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

Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

NDP does it too and the Green person, ooops, Party as well. Sure.
Pop Tv Bb21 GIF by Big Brother After Dark
 
If you honestly think I don't realize ALL parties including CPC do it, shocker I realize it. The LPC take it to whole new heights.
Your words, tone, and tenor all suggest otherwise

You have honestly offered no indication of any ability to see anything other than through an attack dog partisan lens, and you seem to have a hair trigger. And no amount of engagement seems likely to change that.

Anyhoo.

Not my monkey, not my circus.
 
So if Pierre accidently trips in public, will the same crowd here be cheering on and spreading rumours he has parkinsons?

Quid pro quo, Clarice

Liberal supports are just now obsessing over Poilievre falling the same way we Conservative supporters obsessed over Trudeau falling.

Had either Trudeau or Poilievre discovered the cure for cancer the other side would call them monsters for causing cancer researchers lose their job.
 
OTOH, unemployment in areas that have traditionally had lots of jobs is off the charts...

E.g.,
Kamloops as an area that "traditionally had lots of jobs" was not my experience. The mid-'80s in particular were rough. Kamloops going back at least 60 years has always had about 3 major employers at the bottom of the (inverted) economic pyramid, which is why I've always thought opposition to the Ajax mine on the part of people higher up the pyramid whose frivolous employments depend on a healthy bottom layer was/is self-destructive foolishness. Every time one of those employers is shaky, local economic conditions and prospects dip. I'd guess this OK/not-OK threshold of stability is common among modest cities and towns without much diversity in the bottom layer. And, for most, that means resource extraction. Forestry, mining, fishing, agriculture, tourism - the big 5, although the order has changed since it was taught to kids in my day (and maybe I misremember the order of fishing and agriculture).

The TL;DR point is that impediments to expanding and sustaining that healthy bottom layer ought to be the first things removed. Removing costs - easily done in manners which maintain level playing fields - is vastly preferable to subsidization - hard to do without choosing winners and losers.
 
Quid pro quo, Clarice

Liberal supports are just now obsessing over Poilievre falling the same way we Conservative supporters obsessed over Trudeau falling.

Had either Trudeau or Poilievre discovered the cure for cancer the other side would call them monsters for causing cancer researchers lose their job.
Trudeau wasn't getting raked over the coals (he enjoyed a very high level of popularity) until he became very untenable as a PM. Then he was placed under a microscope. Now that being said, I never cared for people attacking his marriage break down, the shady accusations at West Grey academy (until there is proof, they are just rumours), etc. I personally was fed up with with promises that didn't deliver.
 
Quid pro quo, Clarice

Liberal supports are just now obsessing over Poilievre falling the same way we Conservative supporters obsessed over Trudeau falling.
It is sometimes the case that the political opponents of an era, even a brief one, are made for each other. When one goes, the other's usefulness goes.
 
Trudeau wasn't getting raked over the coals (he enjoyed a very high level of popularity) until he became very untenable as a PM.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say "F**k Trudeau" flags, t-shirts & bumper stickers were out there well before the worst of Trudeau's faults were coming through.
Had either Trudeau or Poilievre discovered the cure for cancer the other side would call them monsters for causing cancer researchers lose their job.
Bang on - #PoliticalRorschach right there.
 
Kamloops as an area that "traditionally had lots of jobs" was not my experience. The mid-'80s in particular were rough. Kamloops going back at least 60 years has always had about 3 major employers at the bottom of the (inverted) economic pyramid, which is why I've always thought opposition to the Ajax mine on the part of people higher up the pyramid whose frivolous employments depend on a healthy bottom layer was/is self-destructive foolishness. Every time one of those employers is shaky, local economic conditions and prospects dip. I'd guess this OK/not-OK threshold of stability is common among modest cities and towns without much diversity in the bottom layer. And, for most, that means resource extraction. Forestry, mining, fishing, agriculture, tourism - the big 5, although the order has changed since it was taught to kids in my day (and maybe I misremember the order of fishing and agriculture).

The TL;DR point is that impediments to expanding and sustaining that healthy bottom layer ought to be the first things removed. Removing costs - easily done in manners which maintain level playing fields - is vastly preferable to subsidization - hard to do without choosing winners and losers.
government statement on the closure, puts about 3,000 people out of work

1762537376808.jpeg
 
It is sometimes the case that the political opponents of an era, even a brief one, are made for each other. When one goes, the other's usefulness goes.

Canada certainly owes Mr Poilievre a debt of gratitude.

But yes, maybe his usefulness is waning. Then again, it was a few years before Trudeaus scandals started coming to light. Maybe regulate Poilievre into some kind of attack-dog shadow cabinet position to keep a watchful eye on Carney.
 
Kamloops as an area that "traditionally had lots of jobs" was not my experience. The mid-'80s in particular were rough. Kamloops going back at least 60 years has always had about 3 major employers at the bottom of the (inverted) economic pyramid, which is why I've always thought opposition to the Ajax mine on the part of people higher up the pyramid whose frivolous employments depend on a healthy bottom layer was/is self-destructive foolishness. Every time one of those employers is shaky, local economic conditions and prospects dip. I'd guess this OK/not-OK threshold of stability is common among modest cities and towns without much diversity in the bottom layer. And, for most, that means resource extraction. Forestry, mining, fishing, agriculture, tourism - the big 5, although the order has changed since it was taught to kids in my day (and maybe I misremember the order of fishing and agriculture).

The TL;DR point is that impediments to expanding and sustaining that healthy bottom layer ought to be the first things removed. Removing costs - easily done in manners which maintain level playing fields - is vastly preferable to subsidization - hard to do without choosing winners and losers.

Then there's 100 Mile House....

The axe falls on 100 Mile House mill: West Fraser to shutter facilities on both sides of the border​


The softwood timber tariffs levied by the U.S. have begun to hit the lumber industry hard.

Citing a drooping softwood lumber demand, compounded by higher duties and additional tariffs that have reached 45 per cent for U.S. markets, West Fraser Timber announced Thursday its plans to permanently shutter both its Augusta, Ga., and 100 Mile House lumber mills by the end of 2025.

Approximately 165 employees at the 100 Mile House mill will be laid off, as the company says it can’t secure an adequate volume of economically viable timber. The closing of the mill drops West Fraser’s capacity by 160 million board feet.



 
Canada certainly owes Mr Poilievre a debt of gratitude.

But yes, maybe his usefulness is waning. Then again, it was a few years before Trudeaus scandals started coming to light. Maybe regulate Poilievre into some kind of attack-dog shadow cabinet position to keep a watchful eye on Carney.
Nah, I'd like to see what he's capable of in the real, working world that is private enterprise, aka, the free market. Go, spread your youthful wings in the endless opportunities that await you in Capitalism.
 
Canada certainly owes Mr Poilievre a debt of gratitude.
My biggest fear for Pierre is that he was the perfect leader to defeat Trudeau, and well he is gone.
@Altair said it cleverly "right leaders at the wrong time" (Normally I don't agree with him on just about anything)

Then again, it was a few years before Trudeaus scandals started coming to light.
My fear is that there is still much more to see on the Carney Liberals. But then again, I have a personal conspiracy theory (opinion) that Carney is not ripping off more of Pierre's economic ideas because he is beholden to some behind the scenes Liberal power brokers.

Maybe regulate Poilievre into some kind of attack-dog shadow cabinet position to keep a watchful eye on Carney
I think if he is ousted this January, he will resign for good.

Now, a real danger. If Pierre is ousted and the CPC is in a leadership race, Carney could call an election and run for a majority while the CPC is in reconstitution.
 
My fear is that there is still much more to see on the Carney Liberals. But then again, I have a personal conspiracy theory (opinion) that Carney is not ripping off more of Pierre's economic ideas because he is beholden to some behind the scenes Liberal power brokers.
More likely the economics Ph.D who has spent the last 20 years in the halls of power in international finance thinks the polisci grad watching crypto youtube videos has bad ideas re: fiscal and economic policy. Some of the things in the platform were real stinkers, and his take on the budget was completely untenable.
 
Now, a real danger. If Pierre is ousted and the CPC is in a leadership race, Carney could call an election and run for a majority while the CPC is in reconstitution.
I don't think he would do that.

In fact, based on how fast he got a by-election going for PP, I bet that if another CPC member resigned and their empty seat gave MC a majority as a result, that MC would not drag is feet in getting the by-election done, even though it would likely result in his losing the majority.
 
More likely the economics Ph.D who has spent the last 20 years in the halls of power in international finance thinks the polisci grad watching crypto youtube videos has bad ideas re: fiscal and economic policy. Some of the things in the platform were real stinkers, and his take on the budget was completely untenable.
Are you even remotely aware of Pierre's ideas on energy development and trade? Like at all? He hasn't even muttered the word crypto in years.

Carney was a central banker for most of that time and then heading a large powerful corporation. Bottom line, his policies are private driving investment OUT of Canada.
 
Back
Top