Canadian politics thread

[AstulzerRZD]

Might be an even worse political strategist than Kevin Falcon.
- BC Libs sold their soul to developers in the 2000s and early 2010s
- Changed name to BC United
- Got told by developers to abandon election attempt in 2024
- BC United is basically scrap now

I do like the provincial NDPs but jesus, Jagmeet:
- Loses an official opposition
- Gets outflanked on the working class by PP
- Party is in debt and polling worse than BQ
- Pulls out of supply/confidence agreement without his pension secured
- ** Per yray, now gets challenged to actually put his money where his mouth is and call an election
- Might lose his own seat?

[yray]

Now PP is calling him to trigger an election

[underscore]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

Please, he’s never had to work for anything in his entire life.

Cool, how does that make PP any less self-serving?

[Traum]

Originally Posted by unit

well if the conservatives had decent candidates to run against him then he would have hard to work a little.

O'Toole's had a pretty normal background, and his military career is something that would have been perfectly desirable in US politics. Interestingly, we don't value a former military career as much of a springboard into politics as the US.

I would have preferred O'Toole over Turd as our PM, and I voted for the Cons in the last federal election. Unfortunately, O'Toole couldn't rein in the right wing crazies in his party, and Canadians didn't like that.

Sigh...

[unit]

o'toole wasnt maga enough for cons.

[Hondaracer]

A “random stranger attack” kills one man and chops off another’s hand

“What it can tell you is this appears to be a very troubled man who has a lengthy history of mental health related incidents, which have resulted in more than 60 documented contacts with police throughout Metro Vancouver. He has a prior conviction for assault, prior conviction for assault causing bodily harm, and at the time of his arrest, he was on probation out of White Rock for an assault that occurred in 2023,” said Palmer at a press event Wednesday afternoon

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2024/0...ault-downtown/

Yet another person who should have been dead or behind bars VS destroying multiple lives once again, canadurrrr

[Gumby]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

A “random stranger attack” kills one man and chops off another’s hand

https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2024/0...ault-downtown/

Yet another person who should have been dead or behind bars VS destroying multiple lives once again, canadurrrr

LOL I was waiting for Honda to post about this...

[JDMDreams]

Don't forget no risk to public!

[Harvey Specter]

I was born and raised in Vancouver and loved spending summers downtown at the beach or just walking around the core. But in recent years, I rarely go downtown, even though I live just 10 minutes away. Despite VPD stats, downtown Vancouver is not safe. You have to be on high alert at all times, no matter the time of day or which part of downtown you're in—whether you're sitting in a restaurant or shopping, it doesn't matter. You never know when some nutjob is going to randomly attack you.

I actually feel for the VPD officers because they're doing their job. It's the bleeding-heart judges and politicians who have a soft spot for these repeat offenders. Until we see real change at both the provincial and federal levels, these types of crimes will continue to happen.

[JDMDreams]

I thought something was happening after that girl got murdered by the break in offender in Surrey. I guess they just kick the can down the road now. Just a few crack heads, chopping one dead and macheting hands off. No risk to public, it's mental illness bro.

[Hondaracer]

What? Everyone forgot the homeless guy who murdered the cop in the park off Boundry? Wasn’t someone on here related to her?

Same thing as all these other ones, countless run-ins with police, parole, etc.

Nothings changed

Today’s it’s a random guy with a laundry list of charges, on parole, hacking people to death with a machete. Will this change anything? Probably not.

[mikemhg]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

This whole like “career politician” is such a weird take and always just used in like circumstances where it backs your opinion? Lol

Like ok don’t take a career politician, take a Trump?

Or even Kamala, what you’re a life long govt. schill?

Who do you want then? Elon? RFK?

People seem endlessly confused by this take..

Its all circumstantial, if you’re literally clinging to power at the end of your term and doing anything you can to get over that hump to receive the pension, then ya you’re pretty clearly only doing it for personal benefit.

I disagree.

As much as you can hate Trudeau, he's never ran on a campaign of destroying government, or alluding that government shouldn't exist. That is never a Liberal or Democratic platform.

The problem with Conservatives is that their politicians speak about effectively "drowning government in the bathtub", and decry government oversight, policy, and regulation.

It comes off as extremely hypocritical when you espouse the idea of hating government, that it shouldn't exist, meanwhile carrying your entire career within its golden/comfortable hands.

If government is so bad for the public, then why do you spend your entire career within it, while collecting its benefits specifically to yourself? It's that hypocrisy that gets people annoyed with people like PP or other Cons of his ilk.

[van_city23]

Originally Posted by unit

it's the opposite, it's meant to prevent minor accidents from going to litigation. you cant sue for whiplash or a hurt shoulder, or something that could be potentially treated with just physio sessions. now they just give you basically unlimited sessions until the practitioner thinks that you don't need them anymore. major accidents can still go to litigation, but the system is not perfect. sometimes people with 'minor' accidents can be greatly affected by their injuries and could have trouble doing things like working and still cannot sue. that is the contentious part.

The way no fault is now, you can't sue for anything at all. What we had before no fault was a cap system where minor injuries were capped at $5,500 and non minor didn't have a cap and you could sue for more. Prior to that we had full rights to sue for all injury types. NDP used the cap system to transition into no fault. BC Cons platform says they will go back to cap system and try to privatize it. I don't know if private insurers want caps, no fault, or full rights to sue.

[Hondaracer]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

I disagree.

As much as you can hate Trudeau, he's never ran on a campaign of destroying government, or alluding that government shouldn't exist. That is never a Liberal or Democratic platform.

The problem with Conservatives is that their politicians speak about effectively "drowning government in the bathtub", and decry government oversight, policy, and regulation.

It comes off as extremely hypocritical when you espouse the idea of hating government, that it shouldn't exist, meanwhile carrying your entire career within its golden/comfortable hands.

If government is so bad for the public, then why do you spend your entire career within it, while collecting its benefits specifically to yourself? It's that hypocrisy that gets people annoyed with people like PP or other Cons of his ilk.

I think there is definitely somthing to getting rid of the bloat of govt. at the federal level and all the beaucracy that comes with it.

Under the liberals the about of govt. employees has exploded with little to no positive impact on the average person.

Whether they can tout that they will actually enact positive change in this manner or you’re just providing lip service to your constituents and you’ll just do the exact same shit as the other party is a different matter.

Provide funding, provide support, but I don’t think every single thing needs this federal level oversight we currently see.

[mikemhg]

If government is bad, wouldn't you think someone like PP would enter into government as a change maker, and make his exit tout suite? There are many examples of politicians that run on that very mentality, and I credit them for that. They have a plan, get that policy enacted, and make there way back to the private sector.

It sounds utterly ridiculous to decry government, spouting ideas of Libertarianism, while remaining your entire career in Parliament or Senate, it's shockingly hypocritical.

The reality is Cons enjoy government, but only when it suits their own and their funders best interests.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Harvey Specter

I actually feel for the VPD officers because they're doing their job. It's the bleeding-heart judges and politicians who have a soft spot for these repeat offenders. Until we see real change at both the provincial and federal levels, these types of crimes will continue to happen.

It is plainly obvious that as a whole, Canada needs bail reform and much stricter restrictions / sentencing on repeat offenders. There is definitely an apetite for it everywhere you look, but interestingly, no (federal) party is willing to take that on as something they'd push for.

(I consider the Cons' position for being "tough on crime" as pure BS and political posturing. Bail reform and cracking down on repeat offenders is more important, and would achieve far more than their minimum sentencing initiatives.)

The problem we all know is -- bail reform is going to be expensive. Maybe that's why none of the federal parties really want to take it up. Personally, I think it's a missed opportunity because the time before elections is precisely the perfect timing to get the public's mandate to do something like this (because it is expensive). The Cons are certainly not going to do this because they already anticipate themselves to cruise to an easy victory.

[whitev70r]

There is a lot of talk to revive Riverview Hospital for those living with deep & serious Psychiatric criminal behaviour. Locked up, medication, and confined. Jail might not be the best place for someone like that but damn, we cannot have a revolving door for Mental health people with repetitive criminal behaviour. One person killed is too many by someone like this.

[Hondaracer]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

If government is bad, wouldn't you think someone like PP would enter into government as a change maker, and make his exit tout suite? There are many examples of politicians that run on that very mentality, and I credit them for that. They have a plan, get that policy enacted, and make there way back to the private sector.

It sounds utterly ridiculous to decry government, spouting ideas of Libertarianism, while remaining your entire career in Parliament or Senate, it's shockingly hypocritical.

The reality is Cons enjoy government, but only when it suits their own and their funders best interests.

I know people are triggered by the Fraser institute but even if this is half true it’s pretty bad

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/arti...ce%202014%2F15.

A 40% increase in a decade? Under the liberals.

[Hehe]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

If government is bad, wouldn't you think someone like PP would enter into government as a change maker, and make his exit tout suite? There are many examples of politicians that run on that very mentality, and I credit them for that. They have a plan, get that policy enacted, and make there way back to the private sector.

It sounds utterly ridiculous to decry government, spouting ideas of Libertarianism, while remaining your entire career in Parliament or Senate, it's shockingly hypocritical.

The reality is Cons enjoy government, but only when it suits their own and their funders best interests.

The problem with an ever-growing government is that it gets to a point where a lot of things that makes common sense would be in direct conflict of interest of people who work for gov't.

Take a look at our immigration system... much of the paperwork is still done by paper (no pun intended) where it should have been digitalized ages ago.

In our own life, would you still use a typewriter where a computer can do it much more efficiently and cheaper? Of course not.

But where do you send these people who had been working their entire career as person who deal with these papers now that their services are no longer needed? That's something we should think about instead of allowing thing to continue.

People said shit and criticized about Elon Musk when he took over Twitter and fired 80%+ of its workforce. The reality is that they didn't need all that many people in the first place. And that's the truth... Twitter/X is still working as it was, if not better, with new functionalities introduced and only 20% of headcount than before.

The government should do the same for maximum efficiency for its citizens... where we should invest in systems, be it IT or HR that provide efficiency. Instead, we are putting layers upon layers of bureaucracy.

We could argue whether the "cut-first, see-if-needed later" approach is or is not exactly the most morally accepted way to do things, but the truth is, there are so many areas that can be optimized given technology and whatever, where you not only need fewer people, but could ultimately achieve a greater performance.

And the question becomes, why don't we do it for the greater good? Just so that we can preserve these jobs that are outdated and the rest of the society must accept higher cost and lower efficiency in their life?

[Hondaracer]

Can anyone make an argument for BIGGER government? I’ll wait.

[mikemhg]

Originally Posted by Hondaracer

I know people are triggered by the Fraser institute but even if this is half true it’s pretty bad

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/arti...ce%202014%2F15.

A 40% increase in a decade? Under the liberals.

That's a garbage stat, in itself our population has grown 14% since 2014.

The stat doesn't indicate where those increases in government size even lie, without full data it's an irrelevant stat, which is a convenient tactic the Fraser Institute likes to utilize with these types of stats.

[mikemhg]

Originally Posted by Hehe

The problem with an ever-growing government is that it gets to a point where a lot of things that makes common sense would be in direct conflict of interest of people who work for gov't.

Take a look at our immigration system... much of the paperwork is still done by paper (no pun intended) where it should have been digitalized ages ago.

In our own life, would you still use a typewriter where a computer can do it much more efficiently and cheaper? Of course not.

But where do you send these people who had been working their entire career as person who deal with these papers now that their services are no longer needed? That's something we should think about instead of allowing thing to continue.

People said shit and criticized about Elon Musk when he took over Twitter and fired 80%+ of its workforce. The reality is that they didn't need all that many people in the first place. And that's the truth... Twitter/X is still working as it was, if not better, with new functionalities introduced and only 20% of headcount than before.

The government should do the same for maximum efficiency for its citizens... where we should invest in systems, be it IT or HR that provide efficiency. Instead, we are putting layers upon layers of bureaucracy.

We could argue whether the "cut-first, see-if-needed later" approach is or is not exactly the most morally accepted way to do things, but the truth is, there are so many areas that can be optimized given technology and whatever, where you not only need fewer people, but could ultimately achieve a greater performance.

And the question becomes, why don't we do it for the greater good? Just so that we can preserve these jobs that are outdated and the rest of the society must accept higher cost and lower efficiency in their life?

Yawn.

That's not the way government works, it's not Twitter run by a manchild like Elon. Much of the processes are entangled in webs of old legacy process, systems, and regulatory oversight. You can't run government the same way you would a private business.

Take a look at the massive pain in the ass the Phoenix pay system has been as it was rolled out by the feds, I'm sure 68 can speak deeper on that.

[Hehe]

Originally Posted by mikemhg

Yawn.

That's not the way government works, it's not Twitter run by a manchild like Elon. Much of the processes are entangled in webs of old legacy process, systems, and regulatory oversight. You can't run government the same way you would a private business.

Take a look at the massive pain in the ass the Phoenix pay system has been as it was rolled out by the feds, I'm sure 68 can speak deeper on that.

Then please enlighten me on how government works and explain why that is the optimal solution for the services provided? Why are so many regulatory oversight needed in the first place?

In Canada and US, we need to hire accountants to do our taxes because our system is so fucking dated. In Taiwan and England, where I had the opportunity to file taxes… you go to a machine, it lists out all the taxes that’s figured in the system, it tells you how much you owe/get back, you either accept it, or provide evidence for anything not in the system, boom. Tax filled.

There’s no reason we need so many people at CRA or IRS.

Don’t tell me “oh, it’s the way we have always done it”.

Of course the process can be tedious and quite “out of place”, but just look at examples when most companies moved to computer system vs. human. Yes, there was some screwups. But the idea is, if we take that as cost of serving the citizens and we know the outcome is beneficial, why shouldn’t we?

I don’t know any companies still doing great business comparing to their time before the computers that haven’t moved to it.

We are trying to find a better way here, aren’t we?

[westopher]

How do you always find a way to put Elon dick in your mouth no matter what we are talking about?

[EvoFire]

Originally Posted by Hehe

Then please enlighten me on how government works and explain why that is the optimal solution for the services provided? Why are so many regulatory oversight needed in the first place?

In Canada and US, we need to hire accountants to do our taxes because our system is so fucking dated. In Taiwan and England, where I had the opportunity to file taxes… you go to a machine, it lists out all the taxes that’s figured in the system, it tells you how much you owe/get back, you either accept it, or provide evidence for anything not in the system, boom. Tax filled.

There’s no reason we need so many people at CRA or IRS.

Don’t tell me “oh, it’s the way we have always done it”.

Of course the process can be tedious and quite “out of place”, but just look at examples when most companies moved to computer system vs. human. Yes, there was some screwups. But the idea is, if we take that as cost of serving the citizens and we know the outcome is beneficial, why shouldn’t we?

I don’t know any companies still doing great business comparing to their time before the computers that haven’t moved to it.

We are trying to find a better way here, aren’t we?

We can show you but then you cherry pick something and then take it way out of context to make a point convenient for your argument