grte @ grte @lemmy.ca

Posts

1,203

Comments

921

Joined

2 yr. ago

Carney was kind enough to let you squat in Stornoway, Pierre. Pretty ungrateful.

For the record, I'm not trying to make any accusations towards you. When I said 'you' in the previous comment take it to mean the general you. From the comments of yours I've read you seem like a good person to me.

Cutting off your leg is tough but doable.

I doubt many people are claiming that just having investments makes you bad. But depending on the specific nature of the investments, you could be. If someone ran out and invested in GardaWorld (or had them and didn't divest) after finding out they took part in building that concentration camp in Florida, I'd certainly judge them, as an example. But even casting it as a question of morality is beside the point, I think. It's a question of conflicts of interest. The personal wealth of our Prime Minister seems to be significantly tied up in the success of American industry. In the context of our current relations with the USA, that doesn't concern you even a little bit? Particularly considering the honestly pretty soft stance he's taken towards them post election?

Link to the summary. (Towards the bottom is a link to an appendix summary statement pdf, you'll want to click on that.)

Nature

Mounted and framed Washington Capitals jersey, personalized with Carney #24.

Source

The Honourable Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America.

Man...Fuck Trump.

[Edit] Oh, and Carney is invested in Palantir, along with seemingly every other American big tech company he possibly could be including the likes of Alphabet, Meta, AirBNB, DoorDash, Uber, Amazon, etc. No wonder he rolled over on the DST so easily.

[Edit to the edit] Also American weapons manufacturers such as Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, L3Harris.

It might just. Fox News made a big deal about how the government was oppressing the "trucker" convoy. It may be enough of a show for his base that Trump accepts the asylum claim like he did for those white South Africans.

That life is only going to get a little worse when we cut social programs to buy F35s.

I think that's excessively cynical. If the politicians we put in power tend to look the same, that's a little bit on us for only picking from two different parties for the entire history of the country. There are certainly alternative ideas about economics.

Do you mean specifically Carney flipping pancakes or politicians flipping pancakes in general? I can't speak about elsewhere but in Alberta organizations frequently put on pancake breakfasts often accompanying some other larger event. Politicians local to federal (depending on the size of the event) take it as an opportunity to do some glad-handing. In this particular case I guess Carney isn't a proficient pancake flipper.

We don't live in a two party system. If nothing else, we'd be better off with a much weaker Liberal minority.

The annoying thing is that for a lot of his voters it seems like his decisions have been surprising. I'm seeing a lot of, "trust the plan," sort of comments elsewhere like this is all leading to some bait-and-switch social democratic turn. I think the Liberal campaign didn't focus on his fiscal orthodoxy and a lot of people just projected whatever they wanted him to be onto him.

If this party could implode after only one serious attempt at government, it would make me really happy.

“You will be expected to bring forward ambitious savings proposals to spend less on the day-to-day running of government, and invest more in building a strong, united Canadian economy,” Mr. Champagne wrote in one of the letters.

So cuts to the public service and services to fund loans/giveaways to the private sector.

“Through this ambitious review each minister should examine the programs and activities in their portfolio to determine which are: meeting their objectives, are core to the federal mandate, and complement versus duplicate what is offered elsewhere by the federal government or by other levels of government,” it states.

Anyone who has been through a round of layoffs recognizes this language. All it's missing is a need to find "efficiencies". Carney is looking less and less like the genius economy understander I was told he was and more and more like a bog standard orthodox Friedmanite.

It's infrastructure tariff week.

"Whoa, you say you don't like Nazis? That makes YOU the Nazi!"

This guy would drink the flavour aid without a second thought. Or a first one.

Okay, but Carney is not going to tax the ultra wealthy. His track record so far is cutting taxes, including one targeting the wealthy specifically. People talk about raising military spending without considering that that money is going to have to come at the expense of something else. We talk about the cost in terms of percentage of GDP because it makes a nice small non-scary percentage like 5%. But that represents just shy of a third of the national budget, over double what we just recently raised our spending to. That money is not going to come from new taxes on the wealthy, it's going to come from cuts to services. Health care being the meatiest place to make those cuts.

There's also lots of (frequently not even that) old games that I never got around to/never heard about that I can now get on sale for 5$ or whatever, so it's not always a matter of replaying.

30% of the budget. Certainly the end of nationalized health care. That's worth it to you?

And if you think the US won't engage in the sorts of tactics it currently is engaging in to demand we spend more of our military budget on them then you are mistaken.

That doesn't justify spending more as a percentage of our GDP on the military than the USA who spends more than the next 10 or something states combined. I'm not giving up nationalized health care because Donald fucking Trump wants to shake down NATO and make Canada spend 30% of it's national budget on American arms.