• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Politics in 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
4,235
Points
1,160
So, here we are in 2017 ... what are the big issues? Globally? Nationally?

  Will Putin continue what I have dubbed his "opportunistic adventurism?" Will it, eventually, lead him into a deep cold war or, heaven forbid, even a hot one?

    Will Xi Jinping start a campaign to extend his term beyond the next five years?

      What will happen in the French and, later, German elections? More right wing, nativist, populist, tribalist leaders or a reprieve for liberal social democrats?

  Will Justin Trudeau's honeymoon end in 2017?

    Will there be a revolt against higher and higher federal and provincial taxes?

      Who will lead the Conservative Party of Canada? the NDP?

             
may-you-live-in-interesting-times1_thumb%25255B7%25255D.png
 
As much as I find these new taxes revolting,  what can one do about it?

I do believe the PM is going to have to deliver this year and he won't be able to ride the coat tails of Trudeau mania 2.0 for much longer.  I expect this year will be entertaining for me to see him running for cover more and more as it progresses.
 
The honeymoon is over, the PM has had a 10% drop in approval ratings across the board. He's now in striking distance of the Tories who don't have a leader in vote intention, although most of these polls are the standard +/-5% margin of error, so you'd be better served throwing a dart at the board.

The hallmark of this government will be when the Carbon Tax hits the ground running in 2018. It will be $20 per tonne in 2019 ($10 behind Alberta). That's more than enough time to see the impact in your pocketbook, especially in the middle class who are going to be hit hard every time they consume goods. Alberta and Ontario's price will have been in effect for longer, and if there's no net decrease in emissions its an easy target for Opposition parties to hammer the government for it.
 
E.R. Campbell said:
...More right wing, nativist, populist, tribalist leaders or a reprieve for liberal social democrats?
...

You looking to pick a fight?  Remember a line from the old Saturday morning westerns....."Smile when you say that, pardner!"  ;D

Right Wing - What scale? - Religious, Economic, Political, Oenological?

Nativist, populist, tribalist? - How about plain, old, unexpurgated, unmitigated, unmanaged, unmodified democracy?  The rule of the people with their whim being decided pragmatically by simple majority.  Accepting that every man is as good as his master and has as much ability, and as many rights, to sit in judgment of the people and rules that influence his life.

Not Social Democrats, of Christian Democrats or Liberal Democrats but plain democrats.  Anything other than simple democracy is a route for Managers to borrow authority (from God, the King or the Soviet) and appropriate it as their own - nominally in service of The Truth and Justice.  That is merely to swap the decision-maker - one fallible human for another.

The British System, grown from Scottish Presbyterianism, is not about Truth and Justice.  It is about pragmatic accommodation and the knowledge that if you don't like the answer today then you can come back tomorrow and continue trying to change it.  The world doesn't end just because you lost a game, a vote or an election - or even a war.  Its true that we may end up burning a few more witches, and a few less churches will get paint jobs - but better that than being burnt by the guy that hired the painter.

You look back to the transition from Adam Smith to William Gladstone and see what the most conservative force in the world, the Roman church, was railing against at the time -

Free association of people of different beliefs.
People believing whatever they chose to believe.
People making up their own beliefs.
People expressing their own beliefs.
People printing their own beliefs.

Rationalism,
Indifferentism (indifference to what god and how you prayed),
Latitudinarianism (the latitude to believe as you wish),
Socialism,
Communism,
Secret Societies,
Biblical Societies,
Clerico-Liberal Societies,
Separation of Church and State,
Liberalism (Freedom of worship).

1864 Syllabus of Errors   This was the same chap that was declared infallible in 1871.

The Church was not alone in these beliefs.  These were the dominant beliefs of Europe, aristocracy and commoner.

Britain, her colonies and America were unique in being States where these rules applied - where toleration was given a chance.  Where most people, most of the time believed in the fairness of their system and their neighbours.

Where they trust their fate to juries of their peers, including Justices of the Peace, and not to learned judges.

And since I am on a roll just now....

Freedom of the press. 

There is no Press.  Capitalized.  Institutionalized.  Centralized.

There is only the press, the instrument, the tool, the extension of the individual's voice - the ability to write down and broadcast one's beliefs - and let the devil take the hindmost. 

And if you have a problem with my statements then proffer your own and, if need be, we'll let a jury decide.

Happy New Year and thanks for the opportunity  :subbies:





 
A bit of math shows that Ontario's new 4.3 cent/litre (de facto) tax is the equivalent of $18.38/tonne of CO2 (1 L creates 2.34kg [EPA ref] of COs, 1 tonne/1000 kg results from 427L burned, and 427L/tonne CO2 x $0.043/L = $18.38/tonne CO2).

I had heard that Ontario's price for each tonne of CO2 was $10? No?  Seems ON motorists are going to pay close to two times the industrial CO2 rate.

G2G
 
Good2Golf said:
A bit of math shows that Ontario's new 4.3 cent/litre (de facto) tax is the equivalent of $18.38/tonne of CO2 (1 L creates 2.34kg [EPA ref] of COs, 1 tonne/1000 kg results from 427L burned, and 427L/tonne CO2 x $0.043/L = $18.38/tonne CO2).

I had heard that Ontario's price for each tonne of CO2 was $10? No?  Seems ON motorists are going to pay close to two times the industrial CO2 rate.

G2G
Sure, but it actually has nothing whatsoever to do with saving the environment and everything to do with lining the ON govt's pockets so that Wynne can save her regime by distributing largesse on the back of taxpayers... >:D

She's counting on the fact that people will have forgotten this latest bit of gouging by next year, especially when the pre-election money starts to flow (of course, it also assumes that the Ontario PCs will remain the Feckless Party, which seems to be a given right now)
 
cavalryman said:
Sure, but it actually has nothing whatsoever to do with saving the environment and everything to do with lining the ON govt's pockets so that Wynne can save her regime by distributing largesse on the back of taxpayers... >:D

I would most certainly not disagree with you CM...  ;)
 
[quote author=E.R. Campbell]
Who will lead the Conservative Party of Canada?
[/quote]
             
Bit off topic. I took a crack at becoming a member of the Conservative Party and donating a couple bucks.

I'm  being indunated with emails and requests for donations.  Pretty much begging for $5.  It's pretty brutal actually.
 
Now you are a member, you will
being inundated with emails and requests for donations
from every leadership candidate. :rofl:
 
Jarnhamar said:
             
Bit off topic. I took a crack at becoming a member of the Conservative Party and donating a couple bucks.

I'm  being indunated with emails and requests for donations.  Pretty much begging for $5.  It's pretty brutal actually.

That is why I only gave them my spam inbox  ;D
 
Is this: "Ottawa projects decades of deficits as federal finances worsen" going to be the key story for at least the first few weeks of 2017?

The Finance Department report was released, without any press release, on the Friday afternoon before Christmas ...  ::)

The Globe and Mail article says, and I agree, that "The government’s latest long-term fiscal forecast adds new context to the federal government’s reluctance to boost provincial health transfers [and]  The decades of surpluses projected by Ottawa just two years ago have now shifted to decades of annual deficits that will run until 2050."

This was, of course, entirely avoidable. All Prime Minister Trudeau had to do was stick to his campaign promise:

   
screenshot-2017-01-05-08-14-01.png


It is, also, quite reversible by the Trudeau regime or by an honest, competent government ... Liberal or Conservative.

But, absent a (much needed) cabinet led caucus revolt that replaces Justin Trudeau with an adult we are going to go into "interesting times" with the self inflicted wound of a weakened ecdonomy:

         
webthuedcar05co1.jpg

          Source: David Perkins in The Globe and Mail
 
How much of the budget shortfall actually made it to infrastructure investment? To be honest I'd be hard pressed to list anything right or wrong done by this government in it's first year
 
suffolkowner said:
How much of the budget shortfall actually made it to infrastructure investment? To be honest I'd be hard pressed to list anything right or wrong done by this government in it's first year

I don't think any did. Unless it was overseas infrastructure, or just tossing more money at despots and dictators. He's put millions into that, but none in Canada.
 
suffolkowner said:
How much of the budget shortfall actually made it to infrastructure investment? To be honest I'd be hard pressed to list anything right or wrong done by this government in it's first year

That you know of.  Personally I think they bungled the whole democratic reform thing.  Also this whole pay to play thing stinks and that's just what's known.  I suspect that more will come to light...
 
I doubt much "infrastructure" spending has commenced yet.

When the 2016 Fiscal Reference Tables (PDF) were published last fall, covering the fiscal year ending 2016, I noticed that the government managed to produce the deficit they predicted - just barely (a little less than $1 billion).  That was after the spending spree they went on just at the end of the year.

You can see that the year-over-year revenue increase was healthy compared to previous years, but program spending was way up.  So it is definitely a problem that can be solved, but not if the government insists on turning back on all of the lights the prior government turned off.
 
Don't worry.
The Liberal fiscal plan would see "a modest short-term deficit" of less than $10 billion for each of the first three years  and then a balanced budget by the 2019-2020 fiscal year.

Budget will be balanced in 2 years.
 
Stand by for a bit of a change -- shared under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42) ...
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to give his year-old cabinet a facelift on Tuesday.

Sources tell The Canadian Press that the shuffle will involve at least six people.

Those expected to be moved include International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland, who is considered likely to replace Stephane Dion at Foreign Affairs.

Also believed in the mix are Status of Women Minister Patty Hajdu, seen as a strong performer, and Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef — widely criticized for her handling of Trudeau’s promise to reform Canada’s voting system.

Employment Minister MaryAnn Mihychuk is also expected to be moved.

Sources, speaking anonymously because they are not authorized to disclose details publicly, expect at least one new face in cabinet: Francois-Philippe Champagne, currently parliamentary secretary to Finance Minister Bill Morneau.
 
Not surprising given the change of regime to our south the last guy you want to send there to shore up relations is Stephane Dion.

Monsief has been a disaster and I'm sure she'll be gone.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top