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

Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

QV said:
Well him and his entire cabinet, which many are also the new cabinet....

But what do they care so long as they keep getting elected... I think we'll see a new trend: The LPC will just flip leaders right before an election every time they start to get crushed in the polling.
Click to expand...
In my view, that was a one time get-out-of-jail free card. And they burned it.

What they really need, is to manufacture a new "crisis" that only they can solve.

2019-M'eh Canada wasn't quite ready to ditch LPC and rewarded/punished them with a minority
2021-COVID! Oh My! And O'Toole was weak as a kitten (yeah, all you O'Toole better than Pierre crowd, bugger off and yes in the CPC leadership I supported O'Toole)
2025-Trump! And we are no longer "Trudeau" brand and "elbows up" (from the weakest people).

Seriously. If Trudeau had led the LPC into the 2025 election, Pierre would be PM, Jagmeet or Yves would have battled closely for leader of the opposition. And the LPC would be out of there.

Switch leaders. Promise Canadians it will be different (Actually, weirdly, I have more faith in Carney than Trudeau) and scare the idiots with "TRUMP, oh my!"

My hope right now is that Carney secretly wants Brookfield to build a bunch of pipelines, open up mines, boost internal trade and get something of an economic base going.
 
ArmyRick said:
Switch leaders. Promise Canadians it will be different (Actually, weirdly, I have more faith in Carney than Trudeau) and scare the idiots with "TRUMP, oh my!"

My hope right now is that Carney secretly wants Brookfield to build a bunch of pipelines, open up mines, boost internal trade and get something of an economic base going.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it’s weird to have more faith in Carney than in Trudeau at all.

I don’t think Carney is overly concerned with specifically who builds infrastructure; as a twice over G7 central banker with an exceptional education in economics, he’s likely to be solidly classically liberal in wanting to maximize the ability of the market to achieve positive outcomes. Viewing a lot of what he says through that light, and tempering it with political realities that we all know exist, I expect to see him pushing hard to reduce the degree to which government is in the way of major infrastructure and capital expenditures.

Remius said:

Not wasting time
Click to expand...

Saw that. Interesting tidbit about 75 cents out of every procurement dollar in defense going to the U.S. wanting to diversify that is reasonable. Hopefully we get ourselves integrated into European defence supply chains similar to our involvement with F-35.

If RUMINT is true. Within a day or two we should hear of some relatively substantive commitments within DND/CAF. I hope that’s the case; some early indicators of “we mean business” would be great to see.
 
brihard said:
he’s likely to be solidly classically liberal in wanting to maximize the ability of the market to achieve positive outcomes.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily.

"Second, unless they become pure theorists, grad students immerse themselves in one or two bodies of ultra-specific empirical research. This immersion occasionally shifts economists’ policy views in their areas of specialization. Yet the maximum effect is small because the volume of research is so massive that most economists end up with no more than a few narrow topics of expertise. In all other areas, mainstream Ph.D. students graduate with virtually the same policy views they held when they started grad school. Minor tweaks aside, that’s where they stay for the rest of their careers. They transition from conventional teenage leftist intellectuals to slightly contrarian twenty-something leftist intellectuals to slightly-contrarian mature leftist intellectuals. Possibly with truly contrarian economic policy views in a few ultra-specific areas they know best. Otherwise, mainstream economists barely connect their life’s work to economic policy. When policy comes up, most take off their researcher hat, and put on their slightly-contrarian left-wing intellectual hat."

Deflecting a person's political leanings with reason and empiricism is hard.
 
Brad Sallows said:
Not necessarily.

"Second, unless they become pure theorists, grad students immerse themselves in one or two bodies of ultra-specific empirical research. This immersion occasionally shifts economists’ policy views in their areas of specialization. Yet the maximum effect is small because the volume of research is so massive that most economists end up with no more than a few narrow topics of expertise. In all other areas, mainstream Ph.D. students graduate with virtually the same policy views they held when they started grad school. Minor tweaks aside, that’s where they stay for the rest of their careers. They transition from conventional teenage leftist intellectuals to slightly contrarian twenty-something leftist intellectuals to slightly-contrarian mature leftist intellectuals. Possibly with truly contrarian economic policy views in a few ultra-specific areas they know best. Otherwise, mainstream economists barely connect their life’s work to economic policy. When policy comes up, most take off their researcher hat, and put on their slightly-contrarian left-wing intellectual hat."

Deflecting a person's political leanings with reason and empiricism is hard.
Click to expand...
Sure, and if we were talking about a purely academic ivory tower economist here, that would be much more applicable. Obviously his experiences and roles have gone well beyond that. One cannot meaningfully consider Mark Carney, the PhD in Economics, without considering Mark Carney the senior executive at Goldman Sachs, or Mark Carney the two-time G7 central banker. Any academic leanings or specializations he has are likely to be tempered by rather considerable experience in - and thought put towards - how the economics hit the ground in real life.
 
brihard said:
Sure, and if we were talking about a purely academic ivory tower economist here, that would be much more applicable. Obviously his experiences and roles have gone well beyond that. One cannot meaningfully consider Mark Carney, the PhD in Economics, without considering Mark Carney the senior executive at Goldman Sachs, or Mark Carney the two-time G7 central banker. Any academic leanings or specializations he has are likely to be tempered by rather considerable experience in - and thought put towards - how the economics hit the ground in real life.
Click to expand...
If only a tendency to shape new information to fit priors only affected academic economists. I cannot suppose there are no NDP or Democratic voters, let alone progressive-left-leaners in general, in the world of finance, private or government.
 
Crazy question from your resident crayon eater:

What’s the Golden Dome? Like an Iron Dome? But better and more beautiful?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Czech_pivo
    • Sad
High Speed Train Coming?-split from boosting Canada’s military spending"
14 15 16
Replies
307
Views
32K
lenaitch
lenaitch
Edward Campbell
    • Like
    • Insightful
The Next Canadian Government
19 20 21
Replies
410
Views
60K
mariomike
mariomike
daftandbarmy
    • Like
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly—government budgets in 2024
Replies
0
Views
2K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
S
The Hans Island Dispute (1973-2022) - aka the Whiskey War
Replies
2
Views
1K
SPuitH
S
Maxman1
    • Like
    • Love it!
  • Article Article
MPs call for Ottawa to cancel military rent hike
2
Replies
34
Views
19K
Good2Golf
Good2Golf
Back
Top