I am Groot

Guess you'll be voting for the Communists again, eh?

The way we are going we could get to 3% just from the ridiculously overpriced stuff we buy. Our 'arctic patrol' ships, for example, cost a billion apiece, way more than other countries, but are slow and largely unarmed. Our frigate will be the most expensive ever made in the history of the world, on par with the aircraft carriers the British built recently. I'm sure everything else we buy or build will be similarly overpriced so that while we won't get much of a military, we'll meet the percentage requirement.

We could put money into upgrading our bases quickly enough. Try to get rid of the mold and leaky roofs and broken windows, and build enough housing for members and their families. But we won't.

Instead of building more pipelines to export oil at world prices we sell it all to the US at a discount because there's too many regulations to build pipelines. Instead of refining it ourselves, we ship it to the US and then import the refined oil as gasoline. We ship raw logs to both the US and China, rather than putting it through our own lumber mills. We train IT people at great cost and when they graduate they find Canadian companies have little interest in them because they can hire cheap Indian tech workers for less and make them work like dogs. So they go to the US instead. But the problem is deeper than that. The problem is that we can't build infrastructure. We can't build anything. We approved the Transmountain pipeline in less than a year and built it in nine months back in 1952. Now compare that to the horrendous mess, the years of litigation and hearings, and then astonishing overspending that finally twinned it. How long does it take us to build a subway, or LRT or highway or bridge? All at much higher costs than in other countries. Compare the LRT built in our capital to the subway stations put up in Asia. Theirs are bright, glittering, clean, modern and beautiful, with tracks locked behind glass doors. Ottawa's came in way over budget and years behind schedule. They're made of bare concrete, with no protection from the elements, made of shoddy materials, and a poor design with tiny stations they have to shut down when there is a major crowd-producing event in the area because they'd be unsafe. This happens at all levels of government. We are a bureaucratic state and you need dozens of forms to get anything done, from renovations on your house to opening a factory. The added cost for the average house runs well into six figures. For a mine or other natural resource project you have to supply literally thousands and thousands of pages of studies and forms just to get to the hearing phase. God only knows what that costs but it discourages investment, which seeks friendlier shores to the south. That's the real problem we face. It's behind our low productivity, behind our low investment, behind our low levels of entrepreneurship, and behind our economic and political malaise.

Are you talking about out tariffs or theirs? I know their tariffs, which are across-the-board, will do this. The idea behind ours is to target appropriate imports. The idea is to target industries in Trumpland.

They aren't across-the-board tariffs like Trump's. That would be dumb. They're tariffs on specific products that we can easily replace, mostly made in Trumpland or in swing states. Like Florida orange juice - we can buy from California or Brazil.

Well, the us has about 20,000 border guards on their sieve-like southern border. Clearly that isn't enough, even with his 'wall' or all the fencing. Our border is almost three times longer and runs through the great lakes, lots of rivers, prairies, forests, and native reservations. We'd need about 75,000 new border guards just to have it as secure as the US southern border. Probably 100,000 is more like it. So the downside would be about ten to twelve billion dollars a year spent on the southern border. And Trump wouldn't give a damn anyway. He wants trade concessions. He doesn't really care about the border. The US already has a 25% tariff on China.

Prices are better? When the Canadian dollar is worth 0.69c?

Presumably, that would be Carney since he has no real attachment to Canada. He's already got triple citizenship and has spent half his life abroad. Why would he oppose Canada joining the US as its 51st state? Why is Carney droning on about climate change?

Courts aren't where these decisions will be made. Elections are. And Asians, especially Indians (ironically) aren't going to be willing to keep spending to keep natives on their quaint little reserves doing nothing forever. They're not afflicted with white guilt.

As opposed to what? He's not in the government. What has Trudeau been saying? Almost nothing. And has Carney offered up other than vague promises? Promises that often are the complete opposite of what he's been saying with absolute certainty and conviction for the last ten years.

Are you on the booze again?

Is that you, August?

Objective truth has never been the Left's thing. Canada's past was not pristine, but nobody's was. It was comparatively pristine, though, when compared to other countries, or even how the natives treated each other. The natives need to assimilate, leave, or die. As the number of Asians continues to grow there'll be a great deal less sympathy for them and their constant whining about how rough they have life. And eventually, the reserves will be eliminated as will any other funding and they'll be told to sink or swim just like the rest of the people here. Spending generations living on a patch of rural land with no economic support while holding out their hands for more is just not something anyone but the bleeding heart Left supports.

Doesn't Line 5 also supply Quebec? Mind you, I'm fine with cutting them off.

The idea for energy east was to eventually get to the Atlantic to send oil to Europe. Yes, it would also feed into Ontario and Quebec, but without an export market the cost is largely not recoverable. At least that is the way I understand it.

The impact of across the board tariffs at 25% has been estimated at a 6 point drop in GDP. Without oil, perhaps 4 points. The impact on the GDP of interprovincial trade barriers has been estimated at between 4 and 7 points. This is the equivalent of a 21% tariff on goods and services moving from province to province. Quebec, naturally, is the worst, at 25%. Largely eliminating these would nullify the economic impact of tariffs. However, no one is going to drop their barriers unless Quebec does and Quebec will threaten to separate before dropping theirs.

You mean dishonest and unethical? Yes, Dougie is a good liberal. Quebec still insists they will never approve a pipeline. Ever. For any reason.

But to the extent he has any say in it, his public statements so far amount to "More! Bring in more! More foreign students! More foreign workers! More immigrants! MORE! As many as you can find! Come on, Justin! Send me more! I'll take em all!!" Doug Ford's Pretend Conservatives have done nothing in office but continue the fiscal and social policies of Kathleen Wynne's Liberals.

No. Stories are not good enough. Especially when the government offered up big rewards to anyone who could tell a good story - no evidence required. If you feel so guilty, give your stuff to the nearest native you find and leave.

Whose truth?

Please explain in what way indigenous people are 'disadvantaged'. Also, what exactly does 'disadvantaged' mean? Why is he your favorite premier? Because he hates Canada too?

The Liberals find it much easier to stack the court because they're not looking for quality. They're looking for social justice warriors. And since you can't even get into law school anymore, much less graduate without a convincing testimony of how devoted you are to social justice that isn't hard. It would take ten years of Tory rule before they could get 5 of the 9 justices appointed based on the ages of the existing judges. That hapless native woman Trudeau appointed to the SC is only 51. She'll be on the court for the next 24 years. The Muslim is 58. He's gonna be around a long while too. These two barely qualify as judges and certainly shouldn't be on the SC if Trudeau was looking for more than virtue signaling and people with his shallow ideological views. Since when did conservatives ever win Quebec? They never get more than a handful of seats except when the Liberals have a non-Quebec leader and the Tories have a Quebecer.

We Canadians? The majority of the people in Toronto are either immigrants or their kids. Vancouver isn't that far behind. 12% of the population of Montreal are immigrant Muslims who hate Jews and despise Christians, especially women. Sikhs and Hindus are fighting it out next to temples while Eritreans battle it out with sticks and clubs in parks. And hordes of Muslims match through the streets of every major city demanding who agree with their hatred of Jews. The Trudeaus have done away with 'we Canadians'.

There is going to be a constitutional crisis in the coming year if the Conservatives get in and the Liberal-appointed "independent" senators and Liberal-appointed "independent" judges take it upon themselves to thwart the important things he will be elected to do. And since both groups were appointed based on their ideological conformity with Trudeau's woke social justice beliefs, there almost certainly will be. Trudeau has already appointed 90 senators. Another ten will give him almost the whole senate. Only about 21 are due to retire in the coming four years so this will be a left wing senate for at least a decade. What happens if they refuse to let him change laws on things like trans or asylum or crime? If they won't let him cancel pharmacare or the dental program (if he chooses to), won't let him weaken laws related to climate change or that block natural resource programs? And what happens if the left wing judges declare something unconstitutional, and Poilievre moves to use the notwithstanding clause, and their peers in the senate refuse to approve it? In fact, it would not surprise me to have the leader of these people say quite openly on TV "We will never approve any use of the Notwithstanding clause by this government for any reason."