IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,216
- Points
- 990
Bidding on anything in the current Kidd Straight Shooter sale?
Trudeau Popularity - or not (various polling, etc.)
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,610
- Points
- 1,010
As in Kidd auctions?
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,216
- Points
- 990
Yup.
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,799
- Points
- 1,260
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 33,665
- Points
- 1,160
Some interesting analysis about that....
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2016).Broadly speaking, our assessment reveals that Canada’s overall economic performance during the Harper years was largely driven by external forces, while domestic policy initiatives played a relatively minor role, except during 2008-10. We would argue that the Harper government’s economic policies met the objective of strengthening Canada’s fiscal position without jeopardizing the goal of income redistribution. After 2010, however, in the face of a persistently slow recovery of demand, the Harper government unduly sacrificed economic growth, in particular public investment, in order to improve a debt position that was already solid.
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years - Policy Options
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox.
policyoptions.irpp.org
But are we any better off today or over the last 10 years is the question.Some interesting analysis about that....
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2016).
Broadly speaking, our assessment reveals that Canada’s overall economic performance during the Harper years was largely driven by external forces, while domestic policy initiatives played a relatively minor role, except during 2008-10. We would argue that the Harper government’s economic policies met the objective of strengthening Canada’s fiscal position without jeopardizing the goal of income redistribution. After 2010, however, in the face of a persistently slow recovery of demand, the Harper government unduly sacrificed economic growth, in particular public investment, in order to improve a debt position that was already solid.
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years - Policy Options
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox.
- Reaction score
- 22,855
- Points
- 1,360
As the owner of a #CanadaIsBack-flavoured highest interest rate in the last quarter century mortgage, I’m going with ‘not better off.’
The only things measurably better are the U.S.-based mutual funds in my TFSA.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,610
- Points
- 1,010
Things were night and day different with Prime Minister Harper's days. From my experiences
-I was able to clear out very large credit card debt (from my wifes bad car accident in which she suffered from a hit and run and finding out how much insurance and our health care doesn't cover)
-Buy food at reasonable prices.
-Buy our first home and then sell it at a good price just before he left office
-Buy our farm
-Always found civy employment when I was no longer Class C or B reserve work
-Heating and electrical prices were somewhat decent during those years
-We actually started farming in the Harper years and actually made a very slim profit (Like wow!)
Yeah, I stop voting for Harper after 2006 (for certain reasons such as VAC turning into a shitshow and my perceived mistreatment of my MP at the time). Then Sunny ways came along and its sucked big time since then and just gets worse and worse since.
Now, will the Trudeau Defenders rush in and explain why its just a coincidence and how none of this is his fault?
Story time. When I was a new WO and course 2IC for an old SQ course, I had a fuck up of a MCPL. How the man got promoted is beyond me. I didn't realize how incompetent he was at the time. Anyways I asked him to secure the PL commander's kit and weapon (The LT had to jet out to attend a charge period as an AO). Anywho, get back to the shacks. Then the CSM asked to see me and the PL Comd a few hours later. He got a call from Range Control. They found the LT's kit and weapon. I immediately took the blame and made it clear I was responsible. The LT was asked to carry on. The CSM gave me a blast of shit and then asked for details as to what happened. I explained. I was given a stern warning about blindly trusting NCOs (dumb me apparently) and I got an extra duty instead of a charge.
The point here? Things went sideways. I didn't make excuses, explanations or deny my responsibility. I acted as a leader and accepted responsibility and was fully prepared to accept the consequences for my failure. Anyone hear tell me Trudeau would ever accept responsibility for the long, long list of the current LPC failures?
-I was able to clear out very large credit card debt (from my wifes bad car accident in which she suffered from a hit and run and finding out how much insurance and our health care doesn't cover)
-Buy food at reasonable prices.
-Buy our first home and then sell it at a good price just before he left office
-Buy our farm
-Always found civy employment when I was no longer Class C or B reserve work
-Heating and electrical prices were somewhat decent during those years
-We actually started farming in the Harper years and actually made a very slim profit (Like wow!)
Yeah, I stop voting for Harper after 2006 (for certain reasons such as VAC turning into a shitshow and my perceived mistreatment of my MP at the time). Then Sunny ways came along and its sucked big time since then and just gets worse and worse since.
Now, will the Trudeau Defenders rush in and explain why its just a coincidence and how none of this is his fault?
Story time. When I was a new WO and course 2IC for an old SQ course, I had a fuck up of a MCPL. How the man got promoted is beyond me. I didn't realize how incompetent he was at the time. Anyways I asked him to secure the PL commander's kit and weapon (The LT had to jet out to attend a charge period as an AO). Anywho, get back to the shacks. Then the CSM asked to see me and the PL Comd a few hours later. He got a call from Range Control. They found the LT's kit and weapon. I immediately took the blame and made it clear I was responsible. The LT was asked to carry on. The CSM gave me a blast of shit and then asked for details as to what happened. I explained. I was given a stern warning about blindly trusting NCOs (dumb me apparently) and I got an extra duty instead of a charge.
The point here? Things went sideways. I didn't make excuses, explanations or deny my responsibility. I acted as a leader and accepted responsibility and was fully prepared to accept the consequences for my failure. Anyone hear tell me Trudeau would ever accept responsibility for the long, long list of the current LPC failures?
Yeah that was my point. The position put out there was that things seemed better under Harper. The counter was to show Harper’s weak economic policy at the time.
That still doesn’t mean we are better now than then.
I’m at a different time in my life now so yes I feel I am in a better spot than back then. That doesn’t mean the country is though.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,610
- Points
- 1,010
Just curious. Are you a business owner? yes or no?
Rick, I’m not getting into another pissing contest with you. Enjoy your day.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,610
- Points
- 1,010
@Remius
From that article.
"economic performance during the Harper years was largely driven by external forces, while domestic policy initiatives played a relatively minor role, except during 2008-10."
So academic, payed by university offers this opinion.
"strengthening Canada’s fiscal position without jeopardizing the goal of income redistribution."
I have real issues with income redistribution. Commy speak.
"Harper government unduly sacrificed economic growth, in particular public investment, in order to improve a debt position that was already solid."
So? Paying more and more on the debt is a bad thing? Public investment? As in waste more tax money? I am not liking this term at all without specific context.
"labour force participation continued to decline, at least in part because the older members of the baby boom generation were beginning to retire."
What does retiring baby boomers got to do with Harper's policies? Thats an event that happens and basically can't be stopped.
"economy during the Harper government years, the unemployment rate was considerably lower than during the previous two decades."
Isn't that a good thing?
"thus the policies and structural developments which were at the root of the lower level of structural unemployment in the last decade unfolded well before the Harper government years."
So? Not really Harper's fault?
"While the Canadian economy during the Harper government years worsened on most aggregate measures relative to 1984-2005, it did quite well relative to foreign advanced economies.
Thats a good thing, no?
"As a result, not only was the 2008-09 recession less severe in Canada than in most other advanced economies, but also the recovery in Canada was stronger"
Thats also a good thing, no?
I gotta go (There is alot more to this article, maybe I will finish later). So far, much of what is showing doesn't seem to be about blaming Harper for good or bad.
What policies or plans did Harper put in place that hindered the economy of Canada?
From that article.
"economic performance during the Harper years was largely driven by external forces, while domestic policy initiatives played a relatively minor role, except during 2008-10."
So academic, payed by university offers this opinion.
"strengthening Canada’s fiscal position without jeopardizing the goal of income redistribution."
I have real issues with income redistribution. Commy speak.
"Harper government unduly sacrificed economic growth, in particular public investment, in order to improve a debt position that was already solid."
So? Paying more and more on the debt is a bad thing? Public investment? As in waste more tax money? I am not liking this term at all without specific context.
"labour force participation continued to decline, at least in part because the older members of the baby boom generation were beginning to retire."
What does retiring baby boomers got to do with Harper's policies? Thats an event that happens and basically can't be stopped.
"economy during the Harper government years, the unemployment rate was considerably lower than during the previous two decades."
Isn't that a good thing?
"thus the policies and structural developments which were at the root of the lower level of structural unemployment in the last decade unfolded well before the Harper government years."
So? Not really Harper's fault?
"While the Canadian economy during the Harper government years worsened on most aggregate measures relative to 1984-2005, it did quite well relative to foreign advanced economies.
Thats a good thing, no?
"As a result, not only was the 2008-09 recession less severe in Canada than in most other advanced economies, but also the recovery in Canada was stronger"
Thats also a good thing, no?
I gotta go (There is alot more to this article, maybe I will finish later). So far, much of what is showing doesn't seem to be about blaming Harper for good or bad.
What policies or plans did Harper put in place that hindered the economy of Canada?
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,610
- Points
- 1,010
Fair enough. Walk away.
- Reaction score
- 6,352
- Points
- 1,160
The measure of a PM and his government is not based, simply, on the financial component. What about unity, job creation, natural resource policy and development, cutting red tape and clearing out gatekeepers, national defence, foreign affairs, etc, etc, etc. Trudeau and his crew have been horribly remiss in how they handled all these items. A government completely detached from the reality of their bosses, the Canadian people. A government of carpetbaggers and slimeballs, stealing the treasure from taxpayers. Lying to us on a daily basis. No, there is really no comparison to any other Canadian government, Harpers or otherwise, except his father's. There is not a single redeeming value to our current kakistocracy.
- Reaction score
- 4,915
- Points
- 1,160
By that logic, slagging our closest ally would not be appropriate either, correct? But if that's your view I'm sure we'd save some moderation cycles by shutting down the politics boards completely.
It's a thread on whether Trudeau is popular or not.
Nobody here is identifying with full name, rank, service number, date if birth - and nobody here is posting anything that isn't already open source. Most of the discussion spurs from media links being posted, so it's the epitome of open source...
When in uniform, especially when dealing with the public, there is absolutely a decorum of professionalism we all expect of ourselves and the people we serve with.
And as far as online forums go, army.ca has to be among the most polite and civil of them all - especially where politics are concerned.
Like I said, nobody here is identifiable by name, service number, DOB, etc. We're commenting, as private citizens, on publically available information - usually in the form of published media articles.
...
If an article is reporting that Trudeau is now involved in scandal #856, or that the Canadian economy 'faces challenges' on account of Trudeau destroying our various industries, tripling the national debt, allowing his MP's to funnel $400M to themselves, trying to sole source a contract to a charity his family runs to the tune of a few hundred more millions of dollars, imposing a massive tax burden on farmers that's skyrocketing food prices, having Canadian salaries be on average $22k less than our American family south if the border (made exponentially worse by the low value of our dollar), etc, etc
If the articles the media are posting are about all of the above (and shockingly that list above barely scratches the surface) I think it's fair that people comment on them.
If the current government doesn't want people talking about how corrupt they are, they should stop being corrupt.
If the current government doesn't want people talking about how inept they are at everything, they should start being more competent. And if Trudeau doesn't want people talking about what a piece of public bathroom scum that he is, he should stop being that piece of public bathroom scum.
(Kinda hard to do once you've paid off a teenage girl you slept with while her high school teacher, then bribed her to sign a NDA. I wouldn't even hold that against him anymore, as a lot of time has passed, if he wasn't still such a dirtbag...)
...
And as for the negative opinions people have shared about the rest of the current government? They've funneled almost $400M of taxpayer's money to their own personal companies and bank accounts in exchange for nothing, and that's JUST from the Green Slush Fund. That doesn't even include all the missing money from Covid expenditures...
My overall point is that it's an online forum discussing publically available information, in a thread specifically about Trudeau's popularity. Forum members can have their opinions about the articles posted.
I DO appreciate & agree with you that publically slaggjng the current government while being a uniformed member of the military is something members need to be mindful of, tactful of, and approach a certain way...
I'm just not sure any lines are being crossed here.
But that's just my 2 cents
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
From a policy organization chaired bySome interesting analysis about that....
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2016).
Broadly speaking, our assessment reveals that Canada’s overall economic performance during the Harper years was largely driven by external forces, while domestic policy initiatives played a relatively minor role, except during 2008-10. We would argue that the Harper government’s economic policies met the objective of strengthening Canada’s fiscal position without jeopardizing the goal of income redistribution. After 2010, however, in the face of a persistently slow recovery of demand, the Harper government unduly sacrificed economic growth, in particular public investment, in order to improve a debt position that was already solid.
Economic performance and policy during the Harper years - Policy Options
This is an expanded version of a chapter in The Harper Factor: Assessing a Prime Minister’s Policy Legacy, edited by Jennifer Ditchburn and Graham Fox.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 6,352
- Points
- 1,160
Or farmland, mines, ports, natural resources or bug lab secrets.
- Reaction score
- 22,855
- Points
- 1,360
