Canadian Federal Election

[Taeolas]

Originally Posted by jonny24

Is "Super Majority" actually something that makes a difference to how the government functions, or is it just expressing that it's a very large number of seats?

PPC seems effectively dead now.

I'm not sure if it is a technical term or not. But basically, in any party you can expect some dissent in the ranks. The closer you are to the halfway point, the less dissent you can tolerate.

If you have a razor thin majority (like the States have at the moment with only a 5 seat difference in Congress), then you need to make sure ALL of your party members are whipped into line to pass your agenda (or hope for some bipartisan support from the other parties).

With a super majority, you basically have a blank check to do what you want. When you are that far above the halfway mark, you're not likely to get enough dissent to have any bills fail. It also lets you be more relaxed with your MPs, tolerating more dissension in the ranks to protect their seats while still getting your agenda across.

I'm not sure where the tipping point between Majority and Supermajority is; likely around +10 or so I'd say.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by rousseau

How it was going in 2014 before Trudeau:



How it's going now after ten years of Trudeau:

It's also important to remember when looking at Canada's GDP percapita growth over the last decade that Canada's population has grown faster than most developed countries in that time frame. If you add a new person who contributes an average amount to GDP, then that doesn't affect GDP percapita figures in either direction. While if you add someone who contributes but not quite as much as an average person, then GDP percapita will drop, even though total GDP has grown.

So the percapita figures have to consider the fact that there are many people who have not fully established themselves economically, especially since many are students. Yes adding population makes GDP grow, but not instantly. It clearly did grow significantly since the percapita GDP didn't drop despite the addition of so many more people. It also doesn't mean that incomes haven't improved for established residents, or that having additional residents won't lead to additional growth once they're established since we know they do based on plenty of past observation.

And obviously the first article has little to no relevance to the topic since the reason that Canada's middle class was wealthiest in 2014 was that so much of the developed world, particularly the US, had not recovered from the 2008 financial crash. That didn't affect Canada nearly as much since our banking sector has stronger regulations. And that isn't down to any particular government (although the Cons have historically been most included toward de-regulation, which isn't great when it's said regulations that spared us). Regardless, it's not that we had spectacular growth numbers but that comparable countries were doing worse. If one wants to make relevant comparisons it would be using like for like stats.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Global News is reporting that affiliates of India's BJP (the Hindu nationalist party of Indian PM Modi) helped fund Poilievre's leadership campaign.

https://globalnews.ca/news/11113678/over...da-modi-poilievre-conservative-election/

Why care now?

It’s not like your team hasn’t done the same thing. If anything they set the tone, Chinese communist party supporters buying up $1000 a plate dinners, bussing students to candidate elections, padding Justin’s family foundation to try to get statues of mao erected.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Taeolas

I'm not sure if it is a technical term or not. But basically, in any party you can expect some dissent in the ranks. The closer you are to the halfway point, the less dissent you can tolerate.

If you have a razor thin majority (like the States have at the moment with only a 5 seat difference in Congress), then you need to make sure ALL of your party members are whipped into line to pass your agenda (or hope for some bipartisan support from the other parties).

With a super majority, you basically have a blank check to do what you want. When you are that far above the halfway mark, you're not likely to get enough dissent to have any bills fail. It also lets you be more relaxed with your MPs, tolerating more dissension in the ranks to protect their seats while still getting your agenda across.

I'm not sure where the tipping point between Majority and Supermajority is; likely around +10 or so I'd say.

Where it makes more of a difference is in committees. They're supposed to mirror the representation ratios of the House, so if you've got say 12 members in a committee (standing committees range between 12 and 15 members) then if you have 66% of the seats in the HoC, you'd get 8 members in the committee and the other parties get 4. This means it's much much easier to get your policies and plans through committees, as you could afford three absences of your members while the other parties need everybody to show up.

And the committee level is where the NDP's cratering popularity really affects them, as you need 12 seats in the HoC to be officially recognized and thus be represented in committees. 338's got them at seven seats currently.

[kwoldtimer]

Remember the guilty parties here. We should not be blaming the victims, if they weren't aware at the time that there was foreign govt interference going on.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by travis3000

I just watched this. Agree 100%. We NEED Carney to win.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

• Video Link

A very interesting Youtube commentary

I have come to the conclusion myself that the upcoming election will be one of the most important elections in Canadian history.

This British pundit thinks the election is actually important for world history. He posits that discussions are under way amongst the actual free world nations to create an alternate trading block, and, that Canada (and Mark Carney) in particular are linchpins for this discussion. I actually think he is right.

For a change, what happens in Canada matters to the entire world.

Right now, Mark Carney has become one of the most important leaders in the world.

How often has this been said about a Canadian PM???

As Carney himself said, "if the United States choses not to lead us into the future, then Canada will."

Laurier once said the the 20th century would belong to Canada. He was only off by 100 years.

Mark Carney must win this election..............

If Generation Screwed Over is onboard, sure.

[casper]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

It has flaws. Ireland has a lot of tax haven GDP that provides a lot less relative value. Resource GDP is also often less beneficial though still a clear net positive despite some Canadian perspectives. At the end of the day it's the best indicator of overall wealth.

Last time I was in Ireland was around five years ago. It is a nice place but I don't think it is the Monaco of northern Europe.

Adding a large number of students likely had an impact. Students should be studying, not adding to GDP. Once they graduate and become productive workers in our economy then yes we should expect them to help bump GDP.

However in its wisdom, the feds have cut back on new students so the dynamics have changed again.

[jamincan]

This news about Canada and Japan agree to work together for market stability would be a point in favour of the scenario he describes in the video.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/japan-ca...bility-2025-04-09/?utm_source=reddit.com

[casper]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

If Generation Screwed Over is onboard, sure.

It has been rough for anyone in their 20s and even in their 30s. I get it. Not a uniquely Canadian problem. Same thing in the US, UK and Europe.

What you have to ask is who has the best plan for the future.

The US is going into a recession, perhaps a depression. They want to de-industrialize Canada to build up jobs in the US. That is their stated goal. We need to quickly realign with other trading partners that believe in mutual success.

Do you want a more active government that is going to actively drive that transition quickly, while building housing, build focus on building alignment with countries we trust.

Do you want a government that believes remove as many rules as possible and magically money will pour in (from the US markets?) and the free market will figure out what alignments are in its best interest.

That is the choice. This is not about one generation screwing another.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Why care now?

It’s not like your team hasn’t done the same thing. If anything they set the tone, Chinese communist party supporters buying up $1000 a plate dinners, bussing students to candidate elections, padding Justin’s family foundation to try to get statues of mao erected.

Whataboutism. Distract. Deflect.

Justin's family foundation isn't leading any Federal party right now.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jamincan

This news about Canada and Japan agree to work together for market stability would be a point in favour of the scenario he describes in the video.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/japan-ca...bility-2025-04-09/?utm_source=reddit.com

LNG for Nintendo Switch 2 bartering in effect.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Whataboutism. Distract. Deflect.

Justin's family foundation isn't leading any Federal party right now.

Wonk wonk wonk.

Practice what you preach.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Why care now?

It’s not like your team hasn’t done the same thing. If anything they set the tone, Chinese communist party supporters buying up $1000 a plate dinners, bussing students to candidate elections, padding Justin’s family foundation to try to get statues of mao erected.

100%. Way too much foreign interference in our political parties.

[trueviking]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

It's also important to remember when looking at Canada's GDP percapita growth over the last decade that Canada's population has grown faster than most developed countries in that time frame. If you add a new person who contributes an average amount to GDP, then that doesn't affect GDP percapita figures in either direction. While if you add someone who contributes but not quite as much as an average person, then GDP percapita will drop, even though total GDP has grown.

So the percapita figures have to consider the fact that there are many people who have not fully established themselves economically, especially since many are students. Yes adding population makes GDP grow, but not instantly. It clearly did grow significantly since the percapita GDP didn't drop despite the addition of so many more people. It also doesn't mean that incomes haven't improved for established residents, or that having additional residents won't lead to additional growth once they're established since we know they do based on plenty of past observation.

And obviously the first article has little to no relevance to the topic since the reason that Canada's middle class was wealthiest in 2014 was that so much of the developed world, particularly the US, had not recovered from the 2008 financial crash. That didn't affect Canada nearly as much since our banking sector has stronger regulations. And that isn't down to any particular government (although the Cons have historically been most included toward de-regulation, which isn't great when it's said regulations that spared us). Regardless, it's not that we had spectacular growth numbers but that comparable countries were doing worse. If one wants to make relevant comparisons it would be using like for like stats.

Canada still has the wealthiest middle class in the world.

Conservatives sure love that GDP per capita chart....Canada has had the second fastest growing real GDP in the G7 since 2019.

We chose to increase immigration to keep the economy growing and to stop inflation....the byproduct of that is a temporary decline in GDP per capita....we chose real GDP growth over GDP per capita growth.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Hecate

Wonk wonk wonk.

Practice what you preach.

So you're fine with the India story with PP? You need to practice what you preach as well.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

It also doesn't mean that incomes haven't improved for established residents, or that having additional residents won't lead to additional growth once they're established since we know they do based on plenty of past observation.

This is a good point. I wish Statistics Canada tracked specific demographics and their outcomes. For example, if you are part of a cohort born in Canada in 1995, how is your income and wealth changing over time, and how does this track against 1985, 1975, etc.? What parts of the cohorts are or aren't doing well and what is determining the disparate outcomes?

I think it's obvious that certain groups aren't doing well, namely non-property-owners who rely on labour income but haven't seen wealth gains from real estate. The housing cost issue is clearly a problem on its own. Consumer price inflation has also been bad in recent years and I don't believe that CPI figures capture the full scope of the impact.

On the flip side, national GDP matters from a government or international perspective. Canada has grown in global prominence for example and has a bit more weight in the trade wars than it would have without that total economic growth, even though productivity per person hasn't improved much if at all.

I think we need, should, and can have both growing GDP and growing productivity that results in higher GDP per capita, and I think poor productivity is related to government mismanagement (fiscal, economic policy, immigration policy, regulations).

[dleung]

Originally Posted by trueviking

Canada still has the wealthiest middle class in the world.

Conservatives sure love that GDP per capita chart....Canada has had the second fastest growing real GDP in the G7 since 2019.

We chose to increase immigration to keep the economy growing and to stop inflation....the byproduct of that is a temporary decline in GDP per capita....we chose real GDP growth over GDP per capita growth.

They also love talking about the stock market - until it's no longer convenient

Originally Posted by lio45

I wouldn’t be posting anything here from the CBC if I were you, unless you want to get suspended

Lol what did your friend Acajack do this time, besides all the angry f-bombs and insisting that Israel has a right to genocide as part of "any means possible" to recover hostages

[savevp]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Is it true that the building was not clear with an occupancy permit, fire testing not done, fire hydrants not tested, fire exit signs, sprinklers not installed, no insurance, no liability insurance...

Does CPC HQ not check these things? Why are Conservatives so reckless with the lives of their followers? Where are the authorities aka Gatekeepers to crack down on these things?

Perhaps because it would take months or years to obtain these permits, which is what Poilievre has been getting at all week, in reference to national infrastructure. It's actually something I deal with daily for work, and something like even a one-use event space like this would be unlikely to be approved within the timeline of an election campaign.

That aside, this sort of inner-party-workings 'gotcha' moment is absolutely irrelevant to anyone other than self-congratulating hyperpartisans. Ditto for the 'Carney plagiarised' headlines Conservatives were trumpeting last week.

No one cares about trivialities when there are issues of actual substance.

[savevp]

^
Bloody hell, give it a break dleung. Or leave these sort of posts to private messages with the forumers you keep fighting with. Speaking of gotcha moments that no one cares about...

[MonctonRad]

Trump just blinked. He’s pausing the global tariffs for 90 days, but doubling down on China.

Maybe the “Rebel Alliance” has him worried........