Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[ArmyRick]

I would like to mark this momentous occasion, this, the day of our lord, 4th of july, 2026, as the day I, Altair, before man and god alike, agree with Armyrick.

Easy now! This is what happens when you day drink and you don't own cattle.

 

[ArmyRick]

Don't worry Canadians, the Federal government will now let you know what your opinions are, what your feelings are, and most importantly they will decide what facts are facts. Trust them!

The Late Emperor Palpatine looks at the LPC's ability to manipulate the political system with great envy.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Starting proposition.

In 1960 40 hours of labour would cover the essentials for two and their children.
In 1980 80 hours of labour were necessary to cover the essentials for two - both partners needed to work
In 2000 80 hours of labour only covered the essentials for two - no children
In 2020 80 hours are necessary to cover the bare essentials

Old saying: two can live as cheap as one.

A partnership is necessary to meet the bare essentials of two.

What started out as an aspiration, a job for both partners, has become a requirement. Two salaries are necessary to support one roof.

Jobs are worth only half what they used to be.

Other way around. Couples started having fewer children (some childless), and had more money to spend bidding up the prices of other things, like housing. Relative to almost everything else, an hour's wage typically allows more consumption than at any point in prior human history.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Corporations. Plain and simple.

Ordinary people, then. Owners/shareholders, employees, and consumers.

Corporations enable specialization; specialization promotes productivity; productivity promotes prosperity; prosperity promotes well-being.

 

[PrairieFella]

Ordinary people, then. Owners/shareholders, employees, and consumers.

Corporations enable specialization; specialization promotes productivity; productivity promotes prosperity; prosperity promotes well-being.

What a purposefully naive perspective.

 

[MilEME09]

Would you agree the Liberal government should have been accountable for their "deficit guard rails" where they deliberately lied to the public about their guard rails by $22 billion dollars?

Everyone regardless of party should be held accountable for deliberately lying to the public. But they should be given their time in court to defend them selves as well. In the case of the number you cite, it needs to be determined who knew what because there is a difference between knowingly and unknowingly spreading information that is false.

 

[Brad Sallows]

What a purposefully naive perspective.

Do you have any understanding at all of what corporations really do with respect to pooling investment and resources to undertake complex endeavours?

 

[PrairieFella]

Do you have any understanding at all of what corporations really do with respect to pooling investment and resources to undertake complex endeavours?

Of course I do. Do you have any understanding that normal people have little say especially with the proliferation of the billionaire class? Do you know even know what class A B C shares are?

This isnt 1950 Ford Motor Company anymore. Youre either being willfully naive or willfully ignorant if you think the modern corporate culture and financialization of society by those corporations isnt a major driver of the economy stratification we're seeing today. Take a look at "K shaped economy" on Google. Tell me that isnt a major problem. Theres a storm coming from the youth who are now angry. Ignore it at our peril. First step imo would be major trust busting and a 50% wealth tax on billionaires, stocks included. A pittance compared to the 90ish% rate of the Golden Age of Capitalism post-war.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Everyone regardless of party should be held accountable for deliberately lying to the public.

What a wonderful dream that would be eh?

But they should be given their time in court to defend them selves as well.

Which would last 30 seconds.
Parliamentary privilege, your honour. Kthnxbye

In the case of the number you cite, it needs to be determined who knew what because there is a difference between knowingly and unknowingly spreading information that is false.

I doubt Chrystia Freeland will see any jail time. Aunt Linda probably won't either for posting Tylenol causes autism.

It would make a hell of a club to intimidate and go after people criticizing the government though.

 

[Altair]

I'm going to preface this with, I don't like this potential legislation.

Not because I don't agree with it in principle, but because it would be a nightmare to administer.

And unless those doing the lying get jail time, they will fundraise their way out of any financial penalties. "Look as the thought police infringe on my free speech, look as they try to shut me down for spreading the truth! Help me fight the power by donating 19.99 at this links..."

If, big if, but if this is true, I would want a high bar. I'm talking Alex Jones saying the victims of Sandy Hook were paid actors level blatant lying. And don't get it wrong, that does exist. The stuff I've seen about Tumbler ridge is enough to make me sick, and I wouldn't at all mind if people knowingly spreading lies in cases like those faced some sort of repercussion.

But it would need to meet that high bar, and it would need cross party buy in, and it would need to not be a complete soup sandwich in terms of administering judgements, and I don't think that those prerequisites would be possible.

 

[brihard]

The mechanism for Parliamentary accountability is twofold: within Parliament itself at the hands of other Parliamentarians, and ultimately at the ballot box. It is what it is.

As the to article posted a couple days ago about that memo- I’d need more detail before I get up in arms. Ideas and notions get explored all the time, including mapping out available tools and authorities, considering various ramifications etc. Seems like they memo more than anything focused on whether disingenuous trolls should be engaged with by accounts posting in their official capacity. That of course is. Losing proposition.

Most realistic ‘hard ball’ approach? Identify accounts that may be part of foreign influence networks and go after them on that basis, with some levers applied to service providers to chivvy that along. Even that’s a pretty Sisyphean endeavour.

Simply being a lying asshole on Twitter isn’t legally actionable. We have freedom of expression without a quality filter, and the criminal offence of “publishing false news” was struck down many years ago.

 

[brihard]

I'm going to preface this with, I don't like this potential legislation.

Not because I don't agree with it in principle, but because it would be a nightmare to administer.

And unless those doing the lying get jail time, they will fundraise their way out of any financial penalties. "Look as the thought police infringe on my free speech, look as they try to shut me down for spreading the truth! Help me fight the power by donating 19.99 at this links..."

If, big if, but if this is true, I would want a high bar. I'm talking Alex Jones saying the victims of Sandy Hook were paid actors level blatant lying. And don't get it wrong, that does exist. The stuff I've seen about Tumbler ridge is enough to make me sick, and I wouldn't at all mind if people knowingly spreading lies in cases like those faced some sort of repercussion.

But it would need to meet that high bar, and it would need cross party buy in, and it would need to not be a complete soup sandwich in terms of administering judgements, and I don't think that those prerequisites would be possible.

What potential legislation are you talking about? I don’t see any.

 

[Altair]

What potential legislation are you talking about? I don’t see any.

Potential whatever it is then.

 

[brihard]

Potential whatever it is then.

Sounds like nothing more than a policy options group head scratch.

 

[Altair]

Sounds like nothing more than a policy options group head scratch.

Hopefully it doesn't move past that.

 

[brihard]

Hopefully it doesn't move past that.

Yeah. The story is thin on details; knowing who was involved in these discussions and what their positions in government are would be useful to gauge the seriousness of this.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Hopefully it doesn't move past that.

It makes me think of the guy bringing up an idea and getting thrown out of the office window meme.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Of course I do. Do you have any understanding that normal people have little say especially with the proliferation of the billionaire class? Do you know even know what class A B C shares are?

What "say" is it you think they should have that they don't?

... the modern corporate culture and financialization of society by those corporations isnt a major driver of the economy stratification we're seeing today.

Modern corporate etc. is a major driver of the economy, period. Stratification is mainly a result of people with high-value skills getting what they can. The top 1% isn't the problem; the top 25% is.

Take a look at "K shaped economy" on Google. Tell me that isnt a major problem. Theres a storm coming from the youth who are now angry. Ignore it at our peril. First step imo would be major trust busting and a 50% wealth tax on billionaires, stocks included.

Yeah, that might happen. A lot of people look at someone like Elon Musk and hate him for being rich; the jobs and wealth and human advancement he has stick-handled just don't seem to penetrate their envious minds.

A pittance compared to the 90ish% rate of the Golden Age of Capitalism post-war.

I find it amazing that it is still necessary to point out that very few people ever actually paid at those rates due to all the carve-outs in the codes.