Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Things to look forward to as a result of the election


Recommended Posts

Who's raising taxes?

Trudeau will most certainly have to raise taxes in order to pay for his promises. In fact, one of his promises is a carbon tax or some variant, which is a tax in itself, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In fact, one of his promises is a carbon tax or some variant, which is a tax in itself, of course.

Doubt it. Gerald Butts is his close friend/advisor and look what he did to Ontario. Trudeau will probably reduce emissions in the least cost effective way following the advice of Butts, rather than do what BC has done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trudeau will most certainly have to raise taxes in order to pay for his promises. In fact, one of his promises is a carbon tax or some variant, which is a tax in itself, of course.

Actually it looks like he's going to leave carbon pricing to the provinces, albeit with a coordinated approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it looks like he's going to leave carbon pricing to the provinces, albeit with a coordinated approach.

It will be a challenge, but so long as there are some solid targets, I don't see why leaving it to the Provinces isn't the most sensible solution. Indeed, I have wondered why the Conservatives didn't do it.

Oh, that's right. You have to actually talk to the Provinces to coordinate with them.

Edited by ToadBrother
Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, it was assumed those in lower brackets were already likely to vote Liberal or NDP. The tax break was designed to win votes from the middle class.

Anyone who doesn't understand that 100% of the reason behind this was to secure votes is simply being dishonest with themselves.

I'm not a fan of the policy but I would have never assumed that the low-income vote would be guaranteed to the Liberals, actually. That's generally NDP territory (and, contrary to some posters' beliefs, they are two different parties). If anything, my feeling is that it was more cynical: 'tax break for the middle class' sounds better than 'tax break for higher earners'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my last reply to you. You are too snotty and unpleasant a person for me to want to have anything further to do with you.

The Liberal plan includes a promise to restore the eligibility for old age security and guaranteed income supplement back to 65, a new seniors price index to make sure those benefits keep up with rising costs, a 10 per cent boost to the guaranteed supplement for single low-income seniors and a pledge not to cut pension income splitting for seniors.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-trudeau-retirement-security-cpp-1.3226897

Oh wow did you read your quote? You actually proved msj right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you ask that? You've already decided the 'top 3 or 4 in every department' have to go, even without any evidence any individual, let alone all of them, have done anything wrong. Collective punishment for an alleged bias which has not yet been demonstrated! Talk about brutally autocratic!

You know.... you put yourself forward as looking for "reasonable political discourse".... in fact, you have started a thread on the topic.

Yet.... in response to this simple line in one of my posts:

But the top 3 or 4 or half-dozen in each department.... yeah, time to retire.

.... you immediately put forth the suggestion that I have found somebody "collectively guilty"... that I want to "call up a firing squad"....Did I have "gulags" in mind..... "re-education camps".

Since it boggled my mind how you got there from a simple statement about top Departmental officials leaving, I suggested an imagination because that would be the only logical explanation...

If the quoted statement is ambiguous to you....then did you consider that it might have meant actual "retirement".... or it might have meant that top officials who has been used to operating within a "conservative" framework, may not be comfortable operating with a "liberal" framework.... it may have meant that officials comfortable with dealing with "conservative" ministers may have personality conflicts with "liberal" ministers. ...

Top officials OFTEN move on with a change of government exactly for the reasons above.... sometimes they are replaced... sometimes they move on on their own .... sometimes both parties wait a year or so to see if they can handle it.... And THAT is precisely what my intent was when the statement was typed.

For you to choose such a vitriolic interpretation is NOT "reasonable political discourse" and makes me doubt your sincerity in that other thread.

...

Link to post
Share on other sites

.... you immediately put forth the suggestion that I have found somebody "collectively guilty"... that I want to "call up a firing squad"....Did I have "gulags" in mind..... "re-education camps".

Since it boggled my mind how you got there from a simple statement about top Departmental officials leaving,

I looked back to see if I had misinterpreted you and I see nothing to indicate I did. You were replying to the following statement.

It suggests one of the Liberals' first challenges will be in excising the Tory partisans from the civil service.

To which you replied

But the top 3 or 4 or half-dozen in each department.... yeah, time to retire

There is no misinterpreting the above. You were baldly stating the top people in each department needed to be removed from their jobs because you perceive, without evidence, that they might be tory partisans. That is collective punishment because for some reason some of you on the Left seem to believe targeting charities was done on a political basis. As for the 'gulags' comment that was clearly indicating the direction this sort of radical paranoia and punishment without evidence leads to.

Edited by Scotty
Link to post
Share on other sites

One immediate change that we are going to see is payback time by bureaucrats who were muzzled by the Harper government. This happens to every majority government when it loses power. In this case, the RCMP had warned Steven Blaney that semi-automatics could easily be converted into an automatic weapon. This was in December with an election pending:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/rcmp-tests-show-some-firearms-can-be-converted-to-fully-automatic-1.3284661

The Harper conservatives wouldn't touch that issue and Blaney buried the report. Well its back out now - surprise, surprise.

There are always examples where a Minister will use his position to prioritize party ideology over his/her job.

Look for a few more "revelations" to come.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One immediate change that we are going to see is payback time by bureaucrats who were muzzled by the Harper government. This happens to every majority government when it loses power. In this case, the RCMP had warned Steven Blaney that semi-automatics could easily be converted into an automatic weapon. This was in December with an election pending:

You can also build your own gun, if you have the mechanical know how. So what? Automatic weapons are illegal, as is converting a semi-automatic to an automatic. Here's another news item for you. The ammunition clips which go into guns are specially made in Canada in order to hold fewer bullets than regular clips. For example, the one for my hand gun only holds 10 bullets. I can, however, buy a 'normal' clip in the US which would hold 17 bullets and simply replace them.

That would be against the law, though, just as altering your semi to fire full auto is already illegal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also ...already illegal.

My point is that the RCMP "recommending the government consider laws or regulations to ensure the improvisation technique is prohibited." I know this is quite against Harper Conservative policy but when the RCMP presents a report it is to Parliament not the Conservative party.

When the RCMP presents a report on safety concerns to the Minister of Public Safety then I would assume that it would see the light of day unless it was a question of national security.

If/when Trudeau takes over and his Minister of Public Safety is in place, do you feel that he/she will have the responsibility to follow party policy or his/her definition of the public good?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked back to see if I had misinterpreted you and I see nothing to indicate I did. You were replying to the following statement.It suggests one of the Liberals' first challenges will be in excising the Tory partisans from the civil service.

To which you replied

But the top 3 or 4 or half-dozen in each department.... yeah, time to retire

There is no misinterpreting the above. You were baldly stating the top people in each department needed to be removed from their jobs because you perceive, without evidence, that they might be tory partisans. That is collective punishment because for some reason some of you on the Left seem to believe targeting charities was done on a political basis. As for the 'gulags' comment that was clearly indicating the direction this sort of radical paranoia and punishment without evidence leads to.

Well, even if I DID feel they were Tory partisans, there was nothing about "punishment", gulags, or firing squads, was there? Those were strictly YOUR inventions.

The very top bureaucrats in departments often are partisan because they might not be able to carry out Minesterial direction if they weren't. And it is perfectly reasonable that they will move on, whether voluntarily or involuntarily.

You cannot carry out "reasonable political discourse" if you attribute words and thoughts to your adversary. And especially words and thoughts which he/she never expressed, and never even considered.

You might note that my reply to the "excising" was that most public servants follow direction and a change in direction won't matter. The few at the top, however, in my opinion will consider moving on.

Sure, I could have been more explicit... but I doubt that anybody would consider your vitriolic interpretation as "reasonable political discourse".

...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Things to not look forward to.

1. Carbon taxes which will hurt the economy.

Didn't seem to harm B.C. In fact, by all accounts it's working.

2. Legalized marijuana.

Do you happen to have shares in organized crime??? They're the only ones that benefit from marijuana prohibition.

3. Our leader being completely overmatched by almost every other G7 leader.

Seems to be doing fine in that regard so far.

Harper couldn't even get us on the Security Council.

4. Higher income taxes which will hurt the economy.

The wealthiest Canadians can afford higher taxes.

5. Huge deficits and debt increases.

So you missed the last 10 years under Harper?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you missed the last 10 years under Harper?

Funnily enough he'd argue that the deficits were necessary because the opposition forced them and the economy was terrible. I would even agree with him. The thing he and so many others miss - the economy is just as terrible right now, with no sign of getting all that much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funnily enough he'd argue that the deficits were necessary because the opposition forced them and the economy was terrible. I would even agree with him. The thing he and so many others miss - the economy is just as terrible right now, with no sign of getting all that much better.

Exactly. If much smaller deficits under Trudeau are the end of Canada as we know it, then the record deficits under Harper should be much worse!

It just shows the hypocrisy of the right wing posters on this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We can't keep expressing surprise when we lose jobs. If government continues to install job killing ideas and programs, it will only get worse. Small business is the absolute driver of jobs. Any economist will tell you this, yet sky high hydro rates, new programs like the expanded CPP in Ontario are just killing things. I know everyone thinks small business owners are all rich, but I hate to break the news that many are just making it and now these additional costs are just killing many of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funnily enough he'd argue that the deficits were necessary because the opposition forced them and the economy was terrible. I would even agree with him. The thing he and so many others miss - the economy is just as terrible right now, with no sign of getting all that much better.

The economy is in no way 'terrible'. And most of the problem is due to the hammering the oil industry is taking, and initiatives he and his liberal colleagues in Alberta are taking will cause the oil industry to shrink further, while the appalling incompetence of the Ontario Liberal government will continue to see manufacturing deteriorate in that province.

In light of that you think that baby bonuses and community centres, more money to natives, and climate change initiatives are going to help our economy? I don't. I suspect their first budget deficit will be more like $15 billion than $10, and that four years from now that yearly deficit will have grown, not shrink to a surplus as they currently claim. There are simply too many holes in their rosy economic estimates, what revenues they will get, and what their initiatives will cost.

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. If much smaller deficits under Trudeau are the end of Canada as we know it, then the record deficits under Harper should be much worse!

It just shows the hypocrisy of the right wing posters on this forum.

Nothing demonstrates the ignorance, hypocrisy and lack of respect for honesty of the Left more than talking about Harper's deficits. All of them blandly 'forget' that all opposition parties demanded huge incentive spending at a time when a worldwide recession was sapping the government of revenues while increasing social spending. They demanded it to the point of trying to take over the government to implement it. And when Harper survived and brought in this huge new spending the results were "Not enough! We demand more!"

Yet the Left, all three parties, never miss a chance to sneer at Harper for running deficits, while completely excusing their own 'need' to run deficits which will probably be permanent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It IS good for the CRA to investigate fraud.

But if we are going to investigate fraud by charities.... then let us investigate the Christian Churches, including the Catholic Church.... let us investigate the JEWISH charitable organizations. Let's audit the Fraser Institute, to see if they have carried out any political activities. Etc. etc.

Let's investigate fraud broadly and fairly, not target specific organizations that have been specifically critical of the Administration.

...

I think you will see fewer charities audited period. I also think we will probably kiss FN accountability goodbye.

Edited by Wilber
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Jake Ziegelbauer
      Anyone get a good laugh out of this per stage rehearsed for 9 day clown show. Reading from cards to see who he would call on, questions like what ice cream do you like, How is live in the White house, what time are you taking a nap. I laughed so hard it made me want to call in with Americas Questions like 1 Illegal Immigration, why can no Journalist see whats going on two , covid19 not the fake numbers the White house3 and the media publish their are still 2,000 Americans dying a day, CDC says in 2021 they expect another 900,000 to die, North Korea, China, Russia nuclear threat US economy is now 3 rd in the World and Failing, NO Jobs people dying no money for rent, Stimulus checks for $1,400 not received by more than 10 % of Americans Riots gun deaths People killing people for Food 2020 was a great year compared to 2021 which is not even a 1/4 old. Were is Congress they are on Vacation till April 12/2021
    • By Randyjohnson71
      Joe Biden was inaugurated President, but I didn't watch the inauguration. I'm not a Joe Biden supporter. He didn't win because of me. I voted against him in both the primary and the election. I voted for Mike Bloomberg in the primary and Donald Trump in the election.
      I hope that Biden will be a one term President. I do not like Joe Biden. If this offends some readers, I apologize. But I have to be honest. I'm not a Joe Biden supporter.
    • By JimZiegelbauer2
      Authorities in Pittsburgh, Pa., said they were investigating a newly released video that appeared to show protesters confronting outdoor diners in the city’s downtown on Saturday, a report said.
      FLORIDA PROTESTERS RELEASED FOLLOWING NONE Peaceful DEMONSTRATIONS AGAINST EXONERATION OF OFFICERS INVOLVED IN SHOOTING
      One of the videos that were posted online appeared to show a man holding a megaphone calling diners at the establishment an “embarrassment.” Some of the diners can be seen getting up from their seats.The videos show Blacks Threatening Whites like when Sen Paul and his wife left the DC Republican party Were is the Police?
    • By JimZiegelbauer2
      Obama/Biden/Harris/Pelosi/care law forced on America 2011, COST 1,500.000 medical jobs, 458,000 American deaths, 36 million people unemployed, 29,000 smal Business closed at a cost of 1 trillion dollars and when COVID 19 hit the USA we had no healthcare plan in place in the USA WHY?
    • By Hussain
      All over Ontario, people have been quarantined for weeks in order to flatten the curve and save lives, for the majority of places it has been working. Health officials are now saying that some places in Ontario have reached their peak and the daily number of cases are slowly starting to decline. However, long-term care homes are still at high risk and are being closely monitored to prevent a wide-scale outbreak.
      READ MORE AT
      https://www.youthinpolitics.net/post/leading-death-of-covid-19
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...