The "LOLCANADA" thread...again

Not really. There just isn't that many rich people, so if you drop it from 150k to 100k or whatever, the amount of savings to make make the payment bigger isn't much I don't think. We could google the exact figures but that is what 10% of the population?

Again, if this was meant as a wealth distribution scheme that was in place permanently, I'd absolutely agree that while it is progressive (anything with fixed payments helps poorer people more relatively) it is not as progressive as it should be. It isn't and isn't meant to be a good program for making the poor better off - many other permanent programs address this. But it more about TIME distribution, swapping future pain (through debt and and inflation) with present benefits under the hope that this is a good moment in history to be willing to make that swap. That is, we are not quite back to a low inflation AND low interest rate environment, although that appears to be happening soon, so this is a good TIME to redistribute to. Ok you can argue for or against doing that, but I think it should be argued on the merits or what it is actually trying to do.

The merit is that 250$ for a family winning 300k makes no sense while it could help people and family at the bottom much more ….

As long government will give hand outs to the top 5-10% of the population , canada will never get out of debts problems.

The 99% percentile for family income (with kids) is 216k. There just isn't enough people making close to 300k that cutting their $250/person checks results in those checks being significantly larger for everyone. It's not that I entirely disagree, this program isn't some amazing wealth distribution tool - but it also isn't meant to be.

I still dont see how you tell NATO members we cant meet our goal but are handing out 6 billion $$$ to a large portion of folks that do not need it and your forgiving the GST on booze, junk food and Christmas Tress and the one group your not giving the $250 to is fixed income seniors and those on disability ( two groups)

Because nato not necessary (trump might eliminate it ) and Putin is friend to the world ?
Unless you changed your stance on Putin ?

Have you read the Opinion Piece in the WSJ or NYT calling Trudeau the biggest threat to NATO not Trump. I wasn't overly worried about Putin till Biden gave them the go ahead on launching the long range missiles into Russia .

I have always said Canada signed onto NATO and with that come commitments. Im sure UKE will say Harper never met them and I didn't agree with that at all

I see Trump tying Tariffs to meeting NATO goals and no one believes Justin when he says they will meet it by 2032 even the PBO says its not true

Right, I agreed with that point you made earlier, which is why I said "I'd rather see it dropped far lower where it really would make a difference". I'm not talking "100k or whatever", I'm thinking more along the lines of $30-40,000, where you can cut the number of people in half and double the payments.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/484838/income-distribution-in-canada-by-income-level/

Statista

Canada: total income distribution by income level | Statista

Fair enough. I still see no reason why a measure like this couldn't also be more progressive, but I understand where you're coming from.

Yup

This is a great example of how partisanship works. You can't do anything for anybody without the whataboutisms coming up.

Firstly, Trudeau is the one that IS committed to meeting NATO target. Your guy refuses. Shame on him. This of course is a long term structural issue and not a short term temporary issue, and would equally poorly apply to literally any single thing that anyone ever spends money on.

Secondly, Trudeau has been FANTASTIC for fixed income seniors. But for those he helped with GIS and OAS and eligibility age and dental care etc all of those are long term structural changes that help fixed income seniors. Poilievre refuses to say what (if any) plan he has for these groups of people, but one can surmise based on how conservatives voted against each and every one of those supports when Trudeau brought them in he is against them. So sure, fixed income seniors are not benefiting from today's temporary measure because that is the entire point - to finally do one small thing to help working Canadians because most of the help from the Trudeau years has gone to, well, precisely other groups like fixed income seniors.

Oh sure, but then that's a totally different policy and I WOULDN"T want it to be a temporary one time thing. In general the Trudeau era policies have made life for people near the poverty line better, the amount of kids raised out of poverty has been great (although better pre-pandemic than post to be sure). I'm a supporter of being even more progressive in terms of higher taxation on the richer and upper middle class, more supports for the bottom, but I'd want that as a long term structural support. For a small and short term thing, I'm totally fine with that being much much broader and don't think wealth distribution is remotely the stated goal or purpose of the policy discussed today.

Trudeau is committed to NATO ? Than tell me how much Canada contributed the day he got elected and how much Canada contributes now .

Yes there is fix the border and meet our NATO obligations

You think the problem of illegal immigration and fentanyl comes from here ?
Well yes typical to blame others form their problems with trump .
Anyway , for a guy like trump that said he deal the best commercial accord ever in his first term seem he disagree with himself if those tariffs are needed .

Can’t wait to see the complain from US consumers coming with a spike of inflation …..

Maybe we should impose tariffs too on Americans because they are not fighting climate changes hard enough and because of them we have to fight harder and pay more ?
Pretty much the same logic ….

Well when Trudeau was elected, military spending had dipped below 1% of GDP. Trudeau has grown it to 1.37%. The actual figure has nearly doubled iirc due to gdp growth and inflation.

So yes, Trudeau has done a LOT compared to the conservatives. He pledges even more.

Poilievre refuses.

Why are you spitting out Trump fake talking points when Trump just screwed Canada over?

I will always be loyal to Canada. Not Canada’s enemy.

Fwiw are we sure more illegal goes from Canada to the US instead of US to canada ?

It's pretty simple. Secure the border, work with the US and get on board with them, they are our greatest ally. Or call an election immediately and let Conservatives handle it.

This is a long thread. Very long.

Can you quote one time you’ve claimed Canada needs to “secure the border” before an hour ago when your Dear Leader conflated Mexico and Canada and you jumped to his defense?

I have no patience for maga sycophants in Canada.

The toughest thing about this is how hard it was to foresee. Lozen told us all that Trump would be better for Canada than Harris, so I certainly never expected it.

Illegal immigration from Canada to the USA was at its highest this year. One of the reasons is Trudeau revoked the policy that visitors from Mexico no longer needed a visa to enter Canada but he has since reversed the policy. As for Fentanyl we produce a ton of it here and ship it to the USA. Of course Canada could put in its own tariffs and yes they could target US coal and other things

Source for your stats and I have said Harper was weak on NATO .Please show me a actual quote were Pierre says he will not meet NATO's targets . He is not the leader nothing he can do to meet those targets . Trudeau has 9 years and more than enough time to meet the 2%

Never knew the USA was Canada's enemy

Yes but it pales in comparison to Mexico to the USA

No I said Trump would be better for western Canada than Biden . I thought Trump would be able to restart Keystone but that may be a pipedream as many of the states have set up more blockades for it to get done . I was also very critical when Kenney invested Bilions in Keystone prior to the 2020 election as Biden said he would scrap it .

Lets be clear Trump has made a threat on tariffs but there is more than enough time to address the issue . I am sure Uke is opposed to Canada's 100% tariffs on Chines Electric Cars
Also as it applies to Mexico the last time He threatened Mexico they sent troops to the US Border and their southern border to shut down illegal immigration and agreed to remain in Mexico
Fentanyl is the largest killer of folks 18-45 and the numbers it has killed 1 in 4 deaths in Canada in the ages of 18-39 is caused by Fentanyl

Who's knows, like you said it's a long thread. It might have been mentioned during immigration or the last election cycle and I don't remember and don't care to search.

Also it's not really defending my "dear leader". It's the reality of the situation, what other solutions do you have? Start a trade war with the US and scream orange man bad?

Well there are two options. One is Trump sycophants can parrot Trump talking points about Canada needing to "Secure the border" when they have literally never even thought of this talking point before. That's what you did.

Or, Canadians can band together, set partisanship aside, and do everything possible to reject the ridiculousness of slapping an insane 25% across the board tarrif that will cripple Canada's economy. That's not going to be easy. But it is the only way.

Lol I'm not re-googling for you. The simple fact is Trudeau already significantly increased military spending from the Harper years. I'm sorry you were not aware of that.

Poilievre is slimy, sneaky guy. He COULD pledge - today - that his government will meet the 2% target. That is what Trudeau did. But he refuses to. Now you twisted that reality to demand a quote of him saying he would NOT meet the target, well of course Poilievre won't pledge the opposite. Nevertheless, his failure to pledge to do so is very, very bad. Harper was TERRIBLE for military spending, and Poilievre won't even make basic pledges. Your team is the bad guys on this one.

I said Trump is Canada's enemy. You don't do a Day 1 slapping of a 25% tariff on every.single.canadian.product to your friend. Ok a trade war isn't the same as a military war, but make no mistake, Trump is fighting against us, not with us as partners against the rest of the world.

Hopefully you now realize how ridiculous stupid that was. Every single thing western canada exports to the us (oil, lumber, etc) is now going to be subject to a 25% tariff. This is just such a terrible terrible call.

Canada and the US working together to build an electric car industry with lock-step tarrifs is something that is quite reasonable. The US shutting Canada out and putting them on the same side as the Chinese is not.

Why is this so hard for you?

LOL, no.

I did get the part about Harris wrong because you said this when it was Biden running, but given that you stuck by this even when Trump was promising 10% tariffs, I highly doubt your mind changed on this issue when Harris became the candidate.