2025 Canadian Political Thread

80watts

Well-known member
May 20, 2004
3,221
1,172
113
Victoria
The original came from CTV.
I guess the biggest part of the tax bill would be from the property from the unrealized capital gains. If you own 2 properties. One is capital gains free (the one you live in). So you sell that property (this is capital gains free), and go live in your other secondary property. Now from the time you bought the second property to the time you moved into that property, you have to pay capital gains on that second property (accordingly to the value worth of the property when you moved into second property - using tax assessments and value of same types of property sold in the area too). You will pay for this after you sell the second property. So from the initial price to the move in price, is taxable at capital gains; only from the moving in point to the selling point is the house now capital gains free. I don't know when this sneaky rule got applied to capital gains, but it is a hidden windfall for the government and not so for the owner.

This rule alone is very preventive of people investing in a secondary property or cabin in the woods. Considering since about 2000 house prices have at least tripled and in some cases quadrupled, the capital gains tax on a secondary property is staggering.....

Lets not forget about people claiming office space in their house for bussiness purposes. Yes capital gains will apply against your house for the portion of you office space divided by house space. Again the rising of house prices affects the capital gains you pay on your assumed capital gains free house....

Now for the RRSP- https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-ag...rates-individuals-current-previous-years.html

anything over 254,000.00 is taxed at 33%. I will assume that the couple saved and had 500,000 to 1.5 million already in RRSPs. That is 165,000 to 495,000 in taxes...

So its a combination of both taxes that hit hard in a very short amount of time for the parents tax situation.

The tax free account is a better saving option than RRSPs. Its just that alot of people from the 1980s went into RRSPs, and to make them work still had to contribute to them for retirement.

RRSP should be withdrawn when you have lower income, so as to not go into higher tax brackets (3 or 4th level of taxations). But if you need a very large sum like 100000, you will pay with the extra tax brackets (so expect 33% tax ).

So what I can see for the near future is the government collecting alot of revenue from the dying baby boomers.
Then there is any secondary property that will have to pay capital gains.
Then there is the bussiness deduction in your home busssiness....

In the future I can see the family farm (3rd to 5th generation) having to be sold to pay for the perceived capital gains.....

Everything is designed so that everything comes to a head when you die. Generational wealth will be wiped out!!!!!
 

80watts

Well-known member
May 20, 2004
3,221
1,172
113
Victoria
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/cana...S&cvid=68df418aaa7d432b95b3b1ef9fa7610e&ei=16

When this lawyer gets a degree in economics I just might want to hear what he says.....
He uses the world court to express why we shouldn't burn fossil fuels, but neglects to say that China, Russian and the USA are big polluters of CO2. Canada contributes less than 2% of the worlds CO2 emissions and our economy is bad.

This guys head is in his ass, as the world runs on fossil fuels. Yes it would be nice to get to the carbon free economy, but its not how chemistry and physics work (this could take centuries and even then CO2 will still be produced). Their end goal is to get you to live in stone huts and not burn wood for heat... that is just backwards....

Private companies don't want to invest in pipeline due to the restrictions of the environmental bill and the interference of Aboriginal peoples right to be consulted in mega projects like this (which means more payoffs and less profit).

The thing about the comment section of these type of videos is the comments are turned off by the news company, not really wanting honest feedback.....
 

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
Auto sector tempering expectations of Carney's meeting with Trump

"Surely, after promising to negotiate a win, to have a deal by July 21, the prime minister is not flying all the way to Washington, D.C. just to have lunch? By the sounds of it, that is all the Liberals are going to accomplish," Poilievre charged in question period debate Monday.

https://www.biv.com/news/auto-sector-tempering-expectations-of-carneys-meeting-with-trump-11308729

Trump looks to be trying to embarrass Carney in front of Canadians inviting Carney for luncheon and sending Carney back empty handed. Regime change me once, shame on you. Regime change me a second time shame on me.
 

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
1000000404.jpg
Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2025, in Washington.

Poilievre also took issue with Carney's comments on investment, specifically when the prime minister said in front of Trump that Canada will probably invest about $1 trillion in the U.S. over the next five years "if we get the agreement that we expect to get."

Poilievre charged that would likely mean "closing mines and factories in Canada" to move them south of the border.

https://www.biv.com/news/as-trump-d...nc-suggests-quick-deals-in-the-works-11314025

Meanwhile, Trump quips about annexation, dislike of the former president, hatred of wind power, no substance in trade talk.

Carney, I suppose could just print up a trillion dollars to buy into the States. Other nations, notibly Japan and Switzerland have done similarly. But such purchases don't jive with the multi-polar world we're headed for.

PM Carney you came up with a trillion dollars if such a thing actually exists in Canada. Your sworn duty to Canadians requires you to invest the trillion dollars in Canada.
 

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
Does Carney think a trillion dollars invested offshore won't be inflationary in Canada? Maybe, but I should find out for sure.
 

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
Understanding Money for Depositors
Why not understanding money. Been said money talks. You might as well understand what money says.

Let's say a credit union has $1 billion in customer deposits. If you're bored with the topic I can give you the punch line right now and end the drama so you can get back to what you're most interested. Namely, the credit union or bank can create and lend out $10 billion now without touching any of the $1 billion customer deposits.

Carney's comment for Trump about Canada investing a trillion dollars in America over 5 years really about currency manipulation. For Carney to buy a trillion dollars worth of US stock first Carney would have to buy a trillion US dollars. The value of the US dollar would go up and value of Canadian dollar would go down. US goods would be more expensive for Canadians to buy. Canadian goods would be cheaper to buy.

Now you could just digest the morsel. For many a fact already more than the vast majority know. Not just depositors but bank employees as well, all the way up to senior managerial levels don't know either about how money gets created out of thin air because neither the depositor nor the borrower nor the bank employee need to know anything more to administer a loan.

In related News:
Folks who study the money process say AI uses too much electricity. Bigly. Making parallels between bubbles. Tech bubble of 2002. The problems of the 2008 financial crisis weren't addressed. Sub-prime loans as prevalent today as '08. Trump summoned 800 US military generals and admirals from postings around the world to attend a meeting in an auditorium addressed by Trump. To end "woke" in military training, loose weight and get back into shape.

Money the reason people don't sleep at night. Money paid back gets retired except for the interest the bank keeps. The monitary system demands growth to avoid collapsing. If people stopped borrowing and paid off the loans the money would disappear from circulation. Only the rich would have any cash to spend.
 

masterpoonhunter

"Marriage should be a renewable contract"
Sep 15, 2019
2,979
4,984
113
View attachment 138903
Tuesday, Oct. 7, 2025, in Washington.

Poilievre also took issue with Carney's comments on investment, specifically when the prime minister said in front of Trump that Canada will probably invest about $1 trillion in the U.S. over the next five years "if we get the agreement that we expect to get."

Poilievre charged that would likely mean "closing mines and factories in Canada" to move them south of the border.

https://www.biv.com/news/as-trump-d...nc-suggests-quick-deals-in-the-works-11314025

Meanwhile, Trump quips about annexation, dislike of the former president, hatred of wind power, no substance in trade talk.

Carney, I suppose could just print up a trillion dollars to buy into the States. Other nations, notibly Japan and Switzerland have done similarly. But such purchases don't jive with the multi-polar world we're headed for.

PM Carney you came up with a trillion dollars if such a thing actually exists in Canada. Your sworn duty to Canadians requires you to invest the trillion dollars in Canada.
Wednesday, Oct.8, 2025, in Vancouver

From the US State Department

How much do Canadians contribute to the US economy?

Every day, $3.6 billion in goods and services crosses the Canada-U.S. border, fueling a $1.3 trillion annual trade relationship. This partnership supports: 1.4 million American jobs tied to Canadian exports. 2.3 million Canadian jobs tied to U.S. exports.

"this is historical"
Canada does not have to "Come Up With" this amount, it already has a huge stake in the US and if the orange felon and the fascist regime can be overthrown, this can grow pretty much organically.
Petulant Peepee can say what he wants and his followers can repost it but those who know he is a fucking slimy dick, understand that 99% of what he states is just shit talking.
Pathetic that he is all the conservative party can come up with.
 
Last edited:

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
Recent survey by the BC Ferry and Marine Workers’ Union found 80 per cent of members responding said they’ve been threatened with violence. More than nine in 10 witnessed threats, and nearly two-thirds say the incidents affect mental health. Incidents include passengers driving vehicles toward staff, biting and kicking, the union said. Nearly half of survey respondents said violence or threats have made them consider quitting.

Billions in Chinese ferry contracts to placate clown acts. Could wait a few years for a local contractor to build for BC.
 

Crookedmember

I Don't Member
Sep 2, 2017
1,524
2,034
113
Billions in Chinese ferry contracts to placate clown acts. Could wait a few years for a local contractor to build for BC.
Could be more than a few years. Which will mean cost increases. Then years more to build.

Canada-China trade is about $120 billion per year. With Canada exporting $60 billion to China, and China exporting $60 billion to Canada.

The ferry deal is part of a normal trade relationship that has been made political to score cheap points.
 

licks2nite

Active member
Nov 30, 2006
996
185
43
AI Overview
In 2024, the total bilateral trade value between China and Canada was approximately C$118.71 billion, a slight decrease from the previous year. Canada exported about $30 billion in goods to China, while it imported roughly $87 billion from China, resulting in a trade deficit of approximately $57 billion for Canada.

This sh*t has to stop.
 

80watts

Well-known member
May 20, 2004
3,221
1,172
113
Victoria
The problem with shipbuilding in Canada is the high labour costs. Which usually means high material costs. China has lower wages and lower material costs. Even low IQ morons of politicians should be able to see that.
The only result of any national ship building program is to have a ship yard (that is convertible for construction needs) and has a constant building program to keep long term employees employed. Not this build a ship class for the navy every 30 years.

Without a shipbuilding strategy for Canada, Canada will lose the Arctic to China and Russia as the ice melts for longer periods every year. Lets think gas and oil and mineral wealth Canada will lose out on for future use.

Southern Ontario is a bog of transportation hell due to traffic light ideaism (the use of traffic lights instead of off-ramps). Ontario will have to reposess property to have a better efficient highway/transportation system. Its not going to be cheap.

The current models depend too much on trailer truck transports instead of bulk transport by trains or ships.
Also AB,SASK and MB have to have a better transportation infrastructure for large overweight shipping items.
Ideally Northern Ontario can produce (hydro-electric) is is a good place for major manufacturing. Its just short of heavy transport items.

Politicians have to take their heads out of their asses and talk to industry. Limit profits to 10%, just like WW2 USA, so that we build things that Canadians need.

The priority for Canada should be:
1. Independent Food supply (building hot houses for use in winter months- like the 6 million dollar man, we Canada have the technology)
2. National ship building industry (supported by mining and heavy industry, heavy metal casting and machining and 3d printing).
3. High tech investment (Electronic-phones, chips, 3D printing)
4. Housing strategy (multi-generational, highrise apartment, instead of single famiily homes in large cities).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lounge lizard 101
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts