
I would say that data needs to be compared to median house hold income and average home price as well. In the 70s and 80s it was possible to buy a house on a single income. Today? Good luck unless you make over 250k a year.![]()
I wonder if our data looks like this....
Feminism from the 60s. Followed by austerity, wealth concentration and globalization of the 80s and 90s.
Carney is evil. Evil, evil, EEEEEVIL! (evil).Whoever said Carney is evil?
There are two things going on there, marriage and homeownership.![]()
I wonder if our data looks like this....
Feminism from the 60s. Followed by austerity, wealth concentration and globalization of the 80s and 90s.
Poilievre isn't bad. He's the impetus for a lot of what Carney and the LPC have done. He should be applauded for his work, although bias wont let some here do that, his face is too punchable apparently.
The game changed and this is a new version he is not great at. He needs to step aside and let the party find its new leader.
I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Poilievre but disagree with the timing.
Any candidate the CPC pick to replace Poilievre will instantly start dealing with accusations of being:
-Pro-Trump
-Maple MAGA
-Anti Abortion
and really anything else the LPC can think of to build up the resentment.
Carney already manipulated the system to get a majority government. It's better to let Poilievre mark time in position and pick a new CPC leader closer to the election date. It will give the CPC a better chance. Poilievre is in a good spot to keep hitting the LPC in their weak spot; ethics and transparency.
I would add 1 more thing into the mix - the loss of his seat that he held for quite a long while. Now he no longer resides in the same riding that he represents, he's an 'absentee MP' in essence, lives in another place that he supposedly represents.A lot of PP being accused of being:
- Pro Trump
- Maple Maga
- Anti Abortion
Is the result of his inability to give a clear concise answer or response in opposition to those accusations. And that comes from his fear of losing the hard right minority.
PP is giving off huge loser vibes. Its easy to tell he's hurt, and I get why. A year ago he was looking at 200 seat majority. Now he cant keep his own MPs loyalty. That has to be a tough pill to swallow. I can empathize him.
I suppose there is a train of thought that believes when Trump takes beating in the mid terms the LPC will begin to lose the boogie man that won them the last election, and then PP will start to rebound... I mean that's defiantly a possibility. Couple that with what I expect will be a pretty empty delivery bucket and no real improvement for the lives of Canadians.
From where I sit it looks like Canada doesn't want him to be PM, and it looks like the CPC wont get the nod unless he is replaced with someone better.
I tell you what election night 2029, you come on out to my camp, we will eat like kings, drink like sailors, laugh like jokers and see how this all turned out.
A lot of PP being accused of being:
- Pro Trump
- Maple Maga
- Anti Abortion
Is the result of his inability to give a clear concise answer or response in opposition to those accusations. And that comes from his fear of losing the hard right minority.
Now he cant keep his own MPs loyalty.
I don't think so. Poilievres brand is just too damaged. Trump will be a boogeyman until he's out of office. Even afterwards I suspect the LPC will do their best to paint any new contender as Trump/MAGA[/b].when Trump takes beating in the mid terms the LPC will begin to lose the boogie man that won them the last election, and then PP will start to rebound.
If our cities aren't underwater because of climate change you got yourself a deal.I tell you what election night 2029, you come on out to my camp, we will eat like kings, drink like sailors, laugh like jokers and see how this all turned out.
Is Pierre tone deaf of his own messaging? He just accused Carney of showboating announcements and then he does this.
Cause nothing says showboating like plastering your slogan on the side of a tanker
No idea.Anyone have any idea of how deep of a hole doing that would create?
I can identify 90 billion to balance the loss (HSR)Welcome back, King of the slogans.
Anyone have any idea of how deep of a hole doing that would create?
No idea.
If the government charged 0 tax on gas would you donate 7.5 to 25¢ per litre anyways out of principle?
I can identify 90 billion to balance the loss (HSR)Seriously though, Carney has a difficult choice. He can keep spending or he can cut costs to enable us to spend. Which one would do the most for the most Canadians and buy him the most votes at the same time? His predecessor hasn't left him a lot of room to maneuver.
If the 10c gas tax would be 18B for the full year. Then 25c would be about 45B. Not exactly a small hole in the coffersWelcome back, King of the slogans.
Anyone have any idea of how deep of a hole doing that would create?
More of a rounding error.If the 10c gas tax would be 18B for the full year. Then 25c would be about 45B. Not exactly a small hole in the coffers
No need for "if..."If the 10c gas tax would be 18B for the full year. Then 25c would be about 45B. Not exactly a small hole in the coffers
At least it has more sentence structure than <verb> the <noun>.Welcome back, King of the slogans.