The Worst PM Ever. Period!

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,726
3,599
113
Edmonton
Everybody uses big words that have no meanings. As I demonstrated, the Canadians who hate "socialism" don't hate socialism at all when it provides their health care.

They all want more, more, more from government. Even the most rock-ribbed "conservatives" want more police, more infrastructure, and suchlike. Everybody wants more government employees. And every group wants more for itself at the expense of other groups.
I don't agree. Most people just want to be left alone; to be able to make a decent living without government interference.

Canada is not a socialist country - we have socialized health care which every working Canadian contributes towards through taxes as well as the Canada & Old Age Pensions which again, working Canadians pay into along with their employers so it's kind of a "semi-socialist" program. Socialism really means relying completely on government without having to actually contribute to it which is why they all go bankrupt (i.e. Venezuela).
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLM and Twin_Moose

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,600
7,090
113
Washington DC
I don't agree. Most people just want to be left alone; to be able to make a decent living without government interference.

Canada is not a socialist country - we have socialized health care which every working Canadian contributes towards through taxes as well as the Canada & Old Age Pensions which again, working Canadians pay into along with their employers so it's kind of a "semi-socialist" program. Socialism really means relying completely on government without having to actually contribute to it which is why they all go bankrupt (i.e. Venezuela).
"Socialized." Like that ain't socialist. The government takes your money, and you get what the government chooses to give you. Only way out is if you happen to be rich.

Yeah, nothing socialist there.
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,798
461
83
Penticton, BC
We have to consider the time frame in discussions like this. In the short term, a decade or two, piplines to tide waters would scertainly benefit the greater good of all Canadians. With a time frame of four or five decades the greater good would mean a drastic reduction in the burning of fossil fuels. The same goes for globalization. In the short term it would mean taking on some pretty nasty foreign problems as our own and you woan't find many Canadians who want that. but looking at it in a century or more wouldn't it be nice to think we can do away with hunger and poverty on a global level and maybe put an end to war? Sweeping changes in the short term would just make a huge mess, but I think if we want to achieve long term targets that make the whole world a better place for everybody the least we can do now is to keep moving in that direction. The sort of insular, nationalistic politics common on the right seek to move us in the wrong direction.
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,726
3,599
113
Edmonton
"Socialized." Like that ain't socialist. The government takes your money, and you get what the government chooses to give you. Only way out is if you happen to be rich.

Yeah, nothing socialist there.
Yes, we are fortunate that we do have a choice - if we can afford alternative healthcare, we can use it. Nothing wrong with that!

We do have issues with our healthcare, no doubt about it but it's better than nothing. We have long waiting lists and certain procedures aren't covered - that has always has been and continues to be an issue. We can, however, get extended health care insurance for procedures that aren't covered by our healthcare system and we can obtain it through our employer or individually. Nothing socialist about that!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
5,726
3,599
113
Edmonton
We have to consider the time frame in discussions like this. In the short term, a decade or two, piplines to tide waters would scertainly benefit the greater good of all Canadians. With a time frame of four or five decades the greater good would mean a drastic reduction in the burning of fossil fuels. The same goes for globalization. In the short term it would mean taking on some pretty nasty foreign problems as our own and you woan't find many Canadians who want that. but looking at it in a century or more wouldn't it be nice to think we can do away with hunger and poverty on a global level and maybe put an end to war? Sweeping changes in the short term would just make a huge mess, but I think if we want to achieve long term targets that make the whole world a better place for everybody the least we can do now is to keep moving in that direction. The sort of insular, nationalistic politics common on the right seek to move us in the wrong direction.
As long as we have a free market system, poverty rates will continue to decline as it has in the past 50+ years. Globalism means "socialist/communist" governance which will definitely not be for the "greater good" in the long term. History has already provided us with the template and we should not want to go there at all. Why on earth would we want to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,798
461
83
Penticton, BC
Socialism really means relying completely on government without having to actually contribute to it which is why they all go bankrupt (i.e. Venezuela)

While there are Canadians who would be happy living off the government teat for their whole lives thankfully, they are a minority. Ours is a system of "to each according to his need, from each according to his ability". That's the principle at least. Just as there are people living off social programs who are fully capable of holding down a job, there are those at the high end of the scale who are either not pulling their weight, or are being paid more than they're worth.

Ours is a good system, it's just in need of a tune up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mowich

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,379
5,775
113
Twin Moose Creek
In communism the Gov. takes everything and then decides who deserves what, when, where, and why depending on your standing within the system.
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,379
5,775
113
Twin Moose Creek
In socialism the Gov. decides how much it needs to take from the citizens depending on their standing and dole it out to the different programs it deems essential for the citizens as a whole.

The difference between both the Gov. convinces you socialism is your choice, communism tells you it's the peoples choice
 
  • Like
Reactions: bob the dog

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,379
5,775
113
Twin Moose Creek
While there are Canadians who would be happy living off the government teat for their whole lives thankfully, they are a minority. Ours is a system of "to each according to his need, from each according to his ability". That's the principle at least. Just as there are people living off social programs who are fully capable of holding down a job, there are those at the high end of the scale who are either not pulling their weight, or are being paid more than they're worth.

Ours is a good system, it's just in need of a tune up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mowich and petros

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,373
11,436
113
Low Earth Orbit
In socialism the Gov. decides how much it needs to take from the citizens depending on their standing and dole it out to the different programs it deems essential for the citizens as a whole.

The difference between both the Gov. convinces you socialism is your choice, communism tells you it's the peoples choice
It's also no free enterprise. All business and industry is allegedly owned by the people for benefit of the people.

If only it did benefit the people.
 

Nick Danger

Council Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,798
461
83
Penticton, BC
You can't really reduce this to absolutes like that. Canada has a mixed economy, pure capitalism doesn't exist any more than pure communism, they just don't work. There will always be people who are unable to contribute, just as there will always be those who take more than they are entitled to.

The money I make in the oilsands puts me in the top ten percent of Canadian earners, so I my tax bill is higher than most, but it's still just a fraction of what many pay. I don't cry about it, as I've said we have a good system. I make more, so I'm okay with paying a little more. That's the whole I dea of progressive income tax.

But our system does fall short in a few areas. Polluters for one, should be held responsible for the messes they make. I don't care for what has been an overall reduction in the responsibility employers take for the welfare of their employees. Benefit plans are disappearing, we should be moving in the other direction. Private sector trade unions used to ensure that these benefits are available, but their numbers have been shrinking steadily. Jobs and raw materials are being shipped overseas, and the goods sold back to us. Isn't there something wrong with that picture ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mowich

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,379
5,775
113
Twin Moose Creek
You can't really reduce this to absolutes like that. Canada has a mixed economy, pure capitalism doesn't exist any more than pure communism, they just don't work. There will always be people who are unable to contribute, just as there will always be those who take more than they are entitled to.

The money I make in the oilsands puts me in the top ten percent of Canadian earners, so I my tax bill is higher than most, but it's still just a fraction of what many pay. I don't cry about it, as I've said we have a good system. I make more, so I'm okay with paying a little more. That's the whole I dea of progressive income tax.

But our system does fall short in a few areas. Polluters for one, should be held responsible for the messes they make. I don't care for what has been an overall reduction in the responsibility employers take for the welfare of their employees. Benefit plans are disappearing, we should be moving in the other direction. Private sector trade unions used to ensure that these benefits are available, but their numbers have been shrinking steadily. Jobs and raw materials are being shipped overseas, and the goods sold back to us. Isn't there something wrong with that picture ?
Ask Trudeau, and a flat tax or user based tax would be more fair for everyone
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxme

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
For the past four years, I’ve had a front row seat to witness the effects of Justin Trudeau’s arrogance and failed policy both inside and outside the House of Commons.

It was shortly after his election in 2015, when Trudeau stormed across the House of Commons in a fit of rage and elbowed one of my female colleagues in the chest because he didn’t get his way. Unbeknownst to all of us at the time, this incident would set a disturbing tone of Prime Ministerial strong-arming for the next four years.

Canadians have witnessed Trudeau make history by becoming the first Prime Minister to be found guilty of breaking conflict of interest rules. We have seen him fire his female Attorney General for not kowtowing to his blatant interference in a criminal prosecution. Trudeau attacked small business owners as “tax cheats”, male construction workers as “threats to rural communities” and even had the audacity to call the Official Opposition “ambulance chasers” for seeking truth on the transfer status of a convicted child murderer. (Personally I'd rather be an ambulance chaser than some loser that molly coddles child killers).

When one of Trudeau’s female members of parliament tried to inform him of her intentions to not seek re-election, he became hostile, screaming at her so loudly that her husband could hear through the phone. During question period, rather than answering legitimate questions on the Liberal policies adversely affecting the lives of Canadian families, farmers and businesses, Conservatives received nothing but name calling, rehearsed talking points and non-answers from Trudeau.

When the Kokanee grope story came to light, Trudeau denied and dismissed it. Rather than holding himself to the high standard of accountability he set for everyone else, he merely suggested that “men and women experience things differently”; hardly a feminist response.

Justin Trudeau clearly has no problem using his power against women who stand up to him. He can’t, however, bring himself to be tough on China, a country who has arbitrarily detained two Canadians for purely political purposes since December, and have closed their doors to our meat and canola exports. In yet another act of weakness, Justin Trudeau capitulated to President Trump during NAFTA negotiations, selling out our steel and aluminum workers and dairy farmers.

For these reasons, amongst others, I believe that not only is Justin Trudeau the worst Prime Minister in Canadian history, he is a fake feminist, and clearly not as advertised.

Funny how fast things change. It was only a few months ago, Sir John A. was deemed to be the biggest rogue and pariah in the history of the world and that any enduring symbol of him should be destroyed. Personally, I'd put Sir John A. head and shoulders above Justin. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mowich

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
I don't agree. Most people just want to be left alone; to be able to make a decent living without government interference.

Canada is not a socialist country - we have socialized health care which every working Canadian contributes towards through taxes as well as the Canada & Old Age Pensions which again, working Canadians pay into along with their employers so it's kind of a "semi-socialist" program. Socialism really means relying completely on government without having to actually contribute to it which is why they all go bankrupt (i.e. Venezuela).
I think there's some of both, Dixie, the givers and doers and the takers. I agree with a safety net for the challenged and infirm, whereas the lazy bastards should pay their own way AND provide a dollar or two for their compromised brothers and sisters. :)
 

taxme

Time Out
Feb 11, 2020
2,349
976
113
Funny how fast things change. It was only a few months ago, Sir John A. was deemed to be the biggest rogue and pariah in the history of the world and that any enduring symbol of him should be destroyed. Personally, I'd put Sir John A. head and shoulders above Justin. :)

What is so sad is that our french socialist Turdeau government that runs and owns Ottawa went and decided to replace the picture of our first Prime Minister of Canada Sir John A. McDonald on our Canadian ten dollar bill with a picture of some unknown black woman that no one ever heard of. What a disgraceful thing to have done to our first PM of Canada. I guess that some politically correct french leftist lieberal British hating buffoon bureaucrat in Ottawa decided that Canada needed to have their very own Rosa Parks, eh, or that we have to make Canada appear to be more multicultural and diverse from now on. I wonder who will be replacing the picture of PM Laurier on our Canadian five dollar bill? Maybe some french female from kweebec. Hey, we never know, hey? :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
What is so sad is that our french socialist Turdeau government that runs and owns Ottawa went and decided to replace the picture of our first Prime Minister of Canada Sir John A. McDonald on our Canadian ten dollar bill with a picture of some unknown black woman that no one ever heard of. What a disgraceful thing to have done to our first PM of Canada. I guess that some politically correct french leftist lieberal British hating buffoon bureaucrat in Ottawa decided that Canada needed to have their very own Rosa Parks, eh, or that we have to make Canada appear to be more multicultural and diverse from now on. I wonder who will be replacing the picture of PM Laurier on our Canadian five dollar bill? Maybe some french female from kweebec. Hey, we never know, hey? :D
Ooooh, I'm not sure if that is the best way to "win friends and influence people" :)
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
55,600
7,090
113
Washington DC
I don't agree. Most people just want to be left alone; to be able to make a decent living without government interference.
But that gol-dang gummint keeps harassing you with roads, bridges, education, health care, water and sewer, air traffic control, licensure of use of the radio spectrum, inspection of food and drugs, guaranteeing bank deposits, and making sure restaurants are reasonably clean and hygenic!

Why can't they just leave y'all alone?