oops

You disparage Mr. Hodkison as being a geezer, but I assume that you hope one day to be one. I don't know your background or area of expertise, and I am not a betting man, but if I was I would wager that Mr. Hodkinson is more qualified to address the subject than you are. I know from experience that if a person is faced with a person with with an opposing point of view, and a superior argument, that person will often attack the presenter, rather than address the issue. At any rate people wearing masks does not prevent the spread of the virus.

Wrong again. I do admire your consistency though. I do not believe in government conspiracies, I don't believe our governments are clever enough to pull them off. Don't give up hope of finding Elvis, and when you do, say Hi for me.

Of course the petition will not bring down the government, it is at best a wake up call. The hope is that it will make our leaders recognize the problem, so they will see the need to address it. No luck so far. You think that our government is giving money to help people through a crisis that the virus has created. I believe the government lock downs created the problem, and their solution was to borrow more money, return it to the people who will need to repay it and then expect them to be grateful. That way everyone can keep enjoying their pleasant dreams. During the pre crisis years did Justin use this time to reduce the debt, and prepare us for leaner times? No he did not do that, his solution to rising debt was to borrow money to pay it. Is this what is referred to as fiscal responsibility? No it is not. The government has borrowed 300 billion dollars, to address the problem, at the same time gdp (our resources that enable us to fund government spending) was reduced by 38%. Do some people see this as a problem? Yes they do. Is Justin one of them? No he is not. At a time when we were running a $19 billion deficit we have added 30% to our debt and reduced our resources to 62% of pre crisis levels. In the latest quarter with some easing of restrictions gdp rose by 9%. One would assume that this would mean that it is now 71% of our pre crisis level. Of course the 9% increase is on 62% of our remaining gdp. This means that we are now now operating at 67% of the former gdp. While some see this as progress, we are in fact adding more to a debt that was increasing under much better times. This is of course added to, not subtracted from government deficits. My hope is that people will recognize the problem, and demand change, perhaps I am aiming too high.

Government used to value and support Canadian businesses, now they criminalize them. I believe this is not to our benefit.

I do not hate the Trudeau family, only what they have done to our nation. It is not in fact the Canadian people that decide who is prime minister. Canada is a constitutional monarchy, and the prime minister is appointed by our head of state at the present time that is Queen Elizabeth II, through her representative the Governor General. THE CROWN AND THE GOVERNOR GENERAL In Canada, executive authority is formally vested in the Crown (the Sovereign), and it is exercised in its name by the Governor General, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister and the cabinet. The Constitution reserves certain prerogatives of government for the Crown, including the powers to: give royal recommendation to bills that propose to spend government revenues; give royal assent to bill passed by the Senate and the House of Commons so that they become law; appoint holders of many important offices (e.g., judicial and diplomatic); dissolve Parliament before elections, and to open and close parliamentary sessions (at the beginning of each parliamentary session, the Governor General reads the Speech from the Throne, prepared by the Prime Minister, outlining the Government’s objectives for the upcoming session); and choose the Prime Minister (by convention, the leader of the party with the most seats in the House of Commons following a general election). https://www.ourcommons.ca/About/OurProcedure/ParliamentaryFramework/c_g_parliamentaryframework-e.htm The popukace of each electoral riding elects a member of parliament to represent their interests. Parliament is known as the house of commons (commons referring to the common people) to retain power a prime minister must continue to have the confidence of the house of commons, by inference the common people. The intent of the petition is to inform the queens representative that our current prime minister no longer has the confidence of the people of Canada, and requesting her to dissolve Parliament before elections. You say that I change history, but offer no examples of such, not a sign of a solid argument. You might want to be careful about throwing the term idiotic around, you never know where it might land.

The deficits are indeed annual, but when you string several of them together during times of prosperity and difficult times alike, they do become cumulative. When you say critics of Trudeau like me and other conservatives like me, you know not of which you speak. I believe in people not in political parties. I am grateful for prime ministers that were fiscally responsible and were responsible stewarts of our resources. Among the post war PMs that I respect are Louis St Laurent (liberal) , John Diefenbaker(progressive conservative), Lester Pearson (liberal), Jean Chretien (liberal) and Paul Martin (liberal). Although he was never prime minister I also admire Tommy Douglas our last nation builder who was leader of the CCF which we now know as the NDP. I don't think that Justin is a bad prime minister because he is a liberal, I think it is a result of unfortunate genetics. His father Pierre was prime minister under two separate tenures for a total of 14 years. During that time he was responsible for a 738% rise in the federal debt. His mother Margaret during his formative years was a flower child noted for her fondness of recreational drugs, and partying through the night with the Rolling Stones, and other celebrities of questionable virtue. You may be infatuated with Justin, but others see him as a real menace. There is often a feeling of fatality, people believing that there is nothing that they can do make needed change. This is not totally true. Most people know that a prime minister needs the confidence of parliament to remain in power. It is also true that the PM needs the confidence of the Canadian people. If anyone believes that we need a change in leadership, and is looking for a way to contribute, there is a petition for the removal of Justin Trudeau from office. This can be found at: https://www.change.org/p/canadian-house-of-commons-at-least-1-million-signatures-to-remove-pm-justin-trudeau-and-his-liberal-government

The governments blame the virus for Canadians in need who may have lost their jobs because of pandemic, businesses unable to survive and, renters in danger of becoming homeless and out in cold. I blame the government. You believe that Justin is doing a good job. You might want to look at this. Before the pandemic, the combined federal and provincial Canadian debt totalled $1.4 trillion. And since then, this debt has rapidly grown, with governments borrowing another $300 billion in the current year alone. This debt will be mostly repaid by our children, their children and their children’s children. This raises a moral matter of how we are treating our young and future Canadians. Is it ethical for governments to increase spending by placing greater debts on future generations? Isn’t contractually placing our children into a monetary form of debt bondage morally indefensible? And how might we objectively judge government borrowing policies to ensure justice for future generations? The taxpayers federation’s debt clock tells us that the federal that the federal debt is currently $948 billion. It is according to them rising by $940 thousand per day. Being a leap year that makes a total of $344 million for the year. If that seems like we are headed in the right direction, you might want to see if you are in forward or reverse. https://www.debtclock.ca/

My simple math tells me that if you spend 381 billion, then spend another 200 billion, you don't subtract one from the other you actually have to add them together and arrive at 581 billion. This is 64% of the 900 billion debt Canada accumulated in the nation's first 153 years. I know that when our prime minister and his supporters are not worried about that, it makes me worry. As for a rapid recovery when businesses open up again, with unprecedented business failures, the recovery might not be as rapid as you anticipate.

Don't be sorry. I do believe preventing deaths is important though, but you might have missed some opinions on bankruptcies and putting people out on the streets though.

I would have started before the crisis, reducing the debt in times of prosperity like former Prime Ministers did. I would have supported Canadian businesses, instead of encouraging my premiers to criminalize their operation. If my finance minister was Bill Morneau, whose background was executive chairman of Morneau Shepel a company trusted by several major pension funds to manage their portfolios, I would have listened when he told me that spending was wildly out of control. I would not refuse to take his phone calls, making his position untenable and forcing his resignation. I certainly in a time of crisis would not replace him with former journalist Christina Freespend (sorry that should read Freeland), who would support my every move without question. I would not take money from one of the taxpayers pockets, put in another pocket, and tell them that I was Santa Claus.

I believe that we are experiencing fiscal irresponsibility that is unprecedented, if that brings a smile to your face, go with it. I believe that someone should be held accountable, hope that doesn't spoil your glass half full point of view. I believe that it is time to demand change, but you are welcome to burry your head in the sand and wait for the sun to shine. I believe that if you are on a raft about to go over a waterfall it is time to get off, but if splashing in the pretty white water is more to your liking, I hope that turns out well for you.

If you think that Justin is our guy to pull us out of debt, read this. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/trudeau-sets-another-record-and-not-in-a-good-way Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has set another record—increasing the federal debt (per person) more than any other prime minister (not facing a world war or recession) since 1870. He earlier set a spending record, as the Trudeau government has spent more money (per person) than any other prime minister in Canadian history. Rapid debt accumulation, accompanied by unprecedented levels of spending is simply not sustainable—and Canadians will be left to deal with the consequences. Let’s take a closer look at some of Justin Trudeau’s historic achievements. As noted in a new Fraser Institute study, Justin Trudeau has overseen the largest increase in federal debt (per person) of any prime minister who did not face a world war or recession during his or her tenure. Federal government debt has grown 5.6 per cent ($1,723 per person) over the last four years under the Trudeau government. And Ottawa’s total debt (technically referred to as gross debt) is expected to reach $1.2 trillion in 2019. For comparison, consider that since the 19th century, every former Liberal prime minister who, like Justin Trudeau, did not experience world war of recession, reduced the federal per-person debt. Indeed, Lester B. Pearson reduced per-person debt by 6.7 per cent. So did Paul Martin (by 7.6 per cent) and Jean Chrétien (by a striking 13.3 per cent). Clearly, Justin Trudeau is an outlier by choosing to increase the debt during relatively good economic times. In fact, some prime ministers including Arthur Meighen and Mackenzie King even reduced per-person debt despite experiencing an economic downturn. Justin increased our public debt during times of relative prosperity, now you are counting on him to reduce it during these trying times. He obviously has no appetite for fiscal responsibility. Taking on debt to cover your spending is referred to as spending by borrowing. This seems to be Justin’s mantra. https://globalnews.ca/news/7303230/canada-gdp-q2-2020/ The Canadian economy suffered its worst three-month stretch on record in the second quarter as the economy came to a near halt in April before starting to recover in May and June. Statistics Canada said Friday real gross domestic product contracted at an annualized rate of 38.7 per cent for the quarter, the worst posting for the economy dating back to when comparable data was first recorded in 1961. Trudeau says that his stimulus spending is only 3% of gdp (gross domestic product), this is pre crisis gdp of course. This becomes 4.89% of current gdp. This is clearly unsustainable. https://financialpost.com/opinion/jack-m-mintz-canadas-debt-load-is-even-worse-than-you-think Jack M. Mintz: Canada's debt load is even worse than you think Add it all up and Canada’s debt burden is $3.2 trillion. That’s 166 per cent of GDP — fully four times the IMF forecast for 2020 Jack M. Mintz Keep in mind that when Justin is giving us money, it is not his money, it is our money. If you think that you can get out of debt by borrowing, think again.

Our governments have spent hundreds of millions of dollars responding to the covid19 crisis. They have done this while preventing no deaths. The idea of the lock downs was always to flatten the curve, which means that the same number of infections over a longer period of time, basically letting some people getting ill later instead of too many all at once. News people it is now later, and those delayed illnesses are happening now. Flattening the curve means lower initial infections than would occur under what could be called an unrestricted wave. Under the unrestricted wave though the number of infections reduces faster. The reason for this is that there will be an increasing number of people who have developed immunity. This should eventually result in herd immunity. Many people try to discredit the idea of herd immunity, but at the same time they believe that a vaccine will save us by achieving herd immunity. At some point in time there will be fewer infections under the unrestricted wave than the flattened wave. After 10 months it is difficult to tell if we have arrived at that point yet. It is possible that we now have more current infections than if restrictions had never been put in place. All of this does not mean that there are the same number of deaths with or without lock downs. There is of course collateral damage resulting from the lock downs. Border closures have caused an increase of deadly drugs circulating among our opiod dependent population. Many of these people became dependent after being prescribed opiods by doctors or dentists, and now face an increased prospect of an early death. Another case of collateral damage is people who are on waiting lists for procedures tat are necessary to battle cancer, heart disease etc.. In the spring our hospitals were shut down, delaying these time sensitive procedures. Many other people were not even able to be assessed for these ailments meaning that they could not even have treatment scheduled. We can only assume that there were several deaths among these people. The effects of isolation has also had a negative on the physical and mental health of people in general, but even more so on our seniors. Many feeling lonely or even abandoned, resulting in increasing mortality from cancer, heart disease, Alzheimers and a host of other ailments. Other collateral damage came from the closure of our schools for 3 months, resuting in the loss of nearly one third f the school year. Many students kept up by working online, but with several parents lacking computer skills, meant children under joint custody with parents not able to cooperate that an estimated 0ne third of students did not keep up with on line studies. The lock downs also resulted in unprecedented business failures, while government expenditures were skyrocketing. This is resulting in government debt that was unimagable less than a year ago. There is also the loss of community. People are now seen as a threat , instead of friends and neighbours. The loss of sporting events, live music, family gatherings etc. Has left many thinking that many of the things that enrich their lives has been taken from them. As for the hospitals being overwhelmed by covid cases, there is still on average less than 2 patients per hospital in Canada. Hospital closures, and impending health care cuts necessitated by debt repayments taking an ever larger portion of government expenditures will put serious stress on our health care system, and almost certainly be overwhelming.

Unfortunately Justin's commitment to growth is reserved for the growth of our national debt.

Forcing your businesses into bankruptcy, and paying people not to work is not a commitment to growth.

Payments on Ontario's debt is the fourth largest budget expenditure. That puts it out of the medals, but with a large increase in borrowing, and government lockdowns decreasing revenue, bronze is almost assured in the next budget. Why it matters Interest payments on our debt are Ontario’s fourth largest line item after healthcare, education and social services. In 2019–20, interest on the debt will cost about $13.3 billion. As Ontario’s debt has increased, we continue to pay more and more interest. Every dollar that is spent paying interest is one less dollar going to critical public programs and services. Ontario’s top expenses Health sector $63.5 billion Education sector $41.2 billion Children and social services sector $16.7 billion Interest on debt $13.3 billion source: https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontarios-finances#:~:text=In 2019–20%2C interest on,critical public programs and services.

It is true that Justin's daddy Pierre during his 14 years as prime minister in two separate tenures did increase the national debt by 720%. This reversed the trend of the three post world war 2 prime ministers that preceded him of made serious progress in repaying the war debt. We made progress under Louis St. Laurent (liberal),John Diefenbaker (progressive conservative) and Lester Pearson (liberal). Pierre changed all this doing lot of damage, but Justin is making that pale by comparison.

" not bring able to get our head above water may negate the need to wear a mask"... Should read not being able to get our head above water may negate the need to wear a mask. Spelling has been a life long struggle for me.

Justin might have solved the mask problem for us. With rising debt and falling gdp not bring able to get our head above water may negate the need to wear a mask.

Yes we did spend more in 1945, this was of course in the middle of World War 2. This also was also a record year for gross domestic product (a measure of goods and services produced nationally). When the war ended we had several years of strong production and healthy gdp (gross domestic product). Under Prime Ministers Lester Pearson and John Diefenbaker we actually decreased the national debt. This was a time when Canadian businesses were supported and encouraged by our federal leaders. Trudeau has in 2020 borrowed 300 billion dollars, which is an incredible one third of the debt accumulated during Canada's first 153 years as a nation. At the same time he has encouraged the provincial Premiers to lock down their economies. This has resulted in unprecedented failures especially among small businesses. With partial re openings under restrictions that added costs and reduced revenues, many more business failures are expected. This will of course produce an unprecedented drop in gdp that may very well exceed that of the great depression. Rising expenditures accompanied by falling gdp is a very real problem. If you think that we will manage this situation, then take another look at our manager. You might want to read the article below if you think that our federal government is in good hands. https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/prime-minister-trudeau-cements-his-debt-legacy Here is one morsel: By the time Prime Minister Trudeau completes his current term, federal debt per person (inflation-adjusted) is projected to increase by 5.6 per cent, more than any prime minister who did not preside over a world war or recession.

To pay back a debt, you need to be making more money than you are spending. If you think that this is the case, then you have no idea of what is happening in this country. This is so far from reality that it is beyond absurd. I will try not to wake you though, because your dream world is so much better than the reality you will some day wake up to.

1: If being right is important to you then you are right. Let that be my gift to you, hope it makes you all warm and fuzzy. It is a little binary for my liking though. Getting back to the trade deal I do support it. I have other reasons for believing Justin is an idiot. I was addressing the exposing the PM for what he is part of the topic though. I have great respect for Chretien and even more for Martin. Justin not so much. As for my children drowning, I am not for that at all. I am quite binary on that one.

Let's bring back the old normal days and get rid of these so called new normal days. You have my vote taxme. I am ready for some of that herd immunity, I believe it will go nicely with some oxygen rich fresh air, maybe people will smile again.

Sorry not my thing. You will have to find your own.

Right is right and wrong is wrong, too binary for you. The truth is the truth, also binary but still right. Following a compass is binary, wandering around hopelessly lost is nonbinary but not a better choice. Encouraging international trade is good it will always be good. This is also binary. Spending by borrowing is a bad idea, drowning our children in debt is also a bad idea. This is true 7 days a week, not just Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. I will be non binary and say that Justin is only wrong 99% of the time. That still means that we have a bad Prime Minister. Being well balanced does not mean that you should believe in nothing.