What Policy turned you off Trudeau?

[Skoob]

I find your comments interesting in light of the fact that only 6 Prime Ministers in Canadian history have served a longer consecutive term than JT. Even some Prime Ministers who have served more years in office have done so non-consecutive occasions. It's like the electorate gets tired of the ruling party and wants a change, regardless of political philosophy.

It's about context and its place in time.
Harper served almost 10 years and helped Canada crawl out of a devastating recession. However, even that couldn't erase the impact it had on Canadians.

Trudeau was the perfect candidate that the Liberals offered. He had the name. He was young. And he resonated with young voters who had come of age by the time he was elected. Everyone was quick to forgive him for scandals as long as they saw a future with him as the leader.

Almost 10 years later, those same young voters are in their late 20's/early 30's and have realized they were sold a lie. Their pay goes to taxes that are squandered. Life is unaffordable. They've realized what printing money & government debt translates into. They're pissed.

It will take a decade to fix what the Liberals have done but change needs to start somewhere.

 

[Sugarsweet905]

For me it was the SNC- Lavalin scandal. To me he showed he was just another Liberal Prime Minister of Quebec.

If SNC-Lavalin was based in Alberta does he treat them the same?

 

[JohnLarue]

Trudeau was the perfect candidate that the Liberals offered. He had the name.

What a horrible criteria for picking a leader
the results speak for themselves

 

[JohnLarue]

For me it was the SNC- Lavalin scandal. To me he showed he was just another Liberal Prime Minister of Quebec.

If SNC-Lavalin was based in Alberta does he treat them the same?

Nope , he and Gerald Butts would have absolutely destroyed an Alberta company convicted of an international bribery crime

 

[nottyboi]

tampon dispensers in men's bathrooms

I guess you tried them and they were not big enough?

 

[nottyboi]

What I will say is I knew Trudeau was in major trouble when Home Developers where starting losing money.

This was happening in 2022 and he never addressed it. He'd probably be in good standing if he did.

What does the Fed govt have to do with profitability of home developers? Home dev almost exclusively falls within municipal and provincial jurisdiction. Feds can only provide subsidies and financing and tax policy, like CMHC for example. The issue IMHO is the whole process of development which involves zoning, site plan, environmental, inspection, density etc etc, It all takes too long, and time is money.

 

[nottyboi]

Nope , he and Gerald Butts would have absolutely destroyed an Alberta company convicted of an international bribery crime

you have no proof of that, just the usual AB chip on shoulder.

 

[nottyboi]

And yet there are still some who want more immigration.
https://globalnews.ca/news/10919283...ayors-say-immigration-cuts-hurt-their-cities/

Canada is under populated, to be a major nation we need at least another 30m people.

 

[DesRicardo]

What does the Fed govt have to do with profitability of home developers? Home dev almost exclusively falls within municipal and provincial jurisdiction. Feds can only provide subsidies and financing and tax policy, like CMHC for example. The issue IMHO is the whole process of development which involves zoning, site plan, environmental, inspection, density etc etc, It all takes too long, and time is money.

Then why is he wearing a hardhat standing in front of a housing development project giving a speech?

 

[JohnLarue]

you have no proof of that, just the usual AB chip on shoulder.

you are still a Trudeau apologist / fanboy and you claim someone else is slow ???
the jury has coming in with the verdict : and your hero has been convicted: moron in the first degree
The sentence: Canadians will have a very difficult road to hoe for several generations

its time you clued in
the Lonnie left experiment in Canada has failed

If you can't see that, then you are really a bit exceptionally slow.

 

[JohnLarue]

Canada is under populated, to be a major nation we need at least another 30m people.

they can stay at your place

you do not seem capable of learning from past events
immigration can not exceed housing development nor health care capacity

to be a major nation

adding 30 million people will make Canada a major disaster

 

[bazokajoe]

Canada is under populated, to be a major nation we need at least another 30m people.

You must be smoking the same weed as Trudeau.

 

[RZG]

they can stay at your place

you do not seem capable of learning from past events
immigration can not exceed housing development nor health care capacity


adding 30 million people will make Canada a major disaster

For sure if they are added to the current structure of the country. We need doctors, nurses, other medical, trades, construction, engineers and such. Trudeau allowed no skills invaders and lay-abouts who arrive to bleed the social systems dry, claiming to be refugees coming from America or India. Give our heads a fuckin` shake. How about some mass deportation to clean this shit up. Done properly Canada could be a formidable powerhouse, not the weak and pathetic shambles Trudeau has created.

 

[silentkisser]

No policy in particular.
Just the progressive decline in Canadian economic opportunities, quality of life, inflation, foreign relations etc. as a result of his decisions.
Plus his general demeanour, refusal to take ownership when things go wrong, etc.,

Yeah, most of his policies were not bad for the country. Some were poorly handled (immigration, for example. I understand what they were trying to do, but it wasn't implemented properly).

What did it for me was his constantly stepping on the rake and getting smacked in the head. He went from one self-inflicted wound (scandal) to the other, and several of them had similar characteristics. Then, the whole feminist thing. I applaud him putting equal number of women in cabinet, but he made some of them to just be tokens and not really allowed to do the work.

I really wish Erin O'Toole was still leading the PCs. He was honourable. I find PP to be a liar who just says whatever he can to anger up Canadians.

 

[WyattEarp]

It's like dating a chick for 9 years, and then thinking it would be better to date her best friend. Nine years later, you realize it's no different.

I don't know......it can be quite exhilarating to take up with a new chick particularly one your ex knows.

 

[WyattEarp]

It's about context and its place in time.
Harper served almost 10 years and helped Canada crawl out of a devastating recession. However, even that couldn't erase the impact it had on Canadians.

Don't forget the commodity crash in 2015 was not good for the Canadian economy. Extraneous economic events can still be detrimental to the ruling party. We political junkies like to think every election is about ideological affirmation.

 

[WyattEarp]

Then why is he wearing a hardhat standing in front of a housing development project giving a speech?

Cuz he has a soft head?

 

[WyattEarp]

Canada is under populated, to be a major nation we need at least another 30m people.

I'm guessing your 70 million population target was simply arrived upon by looking at Western Europe nations. In actuality, I don't think there's any special magic to 70 million. Western European nations have more global clout simply because they share similar values and they present a somewhat united front.

You need to ask yourself why does a large geographic presence like Canada have only 40 million people. There has to be practical reasons that most the nation is sparsely populated and most of the population lives near the U.S. border. Google AI says this is due to economic ties and habitat suitability. I also was thinking that natural resource development yields vast wealth but does not require a large population.

I'm not sure you are literally saying that Canada should just keep letting migrants into the country and share its wealth to beef up the population. However, that's the practical reality of what you are saying and what we seem to have seen in recent years. There just hasn't been the growth in the economy to make use of more immigrants in Canada.

If Canada wanted to really increase its population dramatically, it would require more difficult choices politically. The simple example of let them come and they will build it is not a realistic proposition in the modern world. It also romanticizes our shared immigration histories. Rapid industrialization built North American countries that demanded much larger work forces not the other way around.

 

[nottyboi]

I'm guessing your 70 million population target was simply arrived upon by looking at Western Europe nations. In actuality, I don't think there's any special magic to 70 million. Western European nations have more global clout simply because they share similar values and they present a somewhat united front.

You need to ask yourself why does a large geographic presence like Canada have only 40 million people. There has to be practical reasons that most the nation is sparsely populated and most of the population lives near the U.S. border. Google AI says this is due to economic ties and habitat suitability. I also was thinking that natural resource development yields vast wealth but does not require a large population.

I'm not sure you are literally saying that Canada should just keep letting migrants into the country and share its wealth to beef up the population. However, that's the practical reality of what you are saying and what we seem to have seen in recent years. There just hasn't been the growth in the economy to make use of more immigrants in Canada.

If Canada wanted to really increase its population dramatically, it would require more difficult choices politically. The simple example of let them come and they will build it is not a realistic proposition in the modern world. It also romanticizes our shared immigration histories. Rapid industrialization built North American countries that demanded much larger work forces not the other way around.

I was thinking 80M actually.The magic is market size, its really that simple. Stop with this primitive notion of "sharing wealth" without people we have no wealth. Immigrants do much better then multigen Canadians. My family came here in 1982, 4 kids and we are all home owners. Immigrants create wealth and opportunities as long as they are qualified immgrants. Canada is massively underdeveloped. Its true that with robotics the future may require fewer people to produce, but market size is where its at. Look at European nations, many with very sparse energy and other resources are also pretty wealthy. Germany, Japan both wealthy with what they CREATED. We need a larger domestic market so we can create businesses with and have domestic critical mass to incubate them, and make them viable to compete globally.

 

[nottyboi]

they can stay at your place

you do not seem capable of learning from past events
immigration can not exceed housing development nor health care capacity


adding 30 million people will make Canada a major disaster

Who says it needs to exceed any of those things. Adding 30m people over WHAT TIME, I would say 20-30 years. We have a choice, immgration to absorb the massive debt or hyper inflation.