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

2025 Federal Election - 28 Apr 25

From the CCPA...


Mark Carney’s Values: What his 2021 book reveals about the leader he might be​


It’s fair to say that Mark Carney’s 2021 book, Values: Building a Better World for All, was his early application to be prime minister. Values covers a wide swath of economic history and philosophy, and gives us some clues into what makes our new prime minister tick.

At the end of its 531 pages, Carney lays out a hopeful vision for Canada, albeit one lacking a sharper focus on details. We can only conclude he is a very competent centrist whose plans for Canada won’t depart much from the status quo. In the face of the second Trump administration, many will feel that’s enough, but one can’t help wanting more.

For Carney, the banker, resilience has more to do with identifying and preventing systemic risks to the financial system rather than ensuring our buildings and infrastructure can survive fires, droughts, floods and heat domes. Meanwhile, sustainability is about green investment opportunities shaped by a strategic direction set by governments through carbon pricing, regulation and financial disclosure. Ironically, Carney’s support for carbon pricing is among his strongest policy recommendations.

It’s not clear how Carney would come to grips with the massive inequalities in our society, the rapidly declining state of the climate, and the dark side of new technologies and their potential to displace mass amounts of workers. Nor does trade factor in, as the second Trump administration collapses the whole basis for Canadian trade with the United States, and the post-war global order, with the United States as hegemonic power, starting to crumble.

At the end of the day, Mark Carney’s values proposition is not enough to “build a better world for all.” You can take the boy out of Goldman Sachs but the imprint of Goldman Sachs lingers. Carney offers up a solid understanding of how we got here, and the complexities of building a modern mixed economy, but skirts over more fundamental economic challenges. As for Carney the politician, that chapter remains unwritten.


CCPA, which also want to tax empty bedrooms in your house, tax gains on your primary residence … you get the picture.
 
CCPA, which also want to tax empty bedrooms in your house, tax gains on your primary residence … you get the picture.

Indeed. But given the source I'd assume they'd be a bit more effusively complimentary, but not really seeing that...
 
Some more reviews.

This first one, by Jordan Peterson, is a 20 minute read. However, instead of being like most reviews, he really delves into and pulls the book (and Carney) apart. If you dislike Peterson, read it anyway. It is the one review that makes it all clear.


 
I’m pretty sure that’s a interpretive summary of Carneys thoughts and visions derived from that third persons reading of that book. To be clear, Carney did not write that passage, it’s not in his book even if that’s what he meant. (And it is, in fact, a pretty good summary of what probably could have happened if Trump was not elected and Carney is elected. For better or worse, Trump changed everything. Every. Thing.)

If Carney tries to execute on his book, we are dead as a country in the form we have now. I think he will try, albeit slower and in a more sly way.
Mea culpa.
 
If not, was he not just following the existing rules as they are to maximize the profit of the company of which he was an executive? Isn't that the fiduciary responsibility of a board member, to maximize the profits of the company for the shareholders?
Absolutely, but for conservatives to be attacking and progressives to be defending it has them both off-script. Doctrine of flexible principles, I suppose - exigencies dictate.
 
Is there a max someone can put in a TFSA?
Yes. The ceiling increases each year. The contribution limit carries forward; you don't have to use-or-lose each year's contribution room. If you withdraw, you can re-contribute withdrawn amounts after a delay (ie. not in the year withdrawn). See here.

"The TFSA contribution room is the total amount of all of the following:
  • the TFSA dollar limit of the current year
  • any unused TFSA contribution room from previous years
  • any withdrawals made from the TFSA in the previous year"

Tax avoidance is legal and not immoral or unethical. The point of the major individual tax breaks (eg. RRSP, TFSA) is to encourage savings, particularly for retirement. The point of major corporate tax breaks is to encourage investment. It's no good having entrepreneurs with bright ideas that will make our lives better if they lack sufficient capital and can't easily attract investors.
 
Some more reviews.

This first one, by Jordan Peterson, is a 20 minute read. However, instead of being like most reviews, he really delves into and pulls the book (and Carney) apart. If you dislike Peterson, read it anyway. It is the one review that makes it all clear.


Quoting Jordan Paterson, a man named as a russian agent under oath, really does the opposite for me here. Because to me, if a Russian government propagandist is telling me Carney bad, it means they see him as a enemy, which in my books is good.
 
CCPA, which also want to tax empty bedrooms in your house, tax gains on your primary residence … you get the picture.
They'll tax the street. If you try to sit, they'll tax your seat. If you get too cold, they'll tax the heat. If you take a walk, they'll tax your feet
 
Are you suggesting that people should be investing, rather than paying inflated housing prices as "investments"?
There are a lot of paths to sustainable retirement. One of the things that has to be sustained is a place to live. The two most common options are to save enough to rent, or to own a place. Being at the mercy of rentals (availability and cost) is to my thinking a lot riskier, unless you're savings put you well above the threshold of concern.
 
Quoting Jordan Paterson, a man named as a russian agent under oath, really does the opposite for me here. Because to me, if a Russian government propagandist is telling me Carney bad, it means they see him as a enemy, which in my books is good.
That's a lot of faith placed in one source. No-one ever lied or even merely said something he believed to be true that wasn't actually true under oath, of course.
 
There are a lot of paths to sustainable retirement. One of the things that has to be sustained is a place to live. The two most common options are to save enough to rent, or to own a place. Being at the mercy of rentals (availability and cost) is to my thinking a lot riskier, unless you're savings put you well above the threshold of concern.
Owning a home is a solid retirement strategy, but government policy has lead to a housing bubble... So, Canadians are spending money on housing that they should be investing in industry and innovation.

It's hard to put money into the TSX when you spend every penny you have on a mortgage or rent.
 
Quoting Jordan Paterson, a man named as a russian agent under oath, really does the opposite for me here. Because to me, if a Russian government propagandist is telling me Carney bad, it means they see him as a enemy, which in my books is good.
Wait- Jordan Peterson is a Russian agent? When did this happen? Do you happen have a source?
 
Wait- Jordan Peterson is a Russian agent? When did this happen? Do you happen have a source?
Was stated by the PM during the foreign interference inquiry. This is the same inquiry that name dropped tucker Carlson and everyone's favorite Ottawa citizen reporter as Russian assets.

 
Was stated by the PM during the foreign interference inquiry. This is the same inquiry that name dropped tucker Carlson and everyone's favorite Ottawa citizen reporter as Russian assets.

I can only assume Trudeau provided evidence to support this claim and wasn't just throwing out baseless accusations.
 
Was stated by the PM during the foreign interference inquiry. This is the same inquiry that name dropped tucker Carlson and everyone's favorite Ottawa citizen reporter as Russian assets.


Forgive me but f I don’t believe anything Trudeau said or says under oath or not without extensive corroborating source evidence. The man has not earned any trust or respect in his word in of itself, and that partisan display during the inquiry should not be considered as evidence of anything.

I say that knowing full well that you will likely disagree. I also say it with no real stance on Jordan Peterson.
 
Back
Top