Liberal Minority Government 2019 - ????

[Jarnhamar]

From what I can see: It's up to $380M (including taxes) so about $330M (before taxes) for 44M masks per year for ten years, which comes out to about 75 cents per mask for a guaranteed supply made in Canada.

I'm not sure why the contract turned out to be 3 times the amount that was publicly announced (bit of a trend it seems) but I think it's great to have a guaranteed Canadian supply and not have to count on China. I don't think the LPC can take a crap without trying to sole source a toilet paper contract to their friends so I think they fully deserve all the scrutiny they're getting.

 

[dapaterson]

Not having the docs in front of me, a can only surmise that the contract is for a fixed amount around $120m with options that may be exercised that would take it up to $380m.  Not unusual, and provides an out if things do not work out.

 

[stellarpanther]

The obvious barrier to that is the LPC friendly media.  Imagine.

I wouldn't agree with that but I'll give you CBC and the Toronto Star.  CTV is fairly neutral with Global and even the National Post coming across as slightly Conservative leading.  The Toronto Sun is PC all the way 

That seems to be the Canadian way in the last decade or so; always blame someone else for the problem.

 

[Remius]

The obvious barrier to that is the LPC friendly media.  Imagine.

No.  They also shoot themselves in the foot so many times. They are their own worst enemy. 

 

[stellarpanther]

My opinion is that all of the Party's genuinely want to do what's best for Canadians but where they get themselves into trouble is when they try to see if there is a way they can help the Party out at the same time. 
I doubt they often make a move without considering how it will affect them politically in the future.

 

[QV]

They also shoot themselves in the foot so many times. They are their own worst enemy.

No.  Compare the majority of media coverage and headlines etc, of blackface, Norman, SNC, WE, and all the other unbelievable issues this PM has been embroiled in only four years.  And then compare how the media reported on Scheer during the run up.  There us just enough criticism of the LPC so there is the appearance they're reporting all the while they really skewer the CPC.  With that, the average low information voter has a choice: the progressive, feminist, global citizens, but so-so on ethics LPC, or a much worse right wing, environment ruining, anti abortion, and anti LGBTQ+ CPC. 
 
And BTW it won't matter who the CPC leader is, the majority of the media will make that person out to be way worse than any Liberal party leader.  The very fact the LPC is willing to pour hundreds of millions into the media and the CPC might do the opposite will ensure this. 

 

[Remius]

No.  Compare the majority of media coverage and headlines etc, of blackface, Norman, SNC, WE, and all the other unbelievable issues this PM has been embroiled in only four years.  And then compare how the media reported on Scheer during the run up.  There us just enough criticism of the LPC so there is the appearance they're reporting all the while they really skewer the CPC.  With that, the average low information voter has a choice: the progressive, feminist, global citizens, but so-so on ethics LPC, or a much worse right wing, environment ruining, anti abortion, and anti LGBTQ+ CPC. 
 
And BTW it won't matter who the CPC leader is, the majority of the media will make that person out to be way worse than any Liberal party leader.  The very fact the LPC is willing to pour hundreds of millions into the media and the CPC might do the opposite will ensure this.

Again.  Those things were covered by the media.  Extensively btw. 

The CPC comes out swinging but punches itself in the balls every time.  If you can’t express and clarify your views on abortion and gay rights, and get caught on your own hypocrisy when attacking the governing party, you will lose the PR war.  Regardless of things like SNC (very niche internal stuff to most Canadians), Norman (which no one outside the military even cared about) or blackface (when the CPC is already fighting a less than inclusive image problem). 

Sorry, but if the CPC can’t accept that it mismanaged it’s own message then it’s going to keep making that mistake.  They chose identity politics two elections ago and let themselves fall into that trap again in the last one.  You can only blame the media for so much.  The LPC weaponized those issues and outmanoeuvred the CPC.

https://www.tvo.org/article/election-post-mortem-part-1-a-conservative-insider-explains-how-his-party-got-it-so-wrong

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/baird-scheer-conservative-2019-election-1.5426800

So nothing there in those analysis about the media.  Mostly a mea culpa on the CPC’s part. 

But the easy thing for CPC supporters is to just blame the media.

 

[Donald H]

My opinion is that all of the Party's genuinely want to do what's best for Canadians but where they get themselves into trouble is when they try to see if there is a way they can help the Party out at the same time. 
I doubt they often make a move without considering how it will affect them politically in the future.

And my two cents worth of opinion is that the task at hand is to improve and correct the Liberal party. Mainly because the Conservative philosophy has proven to be the wrong way throughout the world's leading socially responsible countries. The American way, which is a close cousin of the Conservative's way is failing quickly now.

Just imagine a country that doesn't have affordable and high quality health care for all their people. Then consider the priorities of the Fraser Institute in Canada and the Conservative mindset of allying with them.

Fortunately for Canada there will always be the NDP expressing an agenda that's closest to the Liberals. The NDP doesn't need to be elected to be useful.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>I'll give you CBC

The publicly funded public broadcaster.  That's problematic, isn't it?

 

[Brad Sallows]

>the Conservative philosophy has proven to be the wrong way throughout the world's leading socially responsible countries.

Except for the ones that decided a more classically liberal (conservative) economy was a pre-requisite for paying for the "socially responsible" add-ons.

 

[Rifleman62]

How long will it take SNC to build a new factory, purchase mfg eqpt, install, train new employees to shipping the PPE?

Sole source contract over 10 years to a Quebec company, without a mfg facility, worth over a quarter of a billion dollars, during a pandemic.

Starting from scratch. Possibly an AB or SK company could have done the same.

 

[Donald H]

>the Conservative philosophy has proven to be the wrong way throughout the world's leading socially responsible countries.

Except for the ones that decided a more classically liberal (conservative) economy was a pre-requisite for paying for the "socially responsible" add-ons.

You may have a valid point with those socalled 'add ons' Brad, but you would have to be more specific.

As a general rule the American way is all about their huge income inequality and my point is that the Conservative agenda closely echos their priorities.

I don't exclude their Dem party from criticism, as they are just as much establishment as their Repubs. However, this isn't about them, it's about us and our tending toward maintaining the high quality of life that's similar to the next 9 countries.

Here's an extreme for you to consider: Norway's prison system compared to the US prison system. Where does Canada need to fit in there?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

However, this isn't about them, it's about us and our tending toward maintaining the high quality of life that's similar to the next 9 countries.

Well my quality of life would rock also if I could just keep borrowing, and spending, as much money as I wanted to my whole life,...….screw future generations of little Monkhouse's.

 

[brihard]

Well my quality of life would rock also if I could just keep borrowing, and spending, as much money as I wanted to my whole life,...….screw future generations of little Monkhouse's.

A lot of people do, though, at least to the extent that it's comaprable. Our debt to GDP ratio is under 100%- comparable to a family that earns $130k a year maintaining a mortgage / home equity line of credit around $120-130k in order to fund investments, real estate, lifestyle spending, etc. Lots of people do exactly that. They carry debt until they're dead, though of course in the context of an actual person, yes their estate has to settle it- usually it's able to, e.g., from selling a residence. While the government doesn't have equivalent equity to draw from, they do have a tremendously high borrowing capacity based on the market's confidence in the value of Canadian government debt as a safe investment.

While to absolute numbers are huge, the numbers as they relate to the government's ability to service and carry debt are not alarming. We're doing better than most of the rest of the G7.

 

[Brad Sallows]

How do we know that debt-to-GDP is not alarming, beyond the claims of people saying it is so - no class of which (politicians, economists, activists), it must be noted, have been consistently correct with economic prognostications?

Debt to GDP is higher now than it was in the mid-80s.

Conservatives and progressives both have paths to QOL; it is false to claim that one group does and the other does not.  Conservatives tend to pursue growing the pie; progressives tend to pursue dividing it differently.  But anyone who understands compounding also can understand which path is preferable.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

A lot of people do, though, at least to the extent that it's comaprable. Our debt to GDP ratio is under 100%- comparable to a family that earns $130k a year maintaining a mortgage / home equity line of credit around $120-130k in order to fund investments, real estate, lifestyle spending, etc. Lots of people do exactly that. They carry debt until they're dead, though of course in the context of an actual person, yes their estate has to settle it- usually it's able to, e.g., from selling a residence. While the government doesn't have equivalent equity to draw from, they do have a tremendously high borrowing capacity based on the market's confidence in the value of Canadian government debt as a safe investment.

While to absolute numbers are huge, the numbers as they relate to the government's ability to service and carry debt are not alarming. We're doing better than most of the rest of the G7.

You missed the point...…someone is going to have to "settle it",....our future Canadians. 

"We're doing better then most"??  Aren't you the one that rails against 'whataboutism'??

 

[RangerRay]

Re: Ethics in government.

Throughout my adult life, I have voted for the “conservative/free enterprise “ option wherever I lived. Usually Reform/Tory federally or BC Liberal in BC. I would be open to voting Liberal federally if they went back to their liberal roots and stopped being a party of Beijing kow-towing Laurentian elites.

Back when I lived in BC, I voted consistently for the BC Liberals, who were really the most recent incarnation of the Liberal-Conservative free enterprise coalition that has governed since the 1940’s.

However, with each election I was decreasingly enthusiastic about voting for them. They soon lost their moral compass and acted increasingly unethically and corruptly. I continued to vote for them because they weren’t the Socialist Horde.

It eventually got to the point where the rot became too much that I determined that for the next election, I would vote for the NDP just to get the BC Liberals defeated so they could rebuild. In the end, I moved to another province before I could make that vote.

My point is, although I favour parties that occupy a certain space on the political spectrum, ethics and corruption are a bigger issue for me. I will vote for the complete opposite if it means a cleaner government for a time, and an opportunity for the party I normally support to renew itself.

 

[brihard]

You missed the point...…someone is going to have to "settle it",....our future Canadians. 

"We're doing better then most"??  Aren't you the one that rails against 'whataboutism'??

I didn’t miss the point. Yes, it needs to get ‘settled’ - generally through bing renewed with new government bonds. At present rates it’s sustainable.

If you think a comparison to other G7 countries is ‘whataboutism’, you haven’t fully grasped the concept. I’m not throwing a red herring in here to distract. I’m adding the contextual clue that, in contrast with fiscal policies and public debt of other major economies, we’re in pretty decent shape.

Canada’s public debt is still well within the bounds of what the financial system seems willing to consider prudent, as evidence by the government maintaining a very solid credit rating. This is determined by those whose entire education and career is dedicated to understanding money on the macro scale, and who are trusted to advise the biggest money managers on the prudence of lending to any given borrower. I put some stock in that.

While I don’t *like* seeing our government debt increasing, that doesn’t detract from the objective fact that those whose job it is to manage money do not appear particularly alarmed by our country’s financial state.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I didn’t miss the point. Yes, it needs to get ‘settled’ - generally through bing renewed with new government bonds. At present rates it’s sustainable.

If you think a comparison to other G7 countries is ‘whataboutism’, you haven’t fully grasped the concept. I’m not throwing a red herring in here to distract. I’m adding the contextual clue that, in contrast with fiscal policies and public debt of other major economies, we’re in pretty decent shape.

Canada’s public debt is still well within the bounds of what the financial system seems willing to consider prudent, as evidence by the government maintaining a very solid credit rating. This is determined by those whose entire education and career is dedicated to understanding money on the macro scale, and who are trusted to advise the biggest money managers on the prudence of lending to any given borrower. I put some stock in that.

While I don’t *like* seeing our government debt increasing, that doesn’t detract from the objective fact that those whose job it is to manage money do not appear particularly alarmed by our country’s financial state.

Government debt isn't the problem in Canada, it's household debt that is the issue.  Many are overleveraged and it is ultimately a drain on long term growth.

 

[brihard]

Government debt isn't the problem in Canada, it's household debt that is the issue.  Many are overleveraged and it is ultimately a drain on long term growth.

Yup, and this long period of extremely low interest, coupled with the financial pressures of the pandemic, will only exacerbate that. I know there’s been a lot of angst at the increased criteria for the mortgage stress test, but it’s probably prudent.

I recognize I’m in a privileged position to say that, my wife and I having two government jobs and being completely financially secure. I don’t want him ownership to be harder for others to achieve. But I do fear a lot of people from our generation who’ve never experienced interest over 5% getting themselves in over their heads.