Restoring a balanced budget is one of Pierre Poilievre’s main commitments. He wants to pass a law that would force the cabinet to find a dollar of savings per dollar of new spending. Since coming to power, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals have never presented a balanced budget. In addition to abolishing CBC funding, eliminating contracts for consultants, and abolishing the Infrastructure Bank of Canada, the Conservative leader has not specified the path he will take to re-balance the budget.
Criminal Justice:
“Stop the crime”. This is one of the four priorities that Pierre Poilievre sets out in the preamble of his press conferences in a systematic manner. How? By doing what no government in Ottawa had dared to do so far: by using the exemption provision to tighten the parole regime, to reinstate mandatory minimum sentences and successive prison sentences. Stephen Harper has failed on these issues.
Social Programs and Health:
Since 2015, the Trudeau government has stepped up investment to expand the country’s social net. The National Day Care Programme and the National Dental Care Programme are examples of this. These programs are popular with Canadians. Pierre Poilievre indicated that he intended to maintain the national day-care programme. But it is unclear about the future of the national dental care programme and the drug insurance programme, arguing that both measures exist only on paper.
Moreover, it rejects the idea of extending medical assistance in dying to people suffering from dementia, as the Government of Quebec wishes. With regard to the opioid crisis and other drug use, a conservative government would focus on treating people with addictions and throwing oversets from supervised consumption – Ottawa’s solution to avoid accidental overdoses and reduce the spread of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS.
Environment:
This one is deceptive (probably) in sounding like they might actually do something useful… except the bit about expanding pipeline construction. In all likelihood, there will be contracts tendered to friends or supporters to do silly things like carbon capture and sequestration. If sequestration is done by pumping it into deep wells, look forward to earthquakes in previously geologically stable areas, escape of CO² into neighbouring communities meaning residents would need to evacuated, and the area may not be habitable for a year or more depending on the size of the CO² pocket. That’s if the carbon capture scheme that gets funded isn’t just a grift, and most of them are.
Pierre Poilievre made it a slogan that pleases his troops: Axe the Tax. Putting the pin into carbon pricing is likely to be one of the first steps implemented by a conservative government. Pierre Poilievre wants the next election campaign to be a referendum on the “tax,” introduced by the Trudeau government as part of a national climate change plan. In doing so, it will also end the Canadian carbon discount for individuals.
At present, the conservative climate change plan focuses on the development and adoption of new technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is not clear whether Pierre Poilievre would endorse the Trudeau government target, reducing GHG emissions by 40% to 45% by 2030, compared to 2005 levels. A conservative government also promises a single environmental study for a natural resource development project in a province and will do its utmost to facilitate the construction of new pipelines.
I’m going to stop here, starting to rage. I recommend reading the article.
Should he only care about poor people when poor people have never hired people and created jobs? Do you want to take all the money away from people who own grocery stores and clothing stores and eliminate those jobs so there are no more food stores?
(Edit – the removed comment was roughly “why give any care to poor people that create no jobs and take away money from banks and grocery store owners?”)
Edit – the removed question was roughly: “how much of your personal cash do you give away to help people?”
original response
My budget for charity (including donations to aid groups, charities, political groups, giving cash and food directly to the homeless, donations to FOSS projects) is between 1-2% of my take home pay. I’m not religious, but when good fortune happens to me, I obligate myself to pay it forward to others in thanks.
(Edit – the removed comment was roughly “why give any care to poor people that create no jobs and take away money from banks and grocery store owners?”)
The simple answer to this: actually giving money to poor people is The Most Effective thing to do with it. Trickle-down is an absolute fallacy, but trickle-UP is a very measurable thing; and it’s been measured. So why care? Pure tax profit on investment – it’s smart business.
But that’s not what the non-conservatives do. They don’t give handouts but they smooth the negative effects of living poor. Fewer bad days mean more good days, and more good days mean actual economic mobility.
… you know: that thing the conservatives sell you every time but seem challenged to provide when all they do is raise middle-class taxes and cut rich-boy taxes. It’s like it’s a con.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
“But someday I might be rich, and people like me better watch their step!”
Conservative Governments have never been for the people.
Their platform revolves around what they can TAKE, and not what they can GIVE to the people, the environment, etc.
That’s actually comforting.
My fear is the fascism aspect, an old school conservative would actually be refreshing.
Don’t worry, he’s a fascist too!
Edit: @cyberorganism shared this article from La Presse it’s French language, my school days french is really rusty so I machine translated it.
Here’s a few excerpts(emphasis mine):
This one is deceptive (probably) in sounding like they might actually do something useful… except the bit about expanding pipeline construction. In all likelihood, there will be contracts tendered to friends or supporters to do silly things like carbon capture and sequestration. If sequestration is done by pumping it into deep wells, look forward to earthquakes in previously geologically stable areas, escape of CO² into neighbouring communities meaning residents would need to evacuated, and the area may not be habitable for a year or more depending on the size of the CO² pocket. That’s if the carbon capture scheme that gets funded isn’t just a grift, and most of them are.
I’m going to stop here, starting to rage. I recommend reading the article.
Thank you for sharing this. There’s also a nice colorful PDF you can download and share.
This is the kind of document people need. Simple bullet points that enumerate the facts.
I would add to that this article by La Presse (in French) about his priorities for a government. It’s pretty scary.
People share PDFs? A gif/meme would probably get more traction.
You can text pdfs. More people should do it.
There is no avoiding it. We will have to suffer through 4 years of pp. I hope it is only 4 years
Should he only care about poor people when poor people have never hired people and created jobs? Do you want to take all the money away from people who own grocery stores and clothing stores and eliminate those jobs so there are no more food stores?
(Edit – the removed comment was roughly “why give any care to poor people that create no jobs and take away money from banks and grocery store owners?”)
Funny you should mention grocery stores:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/481019/leading-grocery-retailers-by-market-share-canada/
When one dynasty (the Weston family) owns nearly a 3rd of the entire grocery market, steal from people by fixing the price of bread, driving independent retailers and smaller suppliers out of business through exploitative supply agreements?
Yes I would like to take a big chunk of money from these hoarders.
How much of your personal cash do you give away every year to help people?
Edit – the removed question was roughly: “how much of your personal cash do you give away to help people?”
original response
My budget for charity (including donations to aid groups, charities, political groups, giving cash and food directly to the homeless, donations to FOSS projects) is between 1-2% of my take home pay. I’m not religious, but when good fortune happens to me, I obligate myself to pay it forward to others in thanks.
What’s your point in asking this?
The simple answer to this: actually giving money to poor people is The Most Effective thing to do with it. Trickle-down is an absolute fallacy, but trickle-UP is a very measurable thing; and it’s been measured. So why care? Pure tax profit on investment – it’s smart business.
But that’s not what the non-conservatives do. They don’t give handouts but they smooth the negative effects of living poor. Fewer bad days mean more good days, and more good days mean actual economic mobility.
… you know: that thing the conservatives sell you every time but seem challenged to provide when all they do is raise middle-class taxes and cut rich-boy taxes. It’s like it’s a con.
Corporations aren’t people. Tax them and use that money to help every Canadian.