Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[MilEME09]

While the weather is one factor I do think there are many factors that would be a solution for Canadian cities but would need to look into alot of different municipal and federal train regulations to understand better.

there is a ridiculous amount of decommissioned rail lines in canada, make the trains electric, set up a couple SMR to power the network and you would have cheap operating, hell, lets put it all underground to take weather out of the factor. It would be expensive as hell but imagine how much would be made if you say drilled through the mountains from calgary, went to Kelowna, then to Vancouver. could probably be in Vancouver in about 6h, less if you exceed 100km/h in a closed system

 

[Navy_Pete]

If there are other projects totaling the same cost that could uplift GDP by more (say, 1.2%), then sinking that money into HSR (given above estimated 1.1%) will be a net loss of 0.1%.

I do not contend that HSR will be a dead loss. I do contend it might be a relative loss.

It also doesn't do much to regionally diversify Canada's economy or spread risks among multiple projects. It represents a lot of eggs in one proposed basket.

Opportunity cost.

I hated that opportunity cost arguement; DoF tried to apply that to the NSS and see if there would be a bigger economic investment if the same money was goign into cars or something.

Maybe, but it completely missed it was a strategic investment into a key economic activity that supported a GoC goal, so spending the money on a car plant would do absolutely FA to rebuild the RCN and CCG, and get a shipbuilding capacity in Canada. It's a strawman arguement that completely misses the point of why you are doing that.

It's like ignoring a hole in the roof and spending the money on new kitchen cabinets; sure, you get a good ROI on kitchen upgrades, but doesn't do anything for a leaking roof.

Also they were just being pricks about it, and deliberately ignoring Cabinet direction because some frustrated EX-1 thought they would be able to build an empire on something and was mad it wasn't going into their pet project, so glad several departments told them to politely F off, and if they have a problem take it up with Cabinet who endorsed the then 50 year old 'Made in Canada' shipbuilding project.

 

[captloadie]

It is interesting that no one has asked why they don't expropriate the current rail corridors from the railway companies and make them more efficient, rather than expropriating private lands.

I know, this would cause more harm than good to the economy, but you'd think someone would at least do the math to answer the question.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Why let those pesky serfs that do things with their hands have increased freedom of choice and reduced commuting friction eh?

The pesky serfs will undoubtedly occasionally use the service, particularly for leisure. But I doubt many of the people who work with their hands (and particularly the ones who have a van/trailer full of tools) will be using HSR to commute to work.

Like subsidies for expensive EVs, the proposed HSR is a gift mainly to people who don't need gifts.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

It may be that you are missing how productivity relates to the economy...

 

[Brad Sallows]

I hated that opportunity cost arguement; DoF tried to apply that to the NSS and see if there would be a bigger economic investment if the same money was goign into cars or something.

Maybe, but it completely missed it was a strategic investment into a key economic activity that supported a GoC goal, so spending the money on a car plant would do absolutely FA to rebuild the RCN and CCG, and get a shipbuilding capacity in Canada. It's a strawman arguement that completely misses the point of why you are doing that.

I've written repeatedly that what government can do is mobilize resources to achieve particular aims (and that mobilization tends to be inherently economically inefficient, but that's just part of the cost of achieving the particular aims). The point of NSS isn't to goose the economy. I wouldn't have accepted DoF's argument in that context either.

When people start talking about the benefits of a project in terms of economic benefit, though, opportunity cost ceases to be a strawman.

If people want to argue that there's some sort of strategic benefit to the HSR, they can try. A huge amount of money, sunk into transportation infrastructure which is highly inflexible, vulnerable to faults in the line, and can't be shared with other private and commercial users. A grave misallocation of capital.

Projects tend to overrun costs and schedules a lot, these days. Factor of 2? 3? 6? Numbers being floated for cost and benefits are the best cases proponents can massage, not worst.

 

[Deleted member 175000]

The pesky serfs will undoubtedly occasionally use the service, particularly for leisure. But I doubt many of the people who work with their hands (and particularly the ones who have a van/trailer full of tools) will be using HSR to commute to work.

Janitorial, food service, PSW, nursing, medical technicians and practitoners, warehouse workers, manufacturing/assembly workers, onsite tradespeople, tradespeople that report to a yard/office and disperse from their, sanitation workers...

 

[Brad Sallows]

It may be that you are missing how productivity relates to the economy...

I repeatedly argue for more roads and more buses in lieu of bespoke passenger rail solutions. Bus service levels, routes, and schedules are highly flexible, as are the uses of public roads. Roads are filled with commercial vehicles; passenger rail, none at all.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Janitorial, food service, PSW, nursing, medical technicians and practitoners, warehouse workers, manufacturing/assembly workers, onsite tradespeople, tradespeople that report to a yard/office and disperse from their, sanitation workers...

Hmm. It's like you want them to be able to procure more affordable accommodations based on a more efficient and effective means of travel than owning a car and paying parking downtown where they serve the chosen ones / masters of the universe...

You are obviously a commie pinko traitor

 

[Eaglelord17]

You are all missing the best benefit of train travel, you can have a bar car on your commute.

If you have a effective train network you don’t exactly need a personal vehicle, just rent one as needed. Just the savings in that alone are huge. Most people have car payments which are in the 500$+ range then insurance, then fuel per month. Train networks with occasionally renting comes up much cheaper than that.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Janitorial, food service, PSW, nursing, medical technicians and practitoners, warehouse workers, manufacturing/assembly workers, onsite tradespeople, tradespeople that report to a yard/office and disperse from their, sanitation workers...

You're describing a lot of people whose work places mostly aren't going to be near a HSR terminal.

 

[PrairieFella]

You're describing a lot of people whose work places mostly aren't going to be near a HSR terminal.

Public transit doesnt stop at the train station. Only in North America could we be so car-brained that the default assumption is that the HSR station will be either in the middle of nowhere and unserved by local transit or surrounded by a sea of parking lots so deep one dare not cross it to their jobs. Ever been to Europe, Brad? If so, ever been to Paris? If so, ever been to Gare du Nord? What about München Hauptbahnhof? Roma Termini? If so, you know what we should be aiming for.

 

[Deleted member 175000]

You're describing a lot of people whose work places mostly aren't going to be near a HSR terminal.

And a lot whose are. More if you build out even the barest hub and spoke system.

 

[ArmyRick]

I could accept HSR if our federal governments financial books were in order, we had a REALISTIC plan to pay down debt, had a growing economy (as opposed to investors and entrepreneurs fleeing Canada), and maybe god forbid, we were on our way to a surplus, then yeah, chipping in for an HSR would be worth risk.

How many FAILED "investments" have the Trudeau/Carney Liberals dumped big bucks into only to have failures? Or failed government programs like gun buy back? Yeah exactly.

Funny, how interested the Liberals are with this project but are A OK with blowing off the MOU and any movement whatsoever on O & G/pipelines. Again, this is something the international community is screaming for. And most Canadians. Or do we just stick to most of our oil going to the USA? Make up your mind.

Let the gas lighting begin. Its a Liberal proposal and many of you will bend over backwards to frame the argument to suit your views.

 

[ArmyRick]

Refreshing listening to someone give direct answers without endless uhhh uhh uhh ummmm uhhh endless hand waving uhh uhh uhh between world salads of non answers.

Absolutely, he has confidence in the truthfulness of what he says, he is very direct and on point. Carney seems to fumble alot when Brookfield or some other company is making out like bandits from his decisions.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I could accept HSR if our federal governments financial books were in order, we had a REALISTIC plan to pay down debt, had a growing economy (as opposed to investors and entrepreneurs fleeing Canada), and maybe god forbid, we were on our way to a surplus, then yeah, chipping in for an HSR would be worth risk.

How many FAILED "investments" have the Trudeau/Carney Liberals dumped big bucks into only to have failures? Or failed government programs like gun buy back? Yeah exactly.

Funny, how interested the Liberals are with this project but are A OK with blowing off the MOU and any movement whatsoever on O & G/pipelines. Again, this is something the international community is screaming for. And most Canadians. Or do we just stick to most of our oil going to the USA? Make up your mind.

Let the gas lighting begin. Its a Liberal proposal and many of you will bend over backwards to frame the argument to suit your views.

I am a little concerned by how much you seem to know about my motivations, intent, viewpoint, etc. Of course if we had a conversation you might be able to confirm the validity of your assumptions. I have no doubt the discussion would also be less shouty and aggressive were we to meet in person

 

[Navy_Pete]

I've written repeatedly that what government can do is mobilize resources to achieve particular aims (and that mobilization tends to be inherently economically inefficient, but that's just part of the cost of achieving the particular aims). The point of NSS isn't to goose the economy. I wouldn't have accepted DoF's argument in that context either.

When people start talking about the benefits of a project in terms of economic benefit, though, opportunity cost ceases to be a strawman.

If people want to argue that there's some sort of strategic benefit to the HSR, they can try. A huge amount of money, sunk into transportation infrastructure which is highly inflexible, vulnerable to faults in the line, and can't be shared with other private and commercial users. A grave misallocation of capital.

Projects tend to overrun costs and schedules a lot, these days. Factor of 2? 3? 6? Numbers being floated for cost and benefits are the best cases proponents can massage, not worst.

Economic benefits isn't the point of NSS, but it is a reality is that is what actually got the policiticians onboard as the majority of them could not care less about the Navy, Coast guard, shipyard capacity, strategic objectives in general or anything beyond getting themselves re-elected. So what was effectively a side effect is what they actually pay attention to, and why the whole program is messaged the way it is.

Even with zero ITBs there is a huge economic benefit for any GoC project that employs thousands of people directly, and supports thousands of others indirectly.

Project 'overruns' are on theses multi generational programs are also far overhyped a lot of times, especially when the TBS continually adjusts what actually gets included in costings, and why the PBO essentially gave up when trying to compare cost of shipbuilding in Canada to other countries.

 

[YZT580]

I repeatedly argue for more roads and more buses in lieu of bespoke passenger rail solutions. Bus service levels, routes, and schedules are highly flexible, as are the uses of public roads. Roads are filled with commercial vehicles; passenger rail, none at all.

those are the arguments GM used to encourage cities to back off urban rail (trams) in favour of (wait for it) GM buses. There are numerous cities that now regret it. As for bespoke rail, having spent a number of years using the Belgian interurban system I would push for spending the 90 Billion into a rapidservice link between OW and Montreal, Peterborough/Toronto, London/Toronto, Edmonton/Calgary with service at least hourly and worry about the longer stretches once those were up and running problem free.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Pierre does it again, well done!

I'm about 45mins into the interview.

I have alot more respect for him as an individual after the first 45mins that I've watched so far. Had a childhood/upbringing that was certainly not 'typical' and made absolutely the most out of it it seems.

For the first time over the last 4-5yrs I can say that he has been able to connect with me on some of the issues that the first 45mins have covered - his explanation of the housing issues facing Canada I thought was spot on.

I will finish the rest of the interview maybe tonight/tomorrow. I am hopeful that he's able to continue to impress me.

Thank you for posting the interview, much appreciated.

 

[ArmyRick]

I'm about 45mins into the interview.

I have alot more respect for him as an individual after the first 45mins that I've watched so far. Had a childhood/upbringing that was certainly not 'typical' and made absolutely the most out of it it seems.

For the first time over the last 4-5yrs I can say that he has been able to connect with me on some of the issues that the first 45mins have covered - his explanation of the housing issues facing Canada I thought was spot on.

I will finish the rest of the interview maybe tonight/tomorrow. I am hopeful that he's able to continue to impress me.

Thank you for posting the interview, much appreciated.

Same dude he has always been. Just presented differently. I admit Jenni Byrne did him no favours. Now, go back and look at the lesser known CANADIAN podcast interviews he did during the election 2025 campaign, same style, same Pierre. However many in this nation were rabid with TDS and bought the MSM slander campaign against Pierre.