Federal Government & Politics II

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by lio45

Such projects are so long they almost always see changes in government.

The QC Third Link, for example, which is totally the CAQ’s Pet Project, and opposed and disliked by all other parties, if it went ahead it would get inaugurated by a different government, that’s almost guaranteed. The credit should go to the guys who made it happen, not to the guys who cut the ribbon.

MONTREAL – The Harper government is promising to build a replacement for Montreal’s Champlain Bridge by 2018, three years earlier than originally planned.

LINK

Perhaps PMJT could get credit for not screwing up the project (cough, cough, JSF).

[Build.It]

.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Nite

$10 daycare, the increase to the childcare benefits, which has brought down child poverty greatly and massive improvement in the water systems of first nations are some of his biggest wins in my opinion.

The first two are massive for a lot of familes.

Yes we spent hundreds of millions to give some remote places better water. Not sure how much of a win that is. Giving everyone in the country municpal water would cost billions.

With a huge majority and a mandate for change Polievre may unwind more than we expect. A UK style benefit cap. Income testing childcare or no strings grants to provinces and let them decide how to spend it are possibilities. Dental coverage could add co-pays. In a normal political environment each of these would trigger a lot of backlash but if he does everything together in a big bang along with huge cuts to public service and reduction in immigration the resulting affordibility gains and later tax cuts would likely be popular and reshape Canada more in one term than Harper Mulroney or Truedeau did in their +/- 10 years in charge.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by lio45

After 9 years of JT, poverty is higher than ever and still climbing (to say nothing of skyrocketing homelessness and skyrocketing food bank use, which are two of the main legacy items of JT along with legalizing weed).

Poverty is up, but still lower than it was at the start of JT's tenure and far form "higher than ever".

[mapleleaf66]

Canadians are hungry for change. Unless Trudeau steps down, the Liberal's poll numbers will continue to decline. Even with Carney at the helm it is much too late.

$10 daycare sounds great but many private operators cannot afford to function under those terms which is leading to a shortage of spaces. This in turn drives up cost as more parents compete for fewer spots.

Dental care for the poor makes sense. But that was already happening to some extent, my son went to the dental faculty at university where students would "practice" on patients that had no coverage. It wasn't great but he got his teeth cleaned. Most of us have coverage through work, and the federal plan doesn't change much. It just looks flashy, but like most things the announcement happens and then the details don't live up to it.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Poverty is up, but still lower than it was at the start of JT's tenure and far form "higher than ever".

Depends by which metric. By one of the best metrics IMO, % of people who live on the streets and beg on the streets, it’s never been that high in Canadian history.

On the other hand, sure, by % of people who have an iPhone, Canada is richer than ever.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lio45

Depends by which metric. By one of the best metrics IMO, % of people who live on the streets and beg on the streets, it’s never been that high in Canadian history.

On the other hand, sure, by % of people who have an iPhone, Canada is richer than ever.

The move from .1 to .2% of drug addicted and/or mentally ill people living on the street because we accept such behavious isn't remotely a good indicator of poverty levels. You won't see any such people in China and few in Alabama but I guess that's a better indicator of poverty and Vancouver and California are the hotbeds of poverty in the world?

Poverty is down dramatically and even more if you look at an absolute level. The middle class millenial is struggling after doing more eating out and travelling in their 20s than any other generation was able to ever but overall things are better than 2015 even if naturally after a pandemic many are worse off than in 2019. (Again anyone who invested all the excess cash we were given or was around from not spending rather than revenge travelled and ordered uber eats everyday is also better off than even 2019)

We could have been even better off if we focussed on economic growth but some of that was a choice to help less fortunate especially children and to purposely stunt our resource development on the climate change alter. It wasn't unequivicolaly bad governing.

[biguc]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The first two are massive for a lot of familes.

Yes we spent hundreds of millions to give some remote places better water. Not sure how much of a win that is. Giving everyone in the country municpal water would cost billions.

With a huge majority and a mandate for change Polievre may unwind more than we expect. A UK style benefit cap. Income testing childcare or no strings grants to provinces and let them decide how to spend it are possibilities. Dental coverage could add co-pays. In a normal political environment each of these would trigger a lot of backlash but if he does everything together in a big bang along with huge cuts to public service and reduction in immigration the resulting affordibility gains and later tax cuts would likely be popular and reshape Canada more in one term than Harper Mulroney or Truedeau did in their +/- 10 years in charge.

Big bang is right. That would be a Liz Truss-style nuke to the economy. Funny thing is, the cons don't have to do any of that. They could do the Chretien play--hold the line for a couple years before ramping up austerity and counting on sinking interest rates to hold the economy afloat. And they don't even have to do that! Canada's finances are in much better shape than they were in the early '90s. They could literally do nothing and go into the next election looking benign and capable (the Harper play).

But watch it be the Liz Truss play. The Tories knew to tourniquet the rot until they didn't. Meme politics and polarization don't lend themselves to quiet bureaucracy.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ahhh yes.."I'll talk about rail infrastructure but exclude the most complex and expensive type of rail infrastructure because it doesn't suit my narrative."

Do you know why HSR is important? It cuts down on flying and driving. Substantially reducing emissions and road wear and freeing up airport space.

By your logic, Canada has better public transport than Japan. After all they don't build much LRT there. But they have lots of HSR.

We shall see how Florida's HSR play turns out but what they did is precisely what we always criticize Canada for NOT doing: having a vision for the future and what could be a transformative change.

Canada always seems to be playing catch-up with infrastructure investments. We only seem to invest when the situation becomes critical and unbearable, and never think about building capacity for future needs.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

The move from .1 to .2% of drug addicted and/or mentally ill people living on the street because we accept such behavious isn't remotely a good indicator of poverty levels. You won't see any such people in China and few in Alabama but I guess that's a better indicator of poverty and Vancouver and California are the hotbeds of poverty in the world?

Poverty is down dramatically and even more if you look at an absolute level. The middle class millenial is struggling after doing more eating out and travelling in their 20s than any other generation was able to ever but overall things are better than 2015 even if naturally after a pandemic many are worse off than in 2019. (Again anyone who invested all the excess cash we were given or was around from not spending rather than revenge travelled and ordered uber eats everyday is also better off than even 2019)

We could have been even better off if we focussed on economic growth but some of that was a choice to help less fortunate especially children and to purposely stunt our resource development on the climate change alter. It wasn't unequivicolaly bad governing.

Yes it was quite satisfactory in fact. Funny how in the US, homelessness is blamed on blue cities/states, while in Canada it's blamed on the feds. Basically whichever jurisdiction progressives are in charge. Blame them for the burdens carried by desirable, high-cost/high-safety-net places where the poor don't simply die lol

Trudeau continued the post-recession economic boom as well as Trump did or better, so since Lio is perfectly fine with Trump getting re-elected, I'd be fine with Trudeau getting re-elected

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by biguc

Big bang is right. That would be a Liz Truss-style nuke to the economy. Funny thing is, the cons don't have to do any of that. They could do the Chretien play--hold the line for a couple years before ramping up austerity and counting on sinking interest rates to hold the economy afloat. And they don't even have to do that! Canada's finances are in much better shape than they were in the early '90s. They could literally do nothing and go into the next election looking benign and capable (the Harper play).

But watch it be the Liz Truss play. The Tories knew to tourniquet the rot until they didn't. Meme politics and polarization don't lend themselves to quiet bureaucracy.

Liz Truss proposed massive tax cuts an increase in spending at the same time they were talking about thretening the independance of the Bank of England.

The disaster that came after is a very important lesson for Polievre as without this example it's not hard to imagine him presenting such a budget. That's clearly no on now. Markets aren't going to care if he cuts spending dramatically. That will in fact universally be seen as positive and probably see a little drop in rates across the board.

He might do things more slowly and steadily which probably makes more sense economically but I think dramatic cuts to spending followed by tax cuts as we head into election is the more likley course. If we end up in recession as he is cutting the finances could get ugly still and his cuts might get rightly or wrongly blamed but that risk will be ignored as idealogically they think cuts are a good in themself.

[Build.It]

DLEUNG and YOWETAL, you guys really need to leave the house more often and use your eyes.

Poverty is up by a lot, not down. This is obvious to anyone who uses their own eyes.

I personally became much wealthier post-COVID, but I know that a lot of other people became poorer. I can tell this by leaving my house and taking a trip to various parts of the GTA, greater Hamilton, and KW and seeing beggars at suburban intersections where there used to be none, and massive tents cities where there also used to be none.

You guys honestly sound like you never leave your own little bubble and are only looking at official data. USE YOUR EYES.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Build.It

DLEUNG and YOWETAL, you guys might need to leave the house more often and use your eyes.

Poverty is up by a lot, not down.

I personally became much wealthier post-COVID, but I know that a lot of other people became poorer. I can tell this by leaving my house and taking a trip to various parts of the GTA, greater Hamilton, and KW and seeing beggars at suburban intersections where there used to be none, and massive tents cities where there also used to be none.

You guys honestly sound like you never leave your own little bubble and are only looking at official data. USE YOUR EYES.

This is why we don't want policy decided by people who work in the trades. You can't judge and extrapolate from a few extreme situations.

If I go to Holt Renfrew and it's busier than ever does that mean we are richer than ever.

The TSX has nearly doubled under Trudeau. Best performance since Chretien and possibly second best all time. So is he the best economic manager?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

We shall see how Florida's HSR play turns out but what they did is precisely what we always criticize Canada for NOT doing: having a vision for the future and what could be a transformative change.

Canada always seems to be playing catch-up with infrastructure investments. We only seem to invest when the situation becomes critical and unbearable, and never think about building capacity for future needs.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Ahhh yes.."I'll talk about rail infrastructure but exclude the most complex and expensive type of rail infrastructure because it doesn't suit my narrative."

Do you know why HSR is important? It cuts down on flying and driving. Substantially reducing emissions and road wear and freeing up airport space.

By your logic, Canada has better public transport than Japan. After all they don't build much LRT there. But they have lots of HSR.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's bad faith bullshit. He should be banned for it.

Exactly what I was going to point out: Nite is diametrically-opposite-wrong when he points to a jurisdiction spending 5 billion USD to serve 7,000 people calling it an example of not taking transit seriously. It's the other way around: unlike us, these guys actually DO put their $$$ into HSR projects!

Miami-Orlando: take the HSR
Toronto-Montreal: take the 401

and Nite calls that an infrastructure success? It's true that the 401 has like the most lanes in the world, I think...?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by dleung

Yes it was quite satisfactory in fact. Funny how in the US, homelessness is blamed on blue cities/states, while in Canada it's blamed on the feds.

Incorrect. In Canada, the massive rise of homelessness is (correctly) blamed on the epic imbalance of housing supply vs housing demand resulting in skyrocketing rents.

At least, that's what anyone who isn't trolling would know! You don't read this forum, right? You just show up here and there to troll.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by lio45

Incorrect. In Canada, the massive rise of homelessness is (correctly) blamed on the epic imbalance of housing supply vs housing demand resulting in skyrocketing rents.

In either event, we get to blame JT.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

We shall see how Florida's HSR play turns out but what they did is precisely what we always criticize Canada for NOT doing: having a vision for the future and what could be a transformative change.

Canada always seems to be playing catch-up with infrastructure investments. We only seem to invest when the situation becomes critical and unbearable, and never think about building capacity for future needs.

For a real-life Florida example, FLDOT was trying to eminent domain two of my properties that were on a major state route, in order to add lanes, and when I argued with the engineer in charge of the project that I wanted to keep my properties and that the state route was perfectly fine in terms of volume and that they should back the fuck off and leave us alone, she explained that it's true now but that they're modeling for 2040 or 2050 traffic volumes (don't recall exactly the year, but it was ridiculously far into the future) and they have to plan and act ahead of time.

[Build.It]

Originally Posted by lio45

Incorrect. In Canada, the massive rise of homelessness is (correctly) blamed on the epic imbalance of housing supply vs housing demand resulting in skyrocketing rents.

At least, that's what anyone who isn't trolling would know! You don't read this forum, right? You just show up here and there to troll.

I don't think he's trolling. If you go to Toronto's residential neighbourhoods around Queen West, Yorkville, etc, this is what people there actually think. They honestly have no idea what's going on in the rest of the country since they never leave their own little bubble. I'm dead serious.

My wife and I always joke about these people every time we go to Toronto. There is a very distinct aura around them that you can sense. Lots of turtleneck/sports jacket combos. A lot of them happen to be architects.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

In either event, we get to blame JT.

Of course we get to blame (or praise) JT. He's the one single-handedly responsible for the Pet LPC Scheme of Great Landlord Enrichment, a.k.a. importing some 1.5M-2M FNSs per year

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lio45

Incorrect. In Canada, the massive rise of homelessness is (correctly) blamed on the epic imbalance of housing supply vs housing demand resulting in skyrocketing rents.

At least, that's what anyone who isn't trolling would know! You don't read this forum, right? You just show up here and there to troll.

Very little of the rise in homelessness has anything to do with rents or housing prices in suburban Toronto or other Canadian cities. Addiction and mental illness make most of them incabable of maintaining any paid rental situation. The loss of subsidized housing growth has hurt some people on the margins as has redvelopment of cheap rentals because of rising real estate prices but all of that is a small part of the overall increase.