[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

The diminishing funding of institutions thus eroding the public trust into them is  what got us here.

Not Harrison Bergeron.

The fiscal imbalance has hurt us a lot.  Left leaning governments cutting provincial transfers so they could fund their own programs.  Just look at the NDP raving with all that money at their disposal and what they did in tandem with Justin Trudeau.

It's a disaster for all of Canada and we're caught in it.

Remove the transfer cuts from 1996 and onward from the scenario, and things are different.  Then again, we made our own choices to expand our programs.  Creating a national childcare program instead of leaving it to the private was probably the biggest mistake.  The costs are ballooning, and I have not see the so much vaunted effects that we detect early case of learning disabilities and are able to treat them accordingly.  We just diagnose them and send them to school with the rest of the group.  And there seem to be a lot of over diagnosis.  You can't, from a statistics point of view, have a class with 90% of the students that have a learning disability.  That's just impossible.

[viper37]

Everyone is a CPA now.

Hey, low blow!

I should have went for that instead of finance.  

Never too late to join the fold . Would have been easier 10 or so years ago, though, before the merger

First plan in early 20s:
- Do a master's degree, get either a CFA or CGA title

Second plan in mid 30s:
- Get the master's degree finished.


Alas, I could never find someone to replace myself here so leaving for studies was just impossible.

Now, I've bought an accounting book.  I'll buy more later.
I might register for distance learning if I can next winter once things are settled here.

[crazy canuck]

The Federal Liberals have made another own goal here in BC.  They gave money to, I think Quebec, to help alleviate the strain the added immigrants have on that province.  But our Premier is now being quite vocal about wondering out loud what bright bulb thought BC should also not receive assistance to help with the exact same issues.

[viper37]

The Federal Liberals have made another own goal here in BC.  They gave money to, I think Quebec, to help alleviate the strain the added immigrants have on that province.  But our Premier is now being quite vocal about wondering out loud what bright bulb thought BC should also not receive assistance to help with the exact same issues.

I don't know about BC.  I think they didn't ask for anything and they were quite happy asking for more immigrants.

Quebec is receiving 55% of all asylum seekers in Canada, it's quite disproportionate to our capacity to receive them.  And that's a Federal issue.

[Barrister]

I don't know about BC.  I think they didn't ask for anything and they were quite happy asking for more immigrants.

Quebec is receiving 55% of all asylum seekers in Canada, it's quite disproportionate to our capacity to receive them.  And that's a Federal issue.

That sounded unlikely to me, so I googled and found this...

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecs-math-on-asylum-seekers-doesnt-add-up-immigration-experts-say

[crazy canuck]

The Federal Liberals have made another own goal here in BC.  They gave money to, I think Quebec, to help alleviate the strain the added immigrants have on that province.  But our Premier is now being quite vocal about wondering out loud what bright bulb thought BC should also not receive assistance to help with the exact same issues.

I don't know about BC.  I think they didn't ask for anything and they were quite happy asking for more immigrants.

Quebec is receiving 55% of all asylum seekers in Canada, it's quite disproportionate to our capacity to receive them.  And that's a Federal issue.

Our numbers are similar, and our percentage increase is larger than yours.  Hence the outrage.

Legault has previously said the number of temporary residents coming to the province – including asylum seekers, students and workers – had "exploded" to 560,000, a number he says doubled in two years, straining social services.

B.C. government figures show there were 475,778 non-permanent residents in the province as of Jan. 1, an increase of about 84 per cent from two years earlier.

[viper37]

I don't know about BC.  I think they didn't ask for anything and they were quite happy asking for more immigrants.

Quebec is receiving 55% of all asylum seekers in Canada, it's quite disproportionate to our capacity to receive them.  And that's a Federal issue.

That sounded unlikely to me, so I googled and found this...

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecs-math-on-asylum-seekers-doesnt-add-up-immigration-experts-say

It's the Gazette.

So, the system is stretched beyond limits, the government has had to unblock emergency funding - again - to help charities that deal with asylum seekers and other first basis necessities.

True, some of them are just passing through.  But they're here for a while.  And they need resources.

Yes, the problem is not new and Quebec has asked the Feds, repeatedly, to do something about it for a while, since before the pandemic.  Remember Roxham road?  It took them an eternity to close it.

We had to park them in the Olympic Stadium at one point because we had too many of them.

Here's another point of view on the crisis:
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2023/01/05/news/influx-asylum-seekers-stretch-quebecs-social-services

[Jacob]

Viper, the argument is not that Quebec's system is not stretched beyond its limit. It probably is. The argument is that BC's system is similarly stretched, and therefore should get similar help.

[crazy canuck]

Viper, the argument is not that Quebec's system is not stretched beyond its limit. It probably is. The argument is that BC's system is similarly stretched, and therefore should get similar help.

Yep, exactly.

In other news the Liberals scored another own goal.  Two in 24 hours is pretty impressive.

They thought they would score political points by putting the new capital gains tax into a separate piece of legislation to force the Conservatives to vote against "taxing the rich to create generational fairness".

But they were widely panned for the move and they gave PP all the time he needed to prepare for this day, including the release of another YouTube video.

Now all the news is about why the Conservatives say the Liberal tax plan is unfair for the middle class and does not work.

[crazy canuck]

More on the Liberal's most recent own goal.  I think Globe's editorials are public so I will just cut and paste it

A tired government tries out one more wedge issue

THE EDITORIAL BOARD

The Liberal government got what it wanted on Tuesday when the House adopted a motion in support of raising taxes on the wealthy, but the Conservatives voted against it.

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland will tell you that what the motion achieved was her party's goal of greater tax fairness for Canadians. But what the Liberals really were after, and got, is a wedge issue designed to slow the momentum of the Conservative opposition under Pierre Poilievre.

It will be astonishing if this strategy actually changes the Liberals' diminishing fortunes. It might even hurt them. This is not about tax fairness – this is about an exhausted government that has given up on governing.

Tax reform aimed at greater fairness and reducing income inequality is as serious as it gets. But, as this space has argued, the Liberal plan to raise the taxable portion of capital gains over $250,000 for individuals, and of all capital gains for corporations and most trusts, is not the end result of a careful examination of tax policy, but of the Liberals' need to raise billions of dollars to plug a hole in their latest budget.

As bad as that is, the government made it worse by hiving off the capital-gains changes from its budget bill and announcing it would introduce them in a separate act – an obvious attempt to force the Conservatives to take a position on raising taxes for the wealthy.

Ms. Freeland drove that wedge home on Sunday in an over-the-top speech in which she described the consequences of any failure to support the tax increase: hungry schoolchildren, pregnant teenagers, crushing intergenerational debt and the wealthy living in walled communities while a wrathful mob roams the wasteland outside the gates.

Democracy itself would be in danger, she warned, and then added: "Pay attention to any member of Parliament voting against these changes and consider their motivation."

Portraying opponents of her tax increase as the moral equivalent of a clueless aristocracy is typical of a government that creates divisive wedge issues when its electoral fortunes are on the line.

The Liberals did it with vaccine mandates in the 2021 election. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was uneasy about mandates for most of that year, even after some of the provinces introduced them. When he called the election, though, suddenly they were an urgent public-health priority that just happened to be an effective wedge against the Conservatives.

At least vaccine mandates were the right policy at the right time. The increase to the capital-gains inclusion rate will take place when Canada's lagging productivity needs a boost. Higher taxes on investment will be a drag on the economy and could harm our diminishing prosperity.

And they won't just affect the super-rich. Doctors who operate as small businesses, and families that sell off long-held second properties, such as cottages, could also see their taxes raised.

Like their belated discovery of the benefits of supporting vaccine mandates, the Liberals' claim that they are the only thing standing between Canada and the inequities of prerevolutionary France is nothing more than cynical politics.

They've had years in office to address the issues dominating Canadian politics today: housing costs, affordability and, yes, the income gap, which has grown steadily since 2015. They've partially addressed some of them, and even modestly lowered taxes for the poor and middle-class while increasing tax rates for incomes over $200,000.

But if you listen to Ms. Freeland, the Liberals haven't exactly created a Canadian utopia during their time in office.

The Conservatives, no strangers themselves to apocalyptic rhetoric, may well pay a price for voting against the government motion, but they were right to do it – even if the Liberals use it to portray them as perfumed princes wandering in walled gardens, indifferent to the hungry children and torch-bearing mob beyond.

It is also possible that they won't pay any price at all. The Trudeau government has had years to undertake a comprehensive reform of the tax system, and now suddenly it is in urgent need of fixing? The Conservatives countered on Tuesday that, if elected, they will launch a tax-reform task force within 60 days of taking office, reduce taxes for the poor and middle-class, end corporate subsidies and crack down on overseas tax havens.

This is what happens to governments that lose their way: they fall into their own traps.

[crazy canuck]

I am out of gifted links, if you can read it I recommend it

"Years of corporate handouts achieved nothing. It's time for something different"

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-years-of-corporate-handouts-achieved-nothing-its-time-for-something/

[Grey Fox]

Yes, vote NDP.

[Josephus]

Appreciate all the links CC.

And yeah, GF, I normally vote ABC, whoever is polling best in my riding, but I'm definately going with NDP next election

[crazy canuck]

The difficulty I am having with the NDP is their lack of a coherent comprehensive policy.  Something I never thought I would say about them.

They are now much like the Liberals-ad hoc policy statements on specific issues with no real overall plan.

Hopefully that changes as we get closer to the election.

[Grey Fox]

The difficulty I am having with the NDP is their lack of a coherent comprehensive policy.  Something I never thought I would say about them.

They are now much like the Liberals-ad hoc policy statements on specific issues with no real overall plan.

Hopefully that changes as we get closer to the election.

It's a fair criticism and Singh is a master of the double speak in French vs English. You really have to watch him with that.