- Reaction score
- 6,817
- Points
- 1,260
I agree he'd be bashed about by POTUS47's backs & forths too, but I don't think even he would have flipped out against Trump & Co.
CAN-USA Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)
- Thread starter Remius
- Start date
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,427
- Points
- 1,040
Of course. Canada leans socialist and the LPC have pushed in that direction. I wasn't happy with PP's approach to the US either. I think his policies would have been better for the country, but I'm not too fussed he lost. There are many bonus' to another LPC win.
- Reaction score
- 6,672
- Points
- 1,190
Repeal of consumer carbon tax was a cheap political trick to save their asses in the election. Without removing industrial carbon tax, it's just hidden the cost from the electorate. We're supposed to be happy it's gone when we were supposedly getting more money back from the rebates? That's gaslighting 101.
NATO pledge for 5% GDP was being walked back almost as fast as our immediate 20% pay raise. It's really only 3.5%, with (important) economic projects counting as part of it. I personally don't think we're even mature enough to spend 2%, which ended up as a slight of hand by adding CCG into defense spending from the same folks that just ripped $1B of O&M money out of the CAF from the last 2 years.
Show me Energy East being shoved through Quebec and more tankers off the west coast and I'll believe C-5 is a success.
C-6/7 is a bill to pretend they don't have to do a budget. Half the cabinet is the same, they could have provided a budget and did not do it. Either Trudeau's previously ready budget was a train wreck, or the "fully costed" campaign plan wasn't actually fully costed.
CPC knows Canadians don't want an election again, trying to claim the Liberals "won support" is laughable.
- Reaction score
- 26,279
- Points
- 1,360
Not holding out hope on this one…
At least the Carney gvt is the most Progressive Conservative government since Brian Mulroney.
Even with a budget they would still have had to legislate the estimates.
Tough to budget when the current extremely disruptive trade relationship with our largest partner is simultaneously challenging what had been stable and predictable assumptions about revenues, and forcing radical rethinks about expenditures. We’re the end of June and already any budget passed in April or May would have been meaningless given events. Could they have stuck numbers on a page? Sure, but that would likely not have reflected the spring and summer’s fiscal tumult. Not committing to a fictitious budget is reasonable.
Sometimes you need to let major events play out for a time so their impact can be properly understood. It’s like putting in your retirement, having your wife spring divorce papers on you the next day, and expecting to have a meaningful personal budget in place that week, before you’ve even got a sense of what your new financial obligations will look like.
I would like to see a federal budget, but I also don’t want my intelligence insulted. If the accurate answer now is “things are pretty effed up and we need to let part of this shake out first”, I’m willing to accept that for a brief period. At least it’s honest.
- Reaction score
- 4,290
- Points
- 1,260
Happy to hear this:At least the Carney gvt is the most Progressive Conservative government since Brian Mulroney.
1) FTA
2) Acid Rain Accord
3) Environmental Protection Act
4) Privatizing Government Corps
5) Nunavut Land Agreement (lead to creation of Nunavut)
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,190
- Points
- 1,040
Over three-and-a-half more years of unpredictability is a long time to wait. When does that excuse wear out?
- Reaction score
- 7,861
- Points
- 1,210
Gas prices went down almost immediately, and its been consistantly lower, even after all the market changes up and down. Do I agree that the corporate rate is political and hides the cost? Yes. But half a carbon tax is still lower than a whole carbon tax. Full disclosure I'm pro-carbon tax. Won't be allowed to trade with the EU free trade zone if we don't have one. So when working with Rome...
There wasn't a walk back. The 5% includes the 3.5% and 1.5% in seperate categories. That is litterally the plan.
The $9 billion has already be given Royal Assent, and treasury board is to disburse the funds to the CAF. Should be seeing the pay changes Aug/Sept timeframe. That's about as immediate as it gets for the federal gov't to not break their own laws.
Now if its a 20% pay raise directly or a 20% increase in the pay budget overall I don't know. I'm expecting them to do something like take the 20% total, divide by number of people to get an amount per person and then give that exact same sum increase to everyone. Which means Pte might get a 30% increase and Col a 5% increase. Gets the jr troops a better paycheque and keeps the delta between the ranks the same.
Tankers and the imaginary zombie lie that was Energy East both have absolutely nothing to do with bill C-5. At all. C-5 is about speeding up approvals and I think (can't remember) not doing double approvals if provinces have already done them. And it doesn't run over provincial juristiction. You wan't Quebec to play nice then talk to Quebec. CPC wouldn't do any better dealing with Quebec. Frankly they would do worse.
You’ve prefaced your question as if we won’t have a budget for three and a half years. Why is that?
PrairieFella
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,193
- Points
- 1,110
PrairieFella
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,193
- Points
- 1,110
Surely you would have shown PP the same grace expecting results days after the bill passes?
- Reaction score
- 6,672
- Points
- 1,190
That whataboutism is strong here, but I wouldn't be cheerleading promises without shovels in the ground.
I think it is reasonable to expect and want to see results before giving credit where credit is due.
I also think you are correct that unrealistic time expectations that would not be expected of others is a fair argument.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,190
- Points
- 1,040
If fiscal tumult is proposed as the excuse for not providing a budget, absence of tumult removes the excuse. However, there is no reason to assume there should be an absence of tumult any time soon, since Trump is the source and will be president until his successor's inauguration. If the likelihood of having to put up a budget during a period of fiscal tumult in the near future is substantial, we might as well have the budget now.
- Reaction score
- 6,817
- Points
- 1,260
Agreed on the industrial carbon tax, but gaslighting? On this one, Team Blue spent a significant bit of time, energy, resources and political capital calling for Team Red to axe the tax. I guess Team Blue didn’t realize the rebate would end, too? Like with the “Justin must go” line of effort showed, careful what you wish for (especially re: what one says Canadians'll be happy to get rid of), and don't forget potential unintended consequences.
1000%
Agreed - especially with next to zero public opposition from Team Blue on the legislation. Proof = pudding.
I'll agree that Team Blue may not have lost as much support as the worst haters say, but I can't agree that the Liberals did worse after PMJT GTFO'ed.
I guess that’s one take you could pick, sure. It isolates the issue from reality though. That reality includes ongoing trade talks that both sides want to achieve results on quickly, NATO talks on defence spending that have occurred since the ‘no budget this spring’ decision, other bilateral or multilateral trade discussions Canada’s in outside of the Can/US bilateral relationship, which are ongoing and actively moving pieces down the board.
While there will always be ongoing events that will have some lesser or greater economic impact, right now not just Canada but the entire developed world is navigating some major restructuring of relationships, so we’re well outside the normal fluctuation. And because industries and businesses need some predictability, pretty much everyone is trying to arrive at some agreements pretty swiftly.
All of that, coupled with with the fact that the PM has specifically promised a budget in the fall, has me personally not too concerned about the lack of one now. Spending still has to pass through Parliament - and it has. A fall budget will likely still face less predictability and more volatility than most would, but it’s also likely to be a much more settled situation than the past couple months.
If we don’t see a federal budget in the fall, that’s where my patience would wear out.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 7,861
- Points
- 1,210
I'm not concerned, but I don't like it. There should be an economic update soon. We, the public are required to see what is going on with our purse.
Unpredictable, or "needing to get a handle on it" or commiting to big spending in the short term are all reasons to wait out so your first financial update/budget is based in reality.
I don’t like it either. I don’t like that these are the circumstances our country is in. I do respect that the PM it approaching it all rationally.
