• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

Yes. PMMC has proposed amendments to th PSSA that would give BSOs and other front line emergency services personnel a 25 and out pension similar to what the RCMP currently enjoy.

Ah ok. I thought you after 25 years they give you the boot and a pension lol. Makes much more sense now.
 
Staking your "policy position" on "ideology" is a mistake. Your police foundation should be "doing what's best for Canada and Canadians" and "what's best" shouldn't be decided in advance and locked into stone, but should be based on the best information and expertise available at any given time. We shouldn't admonish parties automatically because they've switched stances (but it shouldn't require a leader change to achieve that switch).

There is evolving policy to suit the situation and then there is tacking your ship to what ever way the wind is blowing. You seem to be ok with it, obviously I am not but I will also, again, admit my biases.
 
Just me, but I believe you cant be a fiscally responsible Gov while putting the country deeper in debt. You can be fiscally responsible, while paying off that debt, but not getting deeper.

I know others here will be more comfortable with the country taking on a bigger debt load.
Its an extremely tight corner that we've been painted into. I do not see any situation where any Federal government could not put together a budget, currently, and not run a deficit - especially given our 'requirement' to meet certain standards with NATO now, coupled with the present trade situation we are locked into - short of slashing CPP/OAS/GIS payments to those retired, raising the GST by 3-4 %, NOT giving a pay raise to the CAF, slashing the PS by 15% across the board, effective immediately, slashing Federal transfer payments by 15-20% effective immediately.

If 50+.01% of the population is ok with that, then go ahead. But understand that will be trigger a sudden dramatic recession, collapse the housing market (meaning tens of thousands of mortgage defaults and homelessness), a flight of capital investment, a spike in the mortality rates, suicide rates will spike, hospital wait lists will spike, a massive loss in the 'best and brightest' because why stay in a country where the standard of living is falling, wages are falling and opportunities for advancement is closed, etc, etc, etc.

The path out of our current situation does not lay with creating a balanced budget this fiscal year or the next, it simply does not.

Question - which G7 country or even G20 country will run a balanced budget this year or next? I am genuinely this question as I don't have a clue what the answer is but am curious to know.
 
There is evolving policy to suit the situation and then there is tacking your ship to what ever way the wind is blowing. You seem to be ok with it, obviously I am not but I will also, again, admit my biases.
I see it more as getting back to sailing a reach after almost decade of luffing.
 
For those of you talking about the albatross around our neck that is the OAS. Seems some people might have heard your pleas.


Liberals urged to cut Old Age Security spending in upcoming budget​

Kershaw said that OAS has drifted too far from its original aim of 'protecting insecure retirees' to 'padding the comfort of affluence'

 
Its an extremely tight corner that we've been painted into. I do not see any situation where any Federal government could not put together a budget, currently, and not run a deficit - especially given our 'requirement' to meet certain standards with NATO now, coupled with the present trade situation we are locked into - short of slashing CPP/OAS/GIS payments to those retired, raising the GST by 3-4 %, NOT giving a pay raise to the CAF, slashing the PS by 15% across the board, effective immediately, slashing Federal transfer payments by 15-20% effective immediately.

If 50+.01% of the population is ok with that, then go ahead. But understand that will be trigger a sudden dramatic recession, collapse the housing market (meaning tens of thousands of mortgage defaults and homelessness), a flight of capital investment, a spike in the mortality rates, suicide rates will spike, hospital wait lists will spike, a massive loss in the 'best and brightest' because why stay in a country where the standard of living is falling, wages are falling and opportunities for advancement is closed, etc, etc, etc.

The path out of our current situation does not lay with creating a balanced budget this fiscal year or the next, it simply does not.

Question - which G7 country or even G20 country will run a balanced budget this year or next? I am genuinely this question as I don't have a clue what the answer is but am curious to know.

Choices have to be made, doing the right thing doesn't necessarily mean doing the popular thing. Tighten belts or hope we can spend our way out of this. The LPC, and Canada, seem to have made their choice. I guess we will see come budget day and there after.
 
For those of you talking about the albatross around our neck that is the OAS. Seems some people might have heard your pleas.


Liberals urged to cut Old Age Security spending in upcoming budget​

Kershaw said that OAS has drifted too far from its original aim of 'protecting insecure retirees' to 'padding the comfort of affluence'


The LPC will never take this away from those already in receipt of it. They may gate keep it better, but anyone already in receipt will be grandfathered. Too many votes at stake.
 
Question - which G7 country or even G20 country will run a balanced budget this year or next? I am genuinely this question as I don't have a clue what the answer is but am curious to know.
Considering the position the LPC put Canada in stemming from their leadership over the last 10 years I don't think it's fair to try and compare us with other G7 and G20 countries.

imasges-4.jpeg
iggmages-1.png
 
you can be fiscally responsible and still run a deficit, They key is how you spend that money, what you spend it on, and if you have a plan to balance things.

You mean using words like "investment" as a means to justify wasteful spending.
 
The LPC will never take this away from those already in receipt of it. They may gate keep it better, but anyone already in receipt will be grandfathered. Too many votes at stake.
And you think that the CPC party will? Which party currently has a higher % of support among the age group 65%? I don't know this question, again I'm curious to know.
 
And you think that the CPC party will? Which party currently has a higher % of support among the age group 65%? I don't know this question, again I'm curious to know.

I do. PP is preaching about young people and affordability.

And I think the LPC did at the last election, I stand to be corrected.

Section 4 would seem to support my position.


Ive never heard of the student vote, interesting.

 
Stipulated that it's impractical to balance the budget immediately this year.

Note, however, that the LPC (and NDP) response to trying to make a significant change towards that goal is inevitably some variation of "Oh no, not this year; we have too many important things to do".
 
It’s almost like we over sold and stated the need for a university education.
Seeds for this were sown decades ago. I’m a 1985 Ontario Grade 13 grad. I could have left in ‘84 after Gr. 12, but feeling fairly listless it made sense to stick around for the extra ‘free’ year of school. What I wasn’t expecting was to be force-fed how important a uni education was by the guidance councillors. Their attitude seemed to be that now the riff-raff has left after Gr. 12 to college, trade school or…heaven forbid…the CF, we can get down to it and prep you for uni. A week after Gr. 13 final exams I was in Cornwallis 😀.

I’m hoping that attitude of uni being the be all/end all has changed.
 
We'll see. Could be a lower of the claw back threshold. I mean being retired and having an income of 94k a year before the claw back starts - unreal! That's higher than the current max income for the mandatory CPP contributions!

The LPC will never take this away from those already in receipt of it. They may gate keep it better, but anyone already in receipt will be grandfathered. Too many votes at stake.
 
We'll see. Could be a lower of the claw back threshold. I mean being retired and having an income of 94k a year before the claw back starts - unreal! That's higher than the current max income for the mandatory CPP contributions!
Reduce the inflation protection to half and, over time, the demand will erode.
 
Back
Top