Trudeau how can he win the next election

Status
Not open for further replies.

wetnose

Well-known member
Mar 23, 2003
2,049
460
83
South Vancouver
As far as revenue raising measures, a flat tax is regressive. It's not fair to tax someone making $20K @ 22%, because they're barely making ends meet. Our marginal tax system works fine as it is. Maybe the size of the brackets should be tweaked but that's about it.

I would favor a Tobin tax instead. Tax every financial transaction 0.2%. Shares, real estate, bonds, derivatives. So if someone buys $100 of shares, $0.20 is added on as a tax. If you bought a cup of coffee, would you notice if it was short by 0.2%??? But the cumulative effect would be huge.
 

CanineCowboy

Active member
Feb 5, 2010
608
159
43
80watts, I hope that you haven't forgotten that when Harper had a minority government he also prorogued parliament to avoid having his government dissolved by a non confidence vote.

Stormrider, at least Trudeau allows the parliament to sit, when Harper would just shut it down if things got too uncomfortable. And even when it was sitting, Harper's attendance at question period was lower than previous Prime Ministers, attending only about a third of sessions in his last two years in office. So Trudeau may stammer or be evasive, but he at least shows up and doesn't stymie democracy.
 

Lo-ki

Well-known member
Jul 18, 2011
3,672
1,808
113
Check your closet..:)
"So Trudeau may stammer or be evasive, but he at least shows up and doesn't stymie democracy."

That's all that he does is......SHOW UP.......AH UMM..... AH UMM.... AH UMM....
 

Hugh Jass

Banned
May 11, 2015
306
1
16
80watts, I hope that you haven't forgotten that when Harper had a minority government he also prorogued parliament to avoid having his government dissolved by a non confidence vote.

Stormrider, at least Trudeau allows the parliament to sit, when Harper would just shut it down if things got too uncomfortable. And even when it was sitting, Harper's attendance at question period was lower than previous Prime Ministers, attending only about a third of sessions in his last two years in office. So Trudeau may stammer or be evasive, but he at least shows up and doesn't stymie democracy.
What use is it when ..sure..you show up at question period....but you dont answer any questions. By the way they ALL miss lots of question periods be it Harper, Trudeau, or Mulcair. Ignatieff was barely there...ever.
 

CanineCowboy

Active member
Feb 5, 2010
608
159
43
Statistically, Harper was there less. And when did he answer direct questions? What about all those unanswered senate expense scandal questions?

I am raising it because the alt right Harper/Scheer supporters seem to have selective memories.
 

overdone

Well-known member
Apr 26, 2007
1,481
177
63
lol, how soon they forget

Zoolander was trying to shutdown the whole place every Fri, barely into his his first yr
designate one time/one day of the week, that they could question the PM

he was out double dipping while an MP, on his talking tour, his real job, promoting himself

he's Harper Lite, on most of the issues when it comes to democracy

which makes him even more of a joke, considering his continuing BS lines about how he's different

just like he claims they'll use facts

unless they don't fit the Liberals narrative

just look at what the assholes are doing in the Norman case
 

Crookedmember

Crooked Member
Sep 2, 2017
915
758
93
Actually Obama did NOT bring down the deficit. He increased it drastically however he did have to deal with the recession just as Harper had to...only worse.

This link helps explain the US debt by recent presidents..... for Republicans the failure of Reaganomics and several middle eastern wars under the Bushes were a big factor. Under Clinton the budgets were more under control but his only military adventure of note was in the Balkans in a limited role with the UN.


https://www.debtconsolidation.com/us-debt-presidents/

Mulroney was and remains a smug asshole.

Sorry for getting off topic.
You are not understanding the difference between deficits and accumulated debt.

Deficit is the annual budget shortfall. Accumulated debt is the total debt.

Obama inherited a $1.5 trillion deficit from Bush (Bush's 2008-2009 budget).

By the time Obama left office, the deficit had been reduced to around $300 billion.

Trump and the Republicans have once again increased the deficit to around $1 trillion.
 

Hugh Jass

Banned
May 11, 2015
306
1
16
You are not understanding the difference between deficits and accumulated debt.

Deficit is the annual budget shortfall. Accumulated debt is the total debt.

Obama inherited a $1.5 trillion deficit from Bush (Bush's 2008-2009 budget).

By the time Obama left office, the deficit had been reduced to around $300 billion.

Trump and the Republicans have once again increased the deficit to around $1 trillion.
Im not certain where on earth you get that $300 billion dollar deficit number from. Obamas final year had a $666 billion dollar deficit. The huge jump in the deficit that he inherited from GW came on the heels of the recession and was a huge single year jump from previous years which as you can see were around 400 billion.

https://www.thebalance.com/deficit-by-president-what-budget-deficits-hide-3306151



In any event comparing Obama's years with those of Harper you can see how while Harper got the annual deficit back under control following the recession, Obama was unable to do so .
 

Hugh Jass

Banned
May 11, 2015
306
1
16
Statistically, Harper was there less. And when did he answer direct questions? What about all those unanswered senate expense scandal questions?

I am raising it because the alt right Harper/Scheer supporters seem to have selective memories.
So now anyone who dislikes the path Trudeau is taking us down and/or provides statistics showing that Harper was financially responsible during his time in office considering the situation especially when compared to Justin is alt right?

Where did I or anyone else on here say that ANY of them answered questions ? Question period is more about political posturing and getting your face on tv news in a righteous and indignant pose than informing the public.
 

JimDandy

Well-known member
May 17, 2004
2,932
465
83
66
Lower Mainland, B.C.
I love that Trudeau has invited the Lima group to Canada to discuss Venezuela's situation. You can bet this is really pissing off China that has a huge investment in Venezuela which will likely go up in smoke if Nicolas Maduro's government is overthrown. This is a great way to give China the finger over its anal response to Canada for following the rule of law in regards to the arrest of the Huawei CFO. Canada may be small, but it can still be a pain in the ass to a behemoth like China lol.

JD
 
Last edited:

storm rider

Banned
Dec 6, 2008
2,545
6
0
Calgary
80watts, I hope that you haven't forgotten that when Harper had a minority government he also prorogued parliament to avoid having his government dissolved by a non confidence vote.

Stormrider, at least Trudeau allows the parliament to sit, when Harper would just shut it down if things got too uncomfortable. And even when it was sitting, Harper's attendance at question period was lower than previous Prime Ministers, attending only about a third of sessions in his last two years in office. So Trudeau may stammer or be evasive, but he at least shows up and doesn't stymie democracy.
Well I guess your memory is short on FACTS!Harper Prorougued Parliament shortly after an election when the trio of bozos with them being Stephane Dion(pussywimp french Lieberal)Jack Layton( the commie who did not have the balls to admit when he got caught at an asian micro as Toronto city councillor) and lastly Gilles Duceppe of the BLOC(who is retired) tried to form a coalition and hijack government.

The most common reaction by the public was.....WTF?.....I did not vote for those three asshole to form a government!That act of those three assholes was an insult to voters who just went through an election that saw a MINORITY conservative government elected for the second time.

These are the facts I present to you.

Change my mind.

SR
 

storm rider

Banned
Dec 6, 2008
2,545
6
0
Calgary
Statistically, Harper was there less. And when did he answer direct questions? What about all those unanswered senate expense scandal questions?

I am raising it because the alt right Harper/Scheer supporters seem to have selective memories.
OK lets get on to the "Senate Expence Scandal.The Senators include Pamela Wallin(EX employee of the CBC and a person being USED to being entitled...bad choice Harper)Patrick Brazzeau(native and appointed to the senate as a means of attack via his racial background....good idea....wrong person Harper) and finally Mike Duffy( former CTV employee( yet another former pig at the trough who got a bit greedy) and lastly we have the lone Lieberal Senator Mac Harb(crony Chretien appointment).

I cant get into exact numbers but IIRC Duffy got roasted like a pig over the coals and his share was $94,000.Wallin was around $120,000 and Brazzeau was I think just over $85,000.For around $300,000 in total.I will tell the tale of Mac Harb at the end.

The BIG SCANDAL was that Mike Duffy's expenses were re-paid in fully by the head of the PMO who was Nigel Wright.He essentially cut Duffy a cheque out of his OWN money outside of the situation.The money did not come from the CPC party coffers nor Government coffers.It came from his private fortune.The issue which of course the leftist media was pressing on this during an election campaign is if Harper KNEW if it had happened.

At the same time of Mac Harb was being investigated for illegal expenses.His illegal expenses were $495,000 which was/is more than ALL three Conservative combined and HIS expenses were re-paid in a single payment.But by who?There were no further questions by the media because he got swept under the rug.

I f you wish to challenge the facts.....please change my mind.

SR
 

LalaniElectrica

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2010
1,269
26
48
Nanaimo
Trudeau needs to GO! He has treaties with First Nations so he is obligated to consider them under those guidelines. He's also a 'poster" boy to any group or minority, he's an appropriator and very insincere human being. He's a poser and does not have one intelligent thing to say. He's, IMO, very negligent and irresponsible in regards to immigration, and I am a person who loves diversity, but there are major security concerns I have from my experience and from what I know... I'd just charge him with Treason and call it a day. He's irresponsible with weapons deals and mismanagement, he should have NEVER sold those vehicles to the Saudi's, they violate woman's rights and killing Yemenis etc etc... He should keep everything (assets, oil vehicles weapons etc) in Canada, make refineries by now, be self sustaining, come on, get with it... Ask trudeau any question, his answer will be some bs like we will be considering all Canadians viewpoints, and once we do so we will come to the appropriate decision. He's a fuking idiot with zero intellect... I'm actually going really easy on him right now, because I feel he is a TRAITOR to Canada I feel like he should be imprisoned as an enemy of the Country for so many things he has done, stupid, unreliable, not trustworthy, a shitty leader with zero backbone, bring back Jean Cretien any day of the week.. I'm totally ranting, but so many people feel this way and I know I'm not alone...his rein is over because of the 2 faced things he has done, he's not a LEADER, we need a LEADER, not a brainwashed follower of everything he sees in front of him with zero knowledge, especially in regards to National security... Safety first ...


From comments around the board, I know alot of people don't like him. Why? Is it because he is a Liberal, doubt it. Because he is spending more money than he has available- most likely. Or because he believes in the social system for the betterment of Canadians. Or his support of First Nations who seem willing enough to throw knives at his back because of the oil pipeline.

Pipelines and Oil supply will be a big issue; along with carbon tax.

Social programs; including universal health care will be platforms.

Bringing in more revenue should be disscussed either through natural resources; export taxes on minerals etc.

Reequipping the military with sustainable dependable equipment that is not 40 years old and is on the shelf for ready deployment.(not borrowed or rented). Replenishable and available stocks of ammunition for training(that bullet cost $1.00, but if we don't shoot it we save a dollar) great thinking--- sad for training......

Governments have to get out of the habit of paying for it out of another budget.... that just cost taxpayers more in the long run.

Mostly I predict a conservative majority.

Anybody that is saying cut taxes for the next election, won't get my vote. It seems like a win-win situation when you say I'll cut taxes. To maintain the status quo and still have tax cuts means the money has to come from somewhere? It just means the promised tax cut, is only a ways to get elected and not try to do the best for the country.

Yes I still want those social programs. For the youth, education.

Demographics - aging population and not enough health care workers to look after them in those badly run old age homes.....

Instead of ripping the country apart, try building it up.........
 

CanineCowboy

Active member
Feb 5, 2010
608
159
43
He's irresponsible with weapons deals and mismanagement, he should have NEVER sold those vehicles to the Saudi's, they violate woman's rights and killing Yemenis etc etc...

Actually the armoured car deal with the Saudis was made while the Harper Conservatives were in power...Trudeau is stuck with continuing the deal because the way the contract was drawn up puts Canadian taxpayers on the hook to pay $1 billion in penalties if we withdraw.
 

Hugh Jass

Banned
May 11, 2015
306
1
16
He's irresponsible with weapons deals and mismanagement, he should have NEVER sold those vehicles to the Saudi's, they violate woman's rights and killing Yemenis etc etc...

Actually the armoured car deal with the Saudis was made while the Harper Conservatives were in power...Trudeau is stuck with continuing the deal because the way the contract was drawn up puts Canadian taxpayers on the hook to pay $1 billion in penalties if we withdraw.
And when the deal with Harper was made the Saudis were not at war in Yemen, or physically anywhere. The war began under Trudeau's watch around 3 years ago.
 

80watts

Well-known member
May 20, 2004
2,433
640
113
Victoria
The vehicle deal/contract is between the saudis and the company suppling the vehicles. It needs gov approval before it can go ahead because of security/sensitive technology may be involved. Usually that stuff is handled in the government department by civil servants with the minister in charge informing cabinet about general. until it becomes political.... a means of counting.....

The contract provides employment for company workers and taxes back to the government from the employees. This is the main reason it is still in effect, for the employment of Canadians.

I would like to think politicians are mature adults and argue only the merits of the discussion; but its so much easier to sling mud about the personal attributes of the other guy....

So nowadays any failure in achievement is declared a lack of leadership; which is and sounds like a personal attack on the person in charge of the failure....

Stick to the issues, and stay away from the name calling... but politicians these day rarely do....

"Stick and Stones may brea....."
 

dumass

Active member
May 1, 2018
305
196
43
So now anyone who dislikes the path Trudeau is taking us down and/or provides statistics showing that Harper was financially responsible during his time in office considering the situation especially when compared to Justin is alt right?
.
Yes. It is a Far-left tactic to brandish anyone who simply disagrees with the asinine path Trudeau has taken this country as Alt-Right, to undermine one's character as opposed to having a fact-based discussion on the merits. It's easier to call someone names and run away, than to logically disprove a political point. In fairness, that's all one can do when they only have 'emotions' and not 'facts' on their side.

Well I guess your memory is short on FACTS.....
These are the facts I present to you.

Change my mind.

SR
Thanks for bringing the full facts to the table, and not just a Leftist view which conveniently ignores context of because it doesn't support their narrative.
Waiting for my mind to be changed also...
 

dumass

Active member
May 1, 2018
305
196
43
...Trudeau is stuck with continuing the deal because the way the contract was drawn up puts Canadian taxpayers on the hook to pay $1 billion in penalties if we withdraw.
Speaking of 'on the hook', How many Billions did we lose now by overpaying for the TM pipeline? most estimates say there was at least a 1Billion dollar overpayment + additional 700million yearly, until the disaster gets off the ground.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts