Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Syncretic Party - New political group


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you su

I have a few questions. Nice web site. Grats on at least putting your thoughts and policies out there vs a lot of hazy babblethought from most parties. Syncretic means neither political left nor

It seems they want to do better by being even more involved in their vision of micro-managing the economy taking the "best" from the New Democrats and nationalizing industries and the "best" from the

2 hours ago, SyncreticParty said:

Hello,

We are the Syncretic Party.

We're a political group looking to gain registered federal status.

 

Our website is  https://www.syncretic.ca

 

Looking forward to your feedback.

 

Regards,

Syncretic Party

I have a few questions. Nice web site. Grats on at least putting your thoughts and policies out there vs a lot of hazy babblethought from most parties.

Syncretic means neither political left nor political right, but borrowing from both. We already have such a party. It's called the Conservative party. It's not really conservative, though, but fairly centrist. How will you be any different?

Under Economy you propose to nationalize telco. Right now Rogers, BCE and Telus are, combined, valued at roughly $130 billion. The stock in these companies is owned by hundreds of thousands of Canadians, either directly, or through pension plans or various mutual funds or other managed funds. Where do you plan on coming up with the money for this, or do you simply plan to declare them all government property?

You also say the world is moving away from fossil fuels, but right now the renewables mentioned as possible replacements, solar and wind, supply a miniscule percentage of energy needs and their energy is not reliable given changing winds and amount of light. It is estimated that fossil fuel use will continue for many decades. Do you plan on ignoring this, shutting down our fossil fuel industry, and putting billions into renewables as, for example, the Ontario government has done?

You speak about diversifying trade, but every government wants to do that, and so far none has succeeded. How will you do any better?

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems they want to do better by being even more involved in their vision of micro-managing the economy taking the "best" from the New Democrats and nationalizing industries and the "best" from the Liberals of soft on crime.  The are a jumble of left and further left that they seem to crave, with a smattering of the right they really don't understand.  They should be natural Trudeau fans.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no particular use for party affiliation whatsoever, and as this is the House of Windsor, I vote by British Westminster Parliamentary Supremacy, which is agnostic to the party and merely selects the MP for the riding.

If there is no MP which reflects my values, I vote strategically.  If there is no path to a strategic objective and so an impasse, I vote simply by civic duty and expend it into the dirt by spoiled ballot, write in; Monarchist League of Canada GSTQ

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Family.

You rightly point out that immigration is not a solution to a declining birth rate. You suggest that affordability of child care is a principal cause of our low birth rate. Do you have evidence of this? It does not seem to me that those with family incomes of say, $150,000 have more children than families with an income of $75,000.

You suggest that you will nationalize the child care industry. This would doubtless mean child care workers become government employees with the unionized rights, pay rates and pensions which go along with this. Have you considered what the cost of this would be and how you intend paying for it?

Health Care

What would it cost to include dental and pharmacare under national health coverage?

Income Inequality

I'm a bit confused. You want to reward companies for having more Canadian workers, tax them for having automation, encourage them to pay workers more, but you also plan to reduce the cost of necessities by opening up markets and eliminating unnecessary restrictions that drive up prices. This sounds like importing goods, which will cost jobs, not grow them.

Military

I applaud your desire to fix procurement and get the military more equipment. However, your assumption the equipment we buy is scrap is not correct. And the major problem with procurement is purchasing goods not based on what the military wants or needs but based on how many jobs will be created in certain government ridings. This means building goods here rather than purchasing them off the shelf from someone, even if that doubles the price (example, our new frigates). How would you handle this, and would you grow the size of the military?

Link to post
Share on other sites

And its always a double tap when I vote, as my wife leaves it up to me who we vote for, tho of course I take her values and interests in account. 

Since she was indoctrinated to be a squishy Eskimo Communist, she will vote Liberal Party of Canada unless otherwise refrained.

Although right  now our interests are entirely aligned, as she thinks Trudeaupe is fashionable, and I am voting strategically for Trudeaupe as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you suppose to deliver on something that has eluded the liberals for their entire reign of terror, thats what Canadians want to know....Because no one including the libs or cons have been smart enough to fix all these messes....

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you suppose to deliver on something that has eluded the liberals for their entire reign of terror, thats what Canadians want to know....Because no one including the libs or cons have been smart enough to fix all these messes....

Lighten up, Francis.  

This is what democracy looks like, it's not a panacea, merely a peaceful transfer of power.

And stop trying to bring the morale down,  Ducimus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the platform is decent, and the website is well designed as well. Much better than the current mainstream parties. I find it interesting that your party acknowledges men's issues (such as suicides), which is at compete odds with all major parties and the mainstream establishment.

 

That said, I'll probably side with Maxime Bernier's People's Party this election.

 

With respect to climate change / energy policy, if you want evidence based policy, I suggest you consider the approach of a pigouvian tax to internalize the externalities, where the level of taxation is calculated using the world's best integrated assessment models, such as the DICE model by William Nordhaus, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 2018.

Edited by -1=e^ipi
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Argus said:

I have a few questions. Nice web site. Grats on at least putting your thoughts and policies out there vs a lot of hazy babblethought from most parties.

Syncretic means neither political left nor political right, but borrowing from both. We already have such a party. It's called the Conservative party. It's not really conservative, though, but fairly centrist. How will you be any different?

Under Economy you propose to nationalize telco. Right now Rogers, BCE and Telus are, combined, valued at roughly $130 billion. The stock in these companies is owned by hundreds of thousands of Canadians, either directly, or through pension plans or various mutual funds or other managed funds. Where do you plan on coming up with the money for this, or do you simply plan to declare them all government property?

You also say the world is moving away from fossil fuels, but right now the renewables mentioned as possible replacements, solar and wind, supply a miniscule percentage of energy needs and their energy is not reliable given changing winds and amount of light. It is estimated that fossil fuel use will continue for many decades. Do you plan on ignoring this, shutting down our fossil fuel industry, and putting billions into renewables as, for example, the Ontario government has done?

You speak about diversifying trade, but every government wants to do that, and so far none has succeeded. How will you do any better?

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your feedback.
Most of the Canadian political parties are somewhat centered, except for maybe the NDP, so in some instances there will be similarities. At the end of the day, I think we all want what's best for Canada, it's just a question of how do we get there. The issue with the current political parties is they seem to focused on mudslinging and virtue signaling. We are not interested in that. Certain issues, like nuclear power and men's rights, are considered political suicide - yet we think they're important topics that need to be addressed. We are looking to be completely objective, transparent, and focused on a Canada first mentality. We are looking to do what's right and best, and not to pander for the sake of votes.

Telecom:
https://www.syncretic.ca/telecom-reduced-rates
The information is in that link. This is something that we will have to assess in terms of how the telecom powers-that-be want to play.  In any case, we think Huawei is a serious threat and needs to be completely removed from our infrastructure. It will cost money at the end of the day but it needs to be done.

The world is moving away from fossil fuels as an energy source. Many countries have set limits on Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles and are phasing out a number of fossil fuel and coal dependent plants. However, oil and its derivatives will always be necessary in our world. Our economy is heavily reliant on the oil industry. We think we need to keep exporting oil and using it to our advantage. We would increase oil exports. Our goal isn't to shut down oil, it's to introduce environmentally friendly technology and initiatives.

https://www.syncretic.ca/environment-don-t-worry-alberta

The answer to all of this is nuclear power:
https://www.syncretic.ca/environment-electric-infrastructure
If it wasn't for misinformation and oil lobbyists, we wouldn't be having this climate change mess right now. We would have pursued the greenest and most consistent form of power we know - nuclear. 50% of electricity generated in Ontario is from nuclear. 20% of the power generated in the US is from nuclear. +70% for France. There are close to 500 nuclear reactors in the world. The fear and issues surrounding nuclear power are over stated and exaggerated. Our goal is to educate the public on nuclear power. We plan on increasing research and standardization. You can read up on Small Modular Reactors (SMR) which are very cheap mini nuclear reactors that are safer and have less stringent requirements than your standard nuclear power plant. There is an interesting documentary called Pandora's Promise which deals with nuclear power that you may be interested in watching. You can find it for free on youtube.

As for diversification:
https://www.syncretic.ca/economy-diversification

 

3 hours ago, cannuck said:

It seems they want to do better by being even more involved in their vision of micro-managing the economy taking the "best" from the New Democrats and nationalizing industries and the "best" from the Liberals of soft on crime.  The are a jumble of left and further left that they seem to crave, with a smattering of the right they really don't understand.  They should be natural Trudeau fans.

 

Thank you for your feedback. We actually don't want to micromanage the economy. What we want to ensure is that Canadians have jobs. What we do take issue with is when certain industries fleece Canadians of every dime they have. We have the most expensive telecom rates in the modern world. We also are against virtue signaling. We would completely do away with the whole "gender impact" assessment.

https://www.syncretic.ca/economy-diversification

"The Syncretic party believes the following is required to jump start the Canadian economy:

  1. Aggressively enforce existing policies and laws instead of turning a blind eye to oligopolies;

  2. Remove protectionist policies that limit competition;

  3. Streamline regulatory process;

  4. Assess which markets can be safely opened to foreign competition and open them;

  5. Markets which can’t be safely opened to foreign competition will have the infrastructure nationalized and companies will compete on service;

  6. Reward innovation and entrepreneurship;

  7. Increase trade with countries other than the U.S.;

  8. Diversify the Canadian economy, with a focus on developing new technology;

  9. Provide incentives for companies to hire Canadian employees; and

  10. Change the business culture to reward investing in employees and thinking long term instead of short term."

We aren't soft on crime. We just don't see the point in further burdening the Canadian tax payer because of lesser crimes. We actually plan on having more severe punishment regarding corruption and white collar crimes.
https://www.syncretic.ca/crime-rehab-and-prison

 

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I have no particular use for party affiliation whatsoever, and as this is the House of Windsor, I vote by British Westminster Parliamentary Supremacy, which is agnostic to the party and merely selects the MP for the riding.

If there is no MP which reflects my values, I vote strategically.  If there is no path to a strategic objective and so an impasse, I vote simply by civic duty and expend it into the dirt by spoiled ballot, write in; Monarchist League of Canada GSTQ

 

Thank you for your feedback. Noted.

 

3 hours ago, Argus said:

Family.

You rightly point out that immigration is not a solution to a declining birth rate. You suggest that affordability of child care is a principal cause of our low birth rate. Do you have evidence of this? It does not seem to me that those with family incomes of say, $150,000 have more children than families with an income of $75,000.

You suggest that you will nationalize the child care industry. This would doubtless mean child care workers become government employees with the unionized rights, pay rates and pensions which go along with this. Have you considered what the cost of this would be and how you intend paying for it?

Health Care

What would it cost to include dental and pharmacare under national health coverage?

Income Inequality

I'm a bit confused. You want to reward companies for having more Canadian workers, tax them for having automation, encourage them to pay workers more, but you also plan to reduce the cost of necessities by opening up markets and eliminating unnecessary restrictions that drive up prices. This sounds like importing goods, which will cost jobs, not grow them.

Military

I applaud your desire to fix procurement and get the military more equipment. However, your assumption the equipment we buy is scrap is not correct. And the major problem with procurement is purchasing goods not based on what the military wants or needs but based on how many jobs will be created in certain government ridings. This means building goods here rather than purchasing them off the shelf from someone, even if that doubles the price (example, our new frigates). How would you handle this, and would you grow the size of the military?

Thank you for your feedback. Part of the issue has been a culture shift from traditional roles to a career centric mentality. Women are being encouraged to be more career oriented. While this isn't necessarily bad, it does have the consequence of decreasing the fertility rate and increasing the age at which a woman has children.
http://www.oecd.org/els/family/44720649.pdf
While it is up to the individual, those that wish to have children will be restricted from doing so until it is financially viable.


Family:
https://www.syncretic.ca/family

https://www.syncretic.ca/important-issues-declining-populati

"This decrease in live birth rate coincides with when female labour force participation significantly increased after World War 2. Between the 1950s and 1980s, female labour force participation increased from 25% to ~60%. This increase was led, first and foremost, by married women. Women being encouraged to focus on their careers as opposed to adopting traditional roles, in addition to a culture shift towards a career centric life, has played a role in decreasing the fertility rate. Recently, the increased cost of living, unaffordable housing, limited job opportunities, and increasing debt has made it such that it is almost financially impossible for the average couple to have enough children to grow the Canadian population. The best way to remedy this is to improve the economy, reduce living costs, and financially support new families. The future of our country depends on it. "

Yes we have considered this and we are still working on our costing plan.
 

Income Inequality:
If a company wishes to claim corporate welfare (business write offs), it can only do so if it has a significant Canadian work force. The idea being that if a company wants the tax payer to foot part of the bill, the tax payer needs to benefit.


Automation tax is something that will be assessed and not yet certain: https://www.syncretic.ca/income-inequality-automation
There is an increasing trend towards automation, which will put increasingly more people out of jobs. The repercussions are such that it will become a financial burden. This is one of the arguments for Universal Basic Income (UBI). Automation provides a decrease in cost for companies - which is the exact reason for the shift. As such, a tax wouldn't necessarily reduce the margins of profit for a company that includes automation and it still allows the Canadian government to collect sufficient taxes for its purposes.

We plan on removing unnecessary regulation but for things like food, quality is important. We are aware that the US heavily subsidizes it's dairy and wheat industry. In this instance, however, the reduced regulation would be for companies situated in Canada.


Military:
https://www.syncretic.ca/military

Not all of the equipment we buy is scrap but we do purchase second hand. The procurement process needs to be re-hauled in the sense that there seem to be many efficiencies which end up costing the tax payer millions of dollars. Whether it's replacing the Browning, our CF-18s being replaced by Australian F-18s, our rusting navy, etc - it seems that the military is severely underfunded and the procurement process always goes sideways. We plan on growing the military. The founder spent some time in the Canadian Armed Forces Reserve.
We ideally would purchase locally but we need to ensure that the equipment procured works as intended.
 

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Will your party outlaw in-camera lobbying?

Thank you for your feedback. Maybe you can elaborate what you mean by that? We are looking for increased transparency.
https://www.syncretic.ca/first-nations-accountability

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

And its always a double tap when I vote, as my wife leaves it up to me who we vote for, tho of course I take her values and interests in account. 

Since she was indoctrinated to be a squishy Eskimo Communist, she will vote Liberal Party of Canada unless otherwise refrained.

Although right  now our interests are entirely aligned, as she thinks Trudeaupe is fashionable, and I am voting strategically for Trudeaupe as well.

Thank you for your feedback. What do you think would convince your wife to vote something other than Liberal?

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you suppose to deliver on something that has eluded the liberals for their entire reign of terror, thats what Canadians want to know....Because no one including the libs or cons have been smart enough to fix all these messes....

Thank you for your feedback. There is a lot that we would do differently but we would appreciate it if you could be more specific in what you want to know.

 

59 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Honestly, the platform is decent, and the website is well designed as well. Probably much better than the current mainstream parties. I find it interesting that your party acknowledges men's issues (such as suicides), which is at compete odds with all major parties and the mainstream establishment.

 

That said, I'll probably side with Maxime Bernier's People's Party this election.

 

With respect to climate change / energy policy, if you want evidence based policy, I suggest you consider the approach of a pigouvian tax to internalize the externalities, where the level of taxation is calculated using the world's best integrated assessment models, such as the DICE model by William Nordhaus, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics in 2018.

Thank you for your feedback. Our goal on climate change is to introduce more nuclear power and to pass policies which will change our approach to environmental issues such as the loss of bees, the fact that only 10% of plastics are recycled, over fishing, and geo-engineering. We are not looking to only reduce our effect on the environment but to actually reverse it. Our approach is much more aggressive than the existing parties. In doing so, however, we will create jobs.

As for voting for the PP, that will just split the conservative vote.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SyncreticParty said:

Thank you for your feedback. What do you think would convince your wife to vote something other than Liberal?

Oh I convinced her to vote for Stephen Harper on taxes, I convinced her to vote for Ford on cost of living, but she convinced me that Trudeau was in fact amusing, and I saw a strategic use for Trudeau which is the same as Trump, populist bomb to incite creative destruction.  Plus I was punishing Harper for doing nothing on gun liberties, and also I was voting down the Temperance Lady on reefer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, SyncreticParty said:

Thank you for your feedback. Maybe you can elaborate what you mean by that? We are looking for increased transparency.
https://www.syncretic.ca/first-nations-accountability

 

Will your party meet in secret/private with lobbyists? 

AFAIC there are no instances in which any politician or senior government official should meet, discuss and make decisions about any issue that is in the public's domain without the public present in the form of rolling cameras, live microphones, human observers and process guardians.  I'm basically looking for a level of monitoring and souveillance that would make Orwell himself blush.

In the spirit of Orwell I'd keep the name of the Freedom of Information Act except I'd change the act to require that our governments must apply to make something secret as opposed to what we allow them to do now.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Will your party meet in secret/private with lobbyists? 

AFAIC there are no instances in which any politician or senior government official should meet, discuss and make decisions about any issue that is in the public's domain without the public present in the form of rolling cameras, live microphones, human observers and process guardians.  I'm basically looking for a level of monitoring and souveillance that would make Orwell himself blush.

In the spirit of Orwell I'd keep the name of the Freedom of Information Act except I'd change the act to require that our governments must apply to make something secret as opposed to what we allow them to do now.

One of our mandates will be to increase transparency and accountability. We agree with you and we do not intend for any back rooming dealing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SyncreticParty said:

One of our mandates will be to increase transparency and accountability. We agree with you and we do not intend for any back rooming dealing.

Good. Now all you need to do is drop the singular focus on First Nations transparency (it makes you sound like a bunch of rednecks with a bone to pick) and shine the spotlight where it needs it most, the PMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, SyncreticParty said:

Our goal on climate change is to introduce more nuclear power and to pass policies which will change our approach to environmental issues such as the loss of bees, the fact that only 10% of plastics are recycled, over fishing, and geo-engineering.

 

Nuclear is a good source of energy, but you should allow for different methods of CO2 reduction to compete with each other. Pigouvian taxes are the optimal way to respond to the issue of negative externalities (at least from a utilitarian perspective), be it due to cigarettes, water pollution, or CO2 emissions. This was demonstrated by economist Arthur Pigou in the 1930s and is well accepted in economics.

 

21 hours ago, SyncreticParty said:

As for voting for the PP, that will just split the conservative vote.

 

I am not a conservative, I have never voted conservative, nor do I plan to vote conservative. Andrew Scheer and his Harperites are freedom hating conservatives who don't want gay people to marry, don't want us to have the freedom to smoke weed, and believe that 300% tariffs on dairy is free trade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 8:31 PM, Army Guy said:

Same shit different pile...Lots of promises no meat.....want to impress me tell me how your going to mange all of this.......did you discover the magic pill, or maybe the magic weed.....How are you suppose to deliver on something that has eluded the liberals for their entire reign of terror, thats what Canadians want to know....Because no one including the libs or cons have been smart enough to fix all these messes....

Quote

Thank you for your feedback. There is a lot that we would do differently but we would appreciate it if you could be more specific in what you want to know.

Your right , I assumed your party is going to be like all the rest, promising the moon , as that is the easy part the hard part is delivering on all this core statements your party has put on the table. As you have highlighted a lot of the problems with our nation. My first questions is where is all the funding coming from ? raising taxes, cutting programs and if so what ones...

Military: I think for the most part you are right, we do buy a lot of crap, or what is called the cheapest bidder, there are more failures than success stories from this process. Part of that is there is too many fingers in the pie, the purchase policies are to complicated, to many Depts are involved, not enough experienced staff to handle this large contracts, and all of it's moving pieces. To many useless requirements such as the program must be costed out to 40 years, the entire system is broken....but not only for the military, but for every major purchase ie coast guard ships... And nobody has been able to fix it for decades....So what is the magic fix...except scrap it all and start over...

Military has been the go to place for government to scrap up a quick couple of bils to make good on other promises ….and over the decades, it has cost the military core capabilities,such as the navies destroyer fleet, our sub fleet, the armies Self propelled arty, air defenses, the list goes on and on.... along with huge infra structure deficit's out of control, some units have been waiting over 20 years for new buildings...Not to mention the aging equipment, each army base has huge fields of parked rusted out , no longer safe for the roads vehs, such as the LSVW, MLVW, HLVW, to the point where most units can not move themselves or there equipment to any operation without robbing other units....NO LSVW, HLVW replacement even on the procurement books, the New MLVW is not due in until 2020, but it is a 9 ton truck, meant to replace a 2 1/2 ton truck....why because there is no funding to buy any more....something as basic as a truck...DND was asked before the liberals come into power how much would it cost to bring up DND to 1990 standards , they replied with well over 200 bil....The liberals have already come out and said we can afford ships or planes not both...all the Liberals campaign promises have been broken, in regards to our military. 

our Vets;

Vets Should never have to sue our government for basic care, nor prove there legs are still blown off every year...Its a disgrace really, for a G-8 nation.....but then again we are asking for more than the liberal government is willing to give. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 10:02 PM, Dougie93 said:

Lighten up, Francis.  

This is what democracy looks like, it's not a panacea, merely a peaceful transfer of power.

And stop trying to bring the morale down,  Ducimus.

I've been listening Linda,

But when you come on to a forum promising the moon, and thats not democracy, thats just what Canadians let them get away with.....We should be asking the tough questions now before they learn Justins double talk ways, answer all the questions with the same response aaah uhhmmm, ahhh, ummmm 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎22‎/‎2019 at 10:16 PM, SyncreticParty said:

Thank you for your feedback.

I'd thank you for answering my questions, but you didn't. 

Where are you going to get $150 billion odd dollars to nationalize telcos? Where are you going to get the money to nationalize all daycare centers and what will that cost??

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

I've been listening Linda,

But when you come on to a forum promising the moon, and thats not democracy, thats just what Canadians let them get away with.....We should be asking the tough questions now before they learn Justins double talk ways, answer all the questions with the same response aaah uhhmmm, ahhh, ummmm 

All democracy is, is a system to ensure a peaceful transfer of power to avoid a civil war, so long as it does that, it has achieved the aim and purpose.

I mean, you've been to countries where it doesn't happen, it ain't pretty. We are privileged to be British Westminster Parliamentarians, a fully functioning democracy, unbroken since 1688

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why Anglo-America is incandescently wealthy and so rules the world, British rule of law since 1759, to include both the British North American monarchy and its American republican progeny, and why at the same time, Latin America is a basket case, born of autocratic rule over slave states, which were not overthrown at the foot of Cemetery Ridge.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Your right , I assumed your party is going to be like all the rest, promising the moon , as that is the easy part the hard part is delivering on all this core statements your party has put on the table. As you have highlighted a lot of the problems with our nation. My first questions is where is all the funding coming from ? raising taxes, cutting programs and if so what ones...

Military: I think for the most part you are right, we do buy a lot of crap, or what is called the cheapest bidder, there are more failures than success stories from this process. Part of that is there is too many fingers in the pie, the purchase policies are to complicated, to many Depts are involved, not enough experienced staff to handle this large contracts, and all of it's moving pieces. To many useless requirements such as the program must be costed out to 40 years, the entire system is broken....but not only for the military, but for every major purchase ie coast guard ships... And nobody has been able to fix it for decades....So what is the magic fix...except scrap it all and start over...

Military has been the go to place for government to scrap up a quick couple of bils to make good on other promises ….and over the decades, it has cost the military core capabilities,such as the navies destroyer fleet, our sub fleet, the armies Self propelled arty, air defenses, the list goes on and on.... along with huge infra structure deficit's out of control, some units have been waiting over 20 years for new buildings...Not to mention the aging equipment, each army base has huge fields of parked rusted out , no longer safe for the roads vehs, such as the LSVW, MLVW, HLVW, to the point where most units can not move themselves or there equipment to any operation without robbing other units....NO LSVW, HLVW replacement even on the procurement books, the New MLVW is not due in until 2020, but it is a 9 ton truck, meant to replace a 2 1/2 ton truck....why because there is no funding to buy any more....something as basic as a truck...DND was asked before the liberals come into power how much would it cost to bring up DND to 1990 standards , they replied with well over 200 bil....The liberals have already come out and said we can afford ships or planes not both...all the Liberals campaign promises have been broken, in regards to our military. 

our Vets;

Vets Should never have to sue our government for basic care, nor prove there legs are still blown off every year...Its a disgrace really, for a G-8 nation.....but then again we are asking for more than the liberal government is willing to give. 

 

 

 

Thank you for the follow up. We agree with all your points. A simplified and streamlined process is required. 

4 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I've been listening Linda,

But when you come on to a forum promising the moon, and thats not democracy, thats just what Canadians let them get away with.....We should be asking the tough questions now before they learn Justins double talk ways, answer all the questions with the same response aaah uhhmmm, ahhh, ummmm 

We were hoping for more members to challenge and question us. 

2 hours ago, Argus said:

I'd thank you for answering my questions, but you didn't. 

Where are you going to get $150 billion odd dollars to nationalize telcos? Where are you going to get the money to nationalize all daycare centers and what will that cost??

Thank you for the follow up. We will be releasing our costing plan later this summer.

https://www.syncretic.ca/telecom-reduced-rates

Were you able to read the link we provided you? We would not be nationalizing the telecom companies. We would nationalize the infrastructure. We would begin building a modern and nationalized telecom infrastructure, paid for through city/municipal bonds and sourced with Canadian only parts and labor. A discussion with the telecom companies would be had regarding the telecom infrastructure and whether there is interest to sell the infrastructure at a reduced rate. We would not be buying or nationalizing the companies. The interest is in the infrastructure. This is a long term plan.

Regarding childcare affordability, we would modify:

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/child-family-benefits/canada-child-benefit-overview.html

"New Canada Child Benefit will provide a maximum annual benefit of $6,400 per child under the age of six, and $5,400 per child aged 6 through 17". 

We would abolish the payout for children between the ages of two and six. That money would, in cooperation with the provincial governments, be used to pay for daycare instead. Quebec currently pays between 1 and 2 billion dollars a year for its childcare. 

We believe this would be better since this allows both parents to work until the child is capable of going to school. In addition, more people working would equate to more taxes. We hope you feel this answers your questions.

Edited by SyncreticParty
Typo
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.




  • Tell a friend

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