[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[HVC]

Cogeco is also the one in Hamilton, which seems odd to me.

[Admiral Yi]

Have the other two parties campaigned on reversing the policy?

[viper37]

Have the other two parties campaigned on reversing the policy?

The Conservatives opened the market for a little while for cellphones, the Liberals closed it.

[Barrister]

Thanks for the response Beeb.

Now what I don't get is how that ties to corruption and the liberal party.  I thought there was pretty broad consensus in Canada for protecting domestic companies from foreign competition.  And your description doesn't explain how incumbents are protected from domestic competition.

Come on man - you have an economics background don't you?

Telecoms and banking have high barriers to entry, and benefit from economies of scale.  If have a $100 million dollars that I want to invest - it would be suicidal to try and start up a new telecoms company.  You need to invest in infrastructure across the country - be it wireless or wired.  If I want to start a bank I need to invest in retail outlets.  All while trying to compete with established (and profitable) existing competition.  And that's considering that I'm a domestic investor.

"broad consensus"?  Look the Conservative Party isn't perfect from my view.  There are more rumblings from them about opening up Canada to more competition than there ever were from the Liberals - but to date they've resisted such calls.  Because if you announce "we want to open up Canadian banking to foreign competition" - the existing banks are going to fight like hell (and they have lots of money), foreign banks are restricted in trying to influence Canadian politics, and consumers don't necessarily see how that would benefit them.

It's why we have such a "consensus" over cheese and dairy production - producers are wildly in favour, while opposition is diffuse.


And again - when I say "corruption" I'm not necessarily talking about envelopes stuffed with cash (although, at times...).  It's more a matter of politicians/regulators seeing their interests closely aligned with powerful corporate interests, and vice versa.

[Barrister]

Cell, internet, local & long distance, it's now all (or nearly all) controlled by the same companies under different names.  Telus, Bell, Videotron and Cogeco in some parts of Quebec. 

So this is very Quebec-centric.

The national companies are Bell and Rogers.  If I understand it, Videotron is aligned with Rogers.  Telus is similarily aligned with Bell.  I'm more familiar with Bell/Telus.  Telus maintains infrastructure in BC/Alberta, whereas Bell does in the rest of the country.  They do have agreements allowing each other to sell their wireless services to each other.  So if you go to get a new cell phone you do have the option of buying from either Bell, or Telus - but you will be using the same cell phone towers either way.

I believe Videotron/Rogers operate in the same fashion.

[viper37]

Smith refuses to sign joint statement against US tariffs.

"Until these threats cease, Alberta will not be able to fully support the federal government's plan in dealing with the threatened tariffs," wrote Smith. "We will take whatever actions are needed to protect the livelihoods of Albertans from such destructive federal policies."

"We also urge our entire nation to use this tariff threat as an opportunity to correct the misguided direction of this country and commence multiple infrastructure projects that focus on developing, upgrading and exporting our oil, gas and other natural resources."

Listening to her, the threat comes from the Federal government and not the US.

Now, if only Alberta had used the last decades to diversify its economy, hey?

[Barrister]

They're protected from domestic competition by allowing them to become monopolies. Every time a company gets big enough to be a threat they buy them. Government puts on a big show of a trial (not proper term, but I forget what it's actually called) to protect customers... and then let's the takeover happen anyway.

And this is corruption?

I believe the term is "regulatory capture".

Again - come on man.  This is nothing crazy - I believe some pretty typical right-wing, free-market talking points here.

[Barrister]

Smith refuses to sign joint statement against US tariffs.

"Until these threats cease, Alberta will not be able to fully support the federal government's plan in dealing with the threatened tariffs," wrote Smith. "We will take whatever actions are needed to protect the livelihoods of Albertans from such destructive federal policies."

"We also urge our entire nation to use this tariff threat as an opportunity to correct the misguided direction of this country and commence multiple infrastructure projects that focus on developing, upgrading and exporting our oil, gas and other natural resources."

Listening to her, the threat comes from the Federal government and not the US.

Now, if only Alberta had used the last decades to diversify its economy, hey?

I forget who said this, but I saw the following analysis:

Not every Canadian Conservative is a Trump supporter.  But every Trump supporter in Canada does support the Conservatives (or in this case, the United Conservatives).  So this explains a fair bit the actions or Smith (and to a lesser extent Poilievre).

The number of Trump supporters in Canada is far from a majority - but is not negligible either.  Even if it doesn't make any sense to me.

[Grey Fox]

But Smith goes further, she seemed completely enamored with the MAGA crowd. They can do no wrong.

[crazy canuck]

So again, what are the "right schools" what is the "right circles" that underpin your justification for importing the Trumpist terminology of the swamp?

I have interacted with senior politicians and civil servants my whole life (hell I am married to someone who falls within that description).  In my experience most of them, like all Canadians, came from small towns, were educated in a large variety of universities for both their undergrad and post graduate work.

I see no cabal here dwelling in a swamp.

I also note you have moved to the rhetoric of the "elite".  That is at least some progress. You could have doubled down with your use of the word "swamp".  It's better than your attempt to justify your use of Trumpist terminology.

Right schools?

Well Harvard and Oxford seem to come up an awful lot now don't they?  You can certainly add Yale and Cambridge.  Some of the more elite French schools.  In Canada, U of T (and in Quebec - Laval?).

The right circles?  Well - Power Corp / Desmarais family for one.  Not necessarily as a family member, but associating within their empire.  Or Associations with any of the really large corporations really - Rogers family, Weston family.  The CBC and/or Globe and Mail (this category is probably dying off).  And naturally - the Liberal Party itself.

And while Trudeau himself is a pure nepo baby, I agree most of those elites/swamp dwellers weren't born into it, and even see their own circles as being meritocratic.  Many/most of them are in fact quite smart!  Both Freeland and Carney got some level of scholarships to study at Harvard - and just being accepted there is hard.  But they don't realize how narrow the circles they move in are.

For the last time - I do not care if a word or phrase is used by Trump or not.



YOu kow I wondered if there was a list of PMs and the schools they attended - and there is!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Canada_by_academic_degrees

So for starters I think you will notice the obvious difference between Liberal PMs and Conservative ones (other than Mulroney).  And Trudeau Jr is a bit of an outlier.  But here goes:

J Trudeau - McGill/UBC
Harper U of Calgary (x2)
Martin U of T (x2)
Chretien - Seminaire St Marie (?) / Laval
Campbell - UBC (x2)
Mulroney - SFX / Laval (x2)
Turner - UBC / Oxford (x3)
Clark - U of A (x2)
P Trudeau - Montreal / Oxford
Pearson - U of T / Oxford (x2)
Deifenbaker - U of S (x3)
St Laurent - Séminaire Saint-Charles-Borromée (?) / Laval
Mackenzie King - U of T (x3) / Harvard (x2)
Meighen - U of T / Osgoode

(and now we're into the 19th century and lawyers who didn't even have to go to school)

You don't notice a certain pattern when it comes to Liberal leaders?  How many times does U of T / Laval / Harvard / Oxford come up?

BB, I honestly don't follow your argument.  Harvard and Oxford are very rare as schools our politicians and senior civil servants attend. Your list proves the point.

And by the way, Oxford is hardly a sign of being a member of the "swamp".  You might not be aware of this but being a Rhodes Scholar has been a viable way for Canadian kids in smaller communities to get to Oxford.  The criteria are sports, community involvement and to some extent grades. Things small town kids can achieve and even excel at.