Politics in 2016

[Fishbone Jones]

The NDP, Green Party all accept that climate is a serious issue and that humans are the cause. So no, it does not mean less than 43% of Canadians believe "climate change propaganda" and everything else, because these parties all had the same or very similar stances on these issues. The Conservative Party was the outlier on most issues discussed during the campaign. Just as you are the outlier when it comes to widely held views in Canada. I am also an outlier on the opposite end of the spectrum. I've probably read just as many pieces that are critical of Trudeau as you, but from a leftist point of view. The difference between you and I is that I recognize my views don't represent the mainstream.

You'll notice that big business has not yet begun the exodus out of Canada. Do you know why that is? It's because they recognize the Liberal Party will be much the same as the Conservatives when it comes being friendly to corporate interests, but without provoking a socialist or neo-fascist backlash we're seeing the US. There is no vast panic across Canada that Trudeau is going to embark on some socialist crusade, in fact a lot of business leaders welcome him as a return to good old fashioned centrist Canada. He's predictable and stable, just like Chretien and Mulroney before him. Business leaders don't give a shit how terrified of Muslims you are George, and they're calling the shots.

How big is your ass that you can yank these personal opinions out all the time and try, falsely and unsuccessfully, to pass them off as the will of the people.

The election was held in November. Big corporations do not do thing like move, lock, stock and barrel on a whim. You, personally, have no idea what any corporation in Canada is planning based on Trudeau.

As far as the part in orange, you're likely right. Trudeau is the same as Chretien of Adscam and Sidewinder and Mulroney taking $225,000 from Schreiber. Both worked for Power Corporation before becoming Prime Minister and after, as did Trudeau Sr. I expect Trudeau Jr will also find work with them. So yeah, I can see, at least some corporations calling the shots, albeit behind the scenes.

I've had my usual fill for now. Make sure you clean off the mike and put it away properly.

 

[Kilo_302]

How big is your *** that you can yank these personal opinions out all the time and try, falsely and unsuccessfully, to pass them off as the will of the people.

The election was held in November. Big corporations do not do thing like move, lock, stock and barrel on a whim. You, personally, have no idea what any corporation in Canada is planning based on Trudeau.

As far as the part in orange, you're likely right. Trudeau is the same as Chretien of Adscam and Sidewinder and Mulroney taking $225,000 from Schreiber. Both worked for Power Corporation before becoming Prime Minister and after, as did Trudeau Sr. I expect Trudeau Jr will also find work with them. So yeah, I can see, at least some corporations calling the shots, albeit behind the scenes.

I've had my usual fill for now. Make sure you clean off the mike and put it away properly.

Well, I observe conditions in the past, such as business policies and conditions when Paul Martin reduced the corporate tax by 6 points in 3 years (many of his advisers are working with Trudeau). Then I take those observations, combined with Trudeau's policies which include maintaining the very low corporate tax rate of 15%, the fact that Bill Morneau is former chair of the CD Howe Institute (a conservative and pro-business think tank) and a very successful business man with close ties to Bay Street, the fact that there are such close ties between the Liberal Party and Bay Street in general, the fact there is a revolving door between the corporate world and politics, and make what I would say is a very reasonable judgement.

Finally, as we've seen, there hasn't been a panic among the business community in Canada, no flurry of fear-mongering business editorials from anyone but The Toronto Sun (the Sun is so far from the center of corporate and political power in Canada no one of "importance" takes them seriously anyway) so yes I am quite confident that it's big business as usual in Canada. 

But do tell us, what are your Facebook friends saying? Above you said that many people aren't happy with Trudeau. What are you basing this on? I sure hope it's not "your personal opinion that you're trying to pass off as the will of the people". Boy, you would sure have egg on your face then, wouldn't you?

 

[Kilo_302]

So, Kilo, what should we do about the 117,000 women nurses who are 'unfairly' holding more nursing positions in Canada than they are entitled to by gender proportion?

In 2010, there were 268,000 registered nurses and 96% of them were women (251,000 women, 17,000 men). (Ref: https://www.cna-aiic.ca/~/media/cna/page-content/pdf-en/2010_rn_snapshot_e.pdf )

Should we actually let the gender overage of 117,000 women nurses be reduced through regular attrition and only hire male nurses for the next 13 to 16 years until we have gender parity in the nursing profession?

G2G

Surely you understand the barriers to women in politics and business are of a different nature than the "barriers" to men in nursing.

 

[Good2Golf]

Please enlighten us as to how so?

 

[Brad Sallows]

The "barriers" - both ways - are essentially "I don't care to do that".

In many fields of endeavour, the complaint is simply, "I don't care to do that, but I am outraged that not enough other women care to.  Fix it somehow."

Corporations are not likely to pack up as long as additional costs can be passed through.  The government can adopt a populist pose of sticking it to Big Business, while quietly peddling some favours to Big Business and ensuring above all that the structure of the "stick it" provisions do not prevent costs from flowing through to purchasers.  Pretending that corporations will "pay their fare share" is a fool's errand: shareholders/owners, employees, and customers pay.

 

[YZT580]

I think you will find this is far, far more wide-spread than just those two sectors of the work force



Again, I don't think this is restricted to religious fundamentalists or white men only...this is something that happens across many (most? all?) cultures, races and countries, regardless of their political system, religious beliefs, etc.

Including Hillary Clinton's own office.  And I am absolutely certain that she is neither a religious fundamentalist or a white man although she has demonstrated that she has the b***s to be one.  Your personal prejudices are coming to the forefront and destroying your argument

 

[Altair]

I wish I had just said barbaric practices hotline.

 

[ballz]

The only people who seem to have a problem with this are religious fundamentalists who are terrified of women, or white men who somehow think affirmative action makes them victims...and are also terrified of women.

Classic social justice warrior trolling. "The only people who have a problem with this are bigots, you must be a bigot if you disagree."

I personally have no problems with Trudeau ensuring half his cabinet are women, he can make them all women for all I care. He is the leader of his party and that's his prerogative. As long as nothing is legislated that forces political party leaders and businesses to make choices based on Trudeau and Kilo's arrogant "because 2015" mentality, he can fill his boots.

 

[George Wallace]

Classic social justice warrior trolling. "The only people who have a problem with this are bigots, you must be a bigot if you disagree."

I personally have no problems with Trudeau ensuring half his cabinet are women, he can make them all women for all I care. He is the leader of his party and that's his prerogative. As long as nothing is legislated that forces political party leaders and businesses to make choices based on Trudeau and Kilo's arrogant "because 2015" mentality, he can fill his boots.

I am surprised he didn't bring out the "Racist" card..............................Opps!  He did.

The only people who seem to have a problem with this are religious fundamentalists who are terrified of women, or white men who somehow think affirmative action makes them victims...and are also terrified of women.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Things That Make You Go Hmmmmmm.

POTUS and the PM had their world wide media lovefest yesterday.

1) The CAD dropped in value;

2) Every stock exchange in North America had dropped by the end of trading;

3) Oil dropped again, by a fair amount historically; and,

The only bright note is that gold shot up significantly.

 

[Rifleman62]

And Canada sold off the last of it's gold reserves this week.

https://www.biznews.com/gold/2016/03/11/canada-sells-gold-reserves-browns-bottom-repeat/

Article at link.

Canada sells off gold reserves – a ‘Brown’s Bottom’ repeat?

This is a fascinating article for anyone with an interest in the yellow metal. The Canadian government has sold off all its official gold holdings, bucking the trend of central banks as net buyers since 2010. And author David Chapman wonders if this move will become known as ‘Poloz’s Bottom’, named after Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz. The bank says the reason for selling off the assets are so it can diversify assets, the same reason English Prime Minister Gordon Brown gave in 1999. The moment caused policy change and become known as ‘Brown’s Bottom’, given that since 2000 gold outperformed numerous assets, returning 335 percent versus 36 percent for the S&P 500. Chapman says Canada, as England did, will more than likely regret this decision. – Stuart Lowman

 

[ballz]

Things That Make You Go Hmmmmmm.

POTUS and the PM had their world wide media lovefest yesterday.

4) Stephen Harper was accused bringing Canada too close to the US, but Justin Trudeau is now being praised for a "renewed friendship with the US," as if during Stephen Harper's tenure the criticism was that he wasn't working with the US enough....

I couldn't help but notice that one yesterday during all the glamour. Obama and Trudeau are a terrible combination for celebritism, thank god they won't be in office at the same time for very long... The invitation list to the state dinner looked much more like it was for the Oscars than a serious political event. All the world's a stage, indeed...

 

[Loachman]

The invitation list to the state dinner

Unless I am mistaken, the principle guest(s) at a state dinner have to be heads of states.

Has Justin presumed to claim that position from Her Royal Majesty?

 

[PuckChaser]

And Canada sold off the last of it's gold reserves this week.

Evil Harper was buying a bunch of gold reserves, so they had to do the opposite.

 

[Altair]

Unless I am mistaken, the principle guest(s) at a state dinner have to be heads of states.

Has Justin presumed to claim that position from Her Royal Majesty?

It's not a "official" state dinner.

 

[Rick Goebel]

It's not a "official" state dinner.

From https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog  "Later in the evening, the President and the First Lady will host a State Dinner in honor of Prime Minister Trudeau in the East Room."

How is this not "official"?

 

[Remius]

People are getting hung up over the term.  It is HOSTED by the head of state.  But can be in honour of heads of state or heads of government. 

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Actually, US government sites indicate that they can be held in honour of heads of  State OR Heads of government.

Trudeau qualifies on the second count.

We should not try to foist our Canadian perspective on Americans. In Canada, State dinners are held by the GG for other Head of states, while the dinners held by the PM for either Heads of states or heads of government are called Formal dinner.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

From https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog  "Later in the evening, the President and the First Lady will host a State Dinner in honor of Prime Minister Trudeau in the East Room."

How is this not "official"?

Why does it matter? Clearly, PM Trudeau, aside from the technicality of our governmental system, is the head of state. If it was Harper it'd be the liberals complaining about this. It's irrelevant...

 

[Altair]

From https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog  "Later in the evening, the President and the First Lady will host a State Dinner in honor of Prime Minister Trudeau in the East Room."

How is this not "official"?

https://ipolitics.ca/2016/03/08/official-visit-vs-state-visit-state-dinner-vs-just-dinner-our-handy-primer/

When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau arrives in Washington tomorrow, he’ll begin an official visit, not a state visit. When he and Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau have dinner at the White House Thursday night, they’ll be honoured with a state dinner.

The visit is official, not state, because Trudeau is a head of government, not a head of state. But, over the years, the nomenclature for state dinners has evolved to avoid the distinction between the role of head of state — a largely ceremonial, less political role in many countries — but maintain the diplomatic allure of the state dinner.

A state visit is the highest ranking visit and can only be offered to a head of state, like the president of a country or a reigning monarch like Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, according to research from Radio Free Europe.

The confusion hasn’t been contained to media reports. The Conservative Party generously granted Trudeau a protocol promotion in a press release issued Tuesday afternoon, referring to the bilateral as a state visit.

According to The White House’s blog, the term “state dinner” was originally used to denote any affair that honoured the President’s Cabinet, Congress, or other dignitaries in the 19th century,  however, “President Ulysses S. Grant changed the meaning of the term when he welcomed King David Kalakua of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1874. Now, State Dinners are grand affairs hosted by the President to welcome a visiting head of state.”

In 2012, President Barack Obama honoured British Prime Minister David Cameron with a 19-gun salute on the South Lawn of the White House and a state dinner. At the time, the Guardian reported that Obama was “pushing the boundaries” of protocol because Cameron is a head of government, so he cannot be treated to a full state visit, but that the White house found a way around the rules by designating the trip as an official visit with state dinner.

That designation applies to the Trudeau visit.

Raymond Chretien, who was ambassador to the United States during a state dinner for his uncle, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, in 1997 and is now a partner and strategic advisor with law firm Fasken Martineau, concurred that technically Trudeau’s visit is an official visit — not a state visit.

“Technically speaking, it’s not a state visit. A state visit would be for, in our case, the Governor General. So the Americans treat it as a state visit — they give it all the perks and the surrounding privileges of such a visit — but technically speaking, you can call it a state visit but it is not a state visit,” said Chretien.

“They call it a state dinner. That you can call a state dinner because it’s their designation,” he added.

According to The White House, a state dinner requires at minimum of six months of preparation. “From the guest list and invitations, to the menus and seating arrangements, all require the careful attention of the First Lady, State Department, and White House Social Secretary,” states The White House blog.

Happy?