Canadian Federal Election

[theman23]

Baylis was the only one who actually gave clear answers to the difficult questions and avoided the mealy mouthed say nothing answers you expect out of politicians. Likely because he has no chance of winning, but it was refreshing to see.

Pretty impressed with him overall. Seems to have the business chops and demeanor to be able to take on a guy like Trump was well. Why do the Libs like Carney and his fake "business" (read: economist) credentials so much when they have a guy like Baylis available? Fluently bilingual, intelligent, successful businessman, well spoken, charismatic? And while he may have been a part of JT's first caucus, he got out before Trudeau's disastrous second and third acts so has more of a claim to being an outsider than anyone on that stage. He's exactly what they need.

Also not that it's the objective here, but since this seems to be important to the LPC, can you imagine how the media down south would react if we elected a billionaire that was younger, progressive, better looking, and richer than Donald Trump? It also doesn't hurt that he's the son of a renowned civil and abortion rights activist. He would become a media darling.

His post debate comments on Trump were perfect:
https://www.youtube.com/live/K7a_EraGMEE?si=ibJmGxS3ku-FO33P&t=9220

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

Weird, I could have sworn that the Liberals bought and built TMX so that tar sands oil could reach foreign markets easier and cheaper. I guess that was some kind of a fever dream and the Conservatives actually did it.

With your tax dollars. To the tune of $30 billion. They also killed two other projects that would have totaled close to $50 billion dollars. That would have been wholly Canadian projects, built by Canadians, built for Canadians. Those projects would have generated hundreds of billions in revenue over their life. Altogether they put Canada out near $80 billion worth of project that the private sector whole heartedly would have built themselves, with out a dime in handout from the tax payer.

Now THAT is weird… and it gets even more weird, get this… even though Carney supported killing Northern Gateway, he now says he’d implement the Emergency Act to push through these types of major national infrastructure projects!

The Conservatives would have become partners with the private sector to see such national infrastructure projects get built, not outright cancel them or make it impossible for them to proceed.

To add to it, the Libs had the bright idea to pass the oil tanker ban off the west coast, almost as if to say to the world “hey, we want to handcuff ourselves to the great red white and blue”.

Brilliant work Liberals, just brilliant.

Any government can waste taxpayer dollars. The TMX pipeline is proof the Liberals are masters at it.

But hey, let’s give them another shot at it. Another 3 years of deficits, per Carney.

Let’s artificially inflate industry cost in the midst of a tariff war, so it’s even harder and more expensive to produce things like steel, as if tariffs aren’t enough pain, let’s add in additional tax. For Canada

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

With your tax dollars. To the tune of $30 billion.

Is there actual evidence that the private sector would have got it done for much, much cheaper? I don't see any. There's lots of rhetoric from partisans. But is there any real non-partisan study that pegs the numbers. I'd genuinely love to see that.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Is there actual evidence that the private sector would have got it done for much, much cheaper? I don't see any. There's lots of rhetoric from partisans. But is there any real non-partisan study that pegs the numbers. I'd genuinely love to see that.

No there is not. I’d expect Kinder Morgan would have incurred the same cost overruns as TC did with the coastal gas link project. But it would have been Kinder Morgan, not the tax payer, that would have incurred the costs. My point was that there was the private sector ready to build the projects if it wasn’t for so incredibly much political interference.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by theman23

Baylis was the only one who actually gave clear answers to the difficult questions and avoided the mealy mouthed say nothing answers you expect out of politicians. Likely because he has no chance of winning, but it was refreshing to see.

Pretty impressed with him overall. Seems to have the business chops and demeanor to be able to take on a guy like Trump was well. Why do the Libs like Carney and his fake "business" (read: economist) credentials so much when they have a guy like Baylis available? Fluently bilingual, intelligent, successful businessman, well spoken, charismatic? And while he may have been a part of JT's first caucus, he got out before Trudeau's disastrous second and third acts so has more of a claim to being an outsider than anyone on that stage. He's exactly what they need.

Also not that it's the objective here, but since this seems to be important to the LPC, can you imagine how the media down south would react if we elected a billionaire that was younger, progressive, better looking, and richer than Donald Trump? It also doesn't hurt that he's the son of a renowned civil and abortion rights activist. He would become a media darling.

His post debate comments on Trump were perfect:
https://www.youtube.com/live/K7a_EraGMEE?si=ibJmGxS3ku-FO33P&t=9220

Baylis won’t win of course but this could be the launching pad for a political career. This is likely his plan.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by casper

He is being elected to do battle with Trump et al. The Americans don't understand French.

.

That depends on whether Liberals think the most important thing is fighting Trump in a possibly very short-lived Prime Ministership or fighting Poilievre (and Blanchet in French) to become the PM for the next four years.

Arguably, he needs to get through Poilievre (and Blanchet) before he gets into a position to be able to most effectively take on Trump.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

No there is not. I’d expect Kinder Morgan would have incurred the same cost overruns as TC did with the coastal gas link project. But it would have been Kinder Morgan, not the tax payer, that would have incurred the costs. My point was that there was the private sector ready to build the projects if it wasn’t for so incredibly much political interference.

Kinder Morgan studied it and was willing to spend a lot of money to study to it. They never made a final investment decision to move forward with it. Doing studies does not mean they were going to put up the money to do it. They would have needed customer to pre-buy capacity for the decades of operation that would ensure the project was profitable.

The fact it is government owned has little to do with the cost overruns. It is not government employees building the pipeline. There a small number of major engineering firms in Canada that have the capacity to manage a project like this. The private sector (or crown corp) is going to hire one of them to project manage the project. That firm is going to issue a bunch of RFP and built up a team to deliver the project.

Would the private sector company have build a pipeline through three major mountain ranges? No, not unless those refineries in Burnaby or Washington state were willing to pay a high premium over importing oil by tanker from other parts.

Would a US company like Kunder Morgan have done it for Canadian national security interests? Hell No.

The private sector would have build Keystone XL. They tried to. It was stopped by the US. Keystone XL had nothing to do about supplying US market, it delivered product from Alberta to ports on the gulf.

If your a private sector pipeline company trying to get oil to market your going to build the cheapest pipeline you can using the route with the least distance and geological and environmental risk.

Lets not forget the original "old" Trans-mountain pipeline was built due to special deal with the Canadian government, over concern about oil tankers from the middle east to the Pacific Northwest/BC being impacted by the Korean War and securing fuel supplies on the coast of BC.

Industry is motivated by profit. They are not going to spend extra money they don't have to for "strategic national interests".

Government should be motivated by "strategic national interests", but it need to balance that with the fact voters at the end of the day call the shots.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by casper

I hope Quebecers are willing to cut him some slack on that one, given he is trying and will keep improving on the French. Afterall we all tolerated Chretien who did not do well in either language.

Ultimately it won’t be Quebecers who will directly decide his true fate as most Liberals aren’t Quebecers and most Quebecers are not going to vote Liberal anytime soon. (His new car smell will likely wear off before the next election.)

Being decent in French for the Liberals has always been as much about convincing the party brain trust and many of its voters who even though they don’t walk the walk still very much like to talk the talk on bilingualism.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Even if he did say it, it's not the biggest mistake. The sympathy for Israel is all gone, and the World is outraged at the displacement of 2 million Palestinians.

Ok sure.

Anyway, as I said, he clearly misspoke and that is not his position. It’s neither here nor there.

[Marshsparrow]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

With your tax dollars. To the tune of $30 billion. They also killed two other projects that would have totaled close to $50 billion dollars. That would have been wholly Canadian projects, built by Canadians, built for Canadians. Those projects would have generated hundreds of billions in revenue over their life. Altogether they put Canada out near $80 billion worth of project that the private sector whole heartedly would have built themselves, with out a dime in handout from the tax payer.

Now THAT is weird… and it gets even more weird, get this… even though Carney supported killing Northern Gateway, he now says he’d implement the Emergency Act to push through these types of major national infrastructure projects!

The Conservatives would have become partners with the private sector to see such national infrastructure projects get built, not outright cancel them or make it impossible for them to proceed.

To add to it, the Libs had the bright idea to pass the oil tanker ban off the west coast, almost as if to say to the world “hey, we want to handcuff ourselves to the great red white and blue”.

Brilliant work Liberals, just brilliant.

Any government can waste taxpayer dollars. The TMX pipeline is proof the Liberals are masters at it.

But hey, let’s give them another shot at it. Another 3 years of deficits, per Carney.

Let’s artificially inflate industry cost in the midst of a tariff war, so it’s even harder and more expensive to produce things like steel, as if tariffs aren’t enough pain, let’s add in additional tax. For Canada

Just checking my notes to see what Harper actually accomplished when he had a majority gov't by way of pipelines, refineries, etc. oh right, NOTHING.

[casper]

Originally Posted by Acajack

That depends on whether Liberals think the most important thing is fighting Trump in a possibly very short-lived Prime Ministership or fighting Poilievre (and Blanchet in French) to become the PM for the next four years.

Arguably, he needs to get through Poilievre (and Blanchet) before he gets into a position to be able to most effectively take on Trump.

It Carney wins an election and becomes PM, that is the end of it for Poilievre as leader of the Conservatives. He may stick around as a back-bencher but the Conservatives would put in a new leader.

We are going to find out next week if Trump is bluffing again. We may well have tariffs in place. Trudeau will respond quickly with retaliation and some other factors.

Not certain if it is true, but there is a story floating around that on day of tariffs there was a meeting with the CEOs of the major banks, Bank of Canada and Finance scheduled to work through a plan to stabilize the economy. It was called off due to the tariffs being delayed. They are likely some COVID like adjustment to employment insurance etc.

That is the kind of stuff that we may well be in for next week. Then the following weeks we have a new PM. Who knows what will happen. Will we have a snap election or not? I think it is all up in the air.

Alternatively, Canada calls Trumps bluff and he dreams up some other reason to delay tariffs. Who knows?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

No there is not. I’d expect Kinder Morgan would have incurred the same cost overruns as TC did with the coastal gas link project. But it would have been Kinder Morgan, not the tax payer, that would have incurred the costs. My point was that there was the private sector ready to build the projects if it wasn’t for so incredibly much political interference.

What makes you think they would have continued the project with the same cost overruns? Why wouldn't they simply cut their losses and write it off as companies usually do?

I'm trying to understand the complaint here. Are you complaining that the Liberals put in too much effort to get this built? Cause I can only imagine what you'd say if this didn't get built on their watch.

Let's extrapolate a bit here. If all of the Liberal regulation supposedly holding everything back is reversed, how much pipeline do you think will be built and which projects happen, with zero government intervention? What do you expect to get built on Poilievre's watch? I'm curious to hear the projection.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by casper

Alternatively, Canada calls Trumps bluff and he dreams up some other reason to delay tariffs. Who knows?

With delaying tariffs, Trump gets the best of both worlds; investments in Canada are stalled (and often made in the U.S. instead with the fears that the tariffs will actually happen) and no inconveniences from retaliatory tariffs from Canada. And as a bonus (or actually what Trumps wants the most from all this), he gets to order and humiliate Canada so he can feel like a big man...

What Canada needs to do to call his bluff is to publicly tell him something like: "Ok, Fatass, put your tariffs on. We will do the same. Yes, our economy will suffer but so will yours. You will lose jobs, companies will close, inflation will soar and the stock market will crash. Yes, the Canadian economy will be in a recession, but so will be the U.S.. No, your recession may not be as big as ours, but it will hurt you and you will have to spend the rest of your mandate telling the people why the economy is bad, while gaslighting your cult to believe that everything is better than before. You will have to justify job losses and inflation, and your popularity will go down the drain, so there will be no way you could get elected for an illegal third term. Oh, and no Mount Rushmore for you..."

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

What makes you think they would have continued the project with the same cost overruns? Why wouldn't they simply cut their losses and write it off as companies usually do?

Isn't it what Energy East did? Stop the project when it became clear it wouldn't be profitable and instead of telling their stockholders "sorry we lost your money, our bad..." they just blamed the usual suspects: Trudeau, Québec and environmentalist groups.

[Marshsparrow]

Canada needs to get aggressive on the value of investing here.
There should be a full on effort to recruit the US best and brightest talent and small businesses to move here. Incentives, tax forgiveness, reimbursement of moving expenses - whatever it takes...

We also need more Canadian companies like these...

Canada’s TFI Abandons Move to US After Shareholder Backlash
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/202...ada-after-investor-critiqued-move-to-us/

[casper]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Isn't it what Energy East did? Stop the project when it became clear it wouldn't be profitable and instead of telling their stockholders "sorry we lost your money, our bad..." they just blamed the usual suspects: Trudeau, Québec and environmentalist groups.

Trans Canada did not point fingers at the government. They said it was various factors but the key one was oil was $40.

Alberta oil is expensive to extract then you have to pay for the pipline to deliver it to the Atlantic. Once it is on a ship your then competing against oil from Africa and the Middle east.

[missing_middle]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Canada needs to get aggressive on the value of investing here.
There should be a full on effort to recruit the US best and brightest talent and small businesses to move here. Incentives, tax forgiveness, reimbursement of moving expenses - whatever it takes...

We also need more Canadian companies like these...

Canada’s TFI Abandons Move to US After Shareholder Backlash
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/business/202...ada-after-investor-critiqued-move-to-us/

Whatever it takes means lowering taxes below the US.

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by casper

Trans Canada did not point fingers at the government. They said it was various factors but the key one was oil was $40.

All right. Then I suppose politically motivated people filled the gaps and blame their preferred villain.

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Just checking my notes to see what Harper actually accomplished when he had a majority gov't by way of pipelines, refineries, etc. oh right, NOTHING.

You must not have written it down. Keystone mainline was built under his time. Other than that, he had no proposals from the private sector for him to quash.

[Marshsparrow]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

You must not have written it down. Keystone mainline was built under his time. Other than that, he had no proposals from the private sector for him to quash.

Thank you PM Trudeau!

Philip Cross: Trudeau vs. Harper on oil and gas output. The result will surprise you
Justin Trudeau may have hammered the oilsands but real output from oil and gas extraction has grown faster than under Harper
https://financialpost.com/opinion/trudeau-vs-harper-oil-gas-output-result-will-surprise-you