CdnFox

2024. Might be the last one if you and the libs have your way. You spent a lot of time fighting AGAINST transparancy for a guy who claims to believe in it. The rest of your ramblings is distraction to hide the fact you support the liberal's lack of accountability. No, That happened under one PM briefly, and was quickly abandoned. It was not necessary nor widely accepted. Secrecy was considered important in the past but In modern times (since the 90's) budgets have always been discussed in committee before presented to the house and when presented to the house everyone gets a copy in advance. You're saying in the old days the finance minister hand typed all the copies for everyone and the committees discussing it weren't allowed to see it? No, that's only since 2018. Prior to that Omnibus bills COULD NOT include anything that was not directly related to the primary bill. The omnibus was there so that if a change to one bill made it necessary to change other supporting bills as well to reflect the changes it was all done in one process. But your beloved liberals changed that law and removed that. Since then an omnibus could have anything. So here we have proof. An entire post in a long line of posts of you explaining why we shouldn't have accountability. You believe firmly that the liberals should not have to produce a budget which would hold them accountable. You've defended it because a hundred years ago one guy typed a budget one time so budgets aren't real or something You hate accountability. Every single time something comes up to hold the liberals accountable you go on forever about how they shouldn't be held accountable as you are doing here. The liberals should have to produce a budget, they are deliberately avoiding being accountable, they should be punished by the voters for this kind of thing. But you will of course vote again for them next time because you don't mind a lack of accountability as long as it's liberals

dude even you have to see what a bullshit hit piece that is. First off it's wrong on every level. Trump hasn't signed anything transformative in his first hundred days? The tariffs are not transformative to world trade? Literally every commentator everywhere has called them transformative. To suggest he's done nothing transformative in the first hundred days is a joke Secondly he doesn't get to keep the plane so when they call it personal enrichment it's out and out lie This is the CBC at its worst and that's saying something. I'm not saying trump's an angel of that he should be accepting planes or the like but it's crystal clear that the article is mostly factually wrong and is simply there for people to exercise their confirmation bias if they don't like trump Post something useful. If all you've got is the cBC equivalent of the National Enquirer then you're making yourself look bad not trump

LOLOLOL i love that you used an example that proved yourself wrong previously As you point out the AI was correct - for a 95 percent confidence, that is the constant as i mentioned in a previous thread. But the confidence number itself is a variable and THAT IS WHAT"S IN THE FORMULA LOLOLOL WE were looking at a poll with a 97 percent confidence as i recall? So you used the constant associated with the wrong variable in the equasion LOLOL But i appreciate you posting your own stupidity for the world to see You suck at math. So the problem there wasn't the AI, the problem there was your compression. The AI was correct and produced an accurate statement but YOU assumed that the 95 percent was a constant for all polls instead of a variable for every poll which it is. When you read it again, that becomes quite clear. Now i can take one look at what you wrote and one look at the AI and see where the problem is. But for SOME reason you can't find ANY problems with THREE BOOKS worth of commentary, other than one non consequential error in one of them. So there you go. All you've proven with this is that ai is smarter than you, not that it's incapable of producing works that are valid.

Yes. Jim, not Mark.

that's not generally the meaning of the term that they're using. And if it was there be no need to include it because it would be automatic.

Irrelevant to what you said. You're now just trying to excuse your hypocrisy. Here's the thing. You let the liberals off and get a walk for the exact same things you say people should be outraged at trump over. That kind of hypocrisy is what makes people tune out the message on trump and ruins your credibility as a poster and a person. If it's wrong for trump its' wrong for carney. but for you it isn't.

I doubt that very much. And you were pretty arrogant for a guy who was 'just making a mistake'. How do you make a 'mistake' like that? What, you tripped and accidentally added 5 months? You must have looked it up and at no point anywhere does any document say that harper took 8 months to deliver a budget And right there you prove your dishonesty. You said "come up with" originally and now you want to change it to 'passed'. Mean while you want people to believe you're not a dishonest liar and I wasn't wrong, i just rounded down to the nearest month because i know you have trouble with numbers that get into the double digits (oh and fun fact, the budget must be shown and presented to the opposition in committee before it's tabled so it really was more like 3 months for him to 'come up' with it. Even when you're wrong, you're still more wrong than you thought you were ) But you're trying to pass that off as being the same as your lie that it was 8 months before harper "came up" with a budget.

Exactly! Except nobody ever said that That was YOUR claim not mine I just laughed at you for posting a visual representation that showed almost all blue and a little red and claiming "look! This proves the liberals are doing great!!!!" LOLOLOL So here's the difference, you're refering to something that YOU made up and are trying desperately to attribute to me. Whereas you really actually did screw up trying to figure out what a variable is in math, you really did insist for pages that 100 - 50 is not 50 and here you really did agree with Eyeball (should have been your first clue you were on the wrong track) and tried to claim that harper took 8 months to produce a budget when he took 3. You are wrong virtually every single time, and you're so pathetic and desperate that you're looking for spelling mistakes and dictionary definitions of words to try to deflect How's those math lesson's going? LOL

Posters like you are basically free comedy on this board. Why would anyone throw that away? We can all use a laugh

True. I assume you would have similar words for our prime minister?

I know you think that if you use that term you'll sound intelligent but really you just sound out of touch. You probably don't know much about computers but AI is actually considered to be a pretty powerful research tool these days So you were asked to come up with anything in the book that actually is substantially incorrect and in fact in three books you only came up with one really minor thing which isn't substantial I'm not suggests that you don't think the books are wrong you just don't have a better argument other than they are AI generators. I guess you thought if you put the word slop in there somewhere it would somehow make it worse. But you still have to defend that. Can't refute the important parts of the book that he's referring to then that strongly suggests that they are fairly accurate.

Not everyone has a magic credit card that can triple it's value overnight

Exactly! And you kept zooming in till it didn't look like there was so much blue Or like when you claimed a book was completely useless and when asked for evidence,,,, you could only find one small and meaningless error and couldnt' refute the rest And once again you lost a discussion in another thread and followed me around trying to make a random insult to make yourself feel better and lo and behold you've made yourself look stupid yet again really you'd think you'd learn, it's effing hilarious!

you mean how he's been signing things and then holding them up to show his signature just like trump does? Yeah, what the hell is up with that? And you can bet that if a conservative did it they would be all over him about how he's just like trump. I'm getting the sense that the shine might come off of carney a lot faster than anyone thought. At this rate if the NDP can get their act together carney's first budget might very well wind up in his government falling when it finally comes out next year

Dude you are wrong literally every time we talk this is the most recent example. Whether it's not knowing what a variable is, or insisting that nobody mentioned milk in a conversation about milk, or posting a study that proves i was right and the study i already posted was correct, or not being able to comprehend that 100 - 50 is 50. This is just the latest example. I'll probably bug you about it for a while About all we can say about you is that you may be wrong a lot but by god you're consistent

Says the guy that claims that the 2nd amendment only applies to militias

We didn't for the better part of a century. And we don't need to now. There is a reason or more accurately a series of reasons why our housing always lags behind immigration and when you eliminate those reasons you eliminate the problem We have not even come up to the start line. Carney intends to continue with excessively High immigration. He has no plans to tie immigration to the number of houses actually built or anything like that and he's hired the head of the century foundation. So things aren't going to get better in that respect And his idea is to spend $25 billion dollars creating a manufactured home industry. Well you can't put manufactured homes in the cities where we need more building. And manufactured homes aren't really a very efficient way to increase housing. And he intends to do this by spending $25 billion dollars on this program alone. Guess who's company owns a modular home division that they bought a few years ago? So he's going to give his own company $25 billion dollars or at least a significant portion of it to set up factories in Canada for free essentially and we still won't resolve the housing issues. Defense can exert a lot of influence over building homes in several different ways, but the one thing that they have absolute control over is the number of immigrants. And it's the one thing that carney is not willing to exercise.

Yeah, and I don't really see that getting better. His own ministers are standing up and contradicting what he says. Right there we see his complete lack of experience in the political world showing. He hasn't even got control of his party at this point and there's already her feelings and things going on in the background. That means his ability to get things done slows to a crawl. And when he finally does release his first budget people are going to expect it to be perfect because he had a full year to prepare it. And I can already tell it's going to be a disappointment

One of the lowest population per square foot ratios in the entire universe, we're not full. And we do need an increasing population. It has a large number of benefits not to mention the least of which is we are not taken all that seriously as a market because we don't have that many people. The reason the US has so much clout on the world stage economically is because they've got 400,000 people that buy goods. We have a tenth of that even though our country is technically larger. As we expand our market base earning the right to do business with us becomes more and more important to other players and that's valuable. We also increase our own domestic market and it makes it more practical for businesses to start up and manufacture things to sell within Canada because there's more people to buy them. But while it is an obvious benefit the simple fact of the matter is we don't need to rush to it at light speed. Growing faster than we are capable of is even worse than not growing at all

well it looks like 'court' is how it's going to have to be The Bloc Québécois wants the courts to trigger a new election in Terrebonne Mildy disappointing that the Bloc is the one that has to take on the job of standing up for our democracy but there you go. Hopefully the judge will allow a byelection, which will make those misprints a fairly lostly mistake. Hope someone got fired over that.

Makes little difference. And he obviously feels he's speaking the thoughts of the cabinet or he wouldn't have spoken up at all

Yeah. Honestly i think he sold out before he ever won the election. And i hear that we're now mirroring some of trump's entry rules for people from places like iran. And some of them don't make a lot of sense. He's doing what he's told. There's no elbows.

Yes it is, and point and laugh at them Kid, i love that you've realized you're completely looking like a retarded dolt but you somehow want it to be my fault

Not really. Just about every single gov't that has won power turned one in on time. As noted when harper won power for the first time he released a budget within 3 months, just 1 month after you'd normally expect to see it. And... HE WASN"T THE GOV"T BEFORE THAT. THE LIBERALS WERE. they have all the people, they know the budgets, they know the numbers, they were the gov't There MIGHT be an excuse if he was taking over from another party but there's no excuse for this. What happened to "I have a plan"? Fine, even if you wanted to be INSANELY generous, then he should be releasing his full budget in september when the house goes back. Instead, he's not going to release one this year at all and will do a basic 'economic update' which is useless without a budget SOMETIME in the fall, when he feels like it. We MIGHT get a budget the year after. No promises so far. Every single province has turned out a budget. It is NOT hard. You budget based on what you know and then you tell people the budget has some lee way built in for 'unpredictable' orange factors and IF things go off the rails THEN you do an economic update and you make corrections. It's not like Canadians won't forgive you for trump related weirdness. But he's been clear, no budget this year. that is completely indefensible. It creates uncertainty in our own markets, our businesses and investors will not like the uncertainty, it completely robs the opposition who would normally serve on committees looking at expenditures the ability to hold the gov't to account. The public does not know where the money is intended to be spent that they are required to give the gov't which is pretty horrible. And the opposition gets no opportunity to share their thoughts before the budget goes to vote so they get no say in the expendiures which is a pretty flagrant violation of democracy. This is kind of a big deal, and this is how they're starting out. With secrets and zero accountability. Even you are going to have to admit this is not how things should be.

Oh look, once again you're talking without knowing a thing about what you're talking about. As i just posted, 2006 Canadian federal budget - Wikipedia Harper delivered his budget within 3 months of winning office, 1 month after it would traditionally be presented in the house and that's not that uncommon. So. What were you saying about hyper partisans who just spout any old lie to prop up their tribal echo chamber? LOLOLOL It took you only one sentence to look like a loser that time