It is currently December 5th, 2019, 6:57 pm

All times are UTC-08:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 197 posts ]  Go to page Previous 16 7 8 9 10
Author Message
Unread postPosted: September 25th, 2019, 10:51 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Here's Max Bernier's policy proposals for Canada.

Populism in policy
People’s Party of Canada offers plan for all Canadians

Populist sentiment is on the rise in almost every western country, including Canada.

Populism does not simply express anger at the current government. It’s a symptom of a deeper disconnect.

It’s a reaction from disenfranchised citizens who have lost faith in our institutions’ capacity to reflect their concerns, and who feel that even their right to voice these concerns is being negated by the elites’ disdain and a curtailment of their free speech.

The People’s Party is populist because it proposes solutions to Canada’s problems that radically differ from those of all the establishment parties.

Or course, that doesn’t mean they’re good solutions. You can have a reactionary type of populism with disastrous economic policies, or smart populism based on sound policies.

In all my career, I have always supported sound, small-government, responsible, free-market policies.

Depending on the issue, the policies my party is proposing are supported by a majority or a substantial minority of Canadians. These Canadians deserve a voice.

The Peoples’ Party is the only one that will reduce immigration to a sustainable level, from 350,000 per year to a maximum of 150,000. We will increase the proportion of economic immigrants who bring skills in demand, choose immigrants who share Canadian values, and close the border to false refugees at Roxham Rd.

The PPC is the only party also that will end official multiculturalism and the constant glorification of diversity. We will focus on the integration of immigrants in our society.

The PPC is the only party that will abolish foreign aid except for help in emergency situations. Before we send money to build roads or provide health care and education in Africa and Asia, we should take care of the many Canadians in need.

The PPC is the only party that will balance the budget in two years and then use surpluses to lower taxes. We will end the corrupt practice of pandering and buying votes from interest groups and political clienteles with taxpayers’ money.

The PPC is the only party that rejects political correctness, is not afraid to oppose radical Islam, and will protect free speech.

The PPC is the only party that opposes climate alarmism and will not increase taxes or regulations to fight global warming.

The PPC has a unique platform on so many issues that it’s hard to list them all. It’s also the only party that will:

▪Stop Ottawa’s meddling in provincial jurisdictions such as health care. Provinces should have the autonomy to experiment and solve our long waiting lists for surgery.

▪Reduce equalization payments, and change the formula so that it stops being a permanent welfare program for poorer provinces.

▪Use article 92(10) of our Constitution to ensure that pipelines get built.

▪Abolish the costly system of supply management for dairy, poultry and eggs.

▪Abolish corporate welfare and lower corporate taxes equally for all businesses.

▪Reduce Canada’s presence in corrupt UN institutions to a minimum, and withdraw from treaties such as the global compact for migration and the Paris climate accord that threaten our sovereignty.

▪Defund the CBC. Reinstate a fair disability pension to our injured or disabled veterans.

▪Eliminate interprovincial trade barriers and the capital gains tax.

I could go on and on. Canadians have a real choice in this election.

Vote for one of the establishment parties with the same policies — or vote for the smart populist, principled alternative with sound policies.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: September 25th, 2019, 10:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
And Jagmeet Singh's plan to destroy our natural resource sector and jack up the price of electricity er, I mean "fight climate change".

Singh promises cross-canada clean-energy corridor

Winnipeg — new democrat Leader Jagmeet singh made promises tuesday to build an east-west clean-energy corridor and to convert all public transit systems in Canada to electric vehicles, without being sure how much either might cost.

“We can’t afford not to act. there’s a price for not acting as well, and that price is future generations who are going to feel the brunt of a climate crisis, which is going to threaten everything,” singh said as he announced his party’s climate plan at the University of Winnipeg.

If elected, an ndp government would spend $15 billion on an array of enviro-pledges that would also include subsidies for businesses that want to go green. the ndp would also end subsidies for fossil-fuel production.

singh said even his $15-billion global figure is likely not enough.

“We know that we need to put even more forward,” he said. “It’s a bold, ambitious plan, but we know we need to do everything possible to fight this climate crisis.”

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: September 25th, 2019, 2:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: April 1st, 2016, 6:51 pm
Posts: 8628
seoulbro wrote:
Here's Max Bernier's policy proposals for Canada.

Populism in policy
People’s Party of Canada offers plan for all Canadians

Populist sentiment is on the rise in almost every western country, including Canada.

Populism does not simply express anger at the current government. It’s a symptom of a deeper disconnect.

It’s a reaction from disenfranchised citizens who have lost faith in our institutions’ capacity to reflect their concerns, and who feel that even their right to voice these concerns is being negated by the elites’ disdain and a curtailment of their free speech.

The People’s Party is populist because it proposes solutions to Canada’s problems that radically differ from those of all the establishment parties.

Or course, that doesn’t mean they’re good solutions. You can have a reactionary type of populism with disastrous economic policies, or smart populism based on sound policies.

In all my career, I have always supported sound, small-government, responsible, free-market policies.

Depending on the issue, the policies my party is proposing are supported by a majority or a substantial minority of Canadians. These Canadians deserve a voice.

The Peoples’ Party is the only one that will reduce immigration to a sustainable level, from 350,000 per year to a maximum of 150,000. We will increase the proportion of economic immigrants who bring skills in demand, choose immigrants who share Canadian values, and close the border to false refugees at Roxham Rd.

The PPC is the only party also that will end official multiculturalism and the constant glorification of diversity. We will focus on the integration of immigrants in our society.

The PPC is the only party that will abolish foreign aid except for help in emergency situations. Before we send money to build roads or provide health care and education in Africa and Asia, we should take care of the many Canadians in need.

The PPC is the only party that will balance the budget in two years and then use surpluses to lower taxes. We will end the corrupt practice of pandering and buying votes from interest groups and political clienteles with taxpayers’ money.

The PPC is the only party that rejects political correctness, is not afraid to oppose radical Islam, and will protect free speech.

The PPC is the only party that opposes climate alarmism and will not increase taxes or regulations to fight global warming.

The PPC has a unique platform on so many issues that it’s hard to list them all. It’s also the only party that will:

▪Stop Ottawa’s meddling in provincial jurisdictions such as health care. Provinces should have the autonomy to experiment and solve our long waiting lists for surgery.

▪Reduce equalization payments, and change the formula so that it stops being a permanent welfare program for poorer provinces.

▪Use article 92(10) of our Constitution to ensure that pipelines get built.

▪Abolish the costly system of supply management for dairy, poultry and eggs.

▪Abolish corporate welfare and lower corporate taxes equally for all businesses.

▪Reduce Canada’s presence in corrupt UN institutions to a minimum, and withdraw from treaties such as the global compact for migration and the Paris climate accord that threaten our sovereignty.

▪Defund the CBC. Reinstate a fair disability pension to our injured or disabled veterans.

▪Eliminate interprovincial trade barriers and the capital gains tax.

I could go on and on. Canadians have a real choice in this election.

Vote for one of the establishment parties with the same policies — or vote for the smart populist, principled alternative with sound policies.

I really like the platform of the PPC on almost every issue except trade. I like protectionism and Bernier is a big proponent of free trade.

_________________
“No issue better illustrates the divide between America’s working class and America’s political class than illegal immigration- Donald J. Trump.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: September 29th, 2019, 10:29 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Tegan Hill and Jake Fuss are economists with the Fraser Institute.

Candidates ignore federal budget on campaign trail

Unless you’ve been living underground, you’ve already heard plenty from party leaders this federal election, which is less than two weeks old. And yet, we’ve heard almost nothing from the Liberals, Conservatives or NDP about crucial fiscal issues that affect all Canadians today and tomorrow.

For example, no party has a plan to control spending or balance the budget in its first term. So regardless of who wins the election, deficits will likely persist and the federal debt will continue to grow, putting Canada’s finances at risk.

A deficit occurs when spending exceeds revenues in any given year. It indicates the government is not paying for spending today but instead financing spending through borrowing. Eventually, someone must pay for this borrowing — namely future generations who’ll bear the burden of this debt (and the interest that accompanies it) through increased taxes.

And every dollar spent paying interest on government debt is a dollar diverted from other important programs (health care and education, for example) or tax relief (income tax reductions, for example).

Let’s do a quick review. Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer retracted his previous commitment to balance the budget in two years. Instead, he promises a “measured approach to spending growth” but with no commitment to reach budget balance in his first term as prime minister.

The NDP has made no commitment to balance the budget. Instead, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has committed to billions in new spending for a national pharmacare program, a child-care program and 500,000 new units of affordable housing, among other plans.

Four years ago, during the last federal election campaign, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau promised to balance the budget by 2019. The Liberals quickly abandoned that plan after taking office and the deficit is expected to reach nearly $20 billion this year. Trudeau has made no such commitments to return to balance should he be re-elected.

Now some quick history. According to a recent study, the federal government may be repeating many of the fiscal mistakes that led to persistent and prolonged deficits from the mid-1960s to the mid-1990s.

During this time, Ottawa consistently ran deficits because of large increases in spending, which averaged 10% per year from 1965 to 1995. Overall, federal debt increased from $17.2 billion to more than $500 billion, culminating in a near fiscal crisis in the mid-1990s.

But large-scale reforms by the Chretien Liberals, who prioritized balanced budgets and smarter spending, put Canada’s finances back in order. In 1995, the federal government cut program spending by 9.7% over two years. Unlike “spending cuts” from previous governments, this was an actual cut in spending, not just a reduction in spending growth. The budget returned to balance quickly, federal debt was reduced and Canada was in a relatively stable position to weather the 2008-09 recession.

Unfortunately, recent years resemble the pre-reform era, defined by high spending and persistent deficits. Federal government spending (per person) increased from $7,740 in 2014 to a projected $8,804 this year. Indeed, in 2018 per-person inflation-adjusted spending reached its highest point in Canadian history.

Canada’s financial outlook is worrying. The country needs a new plan to control spending and restore fiscal balance.

Otherwise, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past, which produced perpetual and prolonged deficits and the consequences that accompany them.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 3rd, 2019, 10:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Realigning foreign aid makes a lot of sense

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan recently made provocative remarks at the United Nations, which bordered on threats of commencing a nuclear war against India.
The country has previously been accused by many observers of being a state sponsor of terror. Yet Canadian taxpayers shell over money to the Pakistan government each year.
In 2018, Canada’s international assistance to Pakistan was to the tune of $71 million. This is the country that seeks to enforce a hard line interpretation of Islam through its laws.
Sun columnists Tarek Fatah and Farzana Hassan have long cautioned Canadians about the extreme elements that have taken root in Pakistan.
Last year, the Pakistan government even notified Twitter that a post made several years ago by Sun columnist Anthony Furey contravened their blasphemy laws, ones that come with the death penalty.
Is this the sort of country we want to be offering Canadians’ hard-earned tax dollars? Absolutely not. Yet you hardly hear any questions about the over $6 billion the federal government doles out annually to countries all around the world.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is changing that. He’s proposed to reduce the foreign aid budget by 25% and re-align our priorities so the money is only going to poor countries that actually need our help.
It’s a wise idea. The foreign aid system is in need of a shakeup and definitely greater scrutiny.
While Canadians will disagree on specific funding projects and exactly which countries are deserving of our money, Scheer is right to push the conversation.
People’s Party of Canada leader Maxime Bernier had previously promised something similar, to eliminate all foreign aid except for emergency assistance.
There are so many segments of Canadian society that could certainly do with a greater cash infusion. Whether it’s public transit, veterans or First Nations communities
— it’s not hard to find things to spend money on in Canada that most people would agree are worthy of our support.
Yet while these priorities continue to lack funding, the feds have been sending money to countries like Russia, China and North Korea.
It’s time for a change. Realigning our foreign aid funding levels and priorities only makes sense.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 3rd, 2019, 4:05 pm 

Joined: October 4th, 2012, 10:25 pm
Posts: 41381
This is a big surprise.

Conservatives confirm Scheer holds dual Canada-U.S. citizenship

The federal Conservatives have confirmed their leader, Andrew Scheer, holds dual Canadian and American citizenship.
In a statement to media late Thursday afternoon, a spokesperson for Scheer responded to a report by the Globe and Mail that said Scheer had obtained the American citizenship from his father as a child and was in the process of renouncing it.

"Like millions of Canadians, one of Mr. Scheer’s parents was born in another country and immigrated to Canada to start a family. He and his sisters received United States passports as children and Mr. Scheer has not renewed his as an adult," said Simon Jeffries, a spokesperson for Scheer.

"He has not voted in any United States election. Once Mr. Scheer became leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, he decided he would renounce his US citizenship before the election."
Jeffries added that Scheer filed paperwork with the U.S. government in August in order to renounce his citizenship and is "currently waiting for confirmation from the embassy that he is no longer a dual-citizen."
The issue of dual citizenship has proven a thorny one in the past for politicians vying for senior leadership roles.
Thomas Mulcair, the former NDP leader, was criticized by former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper for holding dual citizenship.

Mulcair held both Canadian and French citizenship.
"In my case, as I say, I'm very clear," Harper said at the time. "I'm a Canadian and only a Canadian."
The comment was widely interpreted as casting doubt on whether Mulcair could hold conflicting loyalties.
The same thing happened with former Liberal leader Stephane Dion, who the Conservatives also attacked for his dual Canada-French citizenship.
Dion ultimately gave up his French citizenship.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/election ... ailsignout


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 8th, 2019, 8:53 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
What is striking about this election is what is not being discussed. We have a population, soon, with roughly 2.5 workers for every retiree, down from 5 to 1 not so long ago. The size of the fiscal challenge this represents, mostly for the provinces (since they incure most of the associated increase in costs is for health care). Projections by the Parliamentary Budget Office show provinces like Manitoba, New Brunswick and Newfoundland with debt-to-GDP ratios of well over 100 per cent by mid-century.

That’s simply unsustainable. The only way to avert a fiscal crisis down the road is to put the growth rate of national productivity on a permanently higher track, in hopes of making the next generation or two of taxpayers so much richer than we are that they can afford — or choose to — the crippling costs of looking after us in our dotage. To achieve that sort of transformation will require sweeping changes in economic policy, most of them — slashing marginal tax rates, opening protected industries to competition — politically difficult. Yet not a single word has been spoken throughout the campaign about this.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 8th, 2019, 9:07 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau got off easy on Monday evening’s debate. While the other party leaders certainly took a few shots at the incumbent Prime Minister, for the most part he skated away without having to answer for his record.

Hardly anything on the blackface scandal. Practically nothing on Lavscam. No accountability on massive deficits. Zilch on the China file.

Talk about light treatment for a man who has caused heavy damage on some major files. These are the issues that Canadians need to hold Trudeau to account on, yet none of the other candidates or debate moderators stepped up to the plate.

It’s hard to blame the opposition. Both Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh got in all the shots they could.

But the format of the evening was a strange one, with topics pre-selected. The themes were affordability and economic insecurity, the environment, Indigenous issues, human rights and immigration.

There was nothing on rule of law. Nothing on budgets. Nothing on foreign affairs.

As in, the debate organizers managed to create an evening where Trudeau’s weakest issues rarely came up. This is disappointing and the debates commission failed to offer a balanced discussion.

Some of the most important moments came at the end, when Scheer reminded Canadians that Trudeau has a history of breaking promises.

The best line of the night also came at the end and was by Scheer, when he joked that Trudeau should consider running for the Ontario Liberal Leadership, given how obsessed he is with bringing up Ontario Premier Doug ford.

It was Scheer who ultimately offered up the strongest alternative to Trudeau. Scheer showed he is focused on economic issues and leaving more money in the pockets of Canadian families.

Jagmeet Singh came across as trustworthy and likeable. The only problem is that while he may be a great guy, his policies are too far to the left for Canada.

While both Elizabeth May and Maxime Bernier managed to make a stir at a few places, they were ultimately sideshows to the main event.

It’s now up to Canadians to decide which person they want to select to lead their country.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 9th, 2019, 12:42 pm 
User avatar

Joined: July 20th, 2015, 7:24 pm
Posts: 16234
Reminder! LeadNow is again registered as a third party with Elections Canada.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ ... rvkNx9Hnd4
"In total, the 114 third parties spent $6 million and many of those third parties were funded by California-and New York-based Tides Foundation — which is known in Canada for holding numerous anti-Canadian oil campaigns.

In 2015, Tides Foundation donated $1.5 million of U.S. money to Canadian third parties in the election year, according to the report.

Crockatt’s seat was one of the 29 targeted by an organization called Leadnow through its “largest ever campaign” called Vote Together. The complaint by Canada Decides alleges that foreign money “spawned” Leadnow and helped fund an elaborate campaign to oust the ruling Conservative Party."

_________________
prairie redneck.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 11th, 2019, 7:38 pm 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
The Liberal platform would add $90 billion to the $70 billion they already overspent. Trudeau no longer pretends budgets balances themselves.

Liberals shattered their fiscal promises without embarrassment and many extravagant platform programs haven’t been costed. Therefore, future deficits are sure to exceed forecasts, before taking into account the likelihood of a recession during the next term in office.

With the bank rate at only 1.75%, monetary policy has limited scope to fight an economic downturn, which puts a greater burden on fiscal policy. Rising social payments, declining revenue and more stimulus spending could rapidly multiply deficits to unsustainable levels.

In spite of a wild Liberal spending spree, GDP per capital grew at a disappointing 43% of the American rate, due to their lower corporate taxes, reduced regulation and liberated resource development, the antithesis of the Liberal approach.

Alarmingly, business investment per worker increased at a quarter the U.S. rate and a third that of OECD countries.

Liberals intend to reinforce that record of failure by doubling down on deficits and regulating energy development to death.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 13th, 2019, 7:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
I like this common sense idea. Nothing breeds corruption more than corporate welfare.

Scheer to target corporate welfare

Burnaby, B.C. — andrew Scheer began Saturday to lay out what he’d do in the first 100 days of a conservative government — and he pledged to pin an early bull’s-eye on what he called “frivolous spending.”

With a little over a week until election day, the conservative leader said that, if elected prime minister, he’d name a former b.c. finance minister and a former Via rail ceo to head a commission to review federal subsidies to corporations.

“right now, the Liberal government gives taxpayers’ dollars to wealthy executives, shareholders and foreign companies. this is as ridiculous as it is unacceptable,” Scheer said.

Scheer has pledged to slash $1.5 billion annually from what he has labelled “corporate welfare” to private-sector companies.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 14th, 2019, 7:20 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Herman wrote:
Reminder! LeadNow is again registered as a third party with Elections Canada.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/ ... rvkNx9Hnd4
"In total, the 114 third parties spent $6 million and many of those third parties were funded by California-and New York-based Tides Foundation — which is known in Canada for holding numerous anti-Canadian oil campaigns.

In 2015, Tides Foundation donated $1.5 million of U.S. money to Canadian third parties in the election year, according to the report.

Crockatt’s seat was one of the 29 targeted by an organization called Leadnow through its “largest ever campaign” called Vote Together. The complaint by Canada Decides alleges that foreign money “spawned” Leadnow and helped fund an elaborate campaign to oust the ruling Conservative Party."

Americans complained of Russian interference in their election in 2016, but wealthy American foundations buy votes in all our elections.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 15th, 2019, 4:33 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 6th, 2012, 1:53 pm
Posts: 6880
How would you like Jagmeet Singh to be your new prime minister?

_________________
@realAzhyaAryola

Sometimes, my comments have a touch of humor, often tongue-in-cheek, so don't take it so seriously.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 15th, 2019, 5:14 pm 
User avatar

Joined: October 13th, 2019, 6:54 pm
Posts: 992
@realAzhyaAryola wrote:
How would you like Jagmeet Singh to be your new prime minister?

Very bad for Alberta and Saskatchewan.

_________________
https://www.santasanonymous.ca/


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 18th, 2019, 4:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 13th, 2019, 6:54 pm
Posts: 992
This is an editorial that appeared in a local newspaper in Alberta.

A broken country

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

It seems we Albertans are filthy wretches, walking around with oil sands under our fingernails and camping on the shores of the nearest tailings pond. We await 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg’s reprisals when she visits our oil-stained province sometime this week.

Albertans will take her tongue lashing, just as we’ve taken tongue lashings from the premiers of B.C. and Quebec, and from the leaders of the Green Party and the NDP. The tongue lashing from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hasn’t been as overt, but if you look for it, it’s there. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer appears to be scared of his own shadow, let alone come out swinging in defence of Alberta’s oil and gas industry. After all, being politically correct is more important.

As we stand on the precipice of a federal election, it is crystal clear to Albertans that Canada is broken. Alberta’s economic interests have, by and large, been mentioned only with reference to a vile, dirty economy that must get with the 21st century. Fossil fuels are passé, our politicians tell us. It doesn’t seem to matter that the oil and gas sector has been the main economic driver of wealth in this country for decades. It doesn’t seem to matter that oil and gas are Canada’s biggest exports.

What has happened to our country? Why are a growing number of our fellow Canadians anti-oil and anti-Alberta? They live in homes that require heat. They drive cars that require gasoline. They wear clothes made from fossil fuels. They take trips on planes. They go on cruises. They do all of this without giving it a second thought, but when Alberta and oil are put in the same sentence, it’s as if the scourge of the earth is upon us.

Alberta has been all but forgotten in what has been perhaps the worst federal election campaign in the modern era. The main party leaders have barely visited Alberta. Trudeau has been here once. Scheer’s been here twice. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh hasn’t stopped by for a visit, Green Leader Elizabeth May has been here once to attend a climate protest in Calgary, and Maxime Bernier of the People’s Party has been here once. It seems Alberta’s problems aren’t in the forefront of their minds.

There’s been a noticeable lack of pragmatism and constructive ideas presented during this campaign. The leaders have traded such notions in for name-calling and finger-pointing. They’ve taken to the oldest and most condescending campaign platform of all time – buying our votes with our own money.

You name it, we’ve been promised it. Why so many voters can’t see the connection between supporting Alberta’s energy industry and paying for those promises is lost on us. You can register your opinion by getting out and voting Oct. 21.

https://www.stalberttoday.ca/our-view/a ... t_WZ6l5xnY

_________________
https://www.santasanonymous.ca/


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 18th, 2019, 4:42 am 
User avatar

Joined: October 13th, 2019, 6:54 pm
Posts: 992
This is an editorial that appeared in a local newspaper in Alberta.

A broken country

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

It seems we Albertans are filthy wretches, walking around with oil sands under our fingernails and camping on the shores of the nearest tailings pond. We await 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg’s reprisals when she visits our oil-stained province sometime this week.

Albertans will take her tongue lashing, just as we’ve taken tongue lashings from the premiers of B.C. and Quebec, and from the leaders of the Green Party and the NDP. The tongue lashing from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hasn’t been as overt, but if you look for it, it’s there. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer appears to be scared of his own shadow, let alone come out swinging in defence of Alberta’s oil and gas industry. After all, being politically correct is more important.

As we stand on the precipice of a federal election, it is crystal clear to Albertans that Canada is broken. Alberta’s economic interests have, by and large, been mentioned only with reference to a vile, dirty economy that must get with the 21st century. Fossil fuels are passé, our politicians tell us. It doesn’t seem to matter that the oil and gas sector has been the main economic driver of wealth in this country for decades. It doesn’t seem to matter that oil and gas are Canada’s biggest exports.

What has happened to our country? Why are a growing number of our fellow Canadians anti-oil and anti-Alberta? They live in homes that require heat. They drive cars that require gasoline. They wear clothes made from fossil fuels. They take trips on planes. They go on cruises. They do all of this without giving it a second thought, but when Alberta and oil are put in the same sentence, it’s as if the scourge of the earth is upon us.

Alberta has been all but forgotten in what has been perhaps the worst federal election campaign in the modern era. The main party leaders have barely visited Alberta. Trudeau has been here once. Scheer’s been here twice. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh hasn’t stopped by for a visit, Green Leader Elizabeth May has been here once to attend a climate protest in Calgary, and Maxime Bernier of the People’s Party has been here once. It seems Alberta’s problems aren’t in the forefront of their minds.

There’s been a noticeable lack of pragmatism and constructive ideas presented during this campaign. The leaders have traded such notions in for name-calling and finger-pointing. They’ve taken to the oldest and most condescending campaign platform of all time – buying our votes with our own money.

You name it, we’ve been promised it. Why so many voters can’t see the connection between supporting Alberta’s energy industry and paying for those promises is lost on us. You can register your opinion by getting out and voting Oct. 21.

https://www.stalberttoday.ca/our-view/a ... t_WZ6l5xnY

_________________
https://www.santasanonymous.ca/


Top
   
Unread postPosted: October 18th, 2019, 5:01 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12658
Fashionista wrote:
This is an editorial that appeared in a local newspaper in Alberta.

A broken country

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

Being an Albertan is not a lot of fun these days. Many of our own countrymen, from the shores of British Columbia and Nova Scotia, to la belle province, have all but put Alberta out to pasture.

It seems we Albertans are filthy wretches, walking around with oil sands under our fingernails and camping on the shores of the nearest tailings pond. We await 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg’s reprisals when she visits our oil-stained province sometime this week.

Albertans will take her tongue lashing, just as we’ve taken tongue lashings from the premiers of B.C. and Quebec, and from the leaders of the Green Party and the NDP. The tongue lashing from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau hasn’t been as overt, but if you look for it, it’s there. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer appears to be scared of his own shadow, let alone come out swinging in defence of Alberta’s oil and gas industry. After all, being politically correct is more important.

As we stand on the precipice of a federal election, it is crystal clear to Albertans that Canada is broken. Alberta’s economic interests have, by and large, been mentioned only with reference to a vile, dirty economy that must get with the 21st century. Fossil fuels are passé, our politicians tell us. It doesn’t seem to matter that the oil and gas sector has been the main economic driver of wealth in this country for decades. It doesn’t seem to matter that oil and gas are Canada’s biggest exports.

What has happened to our country? Why are a growing number of our fellow Canadians anti-oil and anti-Alberta? They live in homes that require heat. They drive cars that require gasoline. They wear clothes made from fossil fuels. They take trips on planes. They go on cruises. They do all of this without giving it a second thought, but when Alberta and oil are put in the same sentence, it’s as if the scourge of the earth is upon us.

Alberta has been all but forgotten in what has been perhaps the worst federal election campaign in the modern era. The main party leaders have barely visited Alberta. Trudeau has been here once. Scheer’s been here twice. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh hasn’t stopped by for a visit, Green Leader Elizabeth May has been here once to attend a climate protest in Calgary, and Maxime Bernier of the People’s Party has been here once. It seems Alberta’s problems aren’t in the forefront of their minds.

There’s been a noticeable lack of pragmatism and constructive ideas presented during this campaign. The leaders have traded such notions in for name-calling and finger-pointing. They’ve taken to the oldest and most condescending campaign platform of all time – buying our votes with our own money.

You name it, we’ve been promised it. Why so many voters can’t see the connection between supporting Alberta’s energy industry and paying for those promises is lost on us. You can register your opinion by getting out and voting Oct. 21.

https://www.stalberttoday.ca/our-view/a ... t_WZ6l5xnY


All the parties except the Conservatives are fermenting separatism out West.

_________________
A claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers. Friedrich August von Hayek


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 197 posts ]  Go to page Previous 16 7 8 9 10

All times are UTC-08:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
phpBB SEO
[ GZIP: On ]