP enough that they win a majority government then nothing is going to happen. And I don't see that happening.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Its completely at rest. Despite a brief aberration in 2015 where the LPC ran on it, no political party until the 4th place party in parliament wants it.
> 
> Again, if it was JUST the LPC against it, I would have hope. But are you suggesting that if the CPC won we would see them bring in electoral reform?
> 
> ...



Just because its not on a platform does not meant its not a topic.  In fact I think it really shows the arrogance of our 2 main parties. 

Every poll I can find shows Canadians want a better electoral system.  The Liberal party ran on that and forgot it existed it when the found what was wanted wouldn't suit them best.  So what you have is one party essentially our right admitting they are more interested in what's best for them than the country as a whole.  

Trying to absolve the Liberals of sin because the Cons don have it on their platform is simple parlor games.


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> Just because its not on a platform does not meant its not a topic.  In fact I think it really shows the arrogance of our 2 main parties.
> 
> Every poll I can find shows Canadians want a better electoral system.  The Liberal party ran on that and forgot it existed it when the found what was wanted wouldn't suit them best.  So what you have is one party essentially our right admitting they are more interested in what's best for them than the country as a whole.
> 
> Trying to absolve the Liberals of sin because the Cons don have it on their platform is simple parlor games.


Both are guilty. 

The LPC, the CPC, the BQ, they are all guilty.

Since all of them are standing in the way of electoral reform means I don't place the blame on one party in particular.  The LPC in 2015, fine, granted, they are more guilty than most. Since then, in the 2 elections since they are all equally guilty and as such it will never happen. The NDP are the next best chance at electoral reform and they have all of 26 seats in parliament.


----------



## Halifax Tar (20 Nov 2021)

Altair said:


> Both are guilty.
> 
> The LPC, the CPC, the BQ, they are all guilty.
> 
> Since all of them are standing in the way of electoral reform means I don't place the blame on one party in particular.  The LPC in 2015, fine, granted, they are more guilty than most. Since then, in the 2 elections since they are all equally guilty and as such it will never happen. The NDP are the next best chance at electoral reform and they have all of 26 seats in parliament.



No 1 party stood in the way of electoral reform.  With a majority in parliament. 

They other two are guilty of it being absent on their platforms.  Hell one of them is a regional obstructionist party who never has a hope in hell of forming government, the other is the BQ   See what I did there ?


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Halifax Tar said:


> No 1 party stood in the way of electoral reform.  With a majority in parliament.


I'll give you that. 


Halifax Tar said:


> They other two are guilty of it being absent on their platforms.





			https://cpcassets.conservative.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/15090948/9f7f204744e7480.pdf
		


Old, from 2018, but nothing said on the subject since. 



> The Conservative Party believes the discussion of possible changes to the electoral system is valuable in a healthy democracy. In reviewing options for electoral reform, we believe the government should not endorse any new electoral system that will weaken the link between Members of Parliament and their constituents, that will create unmanageably large ridings, or that will strengthen the control of the party machinery over individual Members of Parliament. 4 A national referendum must be held prior to implementing any future electoral reform proposal.


So last word from them they don't want MMP or PR. 

I doubt they want ranked ballot. Neither are they running on changing the electoral system. So I think its fair to say they are not going to change anything if they win




Halifax Tar said:


> Hell one of them is a regional obstructionist party who never has a hope in hell of forming government, the other is the BQ   See what I did there ?


I do, I got a chuckle. 

Still doesn't change the fact that electoral reform is dead in this country and I've come to accept that.


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Nov 2021)

The NDP is equally guilty of selfish posturing.  Where they would benefit (federally), they might like a particular kind of reform.  Where they would not benefit (eg. provincially in BC), they are just as status quo as everyone else.


----------



## Altair (20 Nov 2021)

Brad Sallows said:


> The NDP is equally guilty of selfish posturing.  Where they would benefit (federally), they might like a particular kind of reform.  Where they would not benefit (eg. provincially in BC), they are just as status quo as everyone else.


It is true.

Which is why I said they are the next best hope, not next best sure thing.

But looking through the options

LPC-No hope

CPC-No hope

BQ- No hope for multiple reasons

NDP- Some hope.

Would a NDP elected using FPTP then change the system that got them into power? Questionable.

I think the CAQ government in Quebec is a good example of what tends to happen. 



			https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-electoral-reform-referendum-2022-1.6005897
		



> The Quebec government will not hold a referendum in 2022 on whether to reform the province's electoral system, the minister in charge of the file said Wednesday.





> The electoral reform bill, Bill 39, proposes moving Quebec from its current first-past-the-post system to a mixed-member proportional representation system.
> 
> But it also stipulates that before the new electoral system can be implemented, the public needs to approve it in a referendum — to be held at the same time as the 2022 provincial election.
> 
> LeBel blamed the pandemic for scotching that plan. "We'll see what the public health situation is in September," she said.


----------



## The Bread Guy (15 Dec 2021)

Interesting tidbit from the bought-and-paid-for media ...


> The Conservative Party has identified 13 federal ridings where they suspect their candidates were targeted by foreign influence campaigns in the recent federal election, Global News has learned.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> ... Some of the 13 ridings identified by its officials could only be charitably described as long shots – such as Mississauga Centre, where Liberal cabinet minister Omar Alghabra won with 54 per cent of the vote ... The alleged foreign interference may not have tipped the scales against the Conservatives, but many of the ridings identified by the party were a lot closer than Mississauga Centre  – like Richmond Centre, where incumbent Alice Wong lost by fewer than 1,000 votes, or Steveston-Richmond East, where incumbent Kenny Chiu lost by roughly 3,500 votes ... The other ridings identified by the party are Coquitlam-Port Coquitlam and Fleetwood-Port Kells in British Columbia, and Markham-Stouffville, Markham-Unionville, Richmond Hill, Willowdale, Don Valley North, Scarborough-Agincourt, Aurora-Oak Ridges-Richmond Hill, and Newmarket-Aurora in Ontario ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (9 Jan 2022)

More from the editorial board of the bought-and-paid-for _Globe & Mail _(archived link if previous link doesn't work for you)


> ... What is indisputable is that there was a concerted effort, using a social-media platform beholden to Beijing, to discourage people from voting for a Canadian MP whose positions were unpopular with Beijing.
> 
> To date, the case has barely caused a ripple in Ottawa. That has to change. This should not be a partisan issue. The Trudeau government needs to let Parliament investigate what happened, and take steps to block foreign meddling in Canadian elections.
> 
> One very good place to start would be with the resurrection of Mr. Chiu’s foreign influence registry. It should become law, and soon. As the McGill researchers wrote, “disinformation campaigns and their potential to manipulate diaspora communities could generate waves that would drown Canada’s democracy.”


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> I'd like to think that discussing the Prime Minister trying to score political points on the back of the Freedom Convoy on the world stage is relatable but we can definitely bring it back to an in Canada discussion.
> 
> I look forward to hearing how supporting an anti-immigration party is different when you do it; the Liberal thread perhaps?


There are 2 key differences

1. There are different levels of anti immigration. The PPC calls for reduced immigration. It does not differentiate by race or creed. The AfD are specifically targeting Muslims. 

2. Under FPTP, my vote was in no way shape or form going to lead to a PPC MP. The LPC candidate in my riding won by 20 percentage points. My vote didn't matter.  Unlike in Germany and Europe, which uses PR. There, every vote matters. Every bit of support AfD gets leads to them having more MPs. I get to goof around under FPTP because my vote doesn't mean anything. That is not true for those voting AfD. If Canada adopted any form of PR I would not for a second consider voting PPC.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Mar 2022)

Altair said:


> There are 2 key differences


Thanks for the reply



> 1. There are different levels of anti immigration. The PPC calls for reduced immigration. It does not differentiate by race or creed. The AfD are specifically targeting Muslims.



Anti-immigration seems like an open and shut definition to me. Maybe the PPC was just playing fast and loose with words though. I see what you mean with AdFs more hardline approach. 



> 2. Under FPTP, my vote was in no way shape or form going to lead to a PPC MP. The LPC candidate in my riding won by 20 percentage points. My vote didn't matter.  Unlike in Germany and Europe, which uses PR. There, every vote matters. Every bit of support AfD gets leads to them having more MPs. I get to goof around under FPTP because my vote doesn't mean anything. That is not true for those voting AfD. If Canada adopted any form of PR I would not for a second consider voting PPC.


Thanks for the explination. Using this logic though, you could just as easily vote for a party that's racist, anti-Muslim or even the KKK if the party isn't likely to win?


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Jarnhamar said:


> Thanks for the reply


I'll reply so long as my ice does not get thinner. 


Jarnhamar said:


> Anti-immigration seems like an open and shut definition to me. Maybe the PPC was just playing fast and loose with words though. I see what you mean with AdFs more hardline approach.


There are different levels of it however. The conservative party in the UK is slightly anti immigration, the US republican Party a bit more so, the PPC more than the Republican party and then you have the extremist view of it in the AfD. 


Jarnhamar said:


> Thanks for the explination. Using this logic though, you could just as easily vote for a party that's racist, anti-Muslim or even the KKK if the party isn't likely to win?


If my vote doesn't matter, I could vote for anyone. If my vote does matter I vote for what I support. Me voting for the PPC isn't me supporting the PPC, it's me mocking FPTP


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

> 1. There are different levels of anti immigration. The PPC calls for reduced immigration. It does not differentiate by race or creed.



That's not anti-immigration.  That's still pro-immigration.  Anti-immigration is "none".  There's no arbitrary number of immigrants above which a policy is "pro-" and below is "anti-".


----------



## Altair (25 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's not anti-immigration.  That's still pro-immigration.  Anti-immigration is "none".  There's no arbitrary number of immigrants above which a policy is "pro-" and below is "anti-".


What do you call a party that says we will take immigrants so long as the immigrant is not muslim?

Because that's what the AfD is so call it whatever you like.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Mar 2022)

If only I had been writing about AfD and not PPC.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (26 Mar 2022)

Bit of a tangent, but how many were aware that trudeau's new coalition partner, Singh, is also a member of WEF? Now, I'm  left wondering whether this pairing of parties was just singh's or trudeau's idea or was it schemed up behind closed doors by Schwab, with input from trudeau, singh and freeland?








						Jagmeet Singh
					

Jagmeet Singh was born in Scarborough, Ontario and spent some time growing up on Canada's East coast before moving back to Southern Ontario. As a kid, he often felt on the margins and left out. That made him more determined to be himself. That’s why he grew up to defend the rights of others to...




					www.weforum.org


----------



## Remius (26 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Bit of a tangent, but how many were aware that trudeau's new coalition partner, Singh, is also a member of WEF? Now, I'm  left wondering whether this pairing of parties was just singh's or trudeau's idea or was it schemed up behind closed doors by Schwab, with input from trudeau, singh and freeland?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Doubtful.









						Michelle Rempel Garner: I went to Davos. The World Economic Forum is not running Canada
					

The WEF portrays itself as a highly influential elite organization. In reality, it's an overpriced sales conference.




					theline.substack.com
				




I believe her.


----------



## Lumber (26 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> Doubtful.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


She admits it herself: she's a WEF "Young Global Leader". She's compromised.

#dictator #castro #fucktrudeau #wef #corruption #blackfacehitler #evil #truth #openyoureyes #canada #freedomconvoy2022 #greatawakeningworldwide #savedemocracy #savethepeople #unitedwestand #freedom


----------



## brihard (26 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Bit of a tangent, but how many were aware that trudeau's new coalition partner, Singh, is also a member of WEF? Now, I'm  left wondering whether this pairing of parties was just singh's or trudeau's idea or was it schemed up behind closed doors by Schwab, with input from trudeau, singh and freeland?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, we know WEF is your boogeyman this quarter. How little this organizations means has been previously discussed on this site, I think in the immediate wake of you sharing that article about why Freeland’s participation in WEF should be considered criminal breach of trust (hint: it’s not).

Your crew will have another chance to win an election once the current term is up, or when they can be part of Trudeau losing the confidence of the House and scuppering the minority.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> Yes, we know WEF is your boogeyman this quarter. How little this organizations means has been previously discussed on this site, I think in the immediate wake of you sharing that article about why Freeland’s participation in WEF should be considered criminal breach of trust (hint: it’s not).
> 
> Your crew will have another chance to win an election once the current term is up, or when they can be part of Trudeau losing the confidence of the House and scuppering the minority.


Just because you have a differing opinion, do you have some insatiable need to try and prove yourself superior by disparaging me? 

Being an investigator, you know you leave no stone unturned. What is wrong with floating possibilities?


----------



## brihard (27 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Just because you have a differing opinion, do you have some insatiable need to try and prove yourself superior by disparaging me?
> 
> Being an investigator, you know you leave no stone unturned. What is wrong with floating possibilities?


I’m not superior to you, I’m just another dude. Sometimes you simply seize on some weird stuff, and insist on spreading it here. The rabbit holes we’ve been watching you go down particularly in the past year or two are increasingly bizarre, and you’ve shown less and less inclination to be critical of the nature or sources of the information and theories you share here. I just don’t choose to awkwardly ignore it in every instance.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> I’m not superior to you, I’m just another dude. Sometimes you simply seize on some weird stuff, and insist on spreading it here. The rabbit holes we’ve been watching you go down particularly in the past year or two are increasingly bizarre, and you’ve shown less and less inclination to be critical of the nature or sources of the information and theories you share here. I just don’t choose to awkwardly ignore it in every instance.


What a load of shit. You just don't like me questioning your bias. You have your idea on how things are and if anyone says different, they are bizarre. You don't prove them wrong, you just make it personal. There are those who believe 100% in trudeau and his government and everyone is honest and above board and trudeau is just out of his depth, quite similar to the way you think. And then there are those like me. Those that believe that the trudeau government is the most dishonest, conniving, backstabbing, ignorant organization in Canada. There are vast numbers that believe Klaus Schwab when he says he has people placed to bring governments to heel. People like trudeau, freeland and singh. It's really too bad we don't have RICO here. Lastly, you know very, very little about me and certainly not enough to intimate that you even have the slightest inkling of my mental state. Don't like what I post? Ignore the point or rebutt it. Leave your personal attacks at the office.


----------



## brihard (27 Mar 2022)

If you’re inferring a questioning of your mental state in that, that’s on you. I’ve accused you of nothing more than an excess of credulity, no different from many others who frequent some of the sites you’ve shared content from. Plenty of people in full possession of their faculties have been convinced of some… interesting things online. You aren’t entitled to be taken seriously when you insist on introducing the tangent to a thread.

Anyway, I guess I won’t hold my breath for a Christmas card this year. But I won’t be convinced to look for the WEF under the bed at night either.

EDIT TO ADD: Lest the DS feel the need to sum this up, no worries, I've said my bit and will now step back from the tangent.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2022)

How magnanimous of you. You started it and now your trying to take the high road. Expected and not surprised.

Fin


----------



## Remius (27 Mar 2022)

So I heard a very good comment about how this supply and confidence arrangement will affect the CPC leadership run. 

In the unlikely scenario where Charest or Brown win they face the prospect of not sitting in the HoC for three years at least assuming the arrangement holds.  Poilievre gets three years to either clean his act up or everyone sees him for what he is as his party disintegrates and splits.

I’m betting all CPC candidates were hoping for an earlier election.  3 years is going to be a long time to keep the party united under the circumstances.


----------



## GK .Dundas (27 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> So I heard a very good comment about how this supply and confidence arrangement will affect the CPC leadership run.
> 
> In the unlikely scenario where Charest or Brown win they face the prospect of not sitting in the HoC for three years at least assuming the arrangement holds.  Poilievre gets three years to either clean his act up or everyone sees him for what he is as his party disintegrates and splits.
> 
> ...


----------



## brihard (27 Mar 2022)

Remius said:


> So I heard a very good comment about how this supply and confidence arrangement will affect the CPC leadership run.
> 
> In the unlikely scenario where Charest or Brown win they face the prospect of not sitting in the HoC for three years at least assuming the arrangement holds.  Poilievre gets three years to either clean his act up or everyone sees him for what he is as his party disintegrates and splits.
> 
> I’m betting all CPC candidates were hoping for an earlier election.  3 years is going to be a long time to keep the party united under the circumstances.


If a non-MP gets selected, I’m sure they’ll have a safe seat vacated and parachute the new leader in via byelection. But yeah, three years is a long time. Though fundamentally no different from a leadership replacement after a loss to a majority.

The CPC face a crisis of credibility and relevance. Walking that narrow line where one can both be CPC leader, and lead the party to victory, will not be an easy one.


----------



## Halifax Tar (27 Mar 2022)

That little allegiance won't last 3 years.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (27 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> If a non-MP gets selected, I’m sure they’ll have a safe seat vacated and parachute the new leader in via byelection. But yeah, three years is a long time. Though fundamentally no different from a leadership replacement after a loss to a majority.
> 
> The CPC face a crisis of credibility and relevance. Walking that narrow line where one can both be CPC leader, and lead the party to victory, will not be an easy one.


The CPC just have weak leadership that stands for nothing.  O'Toole was a boring, indecisive and weak leader.

He also sounded like a weasel every time he opened his mouth.  I don't like a lot of Trudeau's politics but can appreciate that he at least has some natural leadership abilities.

If the CPC had someone with a bit of flair, panache and "cojones" they would be performing far better.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> If a non-MP gets selected, I’m sure they’ll have a safe seat vacated and parachute the new leader in via byelection. But yeah, three years is a long time. Though fundamentally no different from a leadership replacement after a loss to a majority.
> 
> The CPC face a crisis of credibility and relevance. Walking that narrow line where one can both be CPC leader, and lead the party to victory, will not be an easy one.


Singh also has to make his deal with the devil productive, otherwise he be facing a revolt as well. People who vote NDP, like the Liberals only slightly more than the hate the CPC.


----------



## brihard (27 Mar 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> Singh also has to make his deal with the devil productive, otherwise he be facing a revolt as well. People who vote NDP, like the Liberals only slightly more than the hate the CPC.


If he gets major steps forward in pharmacare, dental, and some movement on affordable housing, those are tangible ‘wins’ for the NDPs platform, notwithstanding that the gulf between them and LPC on this items isn’t very vast. I think the NDP are largely realistic of their status as an opposition party. This is how they achieve wins. Besides, any NDP voter, notwithstanding hatred of the LPC- where else can they go that would be meaningful and viable? The NPD are very secure in their corner of the room.

Also, this gives them three predictable years where they can rebuild their war chest and raise funds. Elections are expensive and I don’t get the sense they have much in the piggy bank.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Mar 2022)

> In the unlikely scenario where Charest or Brown win they face the prospect of not sitting in the HoC for three years at least assuming the arrangement holds.



That's not realistic.  Typically someone in a safe seat steps aside, or something resembling that.  Singh is from ON and represents Burnaby South.


----------



## Remius (27 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's not realistic.  Typically someone in a safe seat steps aside, or something resembling that.  Singh is from ON and represents Burnaby South.


Possibly.  Singh was without a seat for two years I believe.


----------



## Lumber (27 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> That's not realistic.  Typically someone in a safe seat steps aside, or something resembling that.  Singh is from ON and represents Burnaby South.


Better idea: have the new leader purposefully stay out of the house until just before the next election and let PP be the lunching bag and take all the blame for not being able to curtail anything the Lib/NDP "not-coaltion" does.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> If he gets major steps forward in pharmacare, dental, and some movement on affordable housing, those are tangible ‘wins’ for the NDPs platform, notwithstanding that the gulf between them and LPC on this items isn’t very vast. I think the NDP are largely realistic of their status as an opposition party. This is how they achieve wins. Besides, any NDP voter, notwithstanding hatred of the LPC- where else can they go that would be meaningful and viable? The NPD are very secure in their corner of the room.
> 
> Also, this gives them three predictable years where they can rebuild their war chest and raise funds. Elections are expensive and I don’t get the sense they have much in the piggy bank.


I know a number of NDPer who already disgusted by him. As for their warchest, they mortgaged that and their HQ. They are deeply in debt. If the CPC ever got their act together and went after the union workers, it would remove the only competent element in the party.


----------



## Navy_Pete (28 Mar 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I know a number of NDPer who already disgusted by him. As for their warchest, they mortgaged that and their HQ. They are deeply in debt. If the CPC ever got their act together and went after the union workers, it would remove the only competent element in the party.


If he gets some major platform items implemented, what is the problem?

The whole point of a party is to implement you platform. Unless you have a majority, getting anything done is a feat. The alternative is they are just nay-sayers for the sake of being contrary, and just mark time until the next election. I think getting some concessions when they have 25 MPs is a great move, especially when they can't afford another election (that no voter wants anyway).

I've seen some pretty interesting approaches with unions modernizing their approach to actually drive improved production and work with the companies to get rid of the baggage (while ensuring they get basic due processes). Means that the company makes money and they still have jobs. Would be nice if that approach was a bit more universal, as the us vs them old school union/company relations really drove a lot of businesses out of the country.


----------



## brihard (28 Mar 2022)

Colin Parkinson said:


> I know a number of NDPer who already disgusted by him. As for their warchest, they mortgaged that and their HQ. They are deeply in debt. If the CPC ever got their act together and went after the union workers, it would remove the only competent element in the party.


No doubt some are. Others may be more pragmatic.

Every party has plenty of members who are wilfully blind to the realities of Westminster parliamentary politics and the ink their party can solve the country’s woes alone. All I’ll say is one needs to be a bit more deluded in one’s thinking if one believes that and aligns with a party that can’t and won’t form government.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Mar 2022)

brihard said:


> If he gets major steps forward in pharmacare, dental, and some movement on affordable housing, those are tangible ‘wins’ for the NDPs platform, notwithstanding that the gulf between them and LPC on this items isn’t very vast. I think the NDP are largely realistic of their status as an opposition party. This is how they achieve wins. Besides, any NDP voter, notwithstanding hatred of the LPC- where else can they go that would be meaningful and viable? The NPD are very secure in their corner of the room.
> 
> Also, this gives them three predictable years where they can rebuild their war chest and raise funds. Elections are expensive and I don’t get the sense they have much in the piggy bank.




Two steps forward, one step back....

"So in the middle of an on-going push by premiers for more secure funding to keep basic health care functioning, Trudeau has committed to two dramatic expansions of health care."

Les Leyne: Liberal-NDP plan for dental, pharmacare coverage could sideline premiers' pleas for more health money​ 
Canada’s premiers have been tearing their hair out about Ottawa’s declining share in the funding of health budgets


National dental care and pharmacare represent the biggest expansion of medicare since it was invented.

But you have to wonder how much money they’re going to suck away from the federal transfers to provinces that keep basic health care operational.

Canada’s premiers have been tearing their hair out about Ottawa’s declining share in the funding of health budgets across the country for years.
The council of the federation, the name they call themselves when they get together, mounted yet another campaign on Tuesday on that theme. Premier John Horgan currently chairs the entity.

As part of the “awareness campaign,” he stressed the need for increased, predictable and sustainable federal funding. It flows from the Canada Health Transfer, which is how the federal government moves health funding to the provinces.

The council of premiers said it is the most effective mechanism for Ottawa to support significant improvements for all Canadians while enabling provinces and territories to address their own needs.


The federal government currently covers about 22 per cent of provincial health care budgets. Premiers want that hiked to 35 per cent, plus guaranteed five per cent hikes every year after. That would be an increase to $69 billion a year from $42 billion last year, for starters.


So they reiterated their invitation to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to begin negotiations without further delay so that an agreement can be finalized as soon as possible.

But they are extending the invitation to someone who just agreed to adopt the NDP’s dental care dream in order to secure his term in power for three more years.

The new federal Liberal-NDP confidence agreement stipulates that the dental care for lower-income families (under $90,000 a year) will start this year and be fully in force by 2025. Independent estimates of the cost are difficult because the scope isn’t defined. But it will be in the billions.

The confidence agreement, which has the effect of a signed contract just like the B.C. version in 2017, also requires “continued progress toward a universal national pharmacare program” by passing a Canada Pharmacare Act by the end of 2023. It would essentially match what B.C. has, and likely be even more expensive than the dental care program.

So in the middle of an on-going push by premiers for more secure funding to keep basic health care functioning, Trudeau has committed to two dramatic expansions of health care.

Canada’s health-care system is a dilapidated old mansion that needs a full-scale renovation. But the confidence agreement means that he’s going to build two expensive new wings on the old pile as it stands.

The confidence agreement doesn’t ignore the perpetual funding crisis of the system as it exists.

It recognizes the system is “stretched” because of COVID, and the parties realize that additional ongoing investments will be needed in the immediate future.









						Les Leyne: Liberal-NDP plan for dental, pharmacare coverage could sideline premiers' pleas for more health money
					

Canada’s premiers have been tearing their hair out about Ottawa’s declining share in the funding of health budgets




					www.timescolonist.com


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 Mar 2022)

Be curious to find out whether the health benefits of solving dental problems outweighs the health benefits of proper access to GPs.  Both "save money" by contributing to resolving problems while they are still relatively cheap to resolve.


----------



## Altair (30 Mar 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Two steps forward, one step back....
> 
> "So in the middle of an on-going push by premiers for more secure funding to keep basic health care functioning, Trudeau has committed to two dramatic expansions of health care."
> 
> ...


I kerp hearing that healthcare is a provincial responsibility.


----------



## Altair (30 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Be curious to find out whether the health benefits of solving dental problems outweighs the health benefits of proper access to GPs.  Both "save money" by contributing to resolving problems while they are still relatively cheap to resolve.


Not sure about dental, but on the pharma front its probably going to be a wash.


----------



## Brad Sallows (30 Mar 2022)

Maybe, but folks usually prefer prevention/cure to palliative care.


----------



## Altair (30 Mar 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Maybe, but folks usually prefer prevention/cure to palliative care.


And people like being able to afford medication when they end up hurt of sick regardless of any preventative measures.


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Mar 2022)

Well, at least the 'Centre of Gravity' is clear... too bad it's all about getting re-elected and bad for any country on a path to recovery from COVID:

Rex Murphy: Ignore what's happening in the world. The Trudeau government does​
The world can spin whichever way it wants, but under the NDP-reinforced Liberal government, Canada has one purpose only — getting to net zero

Does Canada nullify China’s massive indifference to this whole hysteria? A massive country with a massive population is determined to have its place in modern life. Windmills will not take it there. It will use every energy resource, as long as it thinks it needs to, to get there. It will mine coal. It will build dams. It will seek gas and oil in every strip of land under its sovereignty, and import however much it wants. And so it is entitled to do.

Is there some thought in the PMO that the autocrats of China are checking into Trudeau’s Twitter feed? And calling “Halt” when they read of Canada’s “leadership” in the spurious fight against global warming? Can the delusion be that deep?










						Rex Murphy: Ignore what's happening in the world. The Trudeau government does
					

The world can spin whichever way it wants, but under the NDP-reinforced Liberal government, Canada has one purpose only — getting to net zero




					nationalpost.com


----------



## Fishbone Jones (31 Mar 2022)

Senator Alex Antic of the Australian Senate raises concern about the World Economic Forum and sitting governments. He even mentions Canada.









						Senator Alex Antic Warns of WEF Infiltration in Australia - Daily Declaration
					

The World Economic Forum has made its globalist goals and Marxist ideology plain. This week, Senator Alex Antic had questions about the WEF.




					blog.canberradeclaration.org.au


----------



## Altair (31 Mar 2022)

Fishbone Jones said:


> Senator Alex Antic of the Australian Senate raises concern about the World Economic Forum and sitting governments. He even mentions Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I for one hopes the CPC runs on the WEF infiltration into canada.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 Mar 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Well, at least the 'Centre of Gravity' is clear... too bad it's all about getting re-elected and bad for any country on a path to recovery from COVID:
> 
> Rex Murphy: Ignore what's happening in the world. The Trudeau government does​
> The world can spin whichever way it wants, but under the NDP-reinforced Liberal government, Canada has one purpose only — getting to net zero
> ...



There is a big debate in Halifax right now as property taxes are set rise a good portion with most of it going to climate change tactics.

To listen to our local politicians talk youd think Halifax was the world's major polluter and if we dont take these actions Halifax will cause the world to cease.


----------



## Brad Sallows (31 Mar 2022)

Good for them; I always prefer someone else to be the horrible warning.


----------



## Lumber (31 Mar 2022)

Halifax Tar said:


> There is a big debate in Halifax right now as property taxes are set rise a good portion with most of it going to climate change tactics.
> 
> To listen to our local politicians talk youd think Halifax was the world's major polluter and if we dont take these actions Halifax will cause the world to cease.


I'm pro "climate action spending", but after hearing two councillors on the radio talk about what that 3% was going to, I lost my shit. They said that one of the biggest destinations for that money was to buy electric busses. The problem is, electric vehicles are only as clean as the grid they are charged on. Nova Scotia gets _60% of its electricity from the coal fired plant in Cape Breton_. We already HAVE busses; I would much rather they spent that money lobbying to shut down the coal fired plant and produce more green energy, THEN buy electric vehicles.


----------



## Brad Sallows (31 Mar 2022)

That's a needle I use.  Virtuous consumer: "I bought an EV!".  Me: "Ah, a coal-powered car."


----------



## Halifax Tar (1 Apr 2022)

Lumber said:


> I'm pro "climate action spending", but after hearing two councillors on the radio talk about what that 3% was going to, I lost my shit. They said that one of the biggest destinations for that money was to buy electric busses. The problem is, electric vehicles are only as clean as the grid they are charged on. Nova Scotia gets _60% of its electricity from the coal fired plant in Cape Breton_. We already HAVE busses; I would much rather they spent that money lobbying to shut down the coal fired plant and produce more green energy, THEN buy electric vehicles.



We listen to the same radio  

It's pretty evident that the will of the people they represent will not influence these climate crusaders.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Apr 2022)

Whenever I hear those people talk or see what they write, I have a vision of Christopher Guest saying "These go to 11".


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Apr 2022)

Brad Sallows said:


> Whenever I hear those people talk or see what they write, I have a vision of Christopher Guest saying "These go to 11".


Sometimes ‘11’ isn’t so great, Brad…


----------

