Barquentine

They have MOU's and are paying high tariffs.

True. Give me break. Now you're just repeating Trump's talking points. But you preach like you know how everyone should run their lives. If you have so much on your plate and don't want to worry about other people, why are you on here all the time doing just that? PODSNAP!

Yeah, that's all he's ever done, yapping like a little attack dog. He never ran anything except his own campaign and look what happened . He lost, BIG Time!

They have MOU's and are paying huge tariffs.

Then you must oppose home, auto and life insurance.

Well, let's look at the US: 20 States:Including Texas, Florida, and North Carolina, still operate on the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour. That's the rich and powerful wanting "the population to have as much disposable income as possible"? Then why are you replying, genius?

Not too wild for anyone. We have incentives - apprentices in particular get grants and tax incentives.

If we were negotiating with norma lpeople, you'd be right. But Trump is not normal, intelligent, fair or consistent. My suspicion is that talks are going ok in the background but Trump wants some kind of crushing victory. Better no deal than a bad deal. We might just have to wait this out, and counter tariffs won't help us. And you're delusional if you think PeePee could do any better. Couldn't even get re-elected in his own riding!

I agree with that. But how many people can't do that because life happens - 2 year waiting lists for vocational, high tuition for university, or people getting training but then not being able to find jobs in their field... Meanwhile the rent is due, food is expensive, babies arrive, etc... "Life is what happens while you're making other plans." Why not have a portable pension plan for everyone? The higher paid would get more, less stress on gov't coffers... And labour is valid at any level. To say otherwise is elitist. People should do what they can to better their situation, but that's for them to decide, not for us to judge.

I like it as an idea, not so sure how it would work in practice. But if AI and mechanization replace too many jobs it will become a neccessity.

The rich prefer a happy healthy population with just enough disposable income to maintain the status quo. And have you ever met a rich person who didn't want more. The richest people I've met have invariably been the greediest people I've met.

CPP is. You pay into it for 40 years or so. But it's an insurance program that hss to be balanced. That's why I support raising the age to 67 and continuing immigration at the highest levels feasible.

And pay everybody CPP and OAS for 30-40 years?

You're a real life Podsnap, aren't you?

Not sure Rome's a good comparison. They were an empire staying rich by conquering and 'taxing' others. And apart from a military pension, they didn't have a social safety net like we have. But I'll bet they had some epic Toga parties!

Last post you said 7 weeks (which is after 28 yrs working) Get your facts straight. Minimum wage is $15-$18. MBM is approaching $60,000 for a family of 4. Everyone complains. EVERYONE! If only every one's life fit your prescription. You need to gain some, no - a lot of wisdom.

Seems to me it's voicing your desires. If you can let go of your desires, like a stoic or Buddhist, would you need prayer? Repeating learned specific prayers is more meditation then prayer.

We already had a mail strike and no collective agreement since Aug., 2024.

Their wages aren't that high... 2 days a week would be fine. After 28 years of employment. Still a bit high. No I don't think they should privatize it, just make it work. And every job should have some kind of retirement plan. You seem to think that's just for the upper crust. Work is work is work!

But poorer workers pay a higher percentage of their pay if it's just a consumption tax, unless it is VERY progressive. And wages have risen in the trades, should go higher with the shortages of qualified people. And yeah, older workers have problems with heavy physical work. Nice if they can move into jobs in office, warehouse, delivery ... and more of the heavy work is being done with machines.

People are living longer healthier lives. When the CPP started, people collected it for much shorter periods. I haven't done the research but I'm pretty sure the input/payout formula has changed quite a bit. People are more educated on the need to save for retirement and have more options now - RRSP, TFSA, etc... Raising the starting age to 67 would surely be a huge cost saving for us. People could still take it 5 years early (at age 62, and at a lesser monthly rate) even while they're still working. (I did, but kept working and contributing to age 68) People would still have the option of continuing to work. I would do it in 2 steps, 66 in 2 years, and 67 2 or 3 years after that. I'm sure somebody has done the math on this. And yes, I know a lot of people will push back on this idea.

I think public opinion has shifted enough on this issue it'll work out.

Sure, to get an Amazon delivery is cheap, they're subsidizing themselves to sell more (we'll see how long that's tenable). But to send a parcel my experience has always been that CPC is cheaper and more efficient. If private companies like UPS can can run a shipping company, then CPC can do it and break even, especially when you take out the profit cost. And I like the idea of having a Crown Corp doing it. Private corps can suddenly stop a service if it's not profitable. Think about rural and remote areas. This is a gov't service we need.

Isn't there a thread on here bout cheese choices? You can go there and find some to go with your whine!

I'm shocked! The Nat Post critisizing a Liberal Gov't? We're thriough the looking glass, Alice!