Page 37 of 42 FirstFirst ... 27333435363738394041 ... LastLast
Results 3,601 to 3,700 of 4109

Thread: Liberals And Trudeau - Performance Review!

  1. #3601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Time for Trudeau effect thread comparable to the Trump effect thread.



    Canada adds record-setting 106,500 jobs in April


    “Canada’s job market bounced back in April in a big way by adding 106,500 jobs, which is the most ever created in a single month.

    Most of them were full-time ...”


    https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/he...183525033.html

    Thanks Trudeau!!!!
    In comparison, the U.S. added 263,000 new hires in April. The population of the US is nearly 9 times larger. It would be the equivalent of Canada adding 940,000 jobs, or 3.5 times the rate of US job creation.

    Very spectacular indeed.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  2. #3602

    Default

    It seems that Jason Kenney had no problem choosing the single source option for political reasons.

    Electoral calculations around Quebec shipyard laid bare in Norman court docs

    Burke told the Mounties that many senior public servants opposed the idea of accepting Davie's proposal before considering bids and were prepared to recommend a competition to Conservative cabinet ministers in April 2015.


    But then-defence minister Jason Kenney ultimately sold ministers on the Davie plan, according to Burke, as he emphasized both the military and political importance of signing a deal.


    "He made quite an impassioned speech about the importance of the Davie option and how the navy needs better capability and it can help with humanitarian operations and we have to support our navy,'' Burke told the RCMP.


    "And the politics got into (it) as well. He was quite open and talking about: 'We have an election coming up and Lévis is an important riding, it often goes to Conservative(s). You don't get a lot of Conservative ridings in Quebec."

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montr...ium%3Dsharebar
    Contract worth 700 million. 92,000 electors in the riding. Works out to about $7,600 per elector in order to elect a Conservative.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 10-05-2019 at 09:25 AM.

  3. #3603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    It's the only way, Admiral Norman, a highly decorated man, would have a chance , of clearing his name.
    Have to admit to not following this case closely. But what actual evidence is there that the Trudeau government politically interfered with the criminal investigation led by the RCMP?

    On the other hand, it sure looks like three former senior Harper government defence ministers did stick their noses in with Kenney even bragging about his role on Instagram. If these former Ministers had information germane to a criminal investigation didn't they have an obligation to share it with the RCMP as well as Norman's defence team? What kind of games were they playing?

    What an unbelievably specious take. The Active Govt/prosecution withheld information from the defense team and prosecution the whole time, never granted it and the former govt GAVE information to the defence team (upon request) and which was shared with the prosecution the first time they were asked. At no point had the RCMP or the prosecution sought out that information from the prior government at any time. Leaving us with two scenarios. Either the prosecution and RCMP investigations were incompetent, or they were influenced, at the minimum with the information they received being limited and skewed. This indeed is a difficulty with selective release of information and not allowing the Prosecution, or the RCMP full details.

    Given that circumstance you choose to single out the Cons. What a convoluted thought process. I would refer you instead to Henein's observations on difficulties with this case,, and the independence of law.

    Maybe you should follow the case a little before making accusations.


    As far as evidence that the Govt interfered we already know the liberal definition of that term is variegated. To suit their needs. We do know that the RCMP investigation and prosecution had tenuous grounds, that this was from the start a suspicious case against Norman, and one that from the outset seemed to lack the evidence to substantiate the charges, which is now completely confirmed.

    Circumstantially it could even be said (and has been by political pundits nation wide) that it was even prudent at this point for the Liberals to not have this go forward, and certainly not have this be in court around election time.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  4. #3604
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    ^I was asking questions, not making accusations.

    And what do you mean by the statement "the active govt/prosecution withheld information from the defense team and the prosecution the whole time." The prosecution withheld information from the prosecution?

  5. #3605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^I was asking questions, not making accusations.

    And what do you mean by the statement "the active govt/prosecution withheld information from the defense team and the prosecution the whole time." The prosecution withheld information from the prosecution?
    So you're in the habit of asking nebulous accusatory questions, without substantiation, on matters you know very little about? (from your own disclosure) Of course somebody would call that out.

    https://torontosun.com/news/national...f-800c30c86a22

    The Govt withheld information from the Defense team. Why the Prosecution/RCMP did not obtain or look at, or utilize the information from the acting government at the time is anybodies guess. But It doesn't take a lot of thought to infer that the Liberals knew the case was weak, actively left out information from the prior government on this file. Once the prosecution had the information pertaining to the Norman case, from the Con government parties involved, the prosecution correctly decided there was no case, and no reasonable hope of prosecution. So that the entire exercise was a waste of tax money, waste of time, and simply an unsubstantiated attack on Norman. For which there will almost certainly now be a subsequent suit, by Norman, to compensate for damages.

    This all occurring simultaneous to Lavscam. Henein astutely made that connection for all of us to see, even if you don't.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  6. #3606

    Default Challenging propaganda

    This analysis is bang on -basically, the worlds carbon emissions are growing at a rate more than Canada’s entire emissions every seven months. Our impact on global climate is basically nothing, so pretending carbon taxes or similar will stop the next flood is beyond asinine:

    https://business.financialpost.com/o...box=1557493214

  7. #3607
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    ^^Heinen's astuteness as a criminal defence lawyer is not in question. But in trying to shape the narrative around how Norman was allegedly wronged by the RCMP, she is certainly not an impartial party.

  8. #3608
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    It's the only way, Admiral Norman, a highly decorated man, would have a chance , of clearing his name.
    Have to admit to not following this case closely. But what actual evidence is there that the Trudeau government politically interfered with the criminal investigation led by the RCMP?

    On the other hand, it sure looks like three former senior Harper government defence ministers did stick their noses in with Kenney even bragging about his role on Instagram. If these former Ministers had information germane to a criminal investigation didn't they have an obligation to share it with the RCMP as well as Norman's defence team? What kind of games were they playing?
    Those three and PM Harper, offered to help two years ago, they knew VA Norman was being used, so Brison could help the Irving family..
    They knew all the same players that were involved with Lavscsm, were involved in this. The RCMP did nothing, and JT held documents back that he didn't want anyone to see. ..he's a liar, who suppressed evidence, not Harper, he offered up everything he had on the matter. Normans lawyer called them , finally!!!!!
    Last edited by H.L.; 10-05-2019 at 11:17 AM.
    Animals are my passion.

  9. #3609
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^I was asking questions, not making accusations.

    And what do you mean by the statement "the active govt/prosecution withheld information from the defense team and the prosecution the whole time." The prosecution withheld information from the prosecution?
    So you're in the habit of asking nebulous accusatory questions, without substantiation, on matters you know very little about? (from your own disclosure) Of course somebody would call that out.

    https://torontosun.com/news/national...f-800c30c86a22

    The Govt withheld information from the Defense team. Why the Prosecution/RCMP did not obtain or look at, or utilize the information from the acting government at the time is anybodies guess. But It doesn't take a lot of thought to infer that the Liberals knew the case was weak, actively left out information from the prior government on this file. Once the prosecution had the information pertaining to the Norman case, from the Con government parties involved, the prosecution correctly decided there was no case, and no reasonable hope of prosecution. So that the entire exercise was a waste of tax money, waste of time, and simply an unsubstantiated attack on Norman. For which there will almost certainly now be a subsequent suit, by Norman, to compensate for damages.

    This all occurring simultaneous to Lavscam. Henein astutely made that connection for all of us to see, even if you don't.

    100%!



    Admiral Norman just stated on the news "He has a story to tell in the coming days"....excellent can't wait for this!!

    There is so much more to come out and I can’t imagine Trudeau isn’t under a bed somewhere trying to think up his next “they perceived it differently” statement. ...!

    What a poor excuse of a man and even poorer excuse for Liberals who support this corruption.





    Animals are my passion.

  10. #3610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^^Heinen's astuteness as a criminal defence lawyer is not in question. But in trying to shape the narrative around how Norman was allegedly wronged by the RCMP, she is certainly not an impartial party.
    I simply referenced Henein's observations because I find them to be of greater value than your unsubstantiated suggestions.

    Lets review;

    YOU started out your foray in the thread implicitly stating you had not followed the case, ending, in the same post, with a baseless accusation, technically phrased as a query. But which, if we're being honest means that even with limited information that was the baseless question formulated in your mind, due to your apparent impartiality. Isn't that fair? You somehow made that inference, in the face of information to the contrary, because that would be what you want to believe, that the Cons were the ones guilty of withholding information.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-05-2019 at 11:30 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  11. #3611
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Canada's economy adds 106,500 jobs, most in a month since 1976

    Statistics Canada says the economy added 106,500 jobs in April

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/eco...pril-1.5130682

    So why does he keep adding to our debt?
    Animals are my passion.

  12. #3612
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    This analysis is bang on -basically, the worlds carbon emissions are growing at a rate more than Canada’s entire emissions every seven months. Our impact on global climate is basically nothing, so pretending carbon taxes or similar will stop the next flood is beyond asinine:

    https://business.financialpost.com/o...box=1557493214
    Very interesting..very!


    The green party are hypocrites


    Take Andrew Weaver , is he really okay with LNG and the “fugitive emissions” , or is he simply going along with Horgan to stay in power? He could bring the government down over this, and he's with the party, others have said, is the only party to care, so why has he not done this? Is he concerned about fracking?
    Last edited by H.L.; 10-05-2019 at 11:49 AM.
    Animals are my passion.

  13. #3613
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    City of Champions
    Posts
    7,476

    Default

    Default
    Yup thank you Justin for the 21,000 new Alberta jobs mostly part time. While you cost between 75 and 100,000 much higher paying oil field jobs.
    But at least he saved SNC Lavalin jobs so they can get more hookers for Saudi Arabians.

  14. #3614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Canada's economy adds 106,500 jobs, most in a month since 1976

    Statistics Canada says the economy added 106,500 jobs in April

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/eco...pril-1.5130682

    So why does he keep adding to our debt?

    Right...


    Trudeau government ran $3.1-billion surplus in first 11 months of 2018-19
    https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trud...8-19-1.4396509

    Gotta spend money to make money.

    Since you are a 'YUGE' Trump supporter, how come you are totally silent on theother thread that Trump lost more than any other American and did not pay any taxes during a 10 year period?

    But then again, you like attacking our country and supporting Trump
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  15. #3615
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    ^^Could someone please provide a source for the alleged loss of up to 100,000 oil field jobs? This is the third different poster that has quoted this number as if it were established fact.

    Significant energy related job losses occurred in 2015 and 2016 when the price of oil dropped from $100 to $30 US per barrel. Very few Alberta families were unaffected by the loss of oil and gas jobs including mine.

    Not saying the claim is false or even exaggerated but it sure would be nice to have a source.
    Last edited by East McCauley; 11-05-2019 at 12:02 PM. Reason: correct typo

  16. #3616

    Default

    Don't you know? Trudeau and Notley control world oil prices, even when they're not in power. They're insidious!

  17. #3617

    Default

    Job number analysis.

    High-paying gigs are leading growth in Canada’s strong jobs market, economist says

    A report released earlier this week from Indeed.ca economist Brendon Bernard, however, challenges the idea that low-paying positions are leading recent job growth.


    His analysis shows a trend of gains in high and middle-wage jobs, but no significant rise in low-wage positions compared with four years ago.


    Using Statistics Canada data, Bernard found that during the 12 months leading up to March, the number of workers in high-paying roles had risen 11 per cent compared with the beginning of 2015.


    By comparison, overall employment increased by 5.3 per cent during that timeframe, he pointed out.

    https://globalnews.ca/news/5259954/h...oyment-canada/

  18. #3618

    Default

    Yup. Those that hate Trump and those that hate Trudeau are having a tough time taking these hits.

  19. #3619
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Yup. Those that hate Trump and those that hate Trudeau are having a tough time taking these hits.
    Sorry, but not sorry....JT has done more harm to Canada as a whole then any other prime minister in our history.

    He has crippled the economic engine of the country with his anti business policies and pandering to the greens with far more environmental overhauls for an already extremely environmentally responsible industry.

    He has embarrassed us with his trade missions (india trip) that have resulted in the only gains being to india with the money we paid for him to be there. Heck, he even had a convicted killer in his party while there.

    He has ****** off just about every major government for meddling in their business, further isolating us and increasing our dependence on the US. Saudi is annoyed with him, look at what China is currently doing to us, and next, likely will be russia as he fails to properly address the northern sovereignty.

    He stages photo opportunities at the worst possible time, holding up volunteers actually working while people lose their homes to floods.

    He claims to be a feminist yet forces women from his cabinet who stand up to him. He forces out other liberal members who have done minor things yet because he apologized and likely paid off a woman he sexually assaulted 18 years ago its all good. He is trying to use his political position to have a major engineering firm in Quebec avoid prosecution for corruption. He had a respected Vice Admiral get dragged through the mud because of a decision that was financially and timeline smart rather than support his ship building buddies.

    JT has got to go, he is charging the extremist views in our country by trying to silence those that disagree with his ideology, further pushing that issue to a breaking point.

    Next he’s going to meddle with long term contracts on the existing trans mountain pipeline to help BC with their fuel crisis.

    He is a drama teacher and under qualified to run a country. He doesn’t understand economics or business. A drunken monkey in a chicken costume could do a better job than he has.

  20. #3620
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?

  21. #3621
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.

    The problem with EM and JS is that yes, their law degrees could make them a better Prime Minister, but they’re too entrenched in their elitist views towards the environment. Also, the political allegiance they have is borderline socialist for the NDP and unknown for the Green party. So not only would those ideals continue to erode confidence in the oilfield, but they would tax us to oblivion.

  22. #3622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Yup. Those that hate Trump and those that hate Trudeau are having a tough time taking these hits.
    Sorry, but not sorry....JT has done more harm to Canada as a whole then any other prime minister in our history.

    He has crippled the economic engine of the country with his anti business policies and pandering to the greens with far more environmental overhauls for an already extremely environmentally responsible industry.

    He has embarrassed us with his trade missions (india trip) that have resulted in the only gains being to india with the money we paid for him to be there. Heck, he even had a convicted killer in his party while there.

    He has ****** off just about every major government for meddling in their business, further isolating us and increasing our dependence on the US. Saudi is annoyed with him, look at what China is currently doing to us, and next, likely will be russia as he fails to properly address the northern sovereignty.

    He stages photo opportunities at the worst possible time, holding up volunteers actually working while people lose their homes to floods.

    He claims to be a feminist yet forces women from his cabinet who stand up to him. He forces out other liberal members who have done minor things yet because he apologized and likely paid off a woman he sexually assaulted 18 years ago its all good. He is trying to use his political position to have a major engineering firm in Quebec avoid prosecution for corruption. He had a respected Vice Admiral get dragged through the mud because of a decision that was financially and timeline smart rather than support his ship building buddies.

    JT has got to go, he is charging the extremist views in our country by trying to silence those that disagree with his ideology, further pushing that issue to a breaking point.

    Next he’s going to meddle with long term contracts on the existing trans mountain pipeline to help BC with their fuel crisis.

    He is a drama teacher and under qualified to run a country. He doesn’t understand economics or business. A drunken monkey in a chicken costume could do a better job than he has.
    The bottom line is that for both of them, their employment numbers, long a key though conventional and very flawed measure of success, are looking fantastic.

    Moreover Trump has as many or more strikes against him. (Many nearly the same.)
    Last edited by KC; 11-05-2019 at 05:28 PM.

  23. #3623
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.
    He worked as an insurance broker for six months or so. Whoopee!

    Scheer is an Ottawa boy, born and bred. He moved west to marry and worked as an insurance broker for six months or so, before getting involved in Conservative politics. He was elected at the age of 25 and has been a professional politician ever since.

    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/joh...or-all-seasons
    You are the one who claimed Trudeau was unqualified to be PM because he worked as a teacher before entering politics. If this is the benchmark, Scheer is even less qualified.

  24. #3624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.

    The problem with EM and JS is that yes, their law degrees could make them a better Prime Minister, but they’re too entrenched in their elitist views towards the environment. Also, the political allegiance they have is borderline socialist for the NDP and unknown for the Green party. So not only would those ideals continue to erode confidence in the oilfield, but they would tax us to oblivion.
    Sheer has a BA! WOW, I am so impressed!

    At my local java joint, three of the baristas have BA's. Who knew they are Prime Minister material... ROFLMAO
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  25. #3625
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,691

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Medwards View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Time for Trudeau effect thread comparable to the Trump effect thread.



    Canada adds record-setting 106,500 jobs in April


    “Canada’s job market bounced back in April in a big way by adding 106,500 jobs, which is the most ever created in a single month.

    Most of them were full-time ...”


    https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/he...183525033.html

    Thanks Trudeau!!!!
    In comparison, the U.S. added 263,000 new hires in April. The population of the US is nearly 9 times larger. It would be the equivalent of Canada adding 940,000 jobs, or 3.5 times the rate of US job creation.

    Very spectacular indeed.

    Wouldn't Canada adding 106,500 jobs in April be the equivalent of the U.S. adding 940,000 jobs?

    Or alternatively Canada adding 29,200 jobs would be the equivalent of the U.S. adding 263,000 jobs.

  26. #3626
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.
    He worked as an insurance broker for six months or so. Whoopee!

    Scheer is an Ottawa boy, born and bred. He moved west to marry and worked as an insurance broker for six months or so, before getting involved in Conservative politics. He was elected at the age of 25 and has been a professional politician ever since.

    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/joh...or-all-seasons
    You are the one who claimed Trudeau was unqualified to be PM because he worked as a teacher before entering politics. If this is the benchmark, Scheer is even less qualified.
    And I stand by my statement. JT is not qualified to run a country. Harper was with his masters in economics, JT I wouldn’t even want as a teacher at my kids highschool.

    You brought Scheer into it, I simply have stated that working in the insurance industry opens your eyes more to finance and economics than teaching minors how to act out a scene from MacBeth.

  27. #3627
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.

    The problem with EM and JS is that yes, their law degrees could make them a better Prime Minister, but they’re too entrenched in their elitist views towards the environment. Also, the political allegiance they have is borderline socialist for the NDP and unknown for the Green party. So not only would those ideals continue to erode confidence in the oilfield, but they would tax us to oblivion.
    Sheer has a BA! WOW, I am so impressed!

    At my local java joint, three of the baristas have BA's. Who knew they are Prime Minister material... ROFLMAO
    And in my industry we have people with engineering degrees and CMA designations doing labour work. What’s your point?

    A BA could be business administration or bachelor of arts. If its the bachelor of arts, no different than prime minister nice hair has. If its a business administration degree (usually designated as BBA) it would still provide a higher qualification for Scheer.

    But hey, as a country we wanted an actor to be prime minister and thats what we got. We made our bed and are currently enjoying sleeping in it. Thankfully in a couple months there will be a chance to bleach the sheets with some nice blue bleach.

  28. #3628
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Yup. Those that hate Trump and those that hate Trudeau are having a tough time taking these hits.
    Sorry, but not sorry....JT has done more harm to Canada as a whole then any other prime minister in our history.

    He has crippled the economic engine of the country with his anti business policies and pandering to the greens with far more environmental overhauls for an already extremely environmentally responsible industry.

    He has embarrassed us with his trade missions (india trip) that have resulted in the only gains being to india with the money we paid for him to be there. Heck, he even had a convicted killer in his party while there.

    He has ****** off just about every major government for meddling in their business, further isolating us and increasing our dependence on the US. Saudi is annoyed with him, look at what China is currently doing to us, and next, likely will be russia as he fails to properly address the northern sovereignty.

    He stages photo opportunities at the worst possible time, holding up volunteers actually working while people lose their homes to floods.

    He claims to be a feminist yet forces women from his cabinet who stand up to him. He forces out other liberal members who have done minor things yet because he apologized and likely paid off a woman he sexually assaulted 18 years ago its all good. He is trying to use his political position to have a major engineering firm in Quebec avoid prosecution for corruption. He had a respected Vice Admiral get dragged through the mud because of a decision that was financially and timeline smart rather than support his ship building buddies.

    JT has got to go, he is charging the extremist views in our country by trying to silence those that disagree with his ideology, further pushing that issue to a breaking point.

    Next he’s going to meddle with long term contracts on the existing trans mountain pipeline to help BC with their fuel crisis.

    He is a drama teacher and under qualified to run a country. He doesn’t understand economics or business. A drunken monkey in a chicken costume could do a better job than he has.
    The bottom line is that for both of them, their employment numbers, long a key though conventional and very flawed measure of success, are looking fantastic.

    Moreover Trump has as many or more strikes against him. (Many nearly the same.)
    Too bad Harper isn’t as smug or sore a loser as Obama is by going to the media and trying to take credit for those jobs.
    Well known fact that some job creation strategies takes long enough to pay off where the next government gets to take credit. Could this perhaps be a similar scenario where JT gets credit for the path Harper cleared (identical to Obama taking credit for job creation under Trump)?

  29. #3629

    Default

    Interest rates are probably the biggest driver of growth (earnings, etc). The changing world with the downward trend in inflation since the early 1990s in bringing down nominal interest rates and then the central bankers driving them down to near unheard of levels 10 years ago - and keeping them down - I’d guess has been 100 times or 1000 times greater job creator than any government policy.

    Corporations have rolled debt and borrowed more on top of it to dramatically lower their weighted cost of capital. US companies with the spread advantage in borrowing have done very well as a result.

    The low interest rates have allowed unbelievable increases in debt (corporate debt, consumer debt, government debt). No one out there has any fear of debt anymore.

    Both Trump and Trudeau have just continued the already established trend of throwing ever more fuel on the fire.



    As an aside in the 1970s I once owned a 3% coupon Government of Canada perpetual issued in 1936. (I took a photocopy if it but I should have kept it as a rare financial collectible as it’s just UNBELIEVABLE that the government could have got away with issuing paper like that!!!!! It shows how people succumb to extremely flawed thinking.
    Last edited by KC; 11-05-2019 at 07:37 PM.

  30. #3630
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Guess if qualifications were important either Elizabeth May or Jagmeet Singh (who both practiced law before entering politics) should be Prime Minister.

    What qualifications other than career politician does Andrew Scheer have to be Prime Minister?
    Yes and no. Andrew Scheer has a BA and worked in the insurance industry so he does understand economics more than JT one could argue.
    He worked as an insurance broker for six months or so. Whoopee!

    Scheer is an Ottawa boy, born and bred. He moved west to marry and worked as an insurance broker for six months or so, before getting involved in Conservative politics. He was elected at the age of 25 and has been a professional politician ever since.

    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/joh...or-all-seasons
    You are the one who claimed Trudeau was unqualified to be PM because he worked as a teacher before entering politics. If this is the benchmark, Scheer is even less qualified.
    As was Harper. The critiques of Trudeau's background prior to being PM were BS, for that very reason. Harper worked in a mail room at Imperial Oil for a year or two, and then in think tanks. He had zero "real world" experience prior to becoming PM. That being said, we can see looking back that whether you agreed with his policies and how he want about achieving them or not, Harper did seem to have a plan and strategy that he executed on. Despite having the charisma of a dead fish. That doesn't seem to be the case with Trudeau, at all, even with his prodigious gifts of glad handing and retail politics. Whether that's because Butts really was his brain and Butts couldn't get past the "say feminist a lot" part of the plan, who knows? But normally it takes 2-3 terms for a government to get as directionless and caught up in (real or feigned) scandal.

    Quote Originally Posted by KC
    Both Trump and Trudeau have just continued the already established trend of throwing ever more fuel on the fire.


    That's not really a valid comparison. Canada is running small deficits that are less than the economy's growth rate, so the net debt to GDP ratio is still declining. That's not nearly the case with Trump, who is expanding the US's overall debt load as measured against GDP. Which is really the only valid comparison. Focusing on the absolute dollar value of national debt is fairly pointless.

  31. #3631

    Default

    Agreed.

    If Trudeau did not spend money on stimulating the economy or buying Transmountain, Albertans would be screaming blue murder.

    When Trudeau does the opposite, Albertans scream blue murder.

    He can't win when people are pisssed that the oil boom busted and it was not the fault of Trudeau but he makes an excellent scapegoat.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  32. #3632
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    I don't think he bears much responsibility for the state of the economy in Alberta or federally. Whether that's a point for or against him I guess depends on where you live and how you tend to vote. I think economically and fiscally he's done okay, with no huge blunders or successes (maybe the CPP expansion would count as a big success). But he certainly bears responsibility for the litany of unforced errors that started with the botched India trip and has continued almost unabated to today. Most of them are more of the optics variety and are not more "serious" ones like the SNC mess, but the fact is he piddled away a 10+ point lead over the Conservatives last fall despite no major international crises or economic meltdowns. What should have been a cake walk is now a knife fight, largely because of really boneheaded decision making on the part of Trudeau and his inner circle.

  33. #3633
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    He's been an !diot while in office. SNC, what a joke, but even worse, VA Norman. He will apologise to everyone, except those he should. For two years, this mans life has been hell due to documents the feds kept secret.. Before it even went to court, JT took upon himself to say he was guilty. Just as he said in opposition, certain pipelines would be cancelled. Trudeau is inept, incompetent and incapable of telling the truth. He has ballooned our deficit for photo ops, ruined foreign relations and generally become a laughing stock on the world stage.He needs to go!
    Animals are my passion.

  34. #3634
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Agreed.

    If Trudeau did not spend money on stimulating the economy or buying Transmountain, Albertans would be screaming blue murder.

    When Trudeau does the opposite, Albertans scream blue murder.

    He can't win when people are pisssed that the oil boom busted and it was not the fault of Trudeau but he makes an excellent scapegoat.
    it's not just about the economy or buying transmountain. and it's not just albertans…

    in addition to the economy and transmountain; there's bills 48 and 69; there's tax reform that resulted in more inequality and fewer taxes collected (although there was the finance minister's remembering of chateau's owned in france); there was creston's "different people will have different recollections"; there's the norman debacle; there's the f-35/f-16 debacle; there's veterans' affairs and indigineous and northern affairs; a non-existent arctic policy; connections with the aga khan and the irving family and freezers for sobey's; there's the treatment of wilson-reybould and philpott; inadvertently omitting alberta as a province (understandable under the circumstances) and mistaking japan for china (unforgiveable once, never mind twice); believing "the problem with ottawa is too much alberta"; his mismanaging our relationships with both india and sikhs; his mismanaging our relationships with china; his misunderstanding of the implications of brexit; his acting like a football lineman on the floor of the house of parliament;... i'm pretty sure i'm just hitting the highlights here by memory and that this is far from a complete list.

    it's not that he can't win when people are pisssed that the oil boom busted but he makes an excellent scapegoat. a scapegoat is someone blamed for the mistakes and faults of others. the boy wonder arrived where he is on nothing more than name recognition and has done an excellent job proving over and over he has insufficient depth and knowledge and skills to do the job. that's not being treated as a scapegoat, that's being held accountable for his own choices and actions.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  35. #3635

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    He's been an !diot while in office. SNC, what a joke, but even worse, VA Norman. He will apologise to everyone, except those he should. For two years, this mans life has been hell due to documents the feds kept secret.. Before it even went to court, JT took upon himself to say he was guilty. Just as he said in opposition, certain pipelines would be cancelled. Trudeau is inept, incompetent and incapable of telling the truth. He has ballooned our deficit for photo ops, ruined foreign relations and generally become a laughing stock on the world stage.He needs to go!

    H.L. you are so full of hypocrisy. On another thread you back up the biggest liar on the planet.
    Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

  36. #3636
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Edmonton PRT View Post
    Agreed.

    If Trudeau did not spend money on stimulating the economy or buying Transmountain, Albertans would be screaming blue murder.

    When Trudeau does the opposite, Albertans scream blue murder.

    He can't win when people are pisssed that the oil boom busted and it was not the fault of Trudeau but he makes an excellent scapegoat.
    it's not just about the economy or buying transmountain. and it's not just albertans…

    in addition to the economy and transmountain; there's bills 48 and 69; there's tax reform that resulted in more inequality and fewer taxes collected (although there was the finance minister's remembering of chateau's owned in france); there was creston's "different people will have different recollections"; there's the norman debacle; there's the f-35/f-16 debacle; there's veterans' affairs and indigineous and northern affairs; a non-existent arctic policy; connections with the aga khan and the irving family and freezers for sobey's; there's the treatment of wilson-reybould and philpott; inadvertently omitting alberta as a province (understandable under the circumstances) and mistaking japan for china (unforgiveable once, never mind twice); believing "the problem with ottawa is too much alberta"; his mismanaging our relationships with both india and sikhs; his mismanaging our relationships with china; his misunderstanding of the implications of brexit; his acting like a football lineman on the floor of the house of parliament;... i'm pretty sure i'm just hitting the highlights here by memory and that this is far from a complete list.

    it's not that he can't win when people are pisssed that the oil boom busted but he makes an excellent scapegoat. a scapegoat is someone blamed for the mistakes and faults of others. the boy wonder arrived where he is on nothing more than name recognition and has done an excellent job proving over and over he has insufficient depth and knowledge and skills to do the job. that's not being treated as a scapegoat, that's being held accountable for his own choices and actions.
    Excellent post!
    Animals are my passion.

  37. #3637
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    there's tax reform that resulted in more inequality and fewer taxes collected.
    Are you referring to the dip in personal income tax revenue in 2016 after the top tax bracket was increased from 29% to 33% on individual taxable income over $200,000 per year?

    When you consider how federal personal income tax revenue has grown since 2016, there is every reason to believe this was a one year blip. The real lesson to be drawn for this is how the highest income Canadians are able to use so-called tax planning strategies to have income taxed at lower rates in prior years.

    See Table 4 here:

    Personal income tax revenues increased by $9.9 billion, or 6.9 per cent, in 2017–18, reflecting economic growth and the unwinding of the impact of tax planning that suppressed revenues in 2016–17, whereby high income individuals recognized additional income in the 2015 tax year and lower income in the 2016 tax year when the 33 per cent rate came into effect.

    https://www.fin.gc.ca/afr-rfa/2018/r...#_Toc525903643

  38. #3638
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    ^

    https://pressprogress.ca/corporate-c...me-in-history/

    These companies aren't doing anything illegal, they're just managing their affairs - or the affairs of those that own them as many are controlled by individuals - such that they pay as little as possible, just as we do with our RRSP's and making sure we use all of the deductions available to us.

    The thing here is that our deductions are - or should be - ultimately tax neutral as the tax will ultimately be paid in Canada. Not so with the corporate tax havens. The tax still gets paid but at a much lower rate and to another country. This is what happens when taxes reach a level where it is advantageous for those companies and their owners to incur the considerable ongoing costs involved and the long term inconvenience because doing so allows them to retain more of that money instead of losing it in taxes.

    Canada loses the taxes, our banks lose the ability to leverage those deposits by loaning them to Canadian businesses and individuals so they can make more money and pay more taxes. The middle class ends up having to pay the shortfall through their taxes. Taxation might be the one area where trickle down benefits are actually demonstrable. I believe the federal government just announced that the results of their taxing the rich more while cutting middle class taxes by the same amount resulted in their collecting less and not more than previously paid by the rich. That's the effect at home of what this article is reporting on.

    This article is about an effect, not a cause. The rich want the same things from our tax system as most of the rest of us do - fairness and certainty - it's just that they have other options when not being treated fairly. In addition to our tax system needing to be fairer at both ends - for the rich it probably means more but fairer taxes and for the poor it means a minimum basic living income (not just a minimum basic wage). And while we're at it, for those who need benefits and support (from housing to counselling), we need to get out of the supply side of the equation and start to fund the demand side so wherever possible those individuals can exercise control over the choices that affect them and their children the most and be able to do so with the dignity we all deserve, rich or poor.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  39. #3639

    Default

    Weren't you just making the case that using terms like "the rich" and "the poor" wasn't a good thing?

    As for "the rich" wanting fairness in taxation.

    BWAH-HA-HA!!!!!

    More deductions. And end to capital gains. Pushing a "flat tax" that shifts the burden to "the poor".

    Yeah, fairness.

  40. #3640
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Weren't you just making the case that using terms like "the rich" and "the poor" wasn't a good thing?

    As for "the rich" wanting fairness in taxation.

    BWAH-HA-HA!!!!!

    More deductions. And end to capital gains. Pushing a "flat tax" that shifts the burden to "the poor".

    Yeah, fairness.
    you don't have to take my word for anything... you can research what warren buffet and howard schultz and bill gates and ray dalio and abigail disney and charlie fink and countless others think.

    or you could just dig out some memes proving me wrong with cuteness or insist they're all outliers and the koch brothers are the only ones we should pay attention to.

    although you might want to check out https://patrioticmillionaires.org/who-we-are/ before you dig yourself too deep a hole.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  41. #3641

    Default

    Based on what I've read and what I've seen, the ones you mentioned are the outliers. The ones that are pushing for tax breaks and other "tax reforms" tend to stay out of the spotlight. You don't see many of them standing up and calling for lower taxes and such for "the rich" because they know who that would play out. But, they have the ear of politicians, particularly, but by no means exclusively, those on the right. Dropping tons of cash on a political party, directly or indirectly tends to get a lot more attention from said parties than voters.

    But you're perfectly welcome to continue believing that the majority of billionaires out there are all contacting their elected representatives and saying "You know what? I want you to raise my taxes."

  42. #3642

    Default

    Many billionaires are the so call “self-made” billionaires. So I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of them are quite favourable towards higher taxes. They’ve done extraordinarily well, while being taxed, so a few points higher would have made little difference to their wealth.

    They also know how rare they are so they should understand the role good luck and timing have played. Their extreme success is an outlier. Moreover they also know that they have more wealth than they and several generations of descendants could every really need.

    However there are people that see their family as a clan and their wealth as a tool to ensure their clan builds power and influence. This is where the issue isn’t their wealth, it’s their desire for power, to be king, to create a chiefdom, to use their corporations as a tool not for the game of business but the game of power.




    Mexican billionaire pokes fun at Gates, Buffett
    The Associated Press, updated 3/13/2007

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17599905/n...gates-buffett/


    Trump And Other Billionaires Who Scored As Stingiest Members Of Forbes 400

    “Seventy-six billionaires (or nearly a fifth of our list members) earned the lowest-possible philanthropy score of one, which means they have given away less than $30 million or under 1% of their fortune in their lifetimes.
    For some it is quite intentional. One plain-spoken billionaire is blunt about his disavowal of philanthropy. Ken Fisher, who founded Fisher Investments with $250 in 1979 and now manages some $96 billion in assets, says he is “not a fan of philanthropy.” He’s not terribly interested in volunteering his time, either, and has said that sitting on the board of a nonprofit would be “distracting.” (Even still, Forbes found that he has made at least $11.5 million in donations over the years.) ...”

    “Archie Aldis “Red” Emmerson, who made a fortune in timber and is the nation’s third-largest landowner, has made similar comments. When his kids gave Oregon State University $6 million to build a forestry lab and name it in his honor, he quipped: “That’ll take you all the way to the poor farm. Better not do it very often.”

    Another high-profile billionaire has been sued over his philanthropy. In 1987, President Donald Trump...”


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/laureng...ilanthropists/
    Last edited by KC; 13-05-2019 at 01:45 PM.

  43. #3643

    Default

    ^tend to earn their income from investments also, which are often tax at 50% of normal rates. Higher taxes tend to hammer the middle classes / upper middle classes. Think lawyers, doctors, engineers, that sort of thing, which unfortunately for governments, is also a mobile segment of the population - tax them too much, and there are other countries that will take their skillsets.

  44. #3644
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Based on what I've read and what I've seen, the ones you mentioned are the outliers. The ones that are pushing for tax breaks and other "tax reforms" tend to stay out of the spotlight. You don't see many of them standing up and calling for lower taxes and such for "the rich" because they know who that would play out. But, they have the ear of politicians, particularly, but by no means exclusively, those on the right. Dropping tons of cash on a political party, directly or indirectly tends to get a lot more attention from said parties than voters.

    But you're perfectly welcome to continue believing that the majority of billionaires out there are all contacting their elected representatives and saying "You know what? I want you to raise my taxes."
    thank you for your invitation to continue to believe what my research and discussions and what i've read and seen would indicate as correct.

    and for what it's worth, i take no real comfort in knowing beforehand that you would call any indication of opinions that don't agree with your own to be outliers.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  45. #3645
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    Re kcantor post #3638 about corporate tax havens.

    So you were referring to corporate income tax rates, not personal income tax rates in post #3634?

    The Trudeau government has not raised corporate taxes during its mandate. The tax rate for larger corporations has remained at 15%. The small business corporate tax rate has been cut from 11% in 2015 to 9% in 2019.

    Source: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/da...rates_aoda.pdf

  46. #3646
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Many billionaires are the so call “self-made” billionaires. So I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of them are quite favourable towards higher taxes. They’ve done extraordinarily well, while being taxed, so a few points higher would have made little difference to their wealth.

    They also know how rare they are so they should understand the role good luck and timing have played. Their extreme success is an outlier. Moreover they also know that they have more wealth than they and several generations of descendants could every really need.

    However there are people that see their family as a clan and their wealth as a tool to ensure their clan builds power and influence. This is where the issue isn’t their wealth, it’s their desire for power, to be king, to create a chiefdom, to use their corporations as a tool not for the game of business but the game of power.




    Mexican billionaire pokes fun at Gates, Buffett
    The Associated Press, updated 3/13/2007

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17599905/n...gates-buffett/


    Trump And Other Billionaires Who Scored As Stingiest Members Of Forbes 400

    “Seventy-six billionaires (or nearly a fifth of our list members) earned the lowest-possible philanthropy score of one, which means they have given away less than $30 million or under 1% of their fortune in their lifetimes.
    For some it is quite intentional. One plain-spoken billionaire is blunt about his disavowal of philanthropy. Ken Fisher, who founded Fisher Investments with $250 in 1979 and now manages some $96 billion in assets, says he is “not a fan of philanthropy.” He’s not terribly interested in volunteering his time, either, and has said that sitting on the board of a nonprofit would be “distracting.” (Even still, Forbes found that he has made at least $11.5 million in donations over the years.) ...”

    “Archie Aldis “Red” Emmerson, who made a fortune in timber and is the nation’s third-largest landowner, has made similar comments. When his kids gave Oregon State University $6 million to build a forestry lab and name it in his honor, he quipped: “That’ll take you all the way to the poor farm. Better not do it very often.”

    Another high-profile billionaire has been sued over his philanthropy. In 1987, President Donald Trump...”


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/laureng...ilanthropists/
    i'm not sure what the correlation would - or even should - be between tax rates and philanthropy. you can be "anti-tax" and philanthropic just as you can be "pro-tax" and not philanthropic. philanthropy shouldn't be an excuse or a substitute for paying a reasonable/fair share of taxes and paying taxes shouldn't be a substitute for being philanthropic. they serve separate purposes individually and collectively and should be independent of each other.

    allowing philanthropy to be a "tax deductible amount" is self-defeating when it comes to the fairness of the tax system. on an individual basis it allows indiscriminate picking and choosing at the expense of overall government revenues in areas where taxes and tax expenditures should be neutral and non-discriminatory. when you move from individual to corporate giving, i think you are to some degree doubling down on that even more. not only does the company get similar discriminatory tax credits, those contributions come at the expense of shareholder equity and distributions thereby depriving them of the choice as to where their philanthropic dollars should be given. in that respect it's similar to unions distributing dues to areas where individual members are not supportive.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  47. #3647
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Re kcantor post #3638 about corporate tax havens.

    So you were referring to corporate income tax rates, not personal income tax rates in post #3634?

    The Trudeau government has not raised corporate taxes during its mandate. The tax rate for larger corporations has remained at 15%. The small business corporate tax rate has been cut from 11% in 2015 to 9% in 2019.

    Source: https://www2.deloitte.com/content/da...rates_aoda.pdf
    to some degree i'm "lumping them together" as i'm not sure they can be completely separated when trying to discuss the fairness of an overall tax system. there are roughly 1.2 million registered businesses in Canada employing at least one person (often the primary shareholder). almost 97.9% of them are small businesses, about 1.8% are medium sized enterprises and only 0.3% are large enterprises. at the end of the day, the system is intended to create the same cumulative amount of tax revenue regardless of the initial entity receiving the revenue through its distribution to the last beneficial owner/recipient of that revenue. focusing on any single stage of that tax process in isolation or using any single stage to support anything from charitable donations to film credits to accelerated depreciation to rrsp's to home ownership programs to education and day-care deductions only contribute to a tax system that neither the accounting profession nor cra likely fully understand.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  48. #3648
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    Would that also include "home based businesses," and people doing Amway etc?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  49. #3649
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    Would that also include "home based businesses," and people doing Amway etc?
    i think it includes any duly incorporated entity at the federal or provincial level that has a registered tax/business number with cra. most of those home based businesses are sole proprietorships don't fall into that category and most don't bother to file a tax return never mind pay any taxes on their earnings (and to be fair most of them aren't earning anything anywhere close to where any actual earnings would be at a level that would have any taxes due). they might be scamming the system to some degree but they're not likely the ones that are making it unworkable.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  50. #3650
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    Lots of the multi level marketing/IBO's that are honestly working their business do file because they can (not that I am into MLM's) claim 10% of their homes as office space.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  51. #3651
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    to some degree i'm "lumping them together" as i'm not sure they can be completely separated when trying to discuss the fairness of an overall tax system. there are roughly 1.2 million registered businesses in Canada employing at least one person (often the primary shareholder). almost 97.9% of them are small businesses, about 1.8% are medium sized enterprises and only 0.3% are large enterprises. at the end of the day, the system is intended to create the same cumulative amount of tax revenue regardless of the initial entity receiving the revenue through its distribution to the last beneficial owner/recipient of that revenue. focusing on any single stage of that tax process in isolation or using any single stage to support anything from charitable donations to film credits to accelerated depreciation to rrsp's to home ownership programs to education and day-care deductions only contribute to a tax system that neither the accounting profession nor cra likely fully understand.
    But again, East McCauley was ultimately taking issue with you bringing up the tax haven problem as being something that's a direct result of Trudeau's decisions and policies in office, because as far as I know, he hasn't taken any significant steps in any direction on that issue. It's a valid criticism that more isn't being done to address the problem or that Trudeau didn't instruct Morneau to do a complete tax code re-write, but the problem is decades and multiple governments in the making and it's certainly not unique to Canada. I'm not sure why you brought it up in the context you did, either, because it doesn't particularly support your other points about Trudeau.

  52. #3652
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    to some degree i'm "lumping them together" as i'm not sure they can be completely separated when trying to discuss the fairness of an overall tax system. there are roughly 1.2 million registered businesses in Canada employing at least one person (often the primary shareholder). almost 97.9% of them are small businesses, about 1.8% are medium sized enterprises and only 0.3% are large enterprises. at the end of the day, the system is intended to create the same cumulative amount of tax revenue regardless of the initial entity receiving the revenue through its distribution to the last beneficial owner/recipient of that revenue. focusing on any single stage of that tax process in isolation or using any single stage to support anything from charitable donations to film credits to accelerated depreciation to rrsp's to home ownership programs to education and day-care deductions only contribute to a tax system that neither the accounting profession nor cra likely fully understand.
    But again, East McCauley was ultimately taking issue with you bringing up the tax haven problem as being something that's a direct result of Trudeau's decisions and policies in office, because as far as I know, he hasn't taken any significant steps in any direction on that issue. It's a valid criticism that more isn't being done to address the problem or that Trudeau didn't instruct Morneau to do a complete tax code re-write, but the problem is decades and multiple governments in the making and it's certainly not unique to Canada. I'm not sure why you brought it up in the context you did, either, because it doesn't particularly support your other points about Trudeau.
    i brought it up because i am personally aware of numerous instances on a first hand basis where last year's budget changes prompted people to dispose of canadian assets and move funds and business units to other jurisdictions and am further aware of numerous instances on a second hand basis (through appraisers, accounting firms and law firms) of many more instances of the same kinds of behavior. i believe it was and is consistent with my contention that the increased use of havens is just another part of my original comment regarding the use of any single stage of the system to try and achieve changes deemed in isolation to be desirable i.e. tax the wealthy more so you can tax the middle class less. it only works if you are actually successful in taxing the wealthy more instead of moving that taxation out of the system entirely as an unintended consequence. when your changes move past or outside the realm of fairness is when your moves fail and you receive less and not more tax revenue as a result.
    Last edited by kcantor; 13-05-2019 at 03:25 PM.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  53. #3653
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    ^ Money laundering?
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  54. #3654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Based on what I've read and what I've seen, the ones you mentioned are the outliers. The ones that are pushing for tax breaks and other "tax reforms" tend to stay out of the spotlight. You don't see many of them standing up and calling for lower taxes and such for "the rich" because they know who that would play out. But, they have the ear of politicians, particularly, but by no means exclusively, those on the right. Dropping tons of cash on a political party, directly or indirectly tends to get a lot more attention from said parties than voters.

    But you're perfectly welcome to continue believing that the majority of billionaires out there are all contacting their elected representatives and saying "You know what? I want you to raise my taxes."


    Quote Originally Posted by kcantor View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Many billionaires are the so call “self-made” billionaires. So I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of them are quite favourable towards higher taxes. They’ve done extraordinarily well, while being taxed, so a few points higher would have made little difference to their wealth.

    They also know how rare they are so they should understand the role good luck and timing have played. Their extreme success is an outlier. Moreover they also know that they have more wealth than they and several generations of descendants could every really need.

    However there are people that see their family as a clan and their wealth as a tool to ensure their clan builds power and influence. This is where the issue isn’t their wealth, it’s their desire for power, to be king, to create a chiefdom, to use their corporations as a tool not for the game of business but the game of power.




    Mexican billionaire pokes fun at Gates, Buffett
    The Associated Press, updated 3/13/2007

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17599905/n...gates-buffett/


    Trump And Other Billionaires Who Scored As Stingiest Members Of Forbes 400

    “Seventy-six billionaires (or nearly a fifth of our list members) earned the lowest-possible philanthropy score of one, which means they have given away less than $30 million or under 1% of their fortune in their lifetimes.
    For some it is quite intentional. One plain-spoken billionaire is blunt about his disavowal of philanthropy. Ken Fisher, who founded Fisher Investments with $250 in 1979 and now manages some $96 billion in assets, says he is “not a fan of philanthropy.” He’s not terribly interested in volunteering his time, either, and has said that sitting on the board of a nonprofit would be “distracting.” (Even still, Forbes found that he has made at least $11.5 million in donations over the years.) ...”

    “Archie Aldis “Red” Emmerson, who made a fortune in timber and is the nation’s third-largest landowner, has made similar comments. When his kids gave Oregon State University $6 million to build a forestry lab and name it in his honor, he quipped: “That’ll take you all the way to the poor farm. Better not do it very often.”

    Another high-profile billionaire has been sued over his philanthropy. In 1987, President Donald Trump...”


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/laureng...ilanthropists/
    i'm not sure what the correlation would - or even should - be between tax rates and philanthropy. you can be "anti-tax" and philanthropic just as you can be "pro-tax" and not philanthropic. philanthropy shouldn't be an excuse or a substitute for paying a reasonable/fair share of taxes and paying taxes shouldn't be a substitute for being philanthropic. they serve separate purposes individually and collectively and should be independent of each other.

    allowing philanthropy to be a "tax deductible amount" is self-defeating when it comes to the fairness of the tax system. on an individual basis it allows indiscriminate picking and choosing at the expense of overall government revenues in areas where taxes and tax expenditures should be neutral and non-discriminatory. when you move from individual to corporate giving, i think you are to some degree doubling down on that even more. not only does the company get similar discriminatory tax credits, those contributions come at the expense of shareholder equity and distributions thereby depriving them of the choice as to where their philanthropic dollars should be given. in that respect it's similar to unions distributing dues to areas where individual members are not supportive.
    I don’t know what proportion of billionaires are for “low” taxes to the point where they actively seek to work behind the scenes to keep taxes on the wealthy low.

    I could only make an assumption that philanthropy can be somewhat of a proxy for a willingness to pay higher taxes and a supremely wealthy person that shows anti-philanthropic behaviour/attitudes is possibly also against higher taxes.

    However, while a proportion of billionaires may be anti-philanthropy/pro-higher taxes, I feel that that proportion would be less than the proportion would be lower than the pro-philanthropy/anti-higher taxes as the anti-antis may be seeking to maximize and/or retain their wealth by being both anti-philanthropy/anti-high taxes. (And I may be very wrong here as some might believe government through higher taxes could efficiently allocate those resources according to popular and democratic desires as opposed to their own personal agendas.)

    I personally know people that have minimized taxes and then donated quite large sums. I think that is common. However I don’t think that that group would as a whole be vigorously fighting higher tax rates on the rich but instead simply maximizing tax planning opportunities.
    Last edited by KC; 13-05-2019 at 06:57 PM.

  55. #3655
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    ^ Money laundering?
    not even close... it was money earned here honestly through hard work and risk deployment but "cashed out" of canada and redeployed elsewhere to avoid proposed incremental tax levels that could hospitably be called punitive.

    some of that capital had been deployed here for generations in operating businesses or been reinvested here in numerous ventures. that's still the case, except of course for the "here" part. so government lost the planned incremental tax increases, it lost its previous tax income along with it, and it lost the leverage and circulation of having that capital in the canadian economy.

    it was legally earned, legally deployed and legally left.
    Last edited by kcantor; 14-05-2019 at 06:48 AM.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  56. #3656

    Default

    Not only does "philanthropy" give the rich a tax write off, they also get their name prominently displayed on an edifice in many cases. Not only do they avoid paying taxes on that money, they get free advertising as long as the building stands. They can give a much smaller fraction of their wealth to charity than someone who earns magnitudes less but because of the size of their donation, they're memorialized.

    And if we're concerned about what tax rates other countries have, The Cayman Islands and Bermuda have 0% corporate and income tax rates. Maybe we should do the same then.
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 13-05-2019 at 10:48 PM.

  57. #3657
    Addicted to C2E
    Mr. Reality Check

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Posts
    12,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Not only does "philanthropy" give the rich a tax write off, they also get their name prominently displayed on an edifice in many cases. Not only do they avoid paying taxes on that money, they get free advertising as long as the building stands. They can give a much smaller fraction of their wealth to charity than someone who earns magnitudes less but because of the size of their donation, they're memorialized.

    And if we're concerned about what tax rates other countries have, The Cayman Islands and Bermuda have 0% corporate and income tax rates. Maybe we should do the same then.
    while there is some truth to your first point, it is not the whole truth. firstly, i am aware of many large donations that are kept private or anonymous. secondly, the recipient organizations do not like anonymous donations and pressure the donors to go public. it is the recipient that wants the publicity and validation because it's good fundraising pr. it's much the same for naming rights which become a daily reminder that the building, foyer, lecture hall, theatre, research unit, outreach work, etc. are not publicly funded but rely on philanthropy for their existence and for their operations.

    there is some truth to your second point as well but again it is not the whole truth. while their tax regimens are not identical, they charge substantial import duties, property taxes, stamp taxes (which is not postage) etc. bermuda doesn't have an income tax but it does have an employee tax split between the employee and the employer. they are not "tax free environments". what they do offer is no income tax on income earned elsewhere in order to attract more capital and investment and taxable business activity to their jurisdictions. indeed, maybe we should do the same although i somehow think your suggestion was meant to be taken as sarcasm and not an actual suggestion.
    "If you did not want much, there was plenty." Harper Lee

  58. #3658

    Default

    ^The other thing a lot of people don't realize, is unless you break the law, you generally get taxed in two states, the state the income is generated in, and your state of residence (which typically exempts or gives a credit for foreign tax). If you put your money in a tax haven, you can reduce or eliminate both (if you are willing to move there), but you won't really generate any income there as there is minimal business activity in those states. A Swiss bank account for example, pays next to no interest (the Swiss got rich on the backs of a lot of unfortunate people in the holocaust who invested their money there to keep it from the Nazis, it sits earning no interest but the Swiss have profited from investing that cash). The people who use these accounts today aren't those trying to avoid tax, its more often someone trying to hide their wealth (e.g. a corrupt politician or a criminal - which we saw with the Panama papers, its full of Russian and Chinese bureaucrats).


    To stay rich - most people have to invest in places where businesses are, where there is economic activity and that means typically paying some tax. Not the same rate as the middle classes though, as investment income is typically taxed lower (due to competition for capital, and to encourage people to save for retirement). The US has historically generated the best investment returns over time for the last hundred years or so, and has liquidity (its easy to sell), so it attracts most of the worlds capital.
    Last edited by downtownone; 14-05-2019 at 07:50 AM.

  59. #3659

    Default

    Interesting article from the Shadow Finance Minister that lays out a bit of what the "scandal" is re the Norman case:

    https://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...in-norman-case

    As the truth comes out about the government’s persecution of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, a chilling suspicion emerges with it: Justin Trudeau used the legal system to punish somebody he considered a political ‘enemy.’.
    Norman of course, is no enemy to Canada. He is a distinguished naval officer who has honourably served the country for 30 years.

    However, that meant nothing when Trudeau decided Norman must have tipped off Davie Shipbuilding that their supply-ship contract, awarded by the Harper government, might be reallocated to Irving — important Liberal client-friends.

    Certainly, there was a leak. Embarrassed, the government left the contract with Davie.

  60. #3660
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton area.
    Posts
    8,138

    Default

    Notre Dame private donors you can now hold back, the Canadian taxpayers are coming to the rescue.

  61. #3661
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    YEG
    Posts
    1,666

    Default

    Go tax payer funded photo ops for the atheist prime minister...

    http://edmontonjournal.com/pmn/news-...c-6e82d6fad739

  62. #3662

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GranaryMan View Post
    Go tax payer funded photo ops for the atheist prime minister...

    http://edmontonjournal.com/pmn/news-...c-6e82d6fad739
    At least when it burns down next time, it will be hurting France's climate emissions, not Canada's (if for example, it was used to help build, rebuild or repair a cathedral here).

  63. #3663

  64. #3664
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drumbones View Post
    Notre Dame private donors you can now hold back, the Canadian taxpayers are coming to the rescue.
    It's all about him, his brand is dying, so who comes to the rescue? Us..
    I despise the stupid boy.
    Animals are my passion.

  65. #3665

    Default

    ^at least we can take comfort his family is eating well on our dime, from about $1,000 a month under Harper (a store called Farm Boy), to Organics stores now, a bit over $2,000 per month.

    https://nationalpost.com/news/local-...a-06a014e1eef3

    The Harpers spent, on average, a little more than $1,000 a month at Farm Boy, not an exorbitant bill for a family with growing children. They also made smaller purchases at other stores such as Market Organics on York Street, Metro, Your Independent Grocer and Costco.
    There was a steady business too with Loblaws, which had the contract for “refreshments” for the Prime Minister’s Office guests and employees, budgeted at a maximum of $13,000 a year.
    The Trudeaus brought a change in culinary style. They went suddenly and heavily organic.
    In January of 2016, the newly arrived family spent $2,533 at Market Organics, which sold both food and body care products. (The store has since closed.)
    The Farm Boy tab, meanwhile, fell to $612 in that month.
    The Trudeaus’ Market Organics tab continued in following months — $2,080 in February and $1,955 in March.

  66. #3666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    ^at least we can take comfort his family is eating well on our dime, from about $1,000 a month under Harper (a store called Farm Boy), to Organics stores now, a bit over $2,000 per month.

    https://nationalpost.com/news/local-...a-06a014e1eef3

    The Harpers spent, on average, a little more than $1,000 a month at Farm Boy, not an exorbitant bill for a family with growing children. They also made smaller purchases at other stores such as Market Organics on York Street, Metro, Your Independent Grocer and Costco.
    There was a steady business too with Loblaws, which had the contract for “refreshments” for the Prime Minister’s Office guests and employees, budgeted at a maximum of $13,000 a year.
    The Trudeaus brought a change in culinary style. They went suddenly and heavily organic.
    In January of 2016, the newly arrived family spent $2,533 at Market Organics, which sold both food and body care products. (The store has since closed.)
    The Farm Boy tab, meanwhile, fell to $612 in that month.
    The Trudeaus’ Market Organics tab continued in following months — $2,080 in February and $1,955 in March.
    Didn't Harper have a cabinet minister who liked expensive orange juice?

  67. #3667
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    ^at least we can take comfort his family is eating well on our dime, from about $1,000 a month under Harper (a store called Farm Boy), to Organics stores now, a bit over $2,000 per month.

    https://nationalpost.com/news/local-...a-06a014e1eef3

    The Harpers spent, on average, a little more than $1,000 a month at Farm Boy, not an exorbitant bill for a family with growing children. They also made smaller purchases at other stores such as Market Organics on York Street, Metro, Your Independent Grocer and Costco.
    There was a steady business too with Loblaws, which had the contract for “refreshments” for the Prime Minister’s Office guests and employees, budgeted at a maximum of $13,000 a year.
    The Trudeaus brought a change in culinary style. They went suddenly and heavily organic.
    In January of 2016, the newly arrived family spent $2,533 at Market Organics, which sold both food and body care products. (The store has since closed.)
    The Farm Boy tab, meanwhile, fell to $612 in that month.
    The Trudeaus’ Market Organics tab continued in following months — $2,080 in February and $1,955 in March.
    Didn't Harper have a cabinet minister who liked expensive orange juice?
    LOL! dig deep,dig really deep..sheesh!
    Animals are my passion.

  68. #3668

    Default

    Liberal MP proposes setting up a parallel judicial branch (i.e. kangaroo court) to warn, ticket, and fine people for saying "inappropriate" things online:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...s-to-offenders

  69. #3669
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Liberal MP proposes setting up a parallel judicial branch (i.e. kangaroo court) to warn, ticket, and fine people for saying "inappropriate" things online:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...s-to-offenders

    Oh how bloody ridiculous ..lol...
    He scrawled an idea on a napkin....then it's , quick.. give me a solution, what a nitwit..
    Animals are my passion.

  70. #3670
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    So much for free speech in Canada
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  71. #3671
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    So much for free speech in Canada
    It will never fly, it's a stupid idea,
    Animals are my passion.

  72. #3672
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Clareview
    Posts
    9,826

    Default

    They could sneak it in via an Omnibus bill.
    Mom said I should not talk to cretins!

  73. #3673
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    They could sneak it in via an Omnibus bill.
    They can give anyone tickets etc, when we are on SM..it doesn't belong to them...who do they think they are, Al Gore?,

    They should hunt around the dark web, or 8 chan..
    Animals are my passion.

  74. #3674
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    https://nationalpost.com/news/politi..._autoplay=true

    Boy, this really is awful. What this man went through. Sajjan,Brison, you're not worthy.! Neither is your dear leader!
    Animals are my passion.

  75. #3675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    So much for free speech in Canada
    It will never fly, it's a stupid idea,
    Agreed. Even if it ever became law, all it would take is a few people to share photos of the fines their grandmas are being forced to pay for "online hate speech", and it will become the most unpopular law ever.

  76. #3676

    Default

    Warning signs for Trudeau as Fall election comes into view:

    Australian Tories won a surprise election. Similarities with Canada are eye catching:

    Australia’s conservative government eked out a surprise victory in Saturday’s national elections after voters in resource-rich districts turned against center-left opponents who had put climate change at the heart of their campaign.
    And the rural vs. Cities divide:

    Underscoring the city-versus-rural divide, one of the highest-profile casualties of the election was Tony Abbott, a former conservative prime minister and climate skeptic who in 2014 championed the dumping of carbon taxes. He was defeated in the Sydney beachside district he has held for 25 years against an independent candidate who made his resistance to climate change policies her key appeal.
    from: https://www.wsj.com/articles/austral...d=hp_lead_pos7

  77. #3677
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    6,466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    So much for free speech in Canada
    It will never fly, it's a stupid idea,
    Agreed. Even if it ever became law, all it would take is a few people to share photos of the fines their grandmas are being forced to pay for "online hate speech", and it will become the most unpopular law ever.
    Unpopular, that's mild, I've seen comments on this stupidity...and he can't stand to be any more unpopular, than he is
    Animals are my passion.

  78. #3678

    Default

    I’d think that to do this; “routinely accuse their political opponents of not just being wrong, but of being immoral“ is potentially hate speech against an identifiable group (Conservative party members, followers, etc). On the examples though, the accusations were directed against individuals and not a group. However I regularly read similarly hateful prejudices expressed against people on the so called “right”.

    This type of speech against voters favouring another political party seems much like treating all believers of a religion such as this of Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu backgrounds as all having some negative quality, like terrorist tendencies. It would be racist and potentially promoting hatred towards them.

    Moreover, I’d say that this author is then doing the same thing by using “the Liberals” as if they all possess the same characteristics. Failing to name specific Liberal Party officials, party positions or saying anything individualizing just characterizes a group, “Liberals” in this case, as one identifiable group to be disparaged if not hated.



    LORRIE GOLDSTEIN: Trudeau’s ‘hidden agenda’ exposed | Columnists | Opinion | The Journal Pioneer

    “Except much of that dirt will be coming from Trudeau and his party, who, having falsely accused Scheer of being a white supremacist sympathizer, have now supplemented that attack by suggesting, with zero evidence, that Scheer wants to bring back anti-abortion laws.

    Similar to the Liberal attack on Stephen Harper when he was running for prime minister, whom the Liberals falsely accused, as the historical record now shows, of having a hidden agenda to outlaw both abortions and same-sex marriages.

    Such tactics are standard operating procedure for the Liberals, who routinely accuse their political opponents of not just being wrong, but of being immoral, on issues ranging from immigration and refugee law to their opposition to the Liberals’ “Islamophobia” motion.”...

    https://www.journalpioneer.com/opini...xposed-313315/

    Same-Sex Marriage a Civil Right? 'Vile and Disgusting' Said Harper | The Tyee


    “″‘They didn’t want to come to Parliament, they didn’t want to go to the Canadian people and be honest that this is what they wanted. They had the courts do it for them; they put the judges in they wanted, then they failed to appeal, failed to fight the case in court.’”

    Actually, the idea that the judges involved were Liberal plants didn’t add up, as Barrett noted:

    “Despite the fact that at least five of the judges involved in the two appeal court judgements were originally appointed to lower courts by Brian Mulroney’s Conservative government, Harper insisted: ...”

    https://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/06/2...-Sex-Marriage/


    Last edited by KC; 19-05-2019 at 10:49 PM.

  79. #3679

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by envaneo View Post
    So much for free speech in Canada
    It will never fly, it's a stupid idea,
    Agreed. Even if it ever became law, all it would take is a few people to share photos of the fines their grandmas are being forced to pay for "online hate speech", and it will become the most unpopular law ever.
    Unpopular, that's mild, I've seen comments on this stupidity...and he can't stand to be any more unpopular, than he is
    Seems that society always has to limit rights because if they don’t, some narcissist, bully, psychopath or simply wacky or greedy person is always going to take the view that their right includes taking advantage of others or even trying to bring harm to or somehow constrain others.


    Christie Blatchford: Ghastly Your Ward News paper goes beyond ‘mere offence’ – National Post

    “Benedet was asked to review 22 editions of Your Ward News, which is delivered unsolicited to about 300,000 people in southwestern Ontario and is also available online, for evidence of misogyny.

    She found present and pervasive the hallmarks of misogyny — rigid sex role division, with men deemed rightfully dominant; the innate inferiority of women, who are deemed base or unclean and reduced to their genitalia; a profound anti-feminist tone, wherein women are blamed for ruining society, and the notion that women are corrupt, liars and bringers of false complaints.

    The time span of the editions she was asked to review range from March 2015 to the summer of 2018, and while she found examples throughout, Benedet said later editions were “replete with all the hallmarks of women-hating and hate propaganda against women.”

    Ain’t nothing like a menstruation joke, oh hardy har har
    ...
    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chr...riminal-charge

    Your Ward News duo found guilty of peddling hate against women and Jews | CBC News

    "These are examples of the communications that the defendants made available to hundreds of thousands of homes without being asked," Flumerfelt told court.”

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...hate-1.4990806

    Bolding mine

  80. #3680

    Default

    “Several federal government departments — including the Canada Border Services Agency, the Correctional Service of Canada and the RCMP — have restricted who can see their job ads on Facebook by age, which could violate Canadian human rights law.”

    Federal departments may have broken law by microtargeting job ads

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fac...ting-1.5153463

  81. #3681

    Default

    ^surprisingly stupid - why would anyone limit who can see a job advertisement? Its funny though, they can discriminate by language (giving preference for English/French speakers, ahead of say, English/Indigenous speakers), but can't discriminate by Age.

  82. #3682

    Default

    1915 Armenia
    1933 Holocaust
    1975 Cambodia
    1990 Rwanda
    1995 Bosnia
    2003 Darfur
    2019 Canada

  83. #3683

    Default

    Great numbers. Seems to be on par with Trump even though we’re getting blocked out of markets and facing trade deal issues etc.


    Economy added 27,700 jobs in May, unemployment rate hit record low at 5.4 per cent: StatCan | CTV News

    https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/cana...-low-1.4456162

  84. #3684

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    ^surprisingly stupid - why would anyone limit who can see a job advertisement? Its funny though, they can discriminate by language (giving preference for English/French speakers, ahead of say, English/Indigenous speakers), but can't discriminate by Age.
    Yeah all these Pierre Trudeau loyalists that conveniently ignore the fact that the pre-European languages of our indigenous populations were totally overlooked in terms of the multiculturalism propaganda of that Trudeau era.

  85. #3685

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    1915 Armenia
    1933 Holocaust
    1975 Cambodia
    1990 Rwanda
    1995 Bosnia
    2003 Darfur
    2019 Canada

    Add every other nation on earth. They apparently used the originator’s 1940s or ’50s definition so if the actions fit the definition, that’s just how it is. Immigrants are essentially forced to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs too.

    Personally I originally saw the word as meaning to exterminate through murder a certain population but since reading about it, I’ve learned that the definition is like racism, and is far, far more widely applicable under common definitions.
    Last edited by KC; 07-06-2019 at 09:12 AM.

  86. #3686

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Immigrants are essentially forced to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs too.
    Do you have a source for this? I don't think its true, that people were forced to give up their beliefs (Canada didn't do to immigrants what China is trying to do to the Uighur's). Even the internment camps during the war didn't have re-education, they were just separation for the duration of the war. The only forced assimilation was to the indigenous populations, via reserves and residential schools (which is the opposite, the colonized having to assimilate into the culture of the immigrants).. Many immigrants chose to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs (especially my parents generation) - I don't think its ideal, but that was the way the world worked back then - "when in Rome...".
    Last edited by downtownone; 07-06-2019 at 09:33 AM.

  87. #3687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Immigrants are essentially forced to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs too.
    Do you have a source for this? I don't think its true, that people were forced to give up their beliefs (Canada didn't do to immigrants what China is trying to do to the Uighur's). Even the internment camps during the war didn't have re-education, they were just separation for the duration of the war. The only forced assimilation was to the indigenous populations, via reserves and residential schools (which is the opposite, the colonized having to assimilate into the culture of the immigrants).. Many immigrants chose to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs (especially my parents generation) - I don't think its ideal, but that was the way the world worked back then - "when in Rome...".
    Yeah maybe not forced but not facilitated to retain various aspects of their former situations. Legal systems, paternalistic systems, ...

  88. #3688

    Default

    Trudeau officially announces plans to ban single-use plastics as early as 2021
    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says his government will ban single-use plastics — like bags, straws and cutlery — in Canada as early as 2021.

    Trudeau made the announcement during a stop at the Gault Nature Reserve in Mont St-Hilaire, just outside Montreal, on Monday.

    A full list of banned items isn't yet set in stone, but a government source told CBC News that list could include items like plastic straws, cotton swabs, drink stirrers, plates, cutlery and balloon sticks. Fast-food containers and cups made of expanded polystyrene, which is similar to white Styrofoam, will also be banned, said the source.

    ...
    Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pla...enna-1.5168828

  89. #3689

    Default

    This article does a reasonable job of describing the costs in Trudeau pronouncing that Genocide has occurred in Canada;

    https://torontosun.com/opinion/colum...national-stage


    Its another in a series of unintended consequences which so befuddle Trudeau. His intent, clearly, is to be conciliatory to the effected peoples, but the result is much more grave. In short by adopting the irresponsible term used in the National Enquiry Trudeau has again defamed Canada, and Canadians, on the world stage. We are not only Islamaphobes and bigots now. We are murderous genocidal people that are in need of international tribunal and investigation in league with the Countries that have had the worst genocidal atrocities in history.

    This latest instance serves as a harsh reminder of why its always blatantly irresponsible to harmfully and wrongfully escalate divisive labels to serve specious and selective interests.

    In the case of undeterred name calling we all have diminished reputation. The New Canada, under Trudeau. Harmful labels and accusations. How could anybody possibly vote for this man?
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  90. #3690

    Default

    Yeah, the Sun is a bastion of reasonable, political discussion. And Trudeau didn't pronounce genocide. The Truth and Reconciliation commission and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls did. The Prime Minister simply accepted their reports and realized that there's lots Canada has done in the past that we shouldn't be the least bit proud of.

    The Sun is just upset that the reports didn't cover up the truth and pretend that all is sunshine and rainbows.

  91. #3691
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by downtownone View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Immigrants are essentially forced to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs too.
    Do you have a source for this? I don't think its true, that people were forced to give up their beliefs (Canada didn't do to immigrants what China is trying to do to the Uighur's). Even the internment camps during the war didn't have re-education, they were just separation for the duration of the war. The only forced assimilation was to the indigenous populations, via reserves and residential schools (which is the opposite, the colonized having to assimilate into the culture of the immigrants).. Many immigrants chose to assimilate and abandon their cultural beliefs (especially my parents generation) - I don't think its ideal, but that was the way the world worked back then - "when in Rome...".
    Yeah maybe not forced but not facilitated to retain various aspects of their former situations. Legal systems, paternalistic systems, ...
    KC, don't know whether to take offense at the above statements or just attribute them to your tendency to be provocative.

    In my experience, which includes working in the past for an immigrant serving agency, people move to Canada to get away from - and in some cases flee - oppression, dictatorship and misogyny in their home countries. Overwhelmingly, immigrants choose Canada because of its respect for the rule of law, human rights and democratic freedoms. Newcomers to Canada are often the greatest champions for these values which sadly are often taken for granted by those born here.

  92. #3692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Yeah, the Sun is a bastion of reasonable, political discussion. And Trudeau didn't pronounce genocide. The Truth and Reconciliation commission and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls did. The Prime Minister simply accepted their reports and realized that there's lots Canada has done in the past that we shouldn't be the least bit proud of.

    The Sun is just upset that the reports didn't cover up the truth and pretend that all is sunshine and rainbows.
    Trudeau stating "genocide"


    https://www.citynews1130.com/video/2...mmiwg-inquiry/

    "We accept the finding of the committee that it was genocide."


    Trudeau cratered, tragically, and accepted the irresponsible term. Now the reputation of Canada suffers on the world stage as a direct result of the Prime Ministers ill advised statement.

    btw this is the CBC saying the same thing.

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/geno...miwg-1.5164014



    You can discredit that source as well I guess or the near unanimous condemnation of Trudeau saying it was genocide.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-06-2019 at 11:16 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  93. #3693

    Default

    If you think Canada's reputation on the world stage regarding its treatment of Indigenous people could suffer you've not been paying attention.

    Continuing the fixation on the semantics takes away from the very real issue that exists regardless of what label we put on it.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  94. #3694

    Default

    He accepted the findings of the Committees. You make it sound like he came up with the concept all on his own.

    Perhaps you'd prefer the Stephen Harper approach. Make an apology and then say and do nothing.


    PUBLISHED JUNE 3, 2015
    UPDATED MAY 15, 2018


    Government remains silent on Truth and Reconciliation recommendations

    Stephen Harper took part in an emotional closing ceremony for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but the Prime Minister did not say a word.


    Silence has largely been the government's official response to the 94 recommendations released Tuesday by the commission, whose nearly six-year examination of Canada's residential-schools history resulted in calls for sweeping reforms to government policy and a conclusion that the system amounted to "cultural genocide."


    Those recommendations were released along with an almost 400-page summary of the final report, but the much larger version won't be released until later this year. The government now says it will wait for the final report before providing a response, a position that could potentially push any decisions until after the October election.

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...ticle24785944/

  95. #3695

    Default

    I cite this only because of how deluded it is.

    Dallaire condemns Trudeaus declaration of Genocide in Canada and so this delusional perspective is written;

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/romeo-...wandas/5680017

    "Interestingly, Dallaire’s criteria for a genocide — “a deliberate act of a government to exterminate deliberately” — better applies to indigenous people in Canada than to the Tutsi in Rwanda"

    Its sad if people can't even recognize the difference of what occurred in Rwanda vs Canada.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  96. #3696

    Default

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/

    • Overall, we rate GlobalResearch a Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy and Strong Pseudoscience website based on the promotion of unproven information such as the dangers of Vaccines and 9-11 as a false flag operation.
    *sad trombone*
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  97. #3697

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-research/

    • Overall, we rate GlobalResearch a Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy and Strong Pseudoscience website based on the promotion of unproven information such as the dangers of Vaccines and 9-11 as a false flag operation.
    *sad trombone*
    Thank you. I was unfamiliar with the site. I'll remove the link and post if you or anybody want and I did label the article as deluded.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  98. #3698

    Default

    Not calling for any sort of censorship or retraction, just providing context.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  99. #3699

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Not calling for any sort of censorship or retraction, just providing context.
    Again thank you, sincerely.

    It is positive that the source has been outed. Thank you for the Media bias link as well.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  100. #3700
    C2E SME
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    11,396

    Default

    Yeah, Global Research is very, very good at slipping past people's BS detectors. But it's pretty much nothing but all sorts of anti-West, looney tunes commentary. I don't think there's ever been evidence to show that they're a front for Russian influence campaigns, but it may as well be.

Page 37 of 42 FirstFirst ... 27333435363738394041 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •