The Decline of the Liberal Party- Swerved Into a Confederation Topic

[Halifax Tar]

No, speaking about School Taxes only.

You are paying taxes to cover OAS for seniors and yourself, as a future recipient, now as it is included in your income tax.

Let's keep our tax rates but let people select what they want their money going too

We seem reasonable and well adjusted enough to have that option

 

[Kat Stevens]

And as someone who has to live in a society tomorrow filled with/run by people being educated today, there's a case to be made that you're a "future recipient" of the education system. Agree or disagree with how well the education system is working, there's a reason a lot of people say "young people are the future" - a future we'll be living in, too.

And as others smarter than me have said up thread, statistically speaking, younger cohorts don't use as much health care as older cohorts. If we believe the Canadian Medical Association, "The average per-person spending on health care for Canadians aged 64 and below is $2,700. The average per-person spending on Canadians aged 65 and over is more than four times higher at $12,000." So, do we prorate health care costs by age?

Modified Logan's Run. Mandatory MAID at 65, yeah baby! Get all us annoying old fucks who ruined everything out of the way before we start costing some REAL money. Shame we killed all the ice floes. I'm just about ready to pack 'er in anyway, the world isn't fun anymore.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Modified Logan's Run. Mandatory MAID at 65, yeah baby! Get all us annoying old fucks who ruined everything out of the way before we start costing some REAL money. Shame we killed all the ice floes. I'm just about ready to pack 'er in anyway, the world isn't fun anymore.

Ridiculous.

What does need to be accepted by the older generations is that they established various social systems and chronically underfunded them. It doesn't matter who you voted for.

Now that they really need these social systems they expect the working demographic to fix the problem for them.

Personally, I think we have a demographic problem. We have an upside down triangle WRT age.

We should make the ageing generations comfortable and offer what we can to support and weather this storm. But as the older generations disappear the financial and resource drain will subside.

It's a sad fact of life. The world continues to spin after you're gone. And we shouldnt be leveraging the future for short term solutions.

 

[Weinie]

Ridiculous.

What does need to be accepted by the older generations is that they established various social systems and chronically underfunded them. It doesn't matter who you voted for.

Now that they really need these social systems they expect the working demographic to fix the problem for them.

Personally, I think we have a demographic problem. We have an upside down triangle WRT age.

We should make the ageing generations comfortable and offer what we can to support and weather this storm. But as the older generations disappear the financial and resource drain will subside.

It's a sad fact of life. The world continues to spin after you're gone. And we shouldnt be leveraging the future for short term solutions.

I'm entitled to my entitlements.

 

[OldSolduer]

It is also a legitimate answer. If I borrow 20$ and pay back 15$, just because I have spent a long time paying back that 15$ should I not still have to pay the other 5$?

Before Trudeau Sr. got in we had very little national debt. After we added all these social programs to our government and didn’t raise taxes enough to pay for them all we got our national debt. So yes didn’t pay their way is how I word it as if there is more debt after your done than when you showed up, you never paid it all off.

I will admit I am more than a little bitter with the boomer generation. They screwed up a lot of stuff which my generation shall have to fix, but its going to get a lot worse before it gets better. The trades, the healthcare system, the housing market, we are going to see complete collapses of these systems most likely in the next 20 years unless drastic action is taken. And I am not seeing anyone leading the charge on fixing them, only attempting bandaids on a large flesh wound.

When they start suggesting tax cuts for the things they never paid off, I don’t look too kindly upon it.

Ever consider you’ll be if that age one day? Like many of us?

You’re quick to lay blame but many of us on here we’re not of voting age when PET introduced his “just society”.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Ever consider you’ll be if that age one day? Like many of us?

You’re quick to lay blame but many of us on here we’re not of voting age when PET introduced his “just society”.

Perhaps. But you were voting age to help right the ship for decades, I assume.

And now here we are.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Perhaps. But you were voting age to help right the ship for decades, I assume.

And now here we are.

I’ve lived in the west most of my life, my vote has never mattered.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I’ve lived in the west most of my life, my vote has never mattered.

You have a point.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Let them cancel Disney subscriptions....

KINSELLA: Out-of-touch Chrystia Freeland and her Disney gaffe​

Minister of finance thinks cutting cartoons will help Canadians with cost of living

It’s the cost of living, Ms. Freeland. And not Simpsons reruns on Disney. Canadians, from coast to coast to coast, are focused on how hard it is to get by.

Nanos: The top issue for Canadians is the state of the economy, far ahead of any other issue, with inflation not far behind. Abacus: 73% say the cost of living is the most important issue they’re facing — followed by economy (45%) and housing affordability (36%).

Also Abacus: When asked what inflation and rising interest rates have made “much more difficult” to get, half said food. Thirty-five per cent said housing. And 34% said energy — heating their home or fuelling their vehicle.

KINSELLA: Out-of-touch Chrystia Freeland and her Disney gaffe

Let them eat cake. In fairness to Marie Antoinette, she probably didn't even say that.

torontosun.com

For a site where people bitch a lot about Canadians not being financially literate, weird seeing some basic suggestions for cutting extras to pay for the basics being met with derision. If you see the quote in full context, she was saying 'every little bit helps' not this fixes things. Doing the same to all your expenses is part of balancing your cheque book.

Lots of things the government can be doing to (but not consistent with being small government) but smart phones, entertainment etc are all padding if you need to cut expenses to pay for food.

 

[daftandbarmy]

For a site where people bitch a lot about Canadians not being financially literate, weird seeing some basic suggestions for cutting extras to pay for the basics being met with derision. If you see the quote in full context, she was saying 'every little bit helps' not this fixes things. Doing the same to all your expenses is part of balancing your cheque book.

Lots of things the government can be doing to (but not consistent with being small government) but smart phones, entertainment etc are all padding if you need to cut expenses to pay for food.

It doesn't appear that many Canadians agree with you... or Freeland herself

Chrystia Freeland backs away from ‘out of touch’ comment about Disney+​

Freeland admitted her own privilege as she acknowledged Canadian families’ struggles with the cost of living.​

Deputy PM Chrystia Freeland admitted her own privilege Monday as she acknowledged Canadian families’ struggles with the skyrocketing cost of living, after facing criticism over her family’s cost-cutting decision to cancel its Disney+ subscription.

“I am a very privileged person, for sure. Like other elected federal leaders, I am paid a really significant salary. I really recognize that it is not people like me, people who have my really good fortune, who are struggling the most in Canada,” said Freeland in Milton, Ont.

The deputy prime minister said the struggles of Canadians shaped the fall economic statement released last Thursday and prompted the federal government to prioritize helping vulnerable people with measures such as the permanent elimination of interest on the federal portion of student loans, the enriching and redesign of the Canada Workers Benefit, and some housing measures.

“They are people across the country who earn a low income, who really do find that today’s high prices mean they have to make difficult choices about what food to buy, about whether to buy groceries or pull together the money to pay the rent,” she said.

“It is that recognition that the people in Canada who are struggling for whom inflation really is a direct, personal challenge.”

Following the government’s economic update last week, Freeland appeared on Global News’ “The West Block” hosted by Mercedes Stephenson. Asked if Ottawa is open to reviewing programs for wasteful spending, Freeland said the government announced in April it was looking for $9 billion in savings in the federal budget. She added the fall economic statement revealed that more savings were found than the April budget had anticipated.

To drive her point home, Freeland cited an example of her family’s own living choices: cancelling the children’s Disney+ subscription to save $13.99 per month.

“I said to the kids, ‘You’re older now. You don’t watch Disney anymore. Let’s cut that Disney+ subscription. So, we cut it. It’s only $13.99 a month that we’re saving, but every little bit helps,” she said.

“I believe that I need to take exactly the same approach with the federal government’s finances because that’s the money of Canadians.”

Social media users jumped on her comment, calling it “insulting,” “tone-deaf” and “out of touch.” Her critics in the opposition parties echoed those sentiments.

“The finance minister, just like the prime minister, is out of touch with the realities of the hardships they have caused and continue to cause for Canadians. Many Canadians are cutting back on basic necessities and don’t need a tone-deaf lesson from the finance minister on how to stretch a dollar,” Conservative MP Jasraj Singh Hallan, the party’s finance critic, told the Star.

“Canadians are struggling because of the Trudeau government’s greed and their out of control inflationary borrowing and spending.”

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Freeland’s admission shows how disconnected the Liberal government is from ordinary Canadians.

“It is clearer than ever, that Minister Freeland and her government don’t understand what families are going through. Asking families to cut costs, instead of asking billionaires to pay what they owe, shows how out of touch the Liberals are with Canadians,” Singh said.

The NDP leader said the government “chose not to” make things easier on families by waiving the GST on home heating and putting in place a windfall tax on the oil industry and big grocery chains — both of which are making record profits.

A windfall tax refers to higher tax rates on above-average profits that are a result of unexpected events, such as the war in Ukraine which has led to record revenues for oil and gas companies.

The fall economic statement introduced a number of measures to help businesses and employees cope with the rising cost of living as the economy slows down. Freeland’s comments come as the Liberal government’s Bill C-11, or the Online Streaming Act, is making its way through the Senate.

The proposed legislation seeks to amend Canada’s outdated Broadcasting Act to bring streaming giants, such as Disney+, under the same regulations that already apply to traditional broadcasters in this country. While the bill has generated its fair share of criticisms, one of the government’s stated goals in passing the legislation is to support the creation and promotion of Canadian content on platforms like Disney’s.

Chrystia Freeland backs away from ‘out of touch’ comment about Disney+

Freeland admitted her own privilege as she acknowledged Canadian families’ struggles with the cost of living.

www.thestar.com

​

 

[Brad Sallows]

We just went through a period of unusual limitations on private liberty and severe (and continuing) economic pain in order to save the lives of old people - that was how many people phrased their support for the mitigation - and now there's muttering about the customary costs of old people that we've had to deal with all along?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Perhaps. But you were voting age to help right the ship for decades, I assume.

And now here we are.

That is a ridiculous premise. Blaming a generation for your woes. There was a surplus of cash in our coffers, that appeared to be keeping up with things.

In 2015, your generation was voting age. Your generation elected a liberal government, that in seven years has totally wiped out our cash reserves and ruined us financially. We have no money, it's all a big ballooning credit bubble. You believed a charlatan, who wiped us out and left us nothing but financial and individual pain for the next generations. You had the opportunity, and were in a position to stop that. But you didn't. That all your generations fault.

See how that works?

 

[Kilted]

Axe your Senate to a Provincially Elected one, and give it a bit more teeth, and you don't need to worry so much about the imbalance in the HoC with Ontario and Quebec, and the urban population.

That and burn down the PMO...

The Senate has considerable power as is. People will complain that it's unelected, but it's unelected for a reason. Hopefully the next government will get ride of this senator nominating committee and just start appointing them on partisan grounds. The system worked before, there was no reason to make the current arrangements.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So why cant we just get every voter to spoil their ballot and no one can get voted in until there is a set of UNBREAKABLE rules that they have to abide by or the next party that got the most votes take over. We can make it so that they have to keep 50% of their promises that they made during the election or, yup, you guessed it, they are booted and the next party steps in to take over. No costly elections continuously and maybe they might start to take things seriously. Yeah I know I'm dreaming and the only thing that happens is that we will go bankrupt, and it will happen. Now i need to get a coffee and wake up and talk sensibly.....

I like the idea broadly. I'd be afraid though, that would just lead to promising bigger and bigger things. Which would result in a party spending billions, just to gain the edge in a game of one upmanship.
Or what about a government that says something like "We'll supply clean drinking water on Reserves." and keeps promising the same thing election after election after election. Yet fails to do anything substantial.

Maybe a rule along the lines of, once you promise something and fail to deliver during your mandate, you can never use that talking point again as bait during any election.

 

[The Bread Guy]

We just went through a period of unusual limitations on private liberty and severe (and continuing) economic pain in order to save the lives of old people - that was how many people phrased their support for the mitigation - and now there's muttering about the customary costs of old people that we've had to deal with all along?

Speaking for myself only, I've only presented the question in terms of "if you're OK with not paying taxes for services you don't use, are you OK with others not paying for services they don't use." I stand to be corrected, but I haven't seen anyone say it should be done.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Lots of things the government can be doing to (but not consistent with being small government) but smart phones, entertainment etc are all padding if you need to cut expenses to pay for food.

To be fair, without the phone, your not getting a job, everyone assumes you have a phone and all sorts of systems require the employee to have a phone and no, many businesses will not pay for one. Only my youngest has data on her phone, so we can monitor her blood sugars, people are surprised that we don't have data. But it saves us a lot of money each month. I gave up many subscriptions and membership fees, haven't bought a steak in a year, fill up when gas is down, turned down the heat, skimp on a lot of things and don't have any debts at all. Yet with two incomes we are just surviving here in Vancouver. Walmarts sale prices are what Save on Foods normal price on items was 8 months ago.

 

[lenaitch]

To be fair, without the phone, your not getting a job, everyone assumes you have a phone and all sorts of systems require the employee to have a phone and no, many businesses will not pay for one. Only my youngest has data on her phone, so we can monitor her blood sugars, people are surprised that we don't have data. But it saves us a lot of money each month. I gave up many subscriptions and membership fees, haven't bought a steak in a year, fill up when gas is down, turned down the heat, skimp on a lot of things and don't have any debts at all. Yet with two incomes we are just surviving here in Vancouver. Walmarts sale prices are what Save on Foods normal price on items was 8 months ago.

Fair points all, but do people need the $1000 latest iPhone and data package that allows them to game and surf the Interweb at will? Or multiple streaming services? When I see people wandering the dollar store with a phone I can't afford in one had and a Starbucks in the other, I wonder about priorities.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

True enough, my assistant always went to the fancy coffee shop (that made Starbucks look like a deal) and wondered why she had no money. People laughed at me for drinking instant coffee, but I told them "That's how I bought my house". But these days I see a lot of couples who do their very best and can't afford to live. My friend is RCMP and his wife is a nurse, they could not afford a two bedroom apartment in North Vancouver. So had to move further out to find something they could afford. At this point it almost does not matter what you do as inflation outstrips your ability to save costs.

 

[Halifax Tar]

That is a ridiculous premise. Blaming a generation for your woes. There was a surplus of cash in our coffers, that appeared to be keeping up with things.

In 2015, your generation was voting age. Your generation elected a liberal government, that in seven years has totally wiped out our cash reserves and ruined us financially. We have no money, it's all a big ballooning credit bubble. You believed a charlatan, who wiped us out and left us nothing but financial and individual pain for the next generations. You had the opportunity, and were in a position to stop that. But you didn't. That all your generations fault.

See how that works?

I'm talking about our social programs.

Which generations since the 60s have paid lip service to while trying to avoid paying cash money to support. Now that they need them it's a panic and a crisis.

The boomers had no foresight. How they couldn't have foreseen thier massive demographic impact on our services is beyond me. But fail to plan, plan to fail.

Reminds me of the aging folks who I used run into in college. Pissed their life away until they were 45+ and then, late in life, wondered why they had nothing and had to start from the bottom all the while having a false aire of superior wisdom. I used to love debating with these aged hippies in my social work program. Hilarious folks with no sense of personal responsibility. But my goodness they had one hell of a sense of entitlement.

I'm not really a generational blamer, I just think that's the truth. The shit policies from 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s, social and financial, are coming back to haunt us.

 

[OldSolduer]

Perhaps. But you were voting age to help right the ship for decades, I assume.

And now here we are.

Perhaps and yes I voted in every election. -Do you trust your peers to do the same? I get it - anyone older than 60 is to blame.




Perhaps those under 60 need to ask themselves the same question.