News   Oct 31, 2024
Get Ready for a New Era of Mapping and Data Tools on UrbanToronto
 252     0 
News   Oct 31, 2024
55 Yonge Resubmission Eliminates Office Space, Adds Over 350 Units
 1.2K     3 
News   Oct 31, 2024
News Roundup for October 31, 2024
 555     0 

PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

BurlOak said:
The Conservatives need a new election strategy. Appealing to the wise and informed has a cap at about 40%.
They could try the Liberal strategy of lying during the campaign, but they might then loose some of their existing support.
Click to expand...

1546034378585.png

(Image from https://thetyee.ca/News/2016/11/21/Alexander-Says-Trump-Tone-Wont-Work/)

If you think the above is appealing to the wise and informed...

AoD
 
Videodrome said:
I don't think anyone does. They just don't support snitch lines and racist dog whistles.
Click to expand...
Well I mean I really don't think people in Canada really take the issue seriously enough. Most people agree its bad but then when they hear about a parent doing in they will just finger wag at them and not actually do anything of value. I would have liked for there to be real push to either criminalize anyone who allows these act to happen to their child, or to not allow citizenship to these people. But we had to make it impossible to report these people to avoid being called racist. It is really a sad situation and I feel sorry for the victims.
 
Thorns_Embrace said:
Well I mean I really don't think people in Canada really take the issue seriously enough. Most people agree its bad but then when they hear about a parent doing in they will just finger wag at them and not actually do anything of value. I would have liked for there to be real push to either criminalize anyone who allows these act to happen to their child, or to not allow citizenship to these people. But we had to make it impossible to report these people to avoid being called racist. It is really a sad situation and I feel sorry for the victims.
Click to expand...
Uh, you are free to report female genital mutilation to the appropriate authorities. You were free before the 2015 election and you are free now. You should report any case of child abuse to the Children's Aid Society or even just your local police.
 
It seems like the CPC and PP party are competing for how bigoted they can be.

APTA-2048 said:
Uh, you are free to report female genital mutilation to the appropriate authorities. You were free before the 2015 election and you are free now. You should report any case of child abuse to the Children's Aid Society or even just your local police.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Years into Liberals' ambitious infrastructure program, few signs of promised economic benefits
If the plan seemed to lack transparency, it would face even deeper scrutiny over whether it has actually stimulated the economy
Click to expand...
In the last week of August 2015, with a federal election campaign underway regardless of whether Canadians were willing to interrupt their summer plans to pay attention, the Liberal Party — in third place in most polls and eager to set itself apart — announced a policy that diverged sharply from those of its opponents: party leader Justin Trudeau promised a hefty rise in infrastructure spending over the next decade, aimed at jolting the faltering Canadian economy. And despite the received electoral wisdom about the importance of balanced budgets, he pledged to fund it, in part, by running deficits.

When Trudeau took office as prime minister later that fall, the spending plan became a centrepiece of his mandate, totalling a mammoth $186.7 billion over 12 years.

That enormous pool of money came alongside lofty ambitions: It would reinvigorate Canada’s aging roadways and bridges, expand public transit, build green energy assets and widen access to social housing in the North, among other things. The plan amounts to roughly $5,186 for every Canadian citizen over the next decade. The C.D. Howe Institute, a think tank, called the program one of the biggest infrastructure commitments in Canadian history.
Click to expand...
Three years later, however, the program has fulfilled few of its lofty ambitions. The initial rollout of the program was hobbled by delays, forcing Department of Finance officials to push billions worth of planned spending into the future. Ottawa’s budget watchdog found gaping holes in how spending was being tracked and reported, revealing a program that seems to lack organization and transparency. Meanwhile, provincial spending on infrastructure, long expected to rise in tandem with the federal plan, have instead fallen, wiping out a key assumption in the Liberal plan.
Click to expand...
The expected economic benefits have also failed to materialize. In the 2016 federal budget, the Liberal government estimated the infrastructure program would raise Canadian GDP by 0.4 per cent in fiscal 2017-18. An August report from the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimates the program actually increased GDP between just 0.13 and 0.16 per cent.
Click to expand...
Flaws in the program emerged almost as soon as it was rolled out, exposing Ottawa to waves of criticism on a file that typically provides nothing but good news. Unlike some of the more centralized infrastructure programs that preceded it, the Liberal plan was spread across 32 different departments and agencies, each responsible for its own individual pool of money.

That sprawling structure was at least partly responsible for widespread reporting gaps across the agencies, leaving billions of dollars unaccounted for.
Click to expand...
According to Infrastructure Canada’s public database, most of those reporting gaps have since been filled — with the exception of a still-missing $700-million that is largely due to an ongoing failure by two agencies, Indigenous Services Canada and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, to report details of their spending.
Click to expand...
Even with the unprecedented scale of the Liberal program — its total contribution is set to rise from about $10-billion-per-year today to around $18 billion in 2025-26 — the federal government is responsible for only a small fraction of overall infrastructure spending in Canada. The bulk of that spending instead comes from the provinces and municipalities.

A central conceit of the Liberal plan was that the provinces, starved for infrastructure dollars yet eager to build a long list of projects, would pitch in more spending if Ottawa did the same, which Infrastructure Canada said in a 2016 report would “more than double the reach of the Plan’s funding.”

It has fallen well short of that mark. An August PBO report found that while provincial infrastructure spending levels have been rising gradually, “significant downward revisions” in provincial spending levels in 2017-18 threaten to “diminish the magnitude of economic gains” seen by Ottawa. The provinces spent $52.6 billion on infrastructure in 2017-18, down from the $57-billion estimate.
Click to expand...
Pat Vanini, executive director of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario, said the most recent round of Phase I stimulus spending by the Liberals required municipalities to apply for funding within a tight 18-month window. She said a similar trend took place when then-prime minister Harper ramped up infrastructure spending in a bid to ride out the 2008 financial crisis.

Such expedited processes can sometimes funnel capital into the wrong sorts of assets. Rather than building the most economically beneficial projects, provincial and municipal governments may be forced to favour “shovel-ready” projects in order to meet deadlines, even if they’re not high priorities.
Click to expand...
Municipal officials, for their part, favour steadier streams of infrastructure dollars. Many point to the federal gas tax fund, which pulls together tax revenues from gasoline and diesel sales across Canada and ploughs that money back into the municipalities on a biannual basis.

Such funds also allow municipalities to select the most ideal projects and maximize their benefits to local residents — an area where Ottawa has routinely fallen short.
Click to expand...
Even so, large-scale infrastructure programs remain popular with voters.

“Infrastructure just sounds like a good thing,” said the IFSD’s Azfar Ali Khan. “But when it comes to the question of how has our infrastructure performed, there’s just no answer for that — and I don’t know why.”

That absence of clear answers has hardly given pause to politicians, who appear happy to attend as many ribbon-cutting ceremonies as their schedules permit, promoting everything from rail line expansions to wind farms. Perhaps in time they will know whether it was worth the cost.
Click to expand...

https://nationalpost.com/news/polit...=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1546258988
 
You clearly don't understand what a dog whistle tactic is. Look up the "Southern Strategy" that the GOP used in the 70's to convince lifelong Democrats to vote for them. Basically, they had to find a way to say the N-word without saying the N-word.
 
Videodrome said:
You clearly don't understand what a dog whistle tactic is. Look up the "Southern Strategy" that the GOP used in the 70's to convince lifelong Democrats to vote for them. Basically, they had to find a way to say the N-word without saying the N-word.
Click to expand...
Based on usage I hear, "dog whistle" means that the party has a policy that is virtually impossible to oppose since it make so much sense, so a secret negative connotation is applied to it to discredit the policy.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top