It is currently December 8th, 2019, 4:21 pm

All times are UTC-08:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 334 posts ]  Go to page Previous 111 12 13 14 1517 Next
Author Message
Unread postPosted: July 16th, 2019, 12:26 pm 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
With 96 days to go until the Oct. 21 federal election, Canadians would be wise to disbelieve anything Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tells them about the state of federal finances going forward.

That’s because of what he said in the lead-up to the Oct. 19, 2015 election that brought him to power.

Back then he said under his leadership the federal government would record three years of modest deficits, followed by a $1 billion surplus in the current fiscal year, 2019-20.

“I am looking straight at Canadians and being honest the way I always have,” Trudeau said. “We’ve said we are committed to balanced budgets and we are. We will balance that budget in 2019.”

Now let’s consider what happened.

Trudeau said in 2015 if he was elected, his government would have a $9.9 billion deficit in the 2016-17 fiscal year; $9.5 billion in 2017-18; $5.7 billion in 2018-19 and a $1 billion surplus in the current fiscal year.

What Trudeau delivered was a $19 billion deficit in 2016-17; $19 billion in 2017-18; $14.9 billion in 2018-19 and a $19.8 billion deficit in the current fiscal year, when he said he’d have a $1 billion surplus.

While these budgets all contained a $3 billion reserve fund (meaning they would be $3 billion a year lower if Trudeau didn’t spend the reserve), in his latest budget Trudeau predicts deficits going forward of $19.7 billion in 2020-21; $14.8 billion in 2021-22; $12.1 billion in 2022-23 and $9.8 billion in 2023-24, with no end of deficits in sight.

During the 2015 election, then Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper mocked Trudeau’s predictions as absurd given the cost of his election promises, telling a rally in Hamilton, while pinching his figures together: “(Trudeau) says a modest deficit, a tiny deficit, so small you can barely see the deficit. Three modest little deficits … We’ve gone through this before — look at the mess in Ontario with the modest deficits of the Liberal government. I guess it turns out the budget doesn’t balance itself after all.”

No, it doesn’t, as Canadians have learned the hard way.
https://torontosun.com/opinion/editoria ... rs-its-bad

And when overburdened consumers in this country stop borrowing, expect federal deficits to soar.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 18th, 2019, 10:38 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Justin Trudeau, Liberal virtucrat

The Liberal “fear and smear” campaign against Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer orchestrated by Prime Minster Justin Trudeau is nothing new.

The Liberals have always campaigned on the basis that the Conservatives are not only wrong, but evil. It’s part of the Liberals’ DNA.

Thus, Trudeau and Co. absurdly suggest Scheer is a white supremacist sympathizer who will ban abortions if elected, basically turning Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale into a documentary about Canada under Conservatism.

This precisely recalls the previous, perpetual Liberal attack on former Conservative leader and prime minister Stephen Harper regarding his so-called “hidden agenda” of wanting to seize power, albeit through a democratic election, so that he could outlaw abortions and same-sex marriages.

When that tactic failed, the Liberals launched a fusillade of attack ads in the 2006 election campaign as they were about to lose power after 13 years in office, accusing Harper of every evil under the sun.

Including one that was so ludicrous — that Harper was going to take over Canadian cities by having “soldiers with guns” occupy them — that the Liberals were forced to withdraw it before it officially aired, so widespread was the public’s mockery of it.

Needless to say, Harper did not take over Canadian cities by having soldiers with guns occupy them during his prime ministership from 2006 to 2015, nor did he outlaw same-sex marriages or ban abortions.

But reality never intrudes on the fevered Liberal mind as to what the Conservatives are plotting next.

For example in 1991, when then Liberal MP Sheila Copps, a future deputy prime minister of Canada, shamefully compared Reform party leader Preston Manning to David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan. Sound familiar?

In the Liberal mind, Conservative criticism of Canada’s refugee policies was racist, until the Liberals toughened the procedures after Conservatives had been demanding it for two years with regard to “irregular/illegal” border crossers.

Then it suddenly wasn’t racist, according to the Liberals.

Even when Scheer agrees with Trudeau — for example that “conversion therapy” which aims to “cure” people of homosexuality is repugnant — the Liberals say he is still suspect.

This because Scheer said when asked, sensibly, that he would wait and see what specific law the Liberals were proposing when they finally got around to doing it, given that they hadn’t done it during four years of majority government.

Trudeau’s PMO has warned the Conservatives are plotting to bring back abortion laws because some Conservative MPs promoted a controversial anti-abortion film, Unplanned, apparently forgetting that (a) Scheer has said unequivocally, as the party’s leader, just as Harper did, that the Conservatives will not bring back an anti-abortion law and (b) that the Liberals used to have pro-life politicians before Trudeau gagged them.

Writing in an American context Joseph Epstein perfectly described the modern Canadian Liberal mentality in a 1985 article entitled “True Virtue” in the New York Times Magazine.

He called them “people who are extremely confident about their own virtue and whose spectacular confidence nicely feeds their general feeling of superiority … if only you will give them the opportunity to demonstrate it … I think of them as ‘virtucrats’, for they are empowered by the unfaltering sense of their own virtue.”

He described a virtucrat as anyone “who is certain that his or her political views are not merely correct, but deeply, morally righteous in the bargain.”

Sound like any prime minister we know?
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnis ... -virtucrat

We have less than one hundred days now until our federal election. Expect to hear what a racist, sexist, abortion banning, homophobe Andrew Scheer is. And if you disagree with Trudeau, you too are a racist, sexist, abortion banning homophobe.

I am going on an extended golf trip. Call me when it is over.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 27th, 2019, 11:44 am 
User avatar

Joined: July 20th, 2015, 7:24 pm
Posts: 16302
Give Justine hell Michelle.

_________________
prairie redneck.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 27th, 2019, 8:35 pm 

Joined: October 4th, 2012, 10:25 pm
Posts: 41381
Herman wrote:
Give Justine hell Michelle.

She's one of the brightest lights within the Conservative Party.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 27th, 2019, 8:49 pm 
User avatar

Joined: July 20th, 2015, 7:24 pm
Posts: 16302

_________________
prairie redneck.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 27th, 2019, 10:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: April 1st, 2016, 6:51 pm
Posts: 8649
Herman wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJhtyb9BzrU

All of his elitist ideas are dumb.

_________________
“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: July 28th, 2019, 5:23 am 

Joined: October 4th, 2012, 10:25 pm
Posts: 41381
iron horse jockey wrote:
Herman wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJhtyb9BzrU

All of his elitist ideas are dumb.

His ideas are out of touch with working families.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 28th, 2019, 9:35 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Fashionista wrote:
iron horse jockey wrote:
Herman wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJhtyb9BzrU

All of his elitist ideas are dumb.

His ideas are out of touch with working families.

They are out of touch with science. And the plastics ban is an example of that.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: July 28th, 2019, 9:50 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Trudeau expects the same of senior civil servants that he does of his cabinet ministers. They must obey, even if it's unethical or illegal. If they don't they are fired.

By Lorne Gunter of Sun News Media

Affront to free speech

Every month it becomes clearer and clearer that the Trudeau Liberals have no understanding of free speech.

For instance, it was revealed this week that the Prime Minister’s Office has been having career civil servants in Canada’s foreign affairs department call up our former ambassadors to China and pressure them to keep their mouths shut over the Liberals’ handling of our country’s relationship with China.

The two former diplomats, David Mulroney and Guy Saint-jacques, told the same story.

According to the Globe and Mail, Paul Thoppil, assistant deputy minister for Asia-pacific at Global Affairs Canada, telephoned each man and claimed to be calling on behalf of PMO. He then “asked” Saint-jacques and Mulroney not to disagree publicly with the Trudeau government given the current “election environment.”

Now, in a sensitive situation — such as with two Canadians being held by the Chinese government — it is legitimate for the government to request that critics be more mindful of what they say in case their statements upset delicate negotiations.

But what is never, never, never acceptable is for supposedly unbiased civil servants to lean on private citizens to button their lips in the name of preserving the current government’s electoral chances.

This may be an even worse violation of ethics than when the PMO had former Clerk of the Privy Council Michael Wernick try to pressure former Attorney General Jody Wilson-raybould into cutting a deal over Snc-lavalin’s corruption prosecution.

Since both Mulroney and Saint-jacques are now academics — and not federal civil servants — this is a very dangerous request. It could be construed as both an assault of freedom of speech and also an infringement on academic independence.

This is also an excellent example of the Liberals’ faulty understanding of freedom of speech, as well as their belief that nothing — not even Charter values — should get in the way of their re-election.

(As an aside, it’s funny how much the Trudeau PMO so often mirrors the Trump White House when it comes to leaning on critics to shut their mouths about the errors of the boss. Is there any meaningful difference between the Trump Justice department ordering former Special Counsel Robert Mueller to testify only about the contents of his report on Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election when he appeared before Congress this week versus the Trudeau government trying to minimize voter discontent with its foreign policy flubs by seeking to censor former ambassadors?)

It’s not just the pressure on ambassadors, though, or the efforts to squeeze Wilson-raybould into circumventing the law. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government have also mused about regulating social media.

You may think regulating Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and the like sounds like a good idea. Who wants hate messages out there on popular, free apps?

But who gets to decide what’s hateful? Once we’ve stopped the posts that are most obviously hateful, I guarantee you, those in charge will turn their censor’s power to people who disagree with open immigration or transgender issues or multiculturalism.

This is also a government that wants to subsidize newspapers and asked for help doling out dollars from one of the most politically active and biased unions in the country, Unifor — a union that has declared itself the Conservatives’ worst nightmare.

This is a government that appointed five civil servants to monitor Internet messages for “fake” news in the run up to this fall’s election, then appointed the very biased Wernick to sit on that panel. And a government that has increased the Liberal-friendly CBC’S budget by nearly 20% in the past four years.

It also devised a Digital Charter that is so broad and so vague it could easily justify government intervention in what we see, hear and read.

There is no fundamental democratic right the Liberals would not violate in the name of getting themselves re-elected.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 1st, 2019, 8:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Trudeau hates transparency.

Trudeau Liberals kill another public inquiry

While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau claims to run an open and transparent government, the Liberal caucus he leads has no qualms about using its parliamentary majority to be neither open nor transparent.

In a case similar to what happened in Lavscam, the Liberal majority on the Commons foreign affairs committee on Tuesday defeated an opposition motion to hold public hearings on claims by two former ambassadors to China that they were pressured to clear any public comments they made about China with the Prime Minister’s Office.

The vote went strictly on party lines, the five Liberal members outvoting the four opposition MPS.

That’s the same thing that happened when the Liberal majority on the justice committee shut down hearings into Lavscam, when the opposition wanted to call more witnesses.

In the latest case, former ambassadors to China David Mulroney and Guy Saint-jacques told the Globe and

Mail they were contacted by a senior government official at Global Affairs.

Mulroney said the official told him the Prime Minister’s Office had asked him to relay the message about clearing his public statements on China in advance, so that Canada would be speaking with one voice and because of the “election environment.”

Trudeau responded he did not “direct” the former ambassadors to clear their comments with the PMO, nor did anyone from his office.

That was also Trudeau’s response in Lavscam — that neither he nor his office “directed” then-attorney general Jody Wilson-raybould to grant a deferred prosecution agreement on fraud and corruption charges to Snc-lavalin that the Quebec-based company wanted.

During the hearings into Lavscam, Wilson-raybould testified 11 senior Liberals contacted her approximately 20 times about granting the DPA, including Trudeau, who cited the political importance of the issue to him as the MP for Quebec’s Papineau riding.

If the Trudeau government should be contacting any former ambassador to China, it should be John Mccallum, the former Liberal cabinet minister Trudeau fired for making pro-china statements before he was fired, and partisan comments to Chinese officials about the importance of re-electing Trudeau’s government after he was fired.

As for Trudeau’s pledge during the 2015 election to run an open and transparent government, count that one as another broken Liberal promise.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 4th, 2019, 9:34 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
PMO learned nothing from Lavscam

Another week goes by and another apology from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government.

This time it came from Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland to former Canadian ambassadors to China David Mulroney and Guy Saint-jacques.

It turns out the government didn’t like that Mulroney and Saintjacques were not on message with the PMO with regards to dealing with China. Trudeau’s gang of mischief makers pulled a Lavscam on them and co-opted the public service to do their dirty work.

Remember when former clerk of the privy council and Canada’s top public servant Michael Wernick was shamelessly enlisted by Trudeau’s PMO to unsuccessfully squeeze then-attorney general Jody Wilsonraybould into granting Snclavalin a deferred prosecution agreement? So much for the independence of the public service.

But it seems the PMO has not learned from this painful lesson. Mulroney’s offence was to have the temerity to recommend that Canadians avoid nonessential travel to China, which is a no-brainer to me. According to Mulroney, the PMO dutifully dispatched Paul Thoppil, assistant deputy minister for the Asia-pacific at Global Affairs Canada, that he needed to clear any public comments on the Canada-china relationship with the department beforehand.

Mulroney was also told to put a cork in it regarding handing free advice to travel to China.

Why would a senior public servant see fit to instruct what are now two ordinary citizens? According to Mulroney, Thoppil told him it was because we’re in an “election environment.”

It seems odd that having been arguably fatally hit, election-wise, by the Snc-lavalin affair that the government would revert so quickly to compromising our public servants. Thoppil is equally responsible for being a happy Liberal puppet.

While Trudeau took the same approach as in Lavscam, insisting no PMO pressure was put on the retired bureaucrats by a senior public service, that didn’t pass the smell test. Didn’t work in Lavscam and doesn’t work here either.

In contrast, Freeland called Saint-jacques who said there was a “miscommunication” at play.

Saint-jacques characterized the conversation as such: “She said she was very sorry about the impression I got from this conversation that as a former journalist herself, she was all in favour of freedom of expression. And that in fact, it was important to maintain this, and it was out of the question to try to prevent anyone from talking publicly about this. And she told me that she had appreciated working with me when I was ambassador that she had appreciated benefiting from my views since I retired and therefore, she said, ‘I’m very sorry about all this.’ ”

First, Trudeau’s “no pressure” on former public servants by a serving one brings up the question of what would actually constitute pressure in Trudeau’s mind. It was the same lame defence he gave in Lavscam. Nobody bought it.

Maybe Trudeau means the PMO didn’t waterboard anybody? No doubt he views this as a “teachable moment,” one of his favourite empty catch expressions.

Second, the Freeland “apology” that she was “sorry about the impression” given to the communication is shallow and meaningless.

What she should have said is: “Sorry we called you to put pressure on you not to say anything that might affect polling results.” Instead, what she basically said is “Sorry we hurt your feelings,” or “Sorry we got caught.”

The lawyers at Foreign Affairs must have burnt the midnight oil to come up with this apology.

Although Trudeau talks a storm about the “rule of law” and the independence of the public service and the judiciary, his actions show otherwise. Trudeau’s prepared to trample on all of this for political gain.

Unfortunately for him, it’s starting to get noticed more and more.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 4th, 2019, 9:50 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Anybody remember the promise of a balanced budget by 2019? If JT is reelected you just have to wait another twenty one years for a balanced budget.

By Lorrie Goldstein of Sun News Media

Another broken promise
It’s 2019. Where’s Trudeau’s balanced budget?


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should explain to Canadians how he went from his 2015 election promise to balance the federal budget this year, to his own finance department’s latest projection it won’t be balanced until 2040.

Back in 2015, Trudeau was adamant that under his economic stewardship, Canada would have a balanced budget this year.

Looking right into the camera, he said during The Globe and

Mail’s televised leaders’ debate on the economy in 2015: “I am looking straight at Canadians and being honest the way I always have. We’ve said we are committed to balanced budgets and we are. We will balance that budget in 2019.”

After the election, in a 2015 year-end interview with The Canadian Press, Trudeau repeated his promise to balance the budget in 2019, saying it was “very” cast in stone.

“I think one of the things that Canadians expect is a level of fiscal responsibility that we’ve been able to demonstrate in the past and we’re certainly going to demonstrate it in the future,” Trudeau said.

In fact, Trudeau promised that not only would his government have a balanced budget in 2019, but a $1-billion surplus.

Now here’s Trudeau’s actual record.

In his March, 2019 budget — the last before the Oct. 21 election — Trudeau projects a $19.8-billion deficit this year.

To get to that number, Trudeau blew past every one of this 2015 promises to get to a balanced budget in 2019.

Here’s what Trudeau said during the 2015 election would be Canada’s deficits for 2016, ’17, ’18 and ’19: 2016: $9.7 billion. 2017: $9.5 billion. 2018: $5.7 billion. 2019: $1-billion surplus. Here’s what Trudeau’s actual deficits were for 2016, ’17, ’18 and ’19: 2016: $19 billion. 2017: $19 billion. 2018: $14.9 billion. 2019: $19.8 billion. Also in his March 2019 budget Trudeau abandoned any pretence of balancing the federal budget in his next four-year term of office if he’s re-elected with a majority government.

Trudeau now says that under his economic leadership Canada will have a $19.7-billion deficit in 2020, $14.8 billion in 2021, $12.1 billion in 2022 and $9.8 billion in 2023.

Both Trudeau and Finance Minister Bill Morneau now insist the more significant figure when it comes to budgetary deficits isn’t the actual size of the deficit, but Canada’s debt-to-gdp ratio — the lower the better.

So let’s look at that. Trudeau promised during the 2015 election campaign that Canada’s debt-to-gdp ratio under his economic stewardship would be 27% in 2019. His latest budget puts it at 30.7% in 2019.

Meanwhile, the latest projection from Trudeau’s finance department, released in December, projects the federal budget won’t be balanced until 2040 — two decades from now.

It says in 2040, Canada will record a $1.7-billion surplus, at which point the total federal debt will be almost $960 billion, compared to $669.5 billion today.

That’s more optimistic than the finance department’s 2016 projection that the federal budget wouldn’t be balanced until 2055, and its 2017 projection that it would take until 2045.

It also says that if the economy goes well, Canada could achieve a balanced budget earlier than forecast, but if the economy doesn’t go well it could take even longer.

Whatever happens, Trudeau’s 2015 election promise of a balanced budget for this year has gone the way of the dodo bird.

So why should Canadians believe any fiscal promises he makes in this year’s election campaign?

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 14th, 2019, 9:00 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Canada's self imposed investment loss if the United State's gain. Thanks Justin.

Kenneth Green is an analyst at the Fraser institute.

Federal regulators continue to ignore industry concerns

There’s an urgent need for regulatory reform, especially in Alberta, where red tape is strangling a major contributor to Canada’s economy.

While falling oil prices have contributed to Alberta’s troubles, many other factors affect investment in Alberta. And many of those factors are regulatory.

In fact, respondents to the Fraser Institute’s Global Petroleum Survey said the key deterrents to investment in Alberta are all regulatory — environmental regulations and their enforcement, and the cost of regulatory compliance. This was particularly true in the oil and gas sector where 73% of respondents said compliance costs were a deterrent to investment in 2018 compared to only 32% in 2013.

Ottawa should be commended on several elements of its regulatory reform agenda, but more must be done to resolve regulatory duplication, lighten the overall regulatory burden in the oil and gas industry and position Canada to be competitive with its neighbour to the south, which is aggressively streamlining and reducing regulations.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 15th, 2019, 8:21 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Everything Tudeau does is for for self interest.

By Brian Lilley of Sun News Media

Nothing but self-interest
Trudeau falsely claims he’s looking out for Canadians

Justin Trudeau said that he takes “full responsibility” for the SNC-Lavalin affair and accepts the report from the ethics commissioner but also completely disagrees with the report.

“My job as a prime minister is to stand up for Canadians and defend their interests,” Trudeau said. Apparently to Trudeau, helping a company that has a long history of bribery and corruption avoid criminal charges is in the best interests of the country. In Trudeau’s world, having politicians decide which individuals or corporations get prosecuted criminally, based on electoral considerations, is in the interests of the country.

Trudeau wants this entire affair to be about him defending jobs in Quebec and across the country. The claim by some, debunked by many, is that if SNC-Lavalin is prosecuted and banned from bidding on federal contracts for 10 years that the company would leave Canada or layoff its 9,000 workers.

That wouldn’t happen. Even if the company did leave Canada, the jobs they create building government infrastructure would be replaced by jobs with other companies that would get those contracts.

Yet, Trudeau is really worried about one job, his own. he thinks that if snc-lavalin doesn’t get the deal, he or other Liberals could face trouble from the Quebec electorate.

I’m not so sure.

It wasn’t the Quebec electorate that allegedly paid millions in bribes to the gadhafi regime in Libya or was found to have paid millions in kickbacks in cases of hospital and bridge contracts in Montreal. snclavalin did both. I’d be willing to bet Quebecers are tired of money for infrastructure being diverted to bribes.

Yet this is the company that Trudeau went to bat for, the one that he lobbied the then-attorney general to give a sweetheart deal by interfering with an independent criminal prosecution.

Asked if he would even fire top staffers named in the report — Elder Marques or Mathieu Bouchard — or drop gerry Butts from his campaign team, Trudeau refused.

“I take full responsibility. The buck stops with the prime minister,” Trudeau said.

His whole news conference on Wednesday reminded me of the scene from the movie The Princess Bride — “you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

In Trudeau’s case, it is phrases like “full responsibility.” he isn’t taking full responsibility, he is shirking it. he’s also laughing at the idea that he did anything wrong.

Using a word correctly, Conservative Leader andrew scheer said Trudeau’s actions were “unforgivable.”

“Justin Trudeau is guilty again. heading into this election, Trudeau had already become the only prime minister in Canadian history to be found guilty of breaking ethics laws. Now, we know he has done it again,” scheer said.

Scheer detailed the many times that Trudeau changed his story from saying it was completely false when it broke to today when he says he disagrees with it. Noting that the voting public will get a say in this and render a verdict, scheer made a pitch for votes and contrasted himself to Trudeau.

“Between a prime minister who abuses his power, bends the law for his friends, attempts to silence his critics and destroys their reputations and a Conservative government led by a prime minister who will uphold the rule of law, respect our democratic institutions, and help all Canadians get ahead,” scheer said.

On that Trudeau and scheer agree, voters will get the final say in this. On Oct. 21, Canadians get to decide whether they want a justice system that is fair or one that gives out verdicts based on who you know in the PMO.

Choose wisely Canadians.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 19th, 2019, 4:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Trudeau fanning the flames
PM risk pushing more people toward extreme populism

Last week was nine miles of bad road for Justin Trudeau.

Even his most loyal followers squirmed uncomfortably as Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion released a damning report that concluded the prime minister breached the Conflict of Interest Act.

This isn’t the first time Trudeau’s been in hot water over questionable ethics. In 2017, another report slammed the PM over his vacation at a private island owned by the Aga Khan.

Trudeau’s response to the latest controversy was baffling. He took responsibility but refused to apologize. It betrayed a lack of understanding of the gravity of what he did.

He’s accused of attempting to twist the arm of then-attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould to get her to overrule the decision of the director of public prosecutions not to allow a deferred prosecution for troubled SNC-Lavalin in relation to fraud and bribery charges.

This childish response made me yearn for the days when we had an adult in the PMO. Someone like Stephen Harper, who understands law and economics — and what makes people turn to populist alternatives when mainstream politicians fail them. In many ways, those with the most to lose from extremist populism are thoughtful moderate conservatives.

In a recent book, the former PM explains how extreme right-wing populists — like Donald Trump — get elected and why the 2016 Brexit referendum in the U.K. caught fire — and turned the U.K. economy into a dumpster fire. Harper’s book, Right Here, Right Now: Politics and Leadership In the Age of Disruption, takes a look at the underlying anger that fuelled the rise of populism.

One trigger was the 2008 economic downturn and the way it punished the average hardworking person while the architects of the disaster moved on unscathed. The little guy bore the brunt of the crisis, while the elites who caused it walked scot-free.

“When the crisis hit, the result was unremitting capitalism for the working class and socialist protection for the Wall St. financiers who caused the meltdown in the first place,” he points out.

While small investors and those saving for retirement saw their life savings crash and burn, the CEOS who caused the problem carried on as if nothing had happened. The Washington that was slow to move on any relief for the middle class and those whose jobs had been displaced by globalization, leaped into action at lightning speed to approve bank bailouts for the bosses. “In many elite circles, the old narratives quickly returned,” Harper says.

“Even bank executives were soon back to paying themselves bonuses — not that they had ever really stopped — and decrying any attempt to regulate their sector.”

Little guys who’d trusted a system to provide for their future felt betrayed. The way they expressed that dissatisfaction was to slap the elites with the best weapon they had — their vote. So they voted for people like Trump, who promised their jobs would come back and he’d restore the country to a former glory where the Rust Belt was alive and well.

Harper, an economist, and his finance minister, the late Jim Flaherty, steered this country through the economic downturn relatively unscathed. We didn’t suffer catastrophic bank failures.

Brexit was a similar story, Harper points out. While Britain was always an uncomfortable member of the EU, the leave vote was fuelled by people who felt their legitimate concerns about losing their cultural and political identity had been ignored.

If last week was a bad one for Trudeau, it was disastrous for the average voter. We ask little of our politicians: Play fair; stay honest. Put Canada’s interests first. What did we get?

A government that put itself first and played favourites. A government that jeopardized the integrity of our justice system. A PM who vacations on a private island with influential power-brokers.

That’s the stuff that fuels the rise of extreme populism — on the right and left.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 20th, 2019, 4:27 am 
User avatar

Joined: July 20th, 2015, 7:24 pm
Posts: 16302
I aint counting on this ethics shit plunging Justine in the polls. We all knew he was guilty. There aint nothing new here.

_________________
prairie redneck.


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 30th, 2019, 9:09 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Beware of endless deficits, especially now

Back in April 2015, I was proud to present Canada’s last balanced budget. Our Conservative government even legislated that if we regressed to a deficit, salaries of cabinet ministers and deputy ministers would be reduced by five percent until we returned to balance.

That may seem like so yesterday. However, fiscal prudence is actually more pertinent now in an increasingly vulnerable global economy, wild stock market volatility and grim warnings of a looming recession.

Why is working towards a balanced budget so important? Many reasons. It allows government to cut personal and corporate taxes to improve affordability for hard-working families and competitiveness of job-creating businesses. It means spending less on interest payments and more on crucial social programs, like health care. It protects Canada’s top AAA credit rating with stable outlook and avoids austere measures needed to reduce debt in a credit crisis.

It bolsters consumer and investor confidence, so consumption grows and businesses can attract capital for expansion, which is a current challenge. It avoids adding new public spending programs that are excruciatingly difficult to eliminate. It promotes inter-generational fairness – not saddling our children with massive debt.

Finally, prudent spending preserves financial strength to withstand unavoidable geopolitical or financial shocks like war, natural disaster, the collapse in the price of oil or a sharp economic downturn.

The Liberal 2015 election platform promised “modest” deficits totalling $25 billion and a return to balance in the last year of its mandate. Instead, cumulative deficits soared to $73 billion, with no end in sight. Federal net debt hit over $770 billion earlier this year, imposing an annual service cost of $26 billion or $2,787 for a family of four. Add in provincial debt, and Ontario families payed over $6,400 just to cover federal and provincial interest payments.

In spite of all that stimulative spending during an economic recovery, the government didn’t focus on infrastructure projects, which provide long-term benefits. The result is a failure to create sustainable growth, which is forecasted at a subpar 1.3 percent this year and 1.5 percent in 2020, optimistically assuming no downturn.

A depressing reality, according to the Fraser Institute, is that the average Canadian paid over $39,000 in taxes last year, more of its income (44 percent) than for basic necessities like food, shelter and clothing combined (33 percent).

The Prime Minister obstinately ignores the impact of ever increasing debt on the lives of the people he pretends to care most about, “the middle class and those striving to join it.” While he may be oblivious to reality, the laws of economics have not been repealed. Government cannot indefinitely spend more than it earns or tax its way to prosperity. Nor do budgets balance themselves.

Americans are experiencing the longest period of uninterrupted growth in modern history, yet storm clouds are brewing. Global growth is weak, $16 trillion in bonds trade at negative yields and European banks pay people to borrow money. Canadian short-term borrowing costs are higher than long-term rates (the dreaded inverted yield curve).

The escalating trade dispute between China and the U.S. and currency devaluations could precipitate a worldwide recession. Then, automatic stabilizers kick in (social assistance increases) and significant spending to stimulate growth becomes irresistible, which could drive Canada’s deficit to frightening levels.

Fiscal prudence may be a snoozer, but it sure beats the jolting wake-up call of job losses, ballooning debt and a crushing interest burden. While we may avoid an imminent downturn, three-quarters of U.S. economists expect a recession in two years. When the inevitable economic nosedive hits home, we will wish the government had not been so extravagant and irresponsible.

Joe Oliver is the former minister of finance.
https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnis ... cially-now

If reelected, Trudeau will hand a massive bill to future generations just like his father did.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 31st, 2019, 11:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
Putting up a facade
Trudeau isn’t what he claims in standing up for women or minorities

Sometimes as I walk down the street, I see the way people are dressed and wonder if they own a mirror. Then there are the times that I listen to people speak and wonder if they hear themselves.

That’s how I felt listening to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speak about Conservative leader Andrew Scheer on Thursday. Scheer had been asked about his stance on same-sex marriage after the Liberals released a 15 year-old video of Scheer saying he didn’t support same-sex marriage — much like many Liberals back in 2004-05.

Scheer’s answer to the media was simple, he believes in equal rights for all, he supports the law as it is and won’t be reopening this issue or the abortion issue the Liberals keep bringing up.

“It’s not enough to reluctantly support the law because it’s a law, especially when it comes to the rights of women and LGBT2Q communities,” Trudeau said at an event in British Columbia.

Really? He followed that up with another problematic statement.

“People need to know that their prime minister will defend them,” Trudeau said.

Alright, let me unpack some of this for you and explain why these comments are a problem.

Respecting law

First off, on respecting the law, Justin Trudeau has been found to have broken the law twice. His supporters will say that he broke the ethics act and not the Criminal Code and therefore he didn’t break the law. That’s a lie.

He broke the Conflict of Interest Act, not once — but twice. His latest violation was to try and interfere in a criminal prosecution of a company accused of bribery and corruption. So no, Trudeau didn’t break the Criminal Code, but he still broke the law.

And by the way, if we only need to worry about respecting the Criminal Code, then let me point out that the law on same-sex marriage is not part of the Criminal Code. You see how this is getting slippery for Trudeau and the Liberals.

The second statement, though — the one where Trudeau says people need to know that their PM will “defend them”

— is a problem because in Trudeau’s own home province of Quebec, he’s not defending people who are being targeted for who they are.

Quebec recently passed Bill 21, which bans the wearing of religious garb or symbols for people working in the public service.

Teachers can’t wear a crucifix, a yarmulke or a hijab or any other religious symbol. Neither can police officers or many other civil servants.

It’s a major intrusion into the personal lives of citizens and one the Quebec government passed using the notwithstanding clause of the Charter.

Compared to last year when Ontario’s Ford government threatened to use that clause to shrink the size of Toronto city council, Trudeau has been relatively quiet. When Ontario wanted to reduce the number of politicians, it was a national outrage that all Liberals were commenting on.

When Quebec seeks to actually infringe individual liberties, the Liberals are pretty quiet lest they lose votes in the coming election.

Let’s face facts here, the social issues that are in the news are being brought up by Liberals who have a simple message for women. They want to send the message that you can’t vote for Andrew Scheer or he might, despite assurances otherwise, ban all abortions and end same-sex marriage. Instead the Liberals want you to vote for a man who shows that he is a strong feminist by groping a woman and claiming that she “experienced it differently” and who fired two women that stood up to him. And he won’t stand up for people being attacked by his own provincial government. Justin Trudeau can’t claim to be a friend to women or to the minorities he claims to protect.

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


Top
   
Unread postPosted: August 31st, 2019, 12:04 pm 
User avatar

Joined: November 17th, 2012, 4:01 pm
Posts: 12680
More Liberal promises Canadians can’t bank on

In the last election, Justin Trudeau promised that his Infrastructure Bank would leverage private investment and get projects built.

Both of those of promises have turned out to be false.

This should surprise no one. Just like electoral reform and balanced budgets, Justin Trudeau promised a lot and overwhelmingly underdelivered. The Trudeau Infrastructure Bank is no exception.

Recently, Justin Trudeau’s bank was back in the news again. The bank’s head of investment strategy, Nicholas Hann, abruptly resigned from his position, causing speculation that his resignation was a result of poor leadership and frustration at the slow pace of investment in projects.

So far, Trudeau’s bank has only announced a handful projects with four of those announcements being made in 2019.

The only project to be announced in 2018 was the Montreal REM light rail project, which the Trudeau government had already committed to funding back in 2017.

On top of this, Trudeau’s bank seems more interested in taking care of itself, rather than helping get infrastructure built. The bank has more than 70 employees and its CEO, Pierre Lavallée, can take home more than $1 million a year between his base salary and bonuses.

If you break down the numbers, this bank is just another mistake and bad decision by Justin Trudeau.

At $35 billion, this Crown corporation costs about $1,000 per Canadian. That’s a steep figure and for very little value. The bank is announcing projects at a glacial speed and is partnering with municipalities and other Crown corporations, seemingly forgetting about its mission to attract private sector investment.

But, this bank is just a symptom of Trudeau’s broken promise to get infrastructure built in Canada. The Liberals pledged $188 billion for infrastructure projects, but so far only nine per cent of that has flowed to projects.

So, between the bank and the Liberals’ Investing in Canada Plan, the Liberals are spending billions of dollars a year on infrastructure but Canadians aren’t seeing the results. Money is being tied up in bureaucracy in Ottawa and being used for things other than building infrastructure.

This is the exact opposite of what Justin Trudeau promised in the last election.

With Hann’s resignation, it’s clear the bank’s issues are intrinsic and unlikely to be resolved in the short term.

In the last election campaign, Justin Trudeau promised that his bank would deliver much-needed infrastructure for Canadians.

It is clear that Justin Trudeau’s infrastructure plan is not as advertised.

The Conservative Party of Canada has committed to scrapping the Canada Infrastructure Bank after the election. An Andrew Scheer government will put forward an infrastructure plan that not only grows the economy but gets much-needed projects built in communities across Canada.

_________________
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 1st, 2019, 6:03 pm 
User avatar

Joined: April 1st, 2016, 6:51 pm
Posts: 8649
seoulbro wrote:
More Liberal promises Canadians can’t bank on

In the last election, Justin Trudeau promised that his Infrastructure Bank would leverage private investment and get projects built.

Both of those of promises have turned out to be false.

This should surprise no one. Just like electoral reform and balanced budgets, Justin Trudeau promised a lot and overwhelmingly underdelivered. The Trudeau Infrastructure Bank is no exception.

Recently, Justin Trudeau’s bank was back in the news again. The bank’s head of investment strategy, Nicholas Hann, abruptly resigned from his position, causing speculation that his resignation was a result of poor leadership and frustration at the slow pace of investment in projects.

So far, Trudeau’s bank has only announced a handful projects with four of those announcements being made in 2019.

The only project to be announced in 2018 was the Montreal REM light rail project, which the Trudeau government had already committed to funding back in 2017.

On top of this, Trudeau’s bank seems more interested in taking care of itself, rather than helping get infrastructure built. The bank has more than 70 employees and its CEO, Pierre Lavallée, can take home more than $1 million a year between his base salary and bonuses.

If you break down the numbers, this bank is just another mistake and bad decision by Justin Trudeau.

At $35 billion, this Crown corporation costs about $1,000 per Canadian. That’s a steep figure and for very little value. The bank is announcing projects at a glacial speed and is partnering with municipalities and other Crown corporations, seemingly forgetting about its mission to attract private sector investment.

But, this bank is just a symptom of Trudeau’s broken promise to get infrastructure built in Canada. The Liberals pledged $188 billion for infrastructure projects, but so far only nine per cent of that has flowed to projects.

So, between the bank and the Liberals’ Investing in Canada Plan, the Liberals are spending billions of dollars a year on infrastructure but Canadians aren’t seeing the results. Money is being tied up in bureaucracy in Ottawa and being used for things other than building infrastructure.

This is the exact opposite of what Justin Trudeau promised in the last election.

With Hann’s resignation, it’s clear the bank’s issues are intrinsic and unlikely to be resolved in the short term.

In the last election campaign, Justin Trudeau promised that his bank would deliver much-needed infrastructure for Canadians.

It is clear that Justin Trudeau’s infrastructure plan is not as advertised.

The Conservative Party of Canada has committed to scrapping the Canada Infrastructure Bank after the election. An Andrew Scheer government will put forward an infrastructure plan that not only grows the economy but gets much-needed projects built in communities across Canada.

I remember all the talk about the infrastructure that was supposed to be built. Another broken Trudeau promise.

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


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 334 posts ]  Go to page Previous 111 12 13 14 1517 Next

All times are UTC-08:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Herman and 16 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
phpBB SEO
[ GZIP: On ]