2024 Canadian Political Thread

[Drjohn]

Moses, Bhudda and that Zorastrian god-dude! Im tired of people posting these bullshit articles to drum up irratational sentiment unchallenged. You dont like his policies and have a different politcal view, fine. Thr destrucrion of civil discourse with slurs and 'Fuck Trudeau' slogans is a slide into culure wars like the states, mosltly imported by American owned 'news' papers.

Don't worry about "culture wars".

The federal Liberal government and their NDP enablers have done more damage to the Canadian economy than any other government in history.

By every measurement, Canadians are worse off than they were before Trudeau and his crew of clowns came into power.

Don't worry about "American owned newspapers".

The vast majority of mainstream media is literally bought and paid for by the Liberal government.

Blathering about "Civil discourse" just makes you look foolish.

If you think Trudeau and the Liberals are so great, explain why and how they are so great.

Make your argument with facts

Your buzzword laden word salad isn't impressing anyone.

 

[LLLurkJ2]

Don't worry about "culture wars".

Ok, stop using the tactics.

The federal Liberal government and their NDP enablers have done more damage to the Canadian economy than any other government in history.

Objectively false , try facts. GDP has grown.

By every measurement, Canadians are worse off than they were before Trudeau and his crew of clowns came into power.

Objectively false, homeowners are making out like bandits and coporoate profits are near all time highs. Again, facts.

Don't worry about "American owned newspapers".

Stop posting 'articles' from them and I won't worry about the importation of attack dog discourse from the ghetto down south.

The vast majority of mainstream media is literally bought and paid for by the Liberal government.

Objectively false. Try facts again, which you seem bereft of. Apparently there are none in any of your media sources.

Blathering about "Civil discourse" just makes you look foolish.

Blathering Fuck Trudeau makes you look like an impish imitator without faculty to discern smear campaigns from true political discourse. Pillory the man rather than his policies, you just sound like another whiner throwing a tantrum because he didnt get what he wanted.

If you think Trudeau and the Liberals are so great, explain why and how they are so great.

Make your argument with facts

Your buzzword laden word salad isn't impressing anyone.

I acutually dont think Trudeau is so great belive it or not, but I know Poli-Oli is a snake whith no new ideas beyond make the poor pay while blaming everything on them, so by comparison Trudeau is better. Trudeau has done some good things such as dental/pharmacare for the elderly, marajuana decrim, foriegn ownership bans, but they're not the best wtitten laws currently imho and need revisions. Facts.

 

[Drjohn]

Ok, stop using the tactics.

Objectively false , try facts. GDP has grown.


Objectively false, homeowners are making out like bandits and coporoate profits are near all time highs. Again, facts.


Stop posting 'articles' from them and I won't worry about the importation of attack dog discourse from the ghetto down south.

Objectively false. Try facts again, which you seem bereft of. Apparently there are none in any of your media sources.


Blathering Fuck Trudeau makes you look like an impish imitator without faculty to discern smear campaigns from true political discourse. Pillory the man rather than his policies, you just sound like another whiner throwing a tantrum because he didnt get what he wanted.


I acutually dont think Trudeau is so great belive it or not, but I know Poli-Oli is a snake whith no new ideas beyond make the poor pay while blaming everything on them, so by comparison Trudeau is better. Trudeau has done some good things such as dental/pharmacare for the elderly, marajuana decrim, foriegn ownership bans, but they're not the best wtitten laws currently imho and need revisions. Facts.

The Trudeau/Liberal record is not defendable.

The "achievements" you've listed are laughable.

Marijuana decriminalization?

Seriously?

Maybe that's what Trudeau will be remembered for.

Eight years and that's the highlight.

They failed miserably at everything else.

Terrible economic policy.

Terrible foreign policy.

Terrible criminal justice policy.

Terrible immigration policy.

Terrible relations with the provinces.

Terrible handling of covid.

Terrible obsession with "climate change".

I've never said "Fuck Trudeau" and I don't need to use "tactics" to make my point.

Feel free to keep spinning your wheels and trying to swim upstream.

You're not changing anyone's mind.

Whether you like it or not, Trudeau is on his way out.

The hole he dug for himself is just too deep.

 

[Mrmotorscooter]

love this guy
https://youtube.com/shorts/dn6YrbqPrg4?si=q6CPa2qj8Urwlzyi

 

[licks2nite]

https://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/201/301/annual_fin_rep_gov_can/pdf/2006-2007.pdf

https://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/201/301/annual_fin_rep_gov_can/pdf/2007-2008.pdf

https://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/201/301/annual_fin_rep_gov_can/pdf/index.html

Material out of context. Needs someone to go through each year and copy data points on charts for each item. Granted, a laborious task. Work done in pieces by interested individuals and organizations both in government and private sector. Selection likely biased to support a narrative. Read enough charts when available scattered across the Internet from enough interested entities to get a clearer picture.

 

[appleomac]

Material out of context. Needs someone to go through each year and copy data points on charts for each item. Granted, a laborious task. Work done in pieces by interested individuals and organizations both in government and private sector. Selection likely biased to support a narrative. Read enough charts when available scattered across the Internet from enough interested entities to get a clearer picture.

Exactly how are the audited financial statements of the gov't of Canada "out of context" when it speaks to the actual deficit or surplus the gov't of Canada actually achieved in those various fiscal years? LOL

 

[overdone]

Ok, stop using the tactics.

Objectively false , try facts. GDP has grown.


Objectively false, homeowners are making out like bandits and coporoate profits are near all time highs. Again, facts.


Stop posting 'articles' from them and I won't worry about the importation of attack dog discourse from the ghetto down south.

Objectively false. Try facts again, which you seem bereft of. Apparently there are none in any of your media sources.


Blathering Fuck Trudeau makes you look like an impish imitator without faculty to discern smear campaigns from true political discourse. Pillory the man rather than his policies, you just sound like another whiner throwing a tantrum because he didnt get what he wanted.


I acutually dont think Trudeau is so great belive it or not, but I know Poli-Oli is a snake whith no new ideas beyond make the poor pay while blaming everything on them, so by comparison Trudeau is better. Trudeau has done some good things such as dental/pharmacare for the elderly, marajuana decrim, foriegn ownership bans, but they're not the best wtitten laws currently imho and need revisions. Facts.

our standard of living is declining, AB has the highest incomes, due to Fort MacMurry, the oilsands workers

Ont, our biggest province has the equivalent to the inbred hillbillies in the U.S. now, under the Turd


Real output per hour worked (labour productivity) in Canada has declined in 12 of the past 14 quarters and is now back to where it was in the fourth quarter of 2019

per person wealth has actually gone down, adjusted for inflation

The OECD projects Canada will be the worst performing economy among the 38 advanced economies over both 2020-30 and 2030-60, with the lowest growth in real GDP per capita

THEY'RE BASING THAT ON WHAT THE FUCKING TARD IS DOING, HAS BEEN DOING FOR 8 YRS, THEY'VE BEEN SAYING IT FOR WELL OVER 1 YR

Homeowners aren't making out like bandits, cause even if they can afford to sell, they need to find another place to live, which thanks to the Turd, is almost impossible, specially at a lower price point now, unless you're moving to the 3rd world

not to mention, those who are going to have to renew their 3% mortgages this yr, those that did in the last yr, who will be paying way more for

their "windfall"


you want to talk about lies? facts?

dental/pharmacare for the elderly, it's a lie, there is nothing to brag about

dentists aren't signing up for the bullshit program, even if they do, it won't pay for barely a cleaning, pharmacare, again, isn't a thing

it's an announcement, like 99% of what he's done in 8 yrs, make announcements, never implements anything, gets anything done

housing, never going to happen, few thousands for 1.5 million a condo, sure

foreign ownership? on housing I'm assuming you're talking about

yeah, 8 yrs too late, not to mention there are ways around it

pot, again, lol, facts, people are still buying from dealers, the taxes, regs/rules/provinces involvement/muni too, it's a joke

decriminalization of drugs, for fuck sakes are you blind, deaf and dumb?

if you think that's working you really are hopeless, haven't seen the news for 2 yrs?

overdose deaths numbers? small business closings in downtowns, BC?

encampments? Bueller? anyone? Bueller?

nothing you mention is working, his only talent is borrowing others money and spending it on waste

facts, haha

reality, there is nothing the Turd's done well

except double the debt in 8 short years

which makes everyone poorer, specially the young

for decades to come, just like his fucking waste of skin father did, we're still paying for some of that fucking moron's social programs/which did nothing to improve the economy

Jr is 4X worse, which is saying something

 

[overdone]

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/th...ssteps-behind-canadas-productivity-emergencyj

yes, yes, National Post bad, terrible

but read it, look at who's being quoted, people from the Bank of Canada, Investment people, economists, with

FACTS, BASED ON REALITY, ECONOMIC DATA, FROM THE GOV'T STATS, WORLD STATS

anyone who thinks the Liberals are doing well, have been for 8 yrs is clearly

a TruAnon devotee

facts don't matter to them

 

[Crookedmember]

Sadly, a major reason for Canada's productivity decline is declining employment in Alberta's oil industry. As the industry automates and moves head offices south, good-paying jobs are disappearing.

In spite of record production. In spite of cash the UCP is throwing at them. In spite of Alberta signalling to the industry that they are not responsible for the filth and orphan wells they leave behind.

After decades of conservative rule, most of the industry is owned by foreigners. 70% of revenues flow to the American owners and others outside of Canada.

They don't really care about Canada or Canadian productivity. They just care about sucking the maximum amount of cash from resources we are supposed to own.

This is not a Trudeau problem. This is an Alberta conservatives problem.

This is not a TruAnon problem. This is a problem created by a right-wing that has been conditioned to believe that electing drunks and idiots like Ralph Klein and Dani Smith and Pierre Poilievre is a good idea.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-economy-changed-oil-industry-1.6626636

 

[appleomac]

Sadly, a major reason for Canada's productivity decline is declining employment in Alberta's oil industry. As the industry automates and moves head offices south, good-paying jobs are disappearing.

Wow. You really don't know what productivity is nor how it is measured. If you did, you would understand that productivity does NOT measure or have anything to do with those that are unemployed (i.e. "declining employment" as you called it). Nor does it have anything to "good-paying jobs disappearing." Productivity is measuring ACTUAL output (this does not include the unemployed, only the employed, because it is the employed population that are producing output) per unit of some input (usually time). The most common measure of productivity is GDP per hour worked (note that someone unemployed has no hours worked, because you know, they are unemployed, further note that what that unit of time may be worth is also not part of the equation, ergo, it's not about what someone's wage is, whether one has a high wage or low wage does not measure into it, because productivity is measuring output per unit of time). Unemployed people generally do not contribute to producing GDP, ergo, the measure of productivity looks at what the economy produced (in terms of GDP) per unit of time - and again, that cannot include unemployed persons (as they are not producing when unemployed). In other words, if Ford or GM shut down all of it's Canadian auto manufacturing facilities, that will of course, affect GDP (i.e. because we are producing less). HOWEVER, that does not mean productivity has gone down - because productivity is measuring output per unit of input. Even if Ford or GM shut down all it's Canadian manufacturing - we just have different levels of output and input used to calculate/measure productivity. That output (albeit less in absolute terms) can still be measured per unit of input (i.e. time). Productivity is a ratio - which means numerator over denominator, the ratio can change if the numerator changes or the denominator changes or both change. However, you are saying simply because the numerator decreases (i.e. overall GDP decreases) that somehow this automatically means the ratio also decreases - which is not correct. Because the denominator (i.e. total hours worked) also decreases. Ergo, the ratio can increase, decrease or stay the same depending on the relative magnitude of changes in both the numerator and denominator.

Simple example. GDP is $10,000, total hours worked in the entire economy is 200 hours, that means productivity is 10,000 divided by 200 or $50 of GDP produced per hour worked. If, let's say, the environmental lobby is successful in killing our O&G industry - now let's say, GDP is $8000. So, what is productivity? Well, we don't know if it has increased, decreased or stayed the same without knowing what the change in total hours are. Plug in different assumptions about hours worked, the ratio can change up or down or stay the same.

You comment so much (incorrectly) about things you don't understand simply because you are trying to push your biased narrative. It's plain as day. I guess the only question remaining is, do you even know (can you even admit) that that is exactly what you are doing? You talk so much about topics that you know so little about, all for what, trying to "own Conservatives"? Seriously mate, you lose all credibility when in your fervor to "own Conservatives" you continually say things that are wrong either due to your lack of understanding of a specific topic (like productivity) or you continually say things that are false (which you also have a propensity to do).

 

[LLLurkJ2]

Wow. You really don't know what productivity is nor how it is measured. If you did, you would understand that productivity does NOT measure or have anything to do with those that are unemployed (i.e. "declining employment" as you called it). Nor does it have anything to "good-paying jobs disappearing." Productivity is measuring ACTUAL output (this does not include the unemployed, only the employed, because it is the employed population that are producing output) per unit of some input (usually time). The most common measure of productivity is GDP per hour worked (note that someone unemployed has no hours worked, because you know, they are unemployed, further note that what that unit of time may be worth is also not part of the equation, ergo, it's not about what someone's wage is, whether one has a high wage or low wage does not measure into it, because productivity is measuring output per unit of time). Unemployed people generally do not contribute to producing GDP, ergo, the measure of productivity looks at what the economy produced (in terms of GDP) per unit of time - and again, that cannot include unemployed persons (as they are not producing when unemployed). In other words, if Ford or GM shut down all of it's Canadian auto manufacturing facilities, that will of course, affect GDP (i.e. because we are producing less). HOWEVER, that does not mean productivity has gone down - because productivity is measuring output per unit of input. Even if Ford or GM shut down all it's Canadian manufacturing - we just have different levels of output and input used to calculate/measure productivity. That output (albeit less in absolute terms) can still be measured per unit of input (i.e. time). Productivity is a ratio - which means numerator over denominator, the ratio can change if the numerator changes or the denominator changes or both change. However, you are saying simply because the numerator decreases (i.e. overall GDP decreases) that somehow this automatically means the ratio also decreases - which is not correct. Because the denominator (i.e. total hours worked) also decreases. Ergo, the ratio can increase, decrease or stay the same depending on the relative magnitude of changes in both the numerator and denominator.

Simple example. GDP is $10,000, total hours worked in the entire economy is 200 hours, that means productivity is 10,000 divided by 200 or $50 of GDP produced per hour worked. If, let's say, the environmental lobby is successful in killing our O&G industry - now let's say, GDP is $8000. So, what is productivity? Well, we don't know if it has increased, decreased or stayed the same without knowing what the change in total hours are. Plug in different assumptions about hours worked, the ratio can change up or down or stay the same.

You comment so much (incorrectly) about things you don't understand simply because you are trying to push your biased narrative. It's plain as day. I guess the only question remaining is, do you even know (can you even admit) that that is exactly what you are doing? You talk so much about topics that you know so little about, all for what, trying to "own Conservatives"? Seriously mate, you lose all credibility when in your fervor to "own Conservatives" you continually say things that are wrong either due to your lack of understanding of a specific topic (like productivity) or you continually say things that are false (which you also have a propensity to do).

Of course if someone leaves their job or cuts houes to take care of elderly or children, thats factored into productivity as well right?

 

[Crookedmember]

Wow. You really don't know what productivity is nor how it is measured. If you did, you would understand that productivity does NOT measure or have anything to do with those that are unemployed (i.e. "declining employment" as you called it). Nor does it have anything to "good-paying jobs disappearing." Productivity is measuring ACTUAL output (this does not include the unemployed, only the employed, because it is the employed population that are producing output) per unit of some input (usually time). The most common measure of productivity is GDP per hour worked (note that someone unemployed has no hours worked, because you know, they are unemployed, further note that what that unit of time may be worth is also not part of the equation, ergo, it's not about what someone's wage is, whether one has a high wage or low wage does not measure into it, because productivity is measuring output per unit of time). Unemployed people generally do not contribute to producing GDP, ergo, the measure of productivity looks at what the economy produced (in terms of GDP) per unit of time - and again, that cannot include unemployed persons (as they are not producing when unemployed). In other words, if Ford or GM shut down all of it's Canadian auto manufacturing facilities, that will of course, affect GDP (i.e. because we are producing less). HOWEVER, that does not mean productivity has gone down - because productivity is measuring output per unit of input. Even if Ford or GM shut down all it's Canadian manufacturing - we just have different levels of output and input used to calculate/measure productivity. That output (albeit less in absolute terms) can still be measured per unit of input (i.e. time). Productivity is a ratio - which means numerator over denominator, the ratio can change if the numerator changes or the denominator changes or both change. However, you are saying simply because the numerator decreases (i.e. overall GDP decreases) that somehow this automatically means the ratio also decreases - which is not correct. Because the denominator (i.e. total hours worked) also decreases. Ergo, the ratio can increase, decrease or stay the same depending on the relative magnitude of changes in both the numerator and denominator.

Simple example. GDP is $10,000, total hours worked in the entire economy is 200 hours, that means productivity is 10,000 divided by 200 or $50 of GDP produced per hour worked. If, let's say, the environmental lobby is successful in killing our O&G industry - now let's say, GDP is $8000. So, what is productivity? Well, we don't know if it has increased, decreased or stayed the same without knowing what the change in total hours are. Plug in different assumptions about hours worked, the ratio can change up or down or stay the same.

You comment so much (incorrectly) about things you don't understand simply because you are trying to push your biased narrative. It's plain as day. I guess the only question remaining is, do you even know (can you even admit) that that is exactly what you are doing? You talk so much about topics that you know so little about, all for what, trying to "own Conservatives"? Seriously mate, you lose all credibility when in your fervor to "own Conservatives" you continually say things that are wrong either due to your lack of understanding of a specific topic (like productivity) or you continually say things that are false (which you also have a propensity to do).

Labour productivity is a measure of GDP per hour worked.

If a high paying job in the oil industry is lost, and that person is forced to work in a lower paying job, productivity is lost.

That is happening thousands of times each month in Alberta.

 

[appleomac]

If a high paying job in the oil industry is lost, and that person is forced to work in a lower paying job, productivity is lost.

No it is not. That individual has lost their job, yes. That individual may prefer that O&G job, sure. But that individual's productivity is what they are producing NOW based on the hours they are working at that NEW job. That new job may produce lower GDP than their previous job - but that is a loss of GDP and NOT necessarily a loss of productivity. Productivity, again, is measured (for that individual) based on what that individual is ACTUALLY producing - not what they COULD HAVE (if they had a different job or hadn't lost that job). Again, you are trying to speak about a subject matter that you do not understand.

 

[appleomac]

Of course if someone leaves their job or cuts houes to take care of elderly or children, thats factored into productivity as well right?

No. Productivity is measured based on ACTUAL output and ACTUAL hours worked. You are conflating TOTAL OUTPUT for PRODUCTIVITY. If someone works 20 hours vs someone else that works 40 hours, we normalize output per hour worked to COMPARE. Why some person works 20 hours and why someone else works 40 hours is completely irrelevant to determining productivity. Sure, if both worked 40 hours, all other things being equal, that would mean more total output - that says nothing about their productivity. You can work more hours and be less productive, more productive or equally productive - because it's ratio, numerator over denominator - if both change, then the ratio can either go up, go down or stay the same based on the relative magnitude of those changes. You also don't understand productivity, because you are conflating TOTAL OUTPUT for PRODUCTIVITY.

 

[Drjohn]

Sadly, a major reason for Canada's productivity decline is declining employment in Alberta's oil industry. As the industry automates and moves head offices south, good-paying jobs are disappearing.

In spite of record production. In spite of cash the UCP is throwing at them. In spite of Alberta signalling to the industry that they are not responsible for the filth and orphan wells they leave behind.

After decades of conservative rule, most of the industry is owned by foreigners. 70% of revenues flow to the American owners and others outside of Canada.

They don't really care about Canada or Canadian productivity. They just care about sucking the maximum amount of cash from resources we are supposed to own.

This is not a Trudeau problem. This is an Alberta conservatives problem.

This is not a TruAnon problem. This is a problem created by a right-wing that has been conditioned to believe that electing drunks and idiots like Ralph Klein and Dani Smith and Pierre Poilievre is a good idea.
You are incorrect.

Not a surprise.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-economy-changed-oil-industry-1.6626636

Labour productivity is a measure of GDP per hour worked.

If a high paying job in the oil industry is lost, and that person is forced to work in a lower paying job, productivity is lost.

That is happening thousands of times each month in Alberta.

Not how it works but OK!

 

[masterblaster]

Sadly, a major reason for Canada's productivity decline is declining employment in Alberta's oil industry. As the industry automates and moves head offices south, good-paying jobs are disappearing.

In spite of record production. In spite of cash the UCP is throwing at them. In spite of Alberta signalling to the industry that they are not responsible for the filth and orphan wells they leave behind.

After decades of conservative rule, most of the industry is owned by foreigners. 70% of revenues flow to the American owners and others outside of Canada.

They don't really care about Canada or Canadian productivity. They just care about sucking the maximum amount of cash from resources we are supposed to own.

This is not a Trudeau problem. This is an Alberta conservatives problem.

This is not a TruAnon problem. This is a problem created by a right-wing that has been conditioned to believe that electing drunks and idiots like Ralph Klein and Dani Smith and Pierre Poilievre is a good idea.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-economy-changed-oil-industry-1.6626636

Gosh if only you could have run Alberta think how much better off the province would be.

 

[LLLurkJ2]

No. Productivity is measured based on ACTUAL output and ACTUAL hours worked. You are conflating TOTAL OUTPUT for PRODUCTIVITY. If someone works 20 hours vs someone else that works 40 hours, we normalize output per hour worked to COMPARE. Why some person works 20 hours and why someone else works 40 hours is completely irrelevant to determining productivity. Sure, if both worked 40 hours, all other things being equal, that would mean more total output - that says nothing about their productivity. You can work more hours and be less productive, more productive or equally productive - because it's ratio, numerator over denominator - if both change, then the ratio can either go up, go down or stay the same based on the relative magnitude of those changes. You also don't understand productivity, because you are conflating TOTAL OUTPUT for PRODUCTIVITY.

ACTUAL OUTPUT means physical goods right, not like scum sucking lawyers and accountants 'services'?

 

[appleomac]

ACTUAL OUTPUT means physical goods right, not like scum sucking lawyers and accountants 'services'?

No. Actual output being GDP. GDP includes both goods and services. Seriously, tell me you don't know what GDP is without telling me you don't know what GDP is! LOL

 

[LLLurkJ2]

No. Actual output being GDP. GDP includes both goods and services. Seriously, tell me you don't know what GDP is without telling me you don't know what GDP is! LOL

I know what it measures, but its flawed. Eg Pandemic, people work from home, gas price drops = -GDP even though its technically more efficient not to burn the gas. GDP measures a model, buts that model serves at best half of society *and isnt in their best interest economicaly to subscribe to as agents in that system* The dismal science likes to think it obeys natural laws, but 'all other things being equal' it constantly fails to predict outcomes with any statistical accuracy.

 

[appleomac]

I know what it measures, but its flawed. Eg Pandemic, people work from home, gas price drops = -GDP even though its technically more efficient not to burn the gas. GDP measures a model, buts that model serves at best half of society *and isnt in their best interest economicaly to subscribe to as agents in that system* The dismal science likes to think it obeys natural laws, but 'all other things being equal' it constantly fails to predict outcomes with any statistical accuracy.

You are now reverting to nonsensical drivel. That prices change, does not mean "GDP is flawed", as you assert. Sometimes, when prices fall, individuals buy more, meaning maybe sellers produce more. When a price fluctuates, other things also change in response (possibly many things). To believe that you can look at one thing (i.e. prices decreasing) and then conclusively say GDP drops is false - because you are ignoring all other changes that may result from that one thing (i.e. price decrease) happening. Moreover, economics is not about predicting outcomes. This is why people like you call economics the "dismal science" - you fault economics for something (i.e. "predicting outcomes") it never claimed to be able to do. That's like saying The Keg is "dismal" because they aren't a vegan restaurant - hey, Einstein, The Keg never claimed to be a vegan restaurant! What's more laughable is your double-talk - you literally talking out of both sides of your mouth. Case in point, you (apparently now) consider economics the dismal science and previously (in a different thread about national debt) you were blabbering on about "nuanced Keynesian approach" as justification as to why our ballooning national debt is not a big deal. Sure thing mate, out of one side of your mouth comes the statement economics is "dismal" and out of the other side of your mouth you were previously espousing John Maynard Keynes and some sort of secret "nuanced Keynesian approach" that you were privy to because you apparently read about economics! LOL Nonsensical drivel and hypocritical double speak,that's what you do, which equates to a whole lot of saying absolutely nothing.