The "LOLCANADA" thread...again

Sadly Pierre isn’t lying and you have failed to prove he is
The only person that seems to be lying continuously is your man Justin

Remember Justin’s lie Budgets balance themselves

I do! I even remember the full context and the common right wing economic idea it was espousing!

Yes exactly, your main objective as opposition is to win. What Poilievre is doing is working, it's why Uke has a problem with it. Win elections then get to work fixing it.

Right on cue, the old conservative leader repeats the Big Lie of Poilievre's and gets immediately called on it by Andrew Coyne (lord knows no friend of the liberals)

Two things can be true at the same time. It is utterly shameful the lies that Poilievre is doing to distort the basic conversation on this policy. It is also bad that it is working.

It’s an opinion that says ( probably miss interpreting) what Giroux said …
Why doesn’t he post the actual content ?
It’s like the 10 sec video we see without any context of what happens before and after ….

[QUOTE=lozen;58503703]Sadly Pierre isn’t lying and you have failed to prove he is
The only person that seems to be lying continuously is your man Justin

Remember Justin’s lie Budgets balance themselves[/QUOTE]

Jfc ….
Are u that blinded ?

Just what polievre did to the trade agreement with Ukraine and voted against it by a pure lie about the tax carbon is an example .

U are so wrong and we showed It many times and still u maintain your false narrative without a shred of new evidences …

Ahhh ok this is very similar to what often happens in Italy with coalition governments sure, so the attempt is for the government to fail sooner than the next election I get it.

So last night watch Power & Politics with former liberal environment minister Climate Barbie . Shifty is right they have them all promoting the carbon tax and lying . First she starts off with all the forest fires in Alberta but does she mention that the carbon tax will do nothing to reduce them? Nope do according to Uke leaving that out is lying .

Than of all shock she tells the truth and says that a carbon tax of $65 a ton which is were it will increase on April 1 will do nothing I repeat nothing to lower emissions

Ah yes, lozen using more sexist language to refer to women in politics. So sad they have to deal with this crap:(

No comment on the fact she said the $65 a ton carbon tax will do nothing to lower emissions

And the PBO stated in his second report only about 20% of the folks end in the positive the next 20% are neutral and the remaining 60% pay more

Justin can have stooges make the rounds with all the lies but CDN's know the truth and will vote to Axe the Tax

Let's put it this way. I don't trust you to fairly paraphrase a segment you saw on TV. If you provide some exact quote I can analyze it to see if you have captured the context correctly. Until then, I can only note the disgusting - repulsive - repeated - vile sexist language you are using to describe women in Canadian politics.

Stop that.

Be better than that.

Sometimes I think I do it just because it bugs you . Roughly starts at the 8:30 mark

So Uke says Pierre never mentions the rebates. Well this short one came up and he mentions rebates twice in 50 seconds

Seems like the ones lying are Justin and Uke

Great clip. She absolutely DEVASTATES the conservatives for making big splashes back in 2007 and as of 2024 they STILL have no plan. It is even worse than it was in 2007 today! It truly is shocking the conservatives are so bad on this file that you pretend to care about.

And yes, I'm aware you are deliberately being sexist because you seem to think that being sexist is some cute troll of me.

Um bud I didn't say he never did it, I'm much much happier in the rare times when he (still with a lot of distortion and half truths) talks about the rebates, the critique is the time he goes into big affordability spiels WITHOUT doing it. Try to keep up.

It's great that you found a gaffe from a woman in politics that you are weaponizing despite her immediately clarifying it is about the limitations in the conservative plan in the next sentence. And I agree with her, the Liberal plan does a) raises carbon tax to $170, far above $65 and b) does a whole bunch of other non-carbon tax things as well, it is just objectively true that the liberal plan is vastly superior to the conservative plan of harpers from 2007 and of course better than the utter embarassment of "no plan" of Poilievre's. Trying to micro quote a gotcha in that is just embarassing.

I think one of the things that you seem to struggle with the most is when stories aren't black and white. The liberals can both have made tremendous and important product on clean water, and done it with great transparency, and have solid plans on the few percent of remaining problems AND it can be true that they need to finish up those remaining plans. Both are true.

So when you promise to solve the clean water drinking issue in four years and it’s been 8 years and your still not there would you call that a :
Lie
Distortion of the truth
Failed campaign promise
Sorry it’s hard and we promise everything and deliver nothing

I'd call it exactly what I said. It is a very hard, complicated, multifactor issue. The liberals did TREMENDOUS forward progress on it, and have been very transparent on exactly what their progress is and what remains to be done. They had a lofty, ambitious, and morally correct goal and haven't QUITE accomplished it. This is after a decade of inaction by Harper. I guess the best way to phrase it is "mostly but not fully complete campaign promise".

thats scary numbers.
those that will pay a little more will end up paying 10$ more per week....
Surely people will lose their house with that increase...

Maybe you should handle the liberals media because you do a better job spinning their lies than the do

Never answer a direct question with the truth if it hurts your message

I mean all the data is there on the super easy super transparent dashboard. That's one of the great things about the liberals, because they have far more transparency than their predecessor (and very likely successor) we get to know the exact status of every single project. It's fantastic. We can see all the accomplishments and the work still to be done. I know you are super eager to call everything a "lie" except for the Big Lie your guy regularly spouts, but sometimes issues are just complicated and nuanced and we need to dive into the details.

This I can comment because it's not related to Canada.

Even if Canadian CO2 emissions went to zero tomorrow and stayed there, climate change in Canada would be identical, as climate change depends on global emissions and Canadian emissions are approx 1% of global emissions.

Anybody claiming that reducing emissions in Canada will meaningfully impact climate change in Canada is lying.

Are liberals telling this to the Canadian population? Are they telling Canadians all these efforts won't achieve anything at all unless china, India, mexico, Indonesia and so on do the same?

I get it that you would be in favor of going to 0 even with provenly 0 effect on climate change for "moral reasons": do other Canadian voters agree? Or is this very basic truth hidden from them by propaganda?

ho boy....
lets say u have 100k in debts.
u got 10k at 10%
u got 40k at 5% interest
u got 50k at 3% interest

which debt would u choose to pay first to get rid as fast as u can your 100k debt ?

switch that with % of emission instead of interest rates and come back to me....

Canada is like 6th per capita in emission in the world in 2016 !
i wont do a hard search for 2023 because its late, its a trend and i know its probably even worst today with the increase we had in oil production.

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissi...

ho yes and are population in 2022-23-24 is increasing at an epic rate too, thx to justin....
So not only we pollute at an extreme rates per capita but with the population increase we have we will reach amazing level as a whole incredibly quickly too.

its urgent canada do something because the cost later on will be even more painful and being a leader usually means u get innovation much faster which can be very useful and profitable down the road.

I am not sure how you can claim it will be harder to reduce emissions in the future because that is objectively false obviously.

10, 20, 30 years from now technology will be better.

Solar panels will be more efficient, EV will be more efficient, carbon capture will be more efficient and so on.

Definitionally, every year that passes makes it easier to reduce emissions, so the later you do it the less expensive it is for you to do so.

Is that something that gets told to Canadian voters?