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

[dapaterson]

With the NATO job not changing over until 2027, we're a bit premature in calling out person X or Y as the next CDS.

 

[MilEME09]

With the NATO job not changing over until 2027, we're a bit premature in calling out person X or Y as the next CDS.

So it wont be @FJAG being called out of retirement?

 

[dapaterson]

So it wont be @FJAG being called out of retirement?

He's the next Supreme Court Justice.

Prime Minister Carney announces members of the Independent Advisory Board to help select the next judge of the Supreme Court of Canada

Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, announced the Chair and members of the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments.

www.pm.gc.ca

 

[FJAG]

So it wont be @FJAG being called out of retirement?

He's the next Supreme Court Justice.

Prime Minister Carney announces members of the Independent Advisory Board to help select the next judge of the Supreme Court of Canada

Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, announced the Chair and members of the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments.

www.pm.gc.ca

You two have never been more wrong about anything.

There are a lot of burned bridges behind me.

Not to mention that I am the only CAF officer having spent 3 years on Class B in Ottawa who didn't turn in his uniform for a consulting job. I revel in sleeping in and spouting nonsense when the mood strikes me.

 

[dapaterson]

You two have never been more wrong about anything.

There are a lot of burned bridges behind me.

Not to mention that I am the only CAF officer having spent 3 years on Class B in Ottawa who didn't turn in his uniform for a consulting job. I revel in sleeping in and spouting nonsense when the mood strikes me.

Only because contracting for legal advice / legal support is even more convoluted than every other form of contracting

 

[FJAG]

Only because contracting for legal advice / legal support is even more convoluted than every other form of contracting

I must admit in all honesty that when I retired we went to live in a house by the lake and my only thoughts were about doing construction on it and taking off to Florida four months of the year. Working more was the last thing on my mind.

Since getting back into this writing and the gunner community - half of whom seem to be contractors - I have momentary thoughts. But even though I'm staying away from Florida I still like sleeping in and building the railroad.

 

[Eaglelord17]

An interesting , and expensive, fantasy-type project, particularly given the comparatively small tonnage few Canadian ports vs the US (it's hard to find clear data - one site classifies the likes of Parry Sound and Midland as 'major' shipping ports, which is touch laughable). Maybe we could enlarge the Canadian lock at SSM.

We should as it is clear the reason for the initial building of those locks still exists.

We created the Canadian side locks because the Americans denied us transit of our ships with troops on them to go fight the Northwest Rebellion so they had to completely disembark with all the stores and equipment, portage the equipment above the rapids, and re-embark after the locks.

Nation building is expensive, but maintaining sovereignty comes with a cost.

I am tired of Canada being insistant on being someones puppet state. Our country is the most gifted on the planet in terms of location, resources, and population. Yet somehow we squander that.

 

[brihard]

I must admit in all honesty that when I retired we went to live in a house by the lake and my only thoughts were about doing construction on it and taking off to Florida four months of the year. Working more was the last thing on my mind.

Since getting back into this writing and the gunner community - half of whom seem to be contractors - I have momentary thoughts. But even though I'm staying away from Florida I still like sleeping in and building the railroad.

At any given point in time I have a fair bit of karma to balance out, so I won’t reply to the retired lawyer with a crack about ‘depends’.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I am tired of Canada being insistant on being someones puppet state. Our country is the most gifted on the planet in terms of location, resources, and population. Yet somehow we squander that.

Bang on.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Bang on.

The only thing to fear, is the fear of success!

 

[Altair]

We should as it is clear the reason for the initial building of those locks still exists.

We created the Canadian side locks because the Americans denied us transit of our ships with troops on them to go fight the Northwest Rebellion so they had to completely disembark with all the stores and equipment, portage the equipment above the rapids, and re-embark after the locks.

Nation building is expensive, but maintaining sovereignty comes with a cost.

I am tired of Canada being insistant on being someones puppet state. Our country is the most gifted on the planet in terms of location, resources, and population. Yet somehow we squander that.

I'm very confused.

Spending billions to build infrastructure that doesnt currently exist but would get a fair bit of use is too expensive for some (HSR), but spending billions to build infrastructure that is redundant and will likely not be used except in the most extreme of circumstances is nation building?

 

[Eaglelord17]

I'm very confused.

Spending billions to build infrastructure that doesnt currently exist but would get a fair bit of use is too expensive for some (HSR), but spending billions to build infrastructure that is redundant and will likely not be used except in the most extreme of circumstances is nation building?

Considering the States is currently upgrading their side of the locks and we want to open up the ring of fire, yes that is nation building. There is demand, if we choose to be a part of it is the question.

I am also a big proponent of railways, across the whole country. The amount we spend on roads if spent on railways would give us a much better return on a more environmentally friendly and safe method of transportation.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Defence expenditures aren't nation-building; they're nation-preserving. The necessary and sufficient conditions for a society are the means and will to defend it.

 

[MilEME09]

Defence expenditures aren't nation-building; they're nation-preserving. The necessary and sufficient conditions for a society are the means and will to defend it.

Although the arguement can be made some projects are nation building when they have duel use. Example shipyards, ports

 

[Brad Sallows]

Although the arguement can be made some projects are nation building when they have duel use. Example shipyards, ports

We might have to cede some of the usual ground here to secure the assets against sabotage and other attack. I would rather place large areas completely off-limits than expend a bunch of resources trying to find ways to fit dual-use in without compromising security.

 

[lenaitch]

I guess I see a line between absolute sovereignty in all matters, simply for its own sake, and mutually beneficial cooperation with a neighbour who, up until fairly recently, treated us as an ally and with a degree of respect. If we want to spend billions on building locks and dredging channels that parallel that which already exists, simply to say they're ours, strikes me as sovereignty without economic reality. Unless we would plan to legislatively force Canadian flagged ships to use 'our side', it would probably devolve into a rate war that we likely couldn't win.

As for railways, we had more, then they became uneconomical. The major carriers can move more in a 2km long train that it predecessors could even dream of. So long as they are private, for-profit companies, they will build or expand when their current infrastructure is maxed-out. Passenger rail could be better, but with our population distribution and density, we ain't going back to the 'golden age of train travel' anytime soon.

 

[Eaglelord17]

As for railways, we had more, then they became uneconomical. The major carriers can move more in a 2km long train that it predecessors could even dream of. So long as they are private, for-profit companies, they will build or expand when their current infrastructure is maxed-out. Passenger rail could be better, but with our population distribution and density, we ain't going back to the 'golden age of train travel' anytime soon.

Yeah good in theory, corporate welfare says differently in practice.

They intentionally let things get to a bad point (i.e. not spending on maintenance/expansion, rather taking that money and spending on themselves), at which point the government steps in and pays for it because it is a critical capacity.

Private doesn't mean well run, as much as some seem to think it does. It just means they take all the money they can out of it. Remember my profits, our losses...

 

[lenaitch]

Yeah good in theory, corporate welfare says differently in practice.

They intentionally let things get to a bad point (i.e. not spending on maintenance/expansion, rather taking that money and spending on themselves), at which point the government steps in and pays for it because it is a critical capacity.

Private doesn't mean well run, as much as some seem to think it does. It just means they take all the money they can out of it. Remember my profits, our losses...

Other than money for safety upgrades at crossings and other specific initiatives, and money they have given to some shortlines, does the federal government bail out the Class 1 roads for maintenance, expansion or operating expenses?