Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[PPCLI Guy]

Sorry PPCLI Guy, but what is it you are saying with this post?

(Not being snarky at all, I'm genuinely just not following what's being communicated here)

I was not clear, and I did not that indicate the chain that led to my comment:

The chain looks like this:

Well yeah, obviously not. The submarine procurement is still enough years out that the actual payments would not yet be appearing in a budget. That’s been reported on already.


Who would you say is actually doing that here? Several of us have said ‘no thanks, CPC, offer us a better option’, but you’re alleging a level of histrionics that I don’t think actually exists on this site.

You are kidding, right?

No, but you’re deflecting. Who on army.ca is “just losing it over Pierre Poilievre existence”?

Maybe he means women.

Poilievre’s Favourability Hits New Low as Carney Rises

Recent polling shows Poilievre favourability hits lowest point of his leadership, while Carney’s approval edges upward amid voter concerns about Conservative direction.

angusreid.org

View attachment 96818

I agree. 7 out of 10 women are losing it over PP existing.

Which I must say, it makes it really hard to win an election when 70 percent of half of all Canadians don't like you.

It is because of mainstream media disinformation and the CBC don't you know....

$1.4 Billion to CBC (There is a colossal waste of tax money)
$325 Million to CTV, Global, Toronto Star, Toronto Life, Cult MTL, etc.

I am sure there is no reason to believe that an anti-Poilievre bias exist.

They will launch more smear pieces against anyone else that succeeds Poilievre and starts to succeed (IF he doesn't survive the leadership review, big IF)

Got it. Insightful analysis as always.

If I understand what you are implying correctly, 70% of women are incapable of thinking for themselves and only parrot what the paternalistic CBC (and perhaps even their spouse) says.

And disagreeing with Conservative policy (such as it is), the actions of the leader (such as they are), and not wanting another election so quickly is obviously evidence of bias, rather than citizens coming to their own conclusion.

Confirmation bias is not just limited to those you disagree with

But as always, you do you

So that is clearly a tortuous chain hampered by time zone and travel factors on my part. On reflection, the post is a bit gratuitous and will have absolutely zero effect.

I just get fed up with the "othering" and deflection that is prevalent in this thread.

I guess it was me that was being snarky. Apologies.

 

[Altair]

I was not clear, and I did not that indicate the chain that led to my comment:

The chain looks like this:















So that is clearly a tortuous chain hampered by time zone and travel factors on my part. On reflection, the post is a bit gratuitous and will have absolutely zero effect.

I just get fed up with the "othering" and deflection that is prevalent in this thread.

I guess it was me that was being snarky. Apologies.

I personally like the reasoning that 70 percent of all women don't like PP because they listen to mainstream media.

 

[Haggis]

These are NOT CDN citizens leaving, these are people who are Landed Immigrants, who if they fail to meet residency requirement over a 5yr period lose their ability to return to Canada.

The article is silent in this regard. Even so, there are some limited circumstances where time outside of Canada can still count towards fulfilling your residency requirement.

I've heard several stories of foreign national professionals coming to Canada and being unable to gain Canadian certification in their professions. The article makes mention of IRCC being the "bouncer" where in some instances, the professional governing bodies are, in fact the bouncers by failing to recognize international credentials or grant equivalencies to foreign nationals. In some cases, that lack of recognition is justified. In others, credentials are simply not able to be verified. But engineers and technicians being forced to work in the fast food and transportation industries in order to make a living here doesn't serve us well.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Your highlighting Harper's deficit was devoid of context.

Actually no, it had the inherent context of being in direct reply to the statement

....$80B of new national debt in just this one budget alone - which is beyond crippling for future economic growth, and that Canadians will have absolutely nothing to show for it...

The point being- deficit spending, even to the current degree- is not remotely unprecedented nor inherently disastrous. You decided that very simple point could not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

Have you considered, that despite not being in a recession (yet) based on GDP, that other indicators like lagging capital investment and productivity, the headwinds out of the US etc suggest that we're on the edge of a economic crisis worthy of pre-emptive action to avoid? Or that the potential that Mark Carney is better at economics than you, and that early intervention is the reason why Q3 is unlikely to tip us over into an official recession (yet)?

Or that confounding the entire budget is a geopolitical upheaval forcing deficit funded military investment only tangentially related to the broader fiscal picture?

 

[Eaglelord17]

Anti-immigration rhetoric isn't mentioned once in the article.

What is mentioned is that "on ward migration" hasn't decreased in 40 years.

It looks like the professionals who are leaving, a 2:1 ratio for those with doctorates vs bachelor's degrees, are leaving because Canada isnt providing them enough opportunity to flourish.

It is almost as though our extremely protectionist professional associations and the like prevent people from working in their fields by design.

They intentionally make it as difficult as possible to certify someone other than by their very difficult to get into ‘apprenticeship’ programs.

Doctors, Red Seal trades, hair dressers, etc. all make it as difficult as possible to certify someone. If you were said professional in a other country and can’t work/do your job/career in this country why would you stay when someone else will?

 

[Czech_pivo]

It’s not just Landed immigrants. Canada is just too expensive. I’ve worked with and been friends with many Canadian immigrants whom have left for more affordable places to live or better pay and/or lower taxes. USA, Europe, Australia

Its not just about taxes or better pay, its about quality of life and where you in life, in terms of raising a family and such.

I've said it many times on here before, I've lived/worked in 5 countries. What worked best for myself and my wife in terms of what matter the most to us in raising a family was safety, overall quality of life, population density, access/proximity to wide open green space, education (and with that ability at no cost to have our kids exposed/learn a 2nd language through French immersion). All of these things factored into our decisions.

If we had made the choice to have no kids, staying in Boston would have been the answer, as it ticks most of the above boxes for us. People shouldn't wring their hands about this. Picking up and leaving a persons home country once means that doing it a second or third time becomes even easier, these people are surfing along until they find their version of Utopia.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Actually no, it had the inherent context of being in direct reply to the statement

The point being- deficit spending, even to the current degree- is not remotely unprecedented nor inherently disastrous. You decided that very simple point could not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

I surely did. Not because the deficit spending is unprecedented or disastrous, but because it is inherently harmful. The likelihood that the federal government ever makes better use of borrowed money than if it had been left where it was - borrowed by others or not - is a number which is usually close to zero. People throw out plenty of useless information nuggets here; this was one I cared enough to take up. Government can mobilize resources to achieve specific aims, which may produce a specific amount of utility (if not amounting to broken-window spending) but is almost always going to produce less utility than if government had left the resources alone. It's not a physical law; it's just a consequence of where information resides and limits on the decision-making capabilities of people far removed from most information (accuracy, quality, timeliness).

Have you considered, that despite not being in a recession (yet) based on GDP, that other indicators like lagging capital investment and productivity, the headwinds out of the US etc suggest that we're on the edge of a economic crisis worthy of pre-emptive action to avoid?

It's possible, sure, in the sense it must be a non-zero probability. Yet the threatened recession, if it happens, has surely been delayed, and the threatened GDP contraction, if one happens, might not be of the magnitude feared. And it might all happen in part because government is borrowing too much money and spending it in the wrong places. Multitudes of people with real skin in the game, who can't simply pass mistakes along to taxpayers present and future, have already observed and adjusted. I have a great deal of faith in the decision cycles of millions of people, and none in the decision cycles of relative handfuls of technocrats.

Or that the potential that Mark Carney is better at economics than you, and that early intervention is the reason why Q3 is unlikely to tip us over into an official recession (yet)?

The potential is very high, but Mark Carney being better at economics than me is not synonymous with Mark Carney making highly politically-inflected decisions better than the sum of the purely self-interested decisions of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of other people. What Mark Carney does may be part of why status quo is where it is, but might be only a very, very small part.

Or that confounding the entire budget is a geopolitical upheaval forcing deficit funded military investment only tangentially related to the broader fiscal picture?

On this I am in flat disagreement. Military spending is not being forced; it's a choice which to me looks like a preference cascade reminiscent of lemmings. It doesn't have to be at the scale proposed for the time over which it is proposed. It doesn't have to be funded with borrowed money.

Entertain the possibility that our spending does not significantly influence Putin or Trump. What a colossal effing waste at the wrong point in time.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Survey says: PP still not winning the public popularity contest, even with Red and Blue teams pretty much neck & neck.

Poilievre’s Favourability Hits New Low as Carney Rises

Recent polling shows Poilievre favourability hits lowest point of his leadership, while Carney’s approval edges upward amid voter concerns about Conservative direction.

angusreid.org

Details of the survey: "The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from Nov. 5-7 2025, among a randomized sample of 2,038 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. The sample was weighted to be representative of adults nationwide according to region, gender, age, household income, and education, based on the Canadian census. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 1.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI. Detailed tables are found at the end of this release."

 

[Altair]

Survey says: PP still not winning the public popularity contest, even with Red and Blue teams pretty much neck & neck.

Poilievre’s Favourability Hits New Low as Carney Rises

Recent polling shows Poilievre favourability hits lowest point of his leadership, while Carney’s approval edges upward amid voter concerns about Conservative direction.

angusreid.org

View attachment 96825
View attachment 96826
View attachment 96827
Details of the survey: "The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from Nov. 5-7 2025, among a randomized sample of 2,038 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. The sample was weighted to be representative of adults nationwide according to region, gender, age, household income, and education, based on the Canadian census. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 1.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI. Detailed tables are found at the end of this release."

70 percent of women of all ages don't like Poilievre.

Imagine trying to win an election when 70 percent of half of Canadians don't like you.

 

[MilEME09]

SAAB starting to make an offer to big to refuse?

Sweden’s Saab offers to build entire GlobalEye military surveillance plane in Canada

Building the aircraft in Canada would create 3,000 jobs, company says

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[CBH99]

Actually no, it had the inherent context of being in direct reply to the statement

The point being- deficit spending, even to the current degree- is not remotely unprecedented nor inherently disastrous. You decided that very simple point could not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

Have you considered, that despite not being in a recession (yet) based on GDP, that other indicators like lagging capital investment and productivity, the headwinds out of the US etc suggest that we're on the edge of a economic crisis worthy of pre-emptive action to avoid? Or that the potential that Mark Carney is better at economics than you, and that early intervention is the reason why Q3 is unlikely to tip us over into an official recession (yet)?

Or that confounding the entire budget is a geopolitical upheaval forcing deficit funded military investment only tangentially related to the broader fiscal picture?

When this budget is looked at in the broader historical context, you are right. Deficit spending, even to the current degree, is not unprecedented.

Whether it is inherently dangerous or not, I have to refrain from having an opinion because I honestly just don't know.

...

What stands out to me, in the broader context, is that it seems like we are in new territory in terms of our country's fiscal outlook.

Have we ever had our national debt so high that we pay more in interest on that debt than we pay for provincial health transfers?

Has it ever been so high that we pay more in interest than we collect in GST?

...

Maybe it's nothing to worry about, has happened before, and this is just how things are sometimes. Maybe my concerns are totally unfounded. I am the first to admit I am not an economist by any means.

...


The PBO has clearly stated he's alarmed at current levels of government spending & has serious concerns about the budget - and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt & assume he knows what he's talking about.

"Stupifying" and "Unsustainable" are the two words he carefully chose to describe this budget.

...

In the end, there are plenty of people who understand the intricacies of economics far better than I do...

$78B in deficit spending just seems pretty steep, especially when factoring in that Trudeau/Freeland spent more money than all previous Canadian governments combined.

If we look at what our national debt was in 2015 (approx $612B) and we compare that to our national debt in 2025 (approx $1.46T) it just seems we are on a path that isn't sustainable

Adding $78B of new debt is going to result in us paying even more in interest than we already do, which is now already more than we pay in health transfers to the provinces...yikee

At what point do we start to pay that debt down at all? Or do we even try?

Because eventually it's going to get so big that we can't even make the interest payments...and then what??


...


Not to mention this problem is being compounded even further by Carney wanting to put artificial caps on oil & gas production - the one industry that's currently paying for a majority of our expenses as a country, not just for Alberta.

As well as the significant job losses we've experienced over the last 10 years or so.

(True that job creation vs job losses fluctuate greatly on a month to month basis, and overall we have a lot more jobs here than we did 10 years ago...but how many of those new jobs are high paying, and hence highly taxed, jobs compared to part time jobs that don't really pay much into the system because the associated income is so low the government instead has to rebate them the taxes they did pay?)

Less money coming into government coffers from taxation + less money being paid to government by various industries (oil & gas, the auto sector, agriculture, etc)

I don't see how $78B in new debt + less money being collected by government somehow equals a favourable situation for us now or down the road...

Basic math would indicate we aren't going in the right direction.

(None of this was meant to sound snippy towards you or anybody else here personally. The above post is meant in general terms)



But I'm literally just a dude on the internet. And I'm not an expert in anything.

 

[CBH99]

It is almost as though our extremely protectionist professional associations and the like prevent people from working in their fields by design.

They intentionally make it as difficult as possible to certify someone other than by their very difficult to get into ‘apprenticeship’ programs.

Doctors, Red Seal trades, hair dressers, etc. all make it as difficult as possible to certify someone. If you were said professional in a other country and can’t work/do your job/career in this country why would you stay when someone else will?

There was a married couple who worked at the A&W across the street from me about 4 years ago, from India

They both worked at India's largest cancer hospital prior to moving to Canada. She was a nurse practioner, and I believe he was a nurse.

Each had to pay an exorbitant amount of money up front to whatever professional association governs nursing qualifications here in Alberta, and each had to wait between 8 to 14 months just to have their qualifications confirmed

(I would have thought an e-mail to the hospital in India's HR department would have confirmed or denied the couple's previous employment/qualifications within a matter of days at most. And certainly wouldn't cost almost a grand to do.)



The protectionist demeanor of certain professional associations isn't always a benefit to us...

 

[daftandbarmy]

SAAB starting to make an offer to big to refuse?

Sweden’s Saab offers to build entire GlobalEye military surveillance plane in Canada

Building the aircraft in Canada would create 3,000 jobs, company says

www.theglobeandmail.com

I can see the pitch team now...

 

[Altair]

SAAB starting to make an offer to big to refuse?

Sweden’s Saab offers to build entire GlobalEye military surveillance plane in Canada

Building the aircraft in Canada would create 3,000 jobs, company says

www.theglobeandmail.com

On one side you have the Americans, threatening Canada, Canadian jobs. How long before Trump wants those Lockheed Martin jobs and contracts back in the USA?

On the other, you have Sweden, offering technology transfers and jobs here in Canada. More a strategic partnership than a plane sale.

Sweden saw a opening and went for it. Good for them. Maybe Canada shouldn't be taken for granted.

 

[Jarnhamar]

70 percent of women of all ages don't like Poilievre.

Imagine trying to win an election when 70 percent of half of Canadians don't like you.

What percentage of men don't like Poilievre?

 

[Altair]

What percentage of men don't like Poilievre?

65 percent to 55 percent, depending on age group.

Women are far more uniformed in their dislike of Poilievre.

 

[CBH99]

On one side you have the Americans, threatening Canada, Canadian jobs. How long before Trump wants those Lockheed Martin jobs and contracts back in the USA?

On the other, you have Sweden, offering technology transfers and jobs here in Canada. More a strategic partnership than a plane sale.

Sweden saw a opening and went for it. Good for them. Maybe Canada shouldn't be taken for granted.

Gotta hand it to SAAB - they've gone all in on trying to build that relationship with us

Manufacturing the Gripen-E not only for our own needs but for Ukraine as well. Tech transfers, IP access and transfers, etc

And now their offering to build AEW aircraft here in Canada using Bombardier planes as the platform.



This all plays well for us, especially these days.

But how do the Swedes benefit from all this Manufacturing of their kit being done in Canada rather than Sweden?

 

[The Bread Guy]

70 percent of women of all ages don't like Poilievre.

Imagine trying to win an election when 70 percent of half of Canadians don't like you.

The party can always change leader if they want, I'm told - especially if the party's still hovering neck & neck with Team Red

 

[Altair]

Gotta hand it to SAAB - they've gone all in on trying to build that relationship with us

Manufacturing the Gripen-E not only for our own needs but for Ukraine as well. Tech transfers, IP access and transfers, etc

And now their offering to build AEW aircraft here in Canada using Bombardier planes as the platform.



This all plays well for us, especially these days.

But how do the Swedes benefit from all this Manufacturing of their kit being done in Canada rather than Sweden?

Sweden is a country of 10.7m people.

Their industrial base is only so large.

Imagine you're Sweden and you get a country 4 times your size and a already experienced manufacturing base, with a aerospace industry and pipeline willing to work with you?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

But how do the Swedes benefit from all this Manufacturing of their kit being done in Canada rather than Sweden?

This 100%, every article I saw had about five 'could result' in them. Not getting excited over 'could result'....