Justin Trudeau was bad, but Mark Carney will be far worse
- Thread starter bazokajoe
- Start date
Um, and you think you are different?
How do you propose that we work together with these differences?
Hey seth gecko - re post #98
if it is not worth your time , then do not bother
that is beyond arrogant , so i wont read what is not really worth your time
reading it is not worth my time.
Last edited:
Good question - having actual face to face conversations is the only way - to break down stereotypes and understand another point of view.
There is an organization in the US which seeks to get both Democrats and Republicans to talk to each other, it is actually working.
The same can work here in Canada. Here is a link to their Website:
Braver Angels
I get really pissed off when Radio Hosts go on about Doug Ford or PP and his "far right" supporters, who maybe just want accountability and fiscal responsibility and sustainable social programs.
Radio Hosts or CBC new anchors should just play music and talk, not get outside their lane, or be actual journalists and report the news from both perspectives.
Today's so called journalists know practically zero about economics, while complaining that social programs are under threat, so voting Liberal or NDP is seen as the only viable option, which is mind blowing, when the exact opposite is true.
As a taxpayer, as we all are, I am painfully aware of the waste and over taxation of the population.
Even at the local level Toronto is full of people that literally sit and do nothing. This has been reported and discovered with GPS tracking, which was halted due to privacy concerns.
Social programs are critical, but without a strong, growing tax base, that is all under threat. It pains me that we as a country spend far more on debt interest than on Health Care Transfer Payments, while complaining that DOFO is an evil man and somehow his crazy plans for the 401 tunnel or the SPA are soley responsible for long lines at the emergency, or no family doctors. That is completely misleading.
The problem goes much deeper.
No sane person runs a household and keeps increasing their debt payments every year on borrowed money, while running out of money to pay for groceries.
Ah, I see, we're discrediting journalists now because foreign trade is just so complex and boring for the average mind, right? Well then, let me save you some time, or better yet, give you a chance to revise that take.
Riddle me this: does Trump, with his stellar economics background (you know, that one course at Wharton), really have the chops to craft a tariff policy without accidentally lighting the global economy on fire? I mean, we're already seeing 20–25% price hikes on phones, PlayStations, and basically anything with a microchip. But sure, in your view, he’s the economic oracle (sorry @The Oracle, no pun intended)—unlike those pesky journalists and business analysts who at least pretend to understand global markets.
Right?
Sony hikes PlayStation 5 price by 25% as Trump tariffs bite
PS5 digital price in UK would rise to £430 and €500 in Europe as Japanese games developer cites ‘challenging economic environment’
www.theguardian.com
I'm not saying Trump his handling it well. I'm simply saying a $1 trillion trade deficit is not sustainable and contributes to global economic instability. Much of this is a reckoning that is long overdue.Ah, I see, we're discrediting journalists now because foreign trade is just so complex and boring for the average mind, right? Well then, let me save you some time, or better yet, give you a chance to revise that take.
Riddle me this: does Trump, with his stellar economics background (you know, that one course at Wharton), really have the chops to craft a tariff policy without accidentally lighting the global economy on fire? I mean, we're already seeing 20–25% price hikes on phones, PlayStations, and basically anything with a microchip. But sure, in your view, he’s the economic oracle (sorry @The Oracle, no pun intended)—unlike those pesky journalists and business analysts who at least pretend to understand global markets.
Right?
Sony hikes PlayStation 5 price by 25% as Trump tariffs bite
PS5 digital price in UK would rise to £430 and €500 in Europe as Japanese games developer cites ‘challenging economic environment’
Now if you read something that waxes on about global economic summits and mutually beneficial trade agreements, that's the other extreme to Trump's bull in a China shop approach. It's likely that China and a few other nations won't play nice on trade and will continue to be trade predators. The WTO has no bite and there has never been such a thing as free trade.
And yeah, journalists are more interested in framing everything along partisan lines because that's where their audiences are.
Also, people need to read more (not watch TV news). Read things that dig deeper than soundbites and headlines. Go beyond general mainstream newspapers. They're not all going to agree with my thoughts, but I think you can tell when you are getting a more balanced take without axes to grind.
Look, no one’s arguing that a trillion-dollar trade deficit is healthy, but let’s not pretend Trump’s wrecking-ball routine was some masterstroke of economic strategy. There’s a difference between disrupting a broken system and blindly smashing it while hoping something better magically emerges. Spoiler: it didn’t.
Yes, China plays dirty. Yes, the WTO is toothless. But if your answer is slapping tariffs on allies, tanking supply chains, and making everyday goods more expensive for your own citizens, congrats, you’ve made a point. Just not the one you think. That’s not fixing trade, it’s lashing out without a game plan.
And sure, the media has its biases, especially Fox and the Right podcasters Trump has placed in the media room. But this “everyone but me is partisan” shtick is tired. You’re not some above-it-all truth seeker just because you distrust headlines. Reading off-grid blogs and contrarian takes doesn’t automatically mean you're getting to the "real story"—sometimes it just means you're shopping for the narrative you like better.
I find it funny that you have convinced yourself that we need "adults running the country" after a decade of propping up Trudeau and his policies. I also find it funny that you don't even reference the cozy relationship between Eurasia Group, Carney, and the Liberal party and try to pass yourself off as someone who who knows people at a level I don't.
The Liberals pulled a fast one and what we have witnessed well before the election was a coronation. Masterfully put together using the backdrop of fear mongering. Had nothing to do with Poilievre directly. He has been running the same campaign for a few years and did not significantly change his platform.
The Liberals on the other hand, simply "borrowed" key platform policies (carbon tax removal, immigration control, government reduction, etc) which were negatively impacting them. They played the fear mongering card much better than the Conservative campaign.
And after all that, they end up with a minority whos supporters were sold a fantasy that Carney would be able to "stand up to Trump" better than anyone else...but no one can explain how exactly?
My point is if one tries to frame everything in terms of political parties and political personalities you lose the big picture. That's certainly a problem with both mainstream media and social media.
I'm glad that people here in the U.S. are talking about global trade. That might be the one upside from the disruptive and chaotic Trump trade policy.
Since you seem to be reactive to anti-Trump media, I'll tell you to buckle up. I can't see how the U.S. can address China on the trade front without breaking some eggs. Ohhh, those all so expensive eggs!!
Actually you guys seem to jump from "Carney is not an idiot" to "I back Trudeau".
This is why you lost. Zero nuance to you.
On what planet does Carney's education, achievements in the private sector, public service in real jobs compare to Poilievre or Trudeau, who are basically two people with a similar lack of real world experience? I'll throw in Harper by the way, he was basically a hack indirectly too.
I didn't back Trudeau and would simply have sat out yet another election if he was dumb enough to run.
It's for the same reason that me and many other people would never vote for Poilievre even though we agree with many of the things (but not all) his party think are important.
As far as Carney, you would have to be a hardcore partisan in a way that I am not to deny he's vastly more qualified than Poilievre to handle the economy.
He advised Harper, who is just an idiot, and he advised Trudeau, who failed economically also but at least a well-meaning idiot.
You want to hold Carney responsible for one guy he advised but not the other, I choose to hold the leader responsible for what he does because 500 people pass themselves off as knowledgeable and the buck stops with the actual leader.
Mulroney was Conservative and actually a very transformative figure. Some scandals for sure, but made brilliant decisions on many different files.
Chretien was similarly transformative and even more effective, but he would tell you he built off what Mulroney did. Again, micro scandals that annoyed people but whatever.
Different parties, but both guys who made a lot of excellent decisions that grew the country ... had Harper not completely fucked up the platform those two built, we would have been a superpower by now.
And Trudeau was equally a failure economically.
So you can fire away with simplistic partisan rants about non-issues or give a guy with an actual brain a shot at fixing the mess Harper and Trudeau left us.
Maybe he succeeds or fails but at least he has the skills to deserve a shot.
Good point. Poilievre didn't change since just January.
The Liberals popped in a distinguished looking candidate who sold somewhat of a Conservative-Lite approach. Time will tell how committed the Liberal party is to this platform.
As I noted before, the governing party in any nation always has factions who want certain things. Will the progressives who support Carney accept a moderation in Liberal governance?
As an American, I'm fascinated by the mechanics of parliamentary systems. Isn't it correct that for Carney to hold the Prime Minister position he needs a majority vote in Parliament? And that can support can be pulled at any time or after some period with new elections called?
I would never presume a Central Banker is a great steward of the economy. Central Banks around the world have made many blunders in the past twenty-five years. The global inflation we saw 2021-2023 that still lingers is a Central bank problem. By the way, it's no longer supply chains. It's not evil corporations and mysterious investors cornering markets and raising prices.
Exactly. You don't need to be a Central Banker to run a country. You can have one or two in your cabinet or in your advisory circle.
You need to be more specific in laying out this argument that Harper fucked up Canada and denied it superpower status. I think you start off with reasoned arguments but then couldn't resist falling into the liberal deceit of making personal attacks against recent conservative leaders.
The way I see it Canada enjoyed a good run economically under Harper until the commodity crash of 2015. Even the global recession of 2009 was relatively mild for Canada. There's no way around the fact that the Canadian economy relies on commodity production more so than most industrialized countries.
Last edited:
Drifting all the way back to Harper and Mulroney I see. That's desperate.
I see you're mesmerized by Carney's resume even though he has done nothing so far. And you call others partisan???
ps Harper had to deal with a global economic meltdown and didn't grow our national debt anywhere near what Trudeau did by the time he left office. Carney helped Harper back then but after the meltdown in 2011, but he obviously lost his touch by the time he started advising Trudeau in 2020 judging by the size of the debt we have right now and how poor our GDP per Capita is compared to the rest of the G20.
Um.
Trump said that Carney won because of HIM. LOL.
Trump responded with "never say ,never" to the 51st state. And continues talking about 200 billion subsidies. Meaning he knows Carney is WEAK.
Trump crushed Freeland, who made Carney her sons godfather, right in front of his face and he didn't say shit.
Nothing has been negotiated on Tarriffs. If anything Canada's 9 billion dollar film industry just got hit with 100% tarriff.
meeting was very cordial and professional i will say.
After a period of time, I think 18 months (I could be wrong), the opposition can call for a non-confidence vote to trigger an election.
The last few times this happened, the Liberals were saved by their NDP partners who's parliamentary members voted against an election.
A brief history of time...
Shortly after Trump's win, the Liberals unveiled their fall financial statement and basically had lied about how much their deficit was. Turns out it was in the $billions. Trudeau then threw his finance minister under the bus, and the rats started to eat themselves. Trudeau resigned in early January.
Carney was already waiting in the wings and the staged election campaign for the new party leader was good for show but that was about it. That's where democracy crumbled and they crowned their new leader despite protests from people running for that position being excluded and a bunch of shady stuff going on.
But I digress.
Sometimes the U.S. system seems messy particularly when we have a President from one party and part or all of the legislature from the other party.
I do like direct voting for the Nation's leader. A candidate can cut through all the party crap and static making their appeal directly to the American public going over the party apparatchik. They don't have to pay their dues within the party or have a family legacy. Of course, we have had recent legacy candidates (Bush, Clinton), but we the people decided the leader.
Last edited:
You don't really know much about Canada or you're just young.
Chretien and his finance minister Paul Martin crushed the federal deficit and slimmed the bloated federal bureaucracy.
The country was in SURPLUS and the central question being debated was how long it would take to get Canada out of debt, not deficit.
Nobody had a better fiscal record ... built in part of Mulroney wrestling down inflation and bringing in the GST.
Then Harper fucked us.
Rather than keeping the GST exactly where it was and continuing to run surpluses while paying down debt, he cut the tax the economy could easily sustain and squandered the income tax yields that worked on ... tax credits for soccer moms and othera who might vote for him.
He had every chance to be an actual conservative and finish what Chretien started and instead, he fucked the nation long before there was any financial crisis.
That he gets a pass for this from you and other fake conservatives is a joke.
Trudeau said deficits didn't matter and proceeded to prove it, wasting tax dollars on reinflating the bureaucracy.
So the two of them, Harper and Trudeau, wrecked our government capacity long before excuses like 2008 and Covid appeared.
If Harper fucked us, does that apply to Carney too?
From guys like you, it's always Harper did a horrible job for Canada, until Carney came along. Then it became Carney did a great job for Canada.
So which is it, Canada did good or Canada did bad?
Harper fucked us long before the financial crisis.
Carney wasn't responsible for the decision to cut the GST and to cut income tax revenues to buy votes from Karen in suburbs with tax credits that didn't produce economic value.
We have no idea whether Carney will fuck us or not quite yet.
If he builds shit that can be sold in whole or in part to get the money spent back ... like nuclear reactors or houses or toll highways or grain ports or whatever .... efficiently ... then he is better than either Harper or Trudeau.
If he just spends money the way those two did, he's the same.
