Trudeau Liberals Bribe Voters with Taxpayer Dollars

[herbie]

The usual diatribe from deniers and delayers claiming everyone else are the stupid ones.
Proof you can educate some, but there's no cure for stupid.

[Perspektiv]

10 hours ago, herbie said:

Proof you can educate some

Education?

Education is knowing climate change is real.

Its also knowing Canada's contributions to it, along with the global contributions to the issue.

Its knowing how far we have improved, vs shaming people for not doing enough.

Its reasonably reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, vs pressuring struggling families into using alternative types of vehicles that are far more expensive.

Its investing in such technologies to ensure they are ready, for when masses of people start migrating to them.

There are plenty of ways to reduce carbon footprints. How electricity is harvested, distributed to even cleaner means of producing batteries.

More importantly, education is a conversation. Two ways. Its also wiser to learn when stress levels are low. Which is why fun activities tend to boost how quick information is absorbed. Many athletes do this in training.

Trudeau is not in for listening. This isn't a conversation or dialogue.

Its nothing but divisive shaming tactics to refuse any questioning of what he is doing.

[ExFlyer]

41 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Education?

Education is knowing climate change is real.

Its also knowing Canada's contributions to it, along with the global contributions to the issue.

Its knowing how far we have improved, vs shaming people for not doing enough.

Its reasonably reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, vs pressuring struggling families into using alternative types of vehicles that are far more expensive.

Its investing in such technologies to ensure they are ready, for when masses of people start migrating to them.

There are plenty of ways to reduce carbon footprints. How electricity is harvested, distributed to even cleaner means of producing batteries.

More importantly, education is a conversation. Two ways. Its also wiser to learn when stress levels are low. Which is why fun activities tend to boost how quick information is absorbed. Many athletes do this in training.

Trudeau is not in for listening. This isn't a conversation or dialogue.

Its nothing but divisive shaming tactics to refuse any questioning of what he is doing.

Am I to take your post as sarcastic??  Because that is how is comes across to me.

[Gaétan]

Politicians' promises are an illegal way to buy votes, and those who make them should be arrested, brought to justice, and put in jail. It is not legal to buy votes with money in Canada. The Canadian electoral system is based on democratic and fair principles, and vote buying is considered a form of electoral corruption. There are strict laws to prevent such practices and ensure the integrity of elections. Any attempt to buy votes or unduly influence the electoral process can result in severe criminal penalties. We must arrest Trudeau and Poilievre and bring them to court for buying votes with money. The law must not be different depending on the status of individuals and the prime ministers and the leader of the opposition must face justice and the election canceled

Edited April 4 by Gaétan

[BeaverFever]

On 4/3/2024 at 5:24 PM, I am Groot said:

Where is it getting this cash?

From children.

No, it's bribing them with their children's and grandchildren's money given so much of that is being borrowed.

That’s no how economies work. The economy and the population always grows over the long term especially if proper investments are made. In addition Governments are immortal institutions so in a sense they are borrowing over an infinite timeline, it’s not like any particular generation will be required to pay off the entire national debt in full within 30 days of getting a bill. The children and grandchildren won’t be any more short of cash then previous generations. 

[BeaverFever]

On 4/3/2024 at 5:28 PM, I am Groot said:

Of course, the trick is in redefining EVERYTHING as an 'essential service', isn't it? Because the real essential services have been provided for many decades now. The new ones being offered up were not essential last year or any time in the last eight years. Yet now they're essential. They weren't essential under his father in the 1970s ad 1980s. But now they're essential.

Because the Liberals are way down in the polls and need to buy some votes.

And they're using borrowed money to do it.

They’re essential services now and have badly needed for years or in tue case of childcare, a generation.  Look once upon a time paved roads and electricity were not considered essential services gasoline weren’t considered essentials and undoubtedly some conservative of the day was calling them frivolous luxuries. In the modern world where the average household requires two full-time earners to make ends meet, affordable and accessible childcare is a a necessity that also allows both parents contribute to the economy….why is that so hard to understand?
 

In the 70s and 80s women stayed home and a single male earner could afford to pay for everything. As much as the conservative troglodytes want to force women’s from the workforce and back into the home that isn’t going to happen amd even ifnit did, the modern economy wouldn’t allow a single earner to support a family. 

[I am Groot]

12 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

 it’s not like any particular generation will be required to pay off the entire national debt in full within 30 days of getting a bill. The children and grandchildren won’t be any more short of cash then previous generations. 

When Pierre Trudeau took over Canada's debt was in the millions - not billions, millions. He quadrupled spending - but not taxes - and started the mountain of debt his son doubled. And as the debt load mounts the cost of servicing it does too, especially if we don't get inflation under control - which is harder as the government keeps borrowing.

So no, they will, in fact, be shorter of cash than previous generations.

[I am Groot]

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

They’re essential services now and have badly needed for years or in tue case of childcare, a generation.

The national childcare system is a joke that costs too much for what it gives. And the Liberals have infested it with wokeness, just like they do everything else, insisting in their agreements with the provinces that they prioritize non-white parents. 

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

In the 70s and 80s women stayed home and a single male earner could afford to pay for everything. As much as the conservative troglodytes want to force women’s from the workforce and back into the home that isn’t going to happen

I wonder who the barbarians are, the conservatives who allegedly want to 'force' women back into the home, or the progressives who say instead "Go to work, you twat! Never mind your stinking children! Go and produce! Get into that factory! Get into that store! No, you can't stay home with your children! Screw them! Go and make money!"

4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

amd even ifnit did, the modern economy wouldn’t allow a single earner to support a family. 

Gee, I wonder why that is.

 

[Zeitgeist]

22 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

That’s no how economies work. The economy and the population always grows over the long term especially if proper investments are made. In addition Governments are immortal institutions so in a sense they are borrowing over an infinite timeline, it’s not like any particular generation will be required to pay off the entire national debt in full within 30 days of getting a bill. The children and grandchildren won’t be any more short of cash then previous generations. 

Wake up!  The Trudeau government has increased our debt by 75%.  How can you think that continuing to borrow money to pay for new programs is good for Canada and future generations when under current leadership our GDP per capita has fallen along with our wages? Don’t pretend this is worldwide either, because the US economy and wages are growing substantially higher than Canada’s.  You don’t seem to understand fiscal responsibility or living within means, making responsible choices, avoiding moral hazards, and the importance of having policies that are good for business and entrepreneurship.  Continuing to raise taxes and overspend can only lead to ruin.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

That’s no how economies work.

It is precisely how they work. Regardless of how much the economy grows it will be held back by any debt that it owes. That's a simple fact. The children of tomorrow will have to earn significantly more money than they would have to pay off the debt interest that we have today. They also run the risk that inflation rates will go up which could easily double or triple those payments making it almost impossible for the government to collect enough tax to successfully provide those services without destroying the economy.

We've seen this happen before. This is nothing new or theoretical.

The children of tomorrow will have a worse life because of the money that was borrowed today. That is undeniable. You can argue that it won't be much worse, or that somehow they can steal from the generation to come after them so it's okay or something but you cannot deny the fact that they will pay a price for the goods and services being consumed today and the money wasted by the government.

[BeaverFever]

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

At the moment? Not any more than flat earth theory is - pretty much all the experts agree,

Do they?  Which experts?  Poilievre says we “we “common people” can’t trust experts and must rely on our “common sense”. So why are you now invoking experts?

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Nope - sorry. Learn your history.

I did…did you?  Look it up anywhere- fisheries collapsed in the 90s due to overfishing which is clearly to blame. Cod stocks are only now beginning to recover 

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Nope - they were manipulated into being dependent so that the liberals could exploit them.

Oh those tricky liberals so much smarter than the public!  🙄
 

Nobody was manipulated.  For someone who CLAIMS to be knowledgeable about politics you sure don’t seem to know how it works. Various members of the public demand the government address various perceived problems. The political parties then propose their solutions to SOME of those problems, the voters then choose. The collapsing fisheries was a problem and out of work fishermen was a problem.  Limiting certain fishing activity so the stock could recover while supporting the fishermen was the public’s preferred solution and they made an informed choice. It was not a dastardly plot.

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

the PBO has said almost everyone pays more than they get.

Totally incorrect the PBO said the exact opposite of that, he said 80% get more than they pay.  PP and conservatives are trying to cite a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT statement the PBO made about the potential negative impacts of carbon tax but that statement was NOT that “almost everyone pays more than they get”.   I will explain what the actual other statement is below and then we can dissect it and how you and PP are misrepresenting it. 
 

So after confirming “most households will see a net gain” from the carbon tax, PBO went on to discuss other points. He stated that BY THE YEAR 2030-2031, the PBO ESTIMATES that the carbon tax will have a negative economic impact which will result lower wages than would otherwise occur BY THAT TIME. And that FUTURE wage loss, combined with carbon taxes paid up until that point, will mean ON AVERAGE Canadians as a whole will have “paid” more than they have received in rebates 

 

Now let’s dissect, first let’s acknowledge that this is a completely different and more complex statement than “almost every pays more than they get”.
- It’s an ESTIMATE of the future and not a description of the present 

-“on average” is not the same as “almost everyone”

- Nobody can predict with any accuracy what the future economy and future wages will be at any specific point in time, much less predict with and without the carbon tax. This  is because the economy at any specific point is dependent on many complicated factors.  

- In addition the economy is rapidly evolving in response to climate change and climate incentives, other countries’ carbon taxes (of which there are many and there will be more ) new tech, etc.  This makes current predictions of the carbon tax’s impact on future economy even more dubious.

- Lastly, the PBO’s projections don’t fully include the cost of doing nothing as unmitigated climate change will have its own negative economic impact and costs which the PBO did not consider.

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Ahhh - trying to spin the truth there are we kid?  
What i said was that one of the most effective ways to enslave someone is to provide for their every need.

And you had to  falsely claim i said something different.  And what i said is the truth.

Your singing a verse from the same song that conservatives sing about “nanny states” and the masses needing “tough love”    Providing basic services so that people can contribute to the economy and don’t have to live every day on the edge of razor blade one false step away from irreversible disaster is not “providing their every need”.   Maybe you don’t know what the word “every” means?

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Actually our quality of life is nosediving at the moment. There's pretty much universal consensus on that.

Only in the very recent moment mostly due to global events beyond any one governments control and it’s already showing signs of improvement in many key areas. 
 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Capitalism and the free market built canada and propelled it through the 70's

Capitalism has never excluded government spending or social programs and you highlight your lack of knowledge by not know the period you mention That was also the era where we had the most expansive government, liberal and conservative governments alike engaging in “social engineering” to build a new affluent middle class with new social programs, universities, planned communities and infrastructure etc. Capitalism has been around for a few centuries, it didn’t just wake up one morning in the 20th century and decide to build a utopian society. Government did that. With government debt and  tax revenue. 

 

 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

but the trudeau era dragged us down with debt. We took all of the 80's to recover - and those were tough times for many. 

Again that was also a global phenomena that every western nation faced its absurd that you lay that at the feet of just Trudeau but it’s true to your form. What happened in the 70s is that Capitalism ran out of gas (literally and figuratively) snd western nations around the world were in economic doldrums. The post-war economic boom had simply tun its course, many of the previously booming post-war industries and had grown to the maximum size for their market (there was no globalization back then and expanding beyond national borders was much more difficult). In addition tou had the OPEx oil embargo, Vietnam war, and then stagflation. The old economic levers that had worked in recent decades since ww2 no longer produced the same results. 
 

On 4/3/2024 at 12:49 PM, CdnFox said:

THen we started to climb back up to where we were and justin has pushed us all the way to the bottom again.

We never went back to where we were. We abandoned the Keynesian economic model outright and chose a completely different economic model called neoliberalism. From the 80s to the early 2000s we endured repeated boom-bust cycles of recession and market bubble every 5-7 years, embraced globalization, offshoring, outsourcing, union-busting, pension-busting, we absolutely butchered the working classes, creating a new class of working poor that didn’t exist before in such large numbers ….all while allowing the ultra-rich and corporations a free ride to become far wealthier and far more politically powerful than any time in human history. You now have the richest 1% possessing more wealth than half the world combined, and several corporations that richer than some G20 countries. That is not paradise and not what we had at any time in our past, it is a perversion of capitalism. All of the vice and division and bitterness you see i. The world today is backlash coming from the victims of neoliberalism.

As Ive said many times before Canada is experiencing a global phenomenon, no different than you will find in any western country. Justin didn’t push is anywhere. 

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Do they?  Which experts?  Poilievre says we “we “common people” can’t trust experts and must rely on our “common sense”. So why are you now invoking experts?

 

I did…did you?  Look it up anywhere- fisheries collapsed in the 90s due to overfishing which is clearly to blame. Cod stocks are only now beginning to recover 

 

Oh those tricky liberals so much smarter than the public!  🙄
 

Nobody was manipulated.  For someone who CLAIMS to be knowledgeable about politics you sure don’t seem to know how it works. Various members of the public demand the government address various perceived problems. The political parties then propose their solutions to SOME of those problems, the voters then choose. The collapsing fisheries was a problem and out of work fishermen was a problem.  Limiting certain fishing activity so the stock could recover while supporting the fishermen was the public’s preferred solution and they made an informed choice. It was not a dastardly plot.

 

Totally incorrect the PBO said the exact opposite of that, he said 80% get more than they pay.  PP and conservatives are trying to cite a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT statement the PBO made about the potential negative impacts of carbon tax but that statement was NOT that “almost everyone pays more than they get”.   I will explain what the actual other statement is below and then we can dissect it and how you and PP are misrepresenting it. 
 

So after confirming “most households will see a net gain” from the carbon tax, PBO went on to discuss other points. He stated that BY THE YEAR 2030-2031, the PBO ESTIMATES that the carbon tax will have a negative economic impact which will result lower wages than would otherwise occur BY THAT TIME. And that FUTURE wage loss, combined with carbon taxes paid up until that point, will mean ON AVERAGE Canadians as a whole will have “paid” more than they have received in rebates 

 

Now let’s dissect, first let’s acknowledge that this is a completely different and more complex statement than “almost every pays more than they get”.
- It’s an ESTIMATE of the future and not a description of the present 

-“on average” is not the same as “almost everyone”

- Nobody can predict with any accuracy what the future economy and future wages will be at any specific point in time, much less predict with and without the carbon tax. This  is because the economy at any specific point is dependent on many complicated factors.  

- In addition the economy is rapidly evolving in response to climate change and climate incentives, other countries’ carbon taxes (of which there are many and there will be more ) new tech, etc.  This makes current predictions of the carbon tax’s impact on future economy even more dubious.

- Lastly, the PBO’s projections don’t fully include the cost of doing nothing as unmitigated climate change will have its own negative economic impact and costs which the PBO did not consider.

 

Your singing a verse from the same song that conservatives sing about “nanny states” and the masses needing “tough love”    Providing basic services so that people can contribute to the economy and don’t have to live every day on the edge of razor blade one false step away from irreversible disaster is not “providing their every need”.   Maybe you don’t know what the word “every” means?

 

Only in the very recent moment mostly due to global events beyond any one governments control and it’s already showing signs of improvement in many key areas. 
 

Capitalism has never excluded government spending or social programs and you highlight your lack of knowledge by not know the period you mention That was also the era where we had the most expansive government, liberal and conservative governments alike engaging in “social engineering” to build a new affluent middle class with new social programs, universities, planned communities and infrastructure etc. Capitalism has been around for a few centuries, it didn’t just wake up one morning in the 20th century and decide to build a utopian society. Government did that. With government debt and  tax revenue. 

 

 

Again that was also a global phenomena that every western nation faced its absurd that you lay that at the feet of just Trudeau but it’s true to your form. What happened in the 70s is that Capitalism ran out of gas (literally and figuratively) snd western nations around the world were in economic doldrums. The post-war economic boom had simply tun its course, many of the previously booming post-war industries and had grown to the maximum size for their market (there was no globalization back then and expanding beyond national borders was much more difficult). In addition tou had the OPEx oil embargo, Vietnam war, and then stagflation. The old economic levers that had worked in recent decades since ww2 no longer produced the same results. 
 

We never went back to where we were. We abandoned the Keynesian economic model outright and chose a completely different economic model called neoliberalism. From the 80s to the early 2000s we endured repeated boom-bust cycles of recession and market bubble every 5-7 years, embraced globalization, offshoring, outsourcing, union-busting, pension-busting, we absolutely butchered the working classes, creating a new class of working poor that didn’t exist before in such large numbers ….all while allowing the ultra-rich and corporations a free ride to become far wealthier and far more politically powerful than any time in human history. You now have the richest 1% possessing more wealth than half the world combined, and several corporations that richer than some G20 countries. That is not paradise and not what we had at any time in our past, it is a perversion of capitalism. All of the vice and division and bitterness you see i. The world today is backlash coming from the victims of neoliberalism.

As Ive said many times before Canada is experiencing a global phenomenon, no different than you will find in any western country. Justin didn’t push is anywhere. 

Yes they do - i've personally posted around a dozen articles here noting reports from several banks and economists. At this time it's undisputed.

Overfishing happened under the liberals and the damage was done by the mid 80's.  There was no recovering after that. Like i said learn your history.

The cost of doing nothing - is nothing.  Canada does not produce enough emissions to make a difference. That is the simple truth.

FUTHER  - the carbon tax is not achieving its' goals so even IF the goals would have done something - which they woudln't - its still doing nothing.

The liberals are not giving back the money - they're using as a tax.

Nobody said capitalism excluded any gov't spending.  And you show your desperation and dishonestly by claiming I did.

And no - our debt and our situation is NOT a global phenomenon. That is a lie.  Trudeau had borrowed over 100 billion dollars before covid  even showed up. Most of his spending since then has had nothing to do with covid. He DOUBLED our debt - which other country did that.

This has nothing to do with 'global phenomenon' and has everything to do with his fiscal policy and his immigration policy. Sorry kid.

And of course we never went back to where we were.  You can't undo decades of damage with one majority and a couple minorities. But - we leveled the ship and were strongly headed there - then trudeau.  Now we're far far far worse and diving.

To try to pass it off as 'global' is beyond ignorant and you should be deeply ashamed that you would sell out your fellow canadians and future generations peddling that lie. Even the banks ahve weighed in on this - it is NOT global.  Even when there were global elements they accounted for only half our issues at the time and those days are long gone. This is trudeau and the liberals. 100 percent. It could easily be fixed.

Edited April 5 by CdnFox

[Zeitgeist]

Ax the tax and kick the anti-free speech globalist commies out of office. I just hope that the Conservatives are actually conservative.  Canada is too full of unquestioning propagandized babies.  Can they be weened off the nanny state teat, climate fear porn, and identity politics?  I’m skeptical but let’s throw that Hail Mary pass and hope for the best.  Otherwise I hope to emigrate to a red state.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Ax the tax and kick the anti-free speech globalist commies out of office. I just hope that the Conservatives are actually conservative.  Canada is too full of unquestioning propagandized babies.  Can they be weened off the nanny state teat, climate fear porn, and identity politics?  I’m skeptical but let’s throw that Hail Mary pass and hope for the best.  Otherwise I hope to emigrate to a red state.

I'm sure he'll have to temper things a tiny bit to make sure he gets re-elected but i think he'll be  like harper - he'll get results and people will want MORE results and they'll continue to vote for him even if they don't always agree.

[Perspektiv]

4 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Otherwise I hope to emigrate to a red state.

I know some who have, and who say its the best decision they ever made. From Florida, to Texas. I have yet to hear of someone who regretted doing so.

Me and the wife would likelier move to the Philippines, and invest far more in business and real estate.

I mean, if I had to deal with 4 more years of Trudeau, we would fast track this plan, vs waiting it out for 5-6 years which would be more sensible. I'd be prepared to work an extra job or two, as is the wife.

I mean, I feel the pain, as far more of my paycheque is taxed upon.

You tax people like me more of far too much, they won't just keep bending over--they'll leave, and aim for places where their money willingness to work hard and create jobs and entrepreneurial spirits are appreciated.

 

 

[Gaétan]

Trudeau made an announcement with the Minister of Finance under her approving gaze and in front of the media of 1 billion for children's meals at school. He is taking disadvantaged children hostage so it is an act of cowardice and it constitutes buying votes for money which is illegal, so the police must arrest him and criminal charges must be brought against him. I have nothing against him giving money for children's meals at school and that's a good thing but he has to do it discreetly and the fact of having done it in front of the media with great fanfare is illegal. When a righteous person gives money to the poor he does it discreetly especially since it is not his money and by doing it in front of everyone he had his reward which must be prison. He takes credit for the donations taken from our salary to get elected.

Edited April 5 by Gaétan

[Perspektiv]

7 hours ago, Gaétan said:

He is taking disadvantaged children hostage 

I think he is simply using them to virtue signal.

He is all of a sudden throwing billions at housing. Rental issues, as well.

Why the rush? Why the frantic push? You had 10 years to fix these issues. You ran on that very promise. Why is it urgent now?

The average Canadian is now spending over 60% of their salary to cover their rent or mortgages. This is increasing the average debt Canadians owe, where making critical decisions now somehow needs to be a choice for some. Ramen noodles, or actual food?

And you're virtue signaling about climate change?

By compounding their financial misery, no less?

Unfortunately, many Canadians are highly educated, and see through it.

Stabilize the economy first. Worry about other s*** after.

There is nothing more pressing than food clothes and shelter, to the average Canadian.

One of the key skills a politicians must have, is an ability to read the room.

[herbie]

Let's dig up more gibberish terms to explain why feeding children is bad.

MKAY?

It's just bad, no thinking needed.

[blackbird]

26 minutes ago, herbie said:

Let's dig up more gibberish terms to explain why feeding children is bad.

MKAY?

It's just bad, no thinking needed.

Most families feed their children. That is part of the responsibility of having children.  If you can't afford to feed them and look after them, maybe you should not be having them.

People shouldn't be spending their money on booze and drugs and luxuries such as expensive cars and pickup either and not having enough money to take care of their kids.  I see lots of expensive pickup trucks around.  Many don't even have a use for one. Then expecting the government to feed their kids at taxpayer expense.

A nanny state will destroy the country.  Families are the bedrock of society, not the state.

Edited April 5 by blackbird

[herbie]

Maybe you should join the real world someday.
The Band run school provides breakfast & lunch for kids that need it plus apples and fruit for snacks. The public school does not. Both serve the same population.

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

If you can't afford to feed them and look after them, maybe you should not be having them.

Pretty hypocritical thing for someone in favour of ending birth choices and full parental takeover by Children & Families as an alternative to say.

[blackbird]

A nanny state is a threat to personal freedom of everyone as it puts the government in the driver's seat of looking after families instead of the family and breadwinner doing the job.

[blackbird]

1 minute ago, herbie said:

The Band run school provides breakfast & lunch for kids that need it plus apples and fruit for snacks.

You must be talking about FN reserves which may be full of broken families and no head of the home to provide for the families.  In that case, they are welfare cases and require the powers that be to look after them.  But outside those special cases, government should not be trying to take over the care and raising of families in society at large.  People need to take responsibility for raising their own families.

[Zeitgeist]

16 hours ago, blackbird said:

You must be talking about FN reserves which may be full of broken families and no head of the home to provide for the families.  In that case, they are welfare cases and require the powers that be to look after them.  But outside those special cases, government should not be trying to take over the care and raising of families in society at large.  People need to take responsibility for raising their own families.

And where does the money come from to pay for all of this?  Oh yeah, tax paying non-Indigenous, y’know, the settler colonialists.  What a sham.

The Liberal-NDP communists don’t understand the basic idea that raising taxes and the cost of living such that most of Canadians’ after tax income is going towards mortgage/rent and utilities, clothing, food etc. has lowered the demand for goods and services that drive economic growth and give us the high living standards we once enjoyed.  Going without any extras — dinner at a restaurant once in a while, a little landscaping and paint job for your home, some ice cream for the kids, etc., means both that people’s living standards have fallen AND businesses are doing less business.  It’s a vicious circle.

Making a funding announcement that will only result in the bottom 50 percent of households getting an extra $10 a week for housing, kids meals, or whatever else, won’t make a dent in this structural problem. It will drive up our debt as yet another bureaucracy is created to collect taxpayer money and redistribute it to favoured groups. That’s this government’s approach. Grow the bureaucracy, collect more taxes, raise debt, make splashy announcements, and redistribute people’s earnings towards preferred groups. Almost none of it achieves the stated outcomes: national daycare program, pharmacare, affordable housing, etc.

It just makes the most dependent people more dependent, entrenches the nanny state, disincentivizes businesses, and reduces the discretionary spending of working people, but you know, that 17.5 % carbon tax is saving the planet as millions of immigrants arrive to fill theoretical jobs and homes in a country where people no longer have kids but get free birth control, abortion, and assisted suicide from a government that cares so much about you that they want to raise kids instead of letting parents do it, because heterosexual relationships, men, women, and religion are settler colonial, gender normative, and racist. Emissions keep rising but that will be reversed once people really can’t afford food and shelter.

At that point people really won’t dare to start a family, and you can bet that the healthcare system will be ready and waiting with their assisted suicide kits, abortionists, and free opioids, but, y’know, they’ll be really inclusive about it.  All are welcome. And don’t talk about family in the natural sense of a man and a woman having kids and raising them.  That’s a hate crime.

Edited April 6 by Zeitgeist