IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 991
- Points
- 990
I suspect you made the mistake of using the far rarer US gallon at 3.8 litres per in your calculations.
Trudeau Popularity - or not. Nanos research
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,998
- Points
- 1,140
Bingo.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 9,222
- Points
- 1,160
It's very likley his family benefited from the charity scandal and he is likley guaranteed a few well paying board member spots as a reward for his loyalty to certain groups/individuals once he is out of politics.
- Reaction score
- 1,332
- Points
- 1,260
Regarding rural > urban > rural employment migration.
When I was graduating high school, ( "back when the Earth was cooling" LOL ) our town placed its residents on the entry-level eligibility list before non-residents.
That allowed us to remain at home with our parents, and bank money for a down payment on a home of our own.
Also to be automatically enrolled in the city pension plan immediately after high school graduation.
Not to suggest the old way was better or worse than the new way. Just different.
- Reaction score
- 18,528
- Points
- 1,360
Christmas Caribbean Couch-surfing also good for not depleting his savings.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 12,472
- Points
- 1,140
I think there is more to his personal wealth that what we know.Christmas Caribbean Couch-surfing also good for not depleting his savings.
- Reaction score
- 1,593
- Points
- 1,190
@CBH99 I want to start off by saying I also greatly appreciate the decorum with which you post and your willingness to at least listen to and consider positions opposed to your own. It's not something many people are capable of, especially in today's polarized political climate.Lumber, I really do appreciate you man.
We tend to look at political issues from very different perspectives. And while political topics tend to get heated or snarky fairly quickly, you always seem to keep a level head & make sound points, and take the time to explain your perspectives even if they go against the grain. So cheers to that
You've posted a few things in the recent past that I've meant to comment on, but the day has slipped away on me...I think if we took a big step backwards & looked at the REALLY big picture, we actually probably agree on more than it seems we do here in the forum.
_________________________________________
Allow me to clarify some things before I continue...
There are good Liberal MP's who work hard to do what's in the best interest of their constituents, and I respect them.
There are good people who were involved in drafting some parts of the legislation you mentioned, and I respect them too.
I imagine the working class people that get the dry & unrecognized work in government did so with the very best of intentions, and genuinely created it in the way they thought best served Canadians - and I sincerely respect their efforts also.
My criticism of our government lies purely with Trudeau, Freeland, and a few senior cabinet officials.
My criticism is NOT towards the folks behind the scenes that work hard, are enthusiastic, albeit perhaps naive - or the MP's that are down to Earth and work hard on behalf of their constituents, regardless of their party.
It's the key leaders in our government that draw my criticism, and to be honest, my downright hostility.
__________________________________________
So with that said...
No, I don't believe any legislation passed by this government has ever been for the genuine benefit of Canadians - and quite often I find the legislation is detrimental to the national interest.
With the exception of legalizing Marijuana (which the government benefits from greatly via tax revenue) I find every single piece of legislation this government has passed has served one of 5 purposes...
- Take as much money out of the pockets of Canadians as possible.
(An ever increasing carbon tax, higher income taxes, deferred eligibility for CPP, and monetary policies that keep inflation high. So many clear examples, I'm thinking I don't need to expand too much on it)
- Limit what Canadians can read and/or say online via internet censorship legislation.
(Bill C-11 was touted as being all about promoting Canadian content to the press & the people, but in reality the bill didn't mention a single word about Canadian content even once...curious what the final version of the Online Harms Bill will contain.)
- To massively increase the size of the federal government & all the expenses that come from that
- To centralize power in Ottawa
- To bankrupt the country funding a ton of programs that act as a bandaid for problems caused by Trudeau & Freeland In the first place
I don't know a single person that only pays $10 a day for daycare. But I know we as a country must be paying a lot of money to subsidize daycares now.
The cost of paying for such an expanded government work force is sitting at around $20 billion annually...thats $20 billion just to pay for the expanded government, in addition to the costs the government already had.
i dont know a single person that gets more money from the carbon rebate than they put in. The cost of administering the carbon tax alone is now sitting at $200 million...
$200 million dollars to take your money from you throughout the year, only to give you most of it back come tax time... sheer f**king lunacy
Nobody was ever going to get a carbon rebate for more than they paid into it. That was literally idiot math & a snake oil salesmen scheme to try to trick people into supporting the idea
We already have pharmacare in the sense that drug prices are regulated & subsidized. The Pharmacare bill isn't even a thing - it looks like a bill, but all it does is promise to discuss the idea in the near future. As far as I can see, there isn't anything of substance in it yet.
(Medications here cost a fraction of what they do in the US. For the odd person that requires a rare or unique medication thats cost prohibitive, there are pathways to ensuring they have access to it regardless, etc)
Most people already have a dental plan through their employer or health insurance.
For low income folks who need a dentist, most dentist offices have payment options & can link people to different programs - Alberts Works, for example, can assist people with getting dental care arranged.
For dental emergencies one can also always go to their local hospital. Hospitals do offer treatment & care for dental emergencies, and its from some of the same dentists you'd get a cleaning from...
(I had a tooth somehow cracked & come out halfway through Topgun Maverick, and had to go to the hospital right after the movie. Ended up getting treated by my own dentist, just at the hospital, and it didnt cost me a dime)
Crime is up across the board because of policies that pretty much guarantee people will be released on bail, even when they clearly shouldn't be.
For just one example of how this affects all of us, higher car insurance rates...despite not having any tickets or accidents, I pay more now for car insurance than I ever have in the last decade!
The national debt has doubled under Freeland, and currently sits at $2.14 trillion. .
That is up from the $1.1 trillion debt they inherited.
They've added more money to our national debt than all previous governments combined - the servicing costs on that will prevent that same money from being used things that could actually help the country
*Editing this post for length (I already wrote a novel once for this post and deleted it because it was way too long, and now I've done the same again...
I don't see a single thing that this government has done or is doing that is improving our lives from where they were at when Stephen Harper was PM.
Can anybody name a single part of our lives that were crappy under Harper but are now so much better under Trudeau? (Not including violent criminals, that is...)
I'd take a time machine back to when Harper was the PM any day. When we weren't all paying for other people's kids daycare, imaginary pharmacare, no mandatory vaccinations that were rushed & experimental, no internet censorship legislation, no freezing people's bank accounts, no labeling legitimate protestors as terrorists a media that didn't get a government subsidy in exchange for favorable coverage, a MAID program that was there to help those terminally ill & not as a recommendation if someone has a mental health issue (52,000 people killed & counting), when budgets were balanced & the government had a surplus, when I didn't pay a carbon tax, and we were all a lot less financially stressed, all of us had hope regardless of what our ambitions were, when I wouldn't be labeled as a bigot for asking why there's a fucking drag queen reading stories to little kids, and when the country's morale was a whole lot higher.
Oh yeah...one more thing...
The carbon tax has collected approximately $32 billion dollars since it first came into affect...yet this year we are running a deficit of roughly $40B.
Next year, in 2025, Freeland has "confidently stated" that she will "try" to keep the deficit at only $25B. (Ha! Only...)
My question is - where the f**k is all our money going? (Am I legit missing something?)
Also...Justin's net worth in 2016 was approximately $3.2 million, but now he's worth an estimated $97 million (as of the end of 2023) That's just a wee bit fishy, no?
Sorry, I thought I'd posted this week's ago. Feel free to ignore, time has moved on
I read your whole post. I don't want to open up the debate again, but I do want to highlight one general point, and one specific point.
In general, we'll just have to agree to disagree on the purpose and benefit to many of these programs. When the current government has passed a law or created a program that on the surface has a benefit (i.e. reduced day care cost), I see it as nothing more than that, while you see it as a coy and nefarious way of the government to increase the size of the government and centralize power in Ottawa. Is it possible that that is the true motivation? Sure, absolutely, and I don't deny that there probably are laws and programs enacted by Trudeau/LPC with that intent expressly in mind. However, without their admission or the ability to read minds, all we can measure is whether or not a program actually benefited Canadians, and in some cases, I believe they have.
The specific point is regarding the carbon tax, because perhaps your are unaware of why/how the carbon tax is supposed to work. You claim that it is sheer "lunacy" to spend money to collect a tax just to give it back, however, it's actually a bonified government tactic to affect human behaviour in a desirable way. Here's how it works: people are short sighted. If you make something more expensive right now, it will cause people to avoid that thing, even if they know they will get a refund on that "extra expense" sometime later. More specifically, the government wants people to drive less, so, they make gas more expensive, with the idea that people will be more likely to drive less. And, it works. Hell, it worked on me. I used to drive up to the Annapolis Valley (about 1-1.25 hrs away) on weekends just to go for a nice drive, visit a favourite winery, buy some cheese curds, etc. Now? Nope. I don't want to spend the extra cost in gas. It doesn't matter to me that I know I will get a rebate later on, it hurts right now and that all that matter. The $200 mil that the government is spending to administer this program isn't lunacy, it's the cost you pay to socially engineer the population into reducing how much they use fossil fuels. Do I agree with it/support it? In principle... sort of. The timing was and continues to be fucking stupid. But, just to be clear, the point of this paragraph wasn't to try and convince you the carbon tax is good, just to sort of... show you it's a lot more... complex that you may be considering.
Regarding your question about Harper, I take issue with the use of "crappy" in that I don't think anything was "crappy" under Harper, but there are things that are better now, under Trudeau. If you are a new father (generally), your entitlement to time off are much better now. If you are a purveyor or consumer of Cannabis, your life is certainly better now than it was under Harper. If you live in a first nation community, there is a good change that your access to safe and clean water has improved since Harper (though lots of work still needs to be done).
Are we generally better than we were under Harper? I would say no. But again, I like taking shots at black and white statements like "can anyone name a single part of our lives...". Well yes, yes I can.
I think you got my posts mixed up with someone else's @ArmyRick
I can't think of a single time I've ever defended Trudeau, and I can't really envision a scenario where I would deflect criticism from him...
Heck, I'm the guy who's made a deliberate effort to limit my posts on here about Trudeau because my angry/bewildered rants were becoming far too often - even I could sense that I was becoming preoccupied with his nonsense and needed to slow it down!
I'm with you when it comes to Trudeau & Freeland. I personally believe they are intentionally destroying the country, and are shills to a much larger conspiracy to reshape the world into something quite dystopian...
One doesn't even need to dabble in conspiracies to go down THIS rabbit hole
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,575
- Points
- 1,260
Agreed, and I am going to be viewed as a heretic here, that's not all JTs fault either.
His biggest failings, IMHO, is an addiction to virtue signaling with no real action and a real ineptitude on the international stage. And this has completely imploded his image and outpaced his ability because world events have turned in a direction that makes him the wrong guy in the wrong government.
- Reaction score
- 6,345
- Points
- 1,310
Agreed. His biggest failing is his inability to adapt to the situation at hand. The playbook from 2015 is still the one being used for 2024 into 2025; which is lunacy when you take into account:
-Foreign interference from the PRC
-the Housing crisis
-a Trump presidency
-the COVID-19 Pandemic
-inflation, shrinkflation, greedflation
-the largest Land War in Europe since the Second World War
-NATO rearming
-further conflict in the Middle East (Red Sea and Israel/Palestine)
A better politician would have adjusted policy to suit the situation. Instead, pushing forward in spite of these very real game changers has been his undoing, and inturn, ours.
In all of it, PMJT and his cabal of empty suits have decided every time to forego being realistic in favour of appearing "smart."
I use that "smart" word in lieu of the terms "virtue signalling" or "woke" because they are tired expressions and definitely not the motivating factor for this government. They want to appear smart, educated, better knowing than other governments, countries, or their own citizens. That said, to be unbending in the face of wave upon wave of changes to the situation is not being steadfast or smart; its being stubbornly arrogant and stupid.
Maxman1
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 1,057
- Points
- 960
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,953
- Points
- 1,010
I never accused you of such a thing (defending Trudeau). I think it was you or someone else that posted his 2023 personal net worth
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,953
- Points
- 1,010
Come again?
Fathers could take time off for paternity leave under Harper. How is it any better?
Keeping in mind I was a green voter in 2011 and 2015, so not a Harper fan, what is better now under Trudeau than Harper? OK, government employment opportunities are better (which is killing the economy)
You have also inadvertently pointed out the failings of the system. Your pleasure trip on a weekend resulted in your contributing to the economy by buying cheese, wine, Fritos or whatever. So you are no longer helping those outside of your immediate area. You have reduced your social interactions and now confine those to your immediate area. And for what reason? There is first of all no scientific confirmation that reducing CO2 emissions will stop temperature increases at all (all their suppositions are based on models that cannot be proven accurate) and secondly, if Canada disappeared completely China would replace our contributions to "CO2 in a matter of weeks. So why are we wearing hair shirts and sacrificing our children's future?
But back to the tax thing. Everything you purchase is now more expensive; made so by transportation costs. Many things you purchase that used to be made in Canada now come from elsewhere. Companies do indeed look for ways to become more efficient or save money on production costs. One of the ways to do that is to balance the cost of re-locating plus transportation costs as opposed to paying for a ton of carbon. Guess which choice is more viable? One final thing. For those who are working, they still have to get to work so their gas allowance goes towards commuting costs. What is suffering? You mentioned it above: family outings, vacations, dinner out, golf, fishing, flying. These are all things that benefit us socially and emotionally. What is left? 150 years ago no one went more than a couple of miles from their village in their entire lives that way of living is coming back
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,031
- Points
- 1,260
You'll own nothing, do nothing and be happy. -Liberal logic.
- Reaction score
- 1,593
- Points
- 1,190
Maybe you aren't aware, but the way paternity worked (and mostly still does), is that the time off is shared between both partners. Anything one partner didn't take, the other could take.
In reality, this meant (in most case...albeit this is anecdotal) the mother taking 12-18 months off, and the father getting squat. I actually was present for a conversation where a new mother was talking to a friend and said basically "My husband had the nerve to ask for 1 month of the 12 months, like can you believe the audacity?". I've heard many similar stories.
So, NOW there is an additional 5/8 weeks of leave that is entirely meant for the "other parent" (usually the father). If they don't take it, it does not go to the primary parent (usually the mother). This guarantees fathers (in most cases) get at least 5/8 weeks off to be with their newborns.
Hence, life is batter for new fathers than it was before Trudeau.
Just did this; can confirm.
There’s 15 weeks of maternity leave under EI. Mom only. There’s also 40 weeks of parental leave under EI; either parent can take up to 35 weeks of this, the remaining five can only be taken by the other parent. This leave can be split along any proportion within that 35 weeks max per parent cap. In my case I took 5 weeks, my wife is on the 15 weeks + 35, so about a full year.
That’s standard benefits. Max EI rate pays about $610 or so a week. There’s also an 18 month total extended version, but it simply stretches the years’s worth of EI benefits out over 18 months.
Different employers may have additional top ups. My wife for instance has up to 6 months topped up to 93% full pay; I have up to a year at 93%. So in our case because she took the full year we’re eating 6 months with no top up. But I recognize that we’re luckier than many to have had a top up at all.
Eaglelord17
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,738
- Points
- 1,040
Just did 3.5 months of parental leave recently. My employer doesn't have top up. Definitely a bit jealous of those that have it. Not to mention I accidentally miscalculated my weeks so that left a couple grand on the table for EI as my partner doesn't make enough to get max EI well I do.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 6,978
- Points
- 1,040
I paid into EI all my working life and was never able to claim anything. How refreshing it would have been if it were actual insurance to cover unforeseen unfortunate events, and not a kitty to be raided for new social spending that should have been paid out of general revenues if the feds wanted to provide new social programs. Then at least my "premiums" might have been reduced when the embarrassingly large surpluses started to accumulate.
- Reaction score
- 13,516
- Points
- 1,260
Yes, the party of checks notes bringing down inflation to practically zero after Covid is definitely encouraging people not to own anything.
On one hand, the LPC is lambasted for being too close to business and bailing them out. On the other hand, the LPC are red-star Communists.
Communists traditionally didn’t like private businesses…
Similar threads
