First, my sympathies to Jen and Matt, and especially Jen. I remember when the kids were young and strep throat used to do the rounds in the family. All the more courageous for having gotten this number of the Line to us.
Second, neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives are serious parties. As for the NDP, they are beyond hopeless. Nobody takes economic growth seriously. Nobody cares about low productivity, caused in large part by low private sector investment in equipment and structures. Nobody cares about the possibility of exploring a private sector role in our health care system. Nobody cares that Quebec has effectively separated from the rest of Canada. Nobody cares about the condition of our military, and our complete inability to meet any of our military commitments.
Canadians don't care about any of it. Just try talking politics with your neighbours or your barber or others that you meet casually. At best, they repeat someone's talking points.
So we do indeed have the government that we deserve.
I've never seen *that* before. Somebody seems to have perfectly captured the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.
Reducing taxes to reduce public services is the whole point. Starve the beast, etc... The thinking is that the size and scope of government is already too big. But Canadians as has been said in more places than this one are an unserious people, who are hand to mouth. Their cares go little beyond "what's in it for me?"
It will be interesting to see how Canada and Alberta copes between the want of Canadians and the needs of Canada moving forward.
At one point I thought the same thing about the tax cuts when Harper reduced the GST from 7% to 5%. Great! But then the Liberals came to power and just started pinning the credit card. Perhaps I’m just to cynical but Government has become a voracious beast that will always find sustenance so long as there are tax payers. Starving the beast is indeed a noble pursuit, I just don’t believe it can be done anymore due to the sheer size of the beast.
Sure, it can, technically. It was done in 1995 by Martin, by Mike Harris, etc. Can it be politically done is what I'm positive you are asking? That is a good question, I suspect it can't as long as the boomers are still with us. The me generation, the golden generation, are entitled to their entitlements, never mind they didn't pay for them and racked up the national (and provincial debt). Canada, especially Central and Eastern Canada, have always revolved around boomers for our lifetimes. University boom in the 60s, health care boom today. It's no mistake that the core support for the Liberal/NDP coalition, as stated by the Liberals themselves, this last weekend are female boomers in Central and Eastern Canada. Why vote against your own interests? Nevermind the kids.
I suspect there will be a reckoning when the demographic "bomb" of population decline starts happening. Death and taxes are the only two things you can't avoid in life and this involves both.
Well done. I generally agree with you when it comes to the unseriousness of Justin T's political party, but it seems like many Canadians are still willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Which suggests that your next column could plausibly consist of interviews with scholars who lament the unseriousness of Canada as a whole...
And, yes, I'm definitely old enough to remember how I felt about Pierre Elliott T. Definitely a more serious, more credible man.
As for the choice facing Albertans, well, let's just say that the epidemic of unseriousness is not restricted to the Liberal Party of Canada. D Smith seems to be the epitome of unserious (or should that be "seriously unhinged"?). As unsettling as the NDP can be at the federal level, at the provincial level (and in Alberta specifically--under Rachel Notley's leadership), it seems to be the only sane choice.
I never thought I'd write something like that, but it reflects how terrifying the prospect of four more years of faux-Republican Party voodoo libertarianism really is to me. Pity poor Alberta--I don't envy them such a premier and such a prospect.
I have owned an AR15 since "the dawn a time" ... never killed anybody ... had major fun at the local/legal gun range just blasting-away at soup cans ... and the carefully collecting the mess afterwardsKim .
I'll never get to fly a jet like Tom cruise, or (with all due respect) fuck Kim Basinger ... all virtually ... but ... who wouldn't?
On the gun issue, I totally agree with your theorizing that the Liberals are planning to go the OIC route once again. It's guaranteed. They would have obviously *preferred* to "do the deed" via legislation (Bill C21) because an OIC can be easily reversed by a future government ... unlike an actual law.
But, for the time being they'll take whatever they can get ... and everybody knows that this is really all about generating theatre for their loyal peeps for upcoming election time. And, perhaps even more significant ... for Trudeau and Mendocino ... this is now PERSONAL ... after they very publicly got their asses handed to them. I suspect that they may harbour some seriously bitter feelings.
I vote and will continue to vote. I can't tell if the world has changed or I'm just making my inevitable shift towards a grump old man. But, no party seems serious anymore. Dig deep and *maybe* they'll be some thoughtful policy proposals, but mainly it's a bunch of emotional appeals to things that have very little likelihood of coming to pass. Or poorly written policy (some highlighted here) that seems rushed and aimed solely at claiming "we did something."
That policy seems to be heavily shaped by two groups: large corporate interests with the dollars to lobby and small interest groups that again can raise money and have the intellectual infrastructure to lobby governments. And, the first tends to also play in the second with funding.
The end impact: most people are turned off politics because what politicians are selling doesn't speak to their concerns.
It would be lovely to find a way to reduce the influence of small groups of people with the time and money to essentially design polity to fails to address things that matter to people and our collective pressing issues. Ultimately the only answer is for more regular to get involved but most of us don't have the time to offset people who lobby the government professionally!
It seems like all of the federal political parties have given up attempting responsible government and have instead pursued paths driven by pure id. The NDP lost it first: the death of Jack Layton and the disappointment of losing official opposition status in 2015 led to them abandoning attempts at responsible centrism for the left-wing fantasy Leap Manifesto. The Conservatives broke in 2021 after Trudeau won another minority, diving into the sewer of angry, paranoid populism. The Liberals have given into utter, unearned arrogance. "Canada's Natural Governing Party" used to be a magnet for ambitious, talented people. Their mastery of the government used to deliver them a string of electoral and policy successes (implementing them, that is - not necessarily the consequences of the policies) which built that habit of arrogance. However, the Liberal Party has been declining for decades, and the current arrogance has about as much foundation as a school kid from a formerly-rich family who still puts on airs about being superior thanks to his name, despite a mediocre academic record.
I don't think the NDP or Conservatives are going to snap out of their fugue states until responsibility is forced on them when they have to form a government. If the NDP can shed their feckless leader, I think they'd be able to build up a reasonably competent team drawing from veterans of the Layton/Mulcair Orange Crush and provincial governments. The Conservatives would also be able to pull it together - being in power would placate and temper the populist rhetoric, and they've still got a lot of institutional strength to draw on. I don't know if the Liberals can be saved at this point - there doesn't seem to be much of anything left of the party other than a personality cult built around Justin Trudeau. They've got little to point to after 8 years other than legalizing marijuana (which let's note hasn't actually been the fiscal boon they pitched, nor much of a curb on the black market.)
I can't comment on his article as comments are closed off, but regarding Rahim Mohammed's article this morning, I doubt that BC's rejection of the name "Liberal" has anything to do with a rejection of economic and/or social liberalism. I suspect it is more a rejection of Justin Trudeau's version of liberalism and rejection of Justin Trudeau's corruption.
The majority of Canadians are ideologically liberal and most of their differences amount to whether they put the emphasis on social liberalism or economic liberalism. Other influences: Corruption and influence peddling in the Liberal Party have soured Canadians on the Liberal Party; ham fisted idiocy on the part of the Conservatives on fiscal policy and bungling the financing for the technology industry under Harper have soured Canadians on the Conservative Party. One of the reasons that Nortel went down is because Harper refused to provide the level of long term funding for technology that is provided in both the US and China.
Years ago, when Alberta was rolling in cash, I always thought they would roll some of that money into developing a technology industry. They did a little bit, but not nearly enough, and not with a long term strategy.
Rahim Mohammed states in his article that parliamentary democracies don't allow for centrist parties. He points to the UK as an example. But Canada is not the UK. In any case, in the recent elections a week ago, it is exactly the liberal party in the UK that picked up most of the votes from the conservatives (not the Labour Party).
The problem between having only a choice between Labour/NDP and various conservative parties is that governments then vacillate between two completely irreconcilable systems. The advantage with liberalism is that it seeks to reconcile the needs of business, the needs of working people and the need to set policy in the long term to allow both businesses and people to thrive.
So, yes, perhaps Justin Trudeau will soon have an appointment with reality, but I doubt that liberalism is dead in Canada.
First, my sympathies to Jen and Matt, and especially Jen. I remember when the kids were young and strep throat used to do the rounds in the family. All the more courageous for having gotten this number of the Line to us.
Second, neither the Liberals nor the Conservatives are serious parties. As for the NDP, they are beyond hopeless. Nobody takes economic growth seriously. Nobody cares about low productivity, caused in large part by low private sector investment in equipment and structures. Nobody cares about the possibility of exploring a private sector role in our health care system. Nobody cares that Quebec has effectively separated from the rest of Canada. Nobody cares about the condition of our military, and our complete inability to meet any of our military commitments.
Canadians don't care about any of it. Just try talking politics with your neighbours or your barber or others that you meet casually. At best, they repeat someone's talking points.
So we do indeed have the government that we deserve.
TWENTY "likes" ... and counting!
I've never seen *that* before. Somebody seems to have perfectly captured the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.
At least, in Canada. Today. Zeitgeist.
This was very well written and well considered. Thank you.
Reducing taxes to reduce public services is the whole point. Starve the beast, etc... The thinking is that the size and scope of government is already too big. But Canadians as has been said in more places than this one are an unserious people, who are hand to mouth. Their cares go little beyond "what's in it for me?"
It will be interesting to see how Canada and Alberta copes between the want of Canadians and the needs of Canada moving forward.
At one point I thought the same thing about the tax cuts when Harper reduced the GST from 7% to 5%. Great! But then the Liberals came to power and just started pinning the credit card. Perhaps I’m just to cynical but Government has become a voracious beast that will always find sustenance so long as there are tax payers. Starving the beast is indeed a noble pursuit, I just don’t believe it can be done anymore due to the sheer size of the beast.
Sure, it can, technically. It was done in 1995 by Martin, by Mike Harris, etc. Can it be politically done is what I'm positive you are asking? That is a good question, I suspect it can't as long as the boomers are still with us. The me generation, the golden generation, are entitled to their entitlements, never mind they didn't pay for them and racked up the national (and provincial debt). Canada, especially Central and Eastern Canada, have always revolved around boomers for our lifetimes. University boom in the 60s, health care boom today. It's no mistake that the core support for the Liberal/NDP coalition, as stated by the Liberals themselves, this last weekend are female boomers in Central and Eastern Canada. Why vote against your own interests? Nevermind the kids.
I suspect there will be a reckoning when the demographic "bomb" of population decline starts happening. Death and taxes are the only two things you can't avoid in life and this involves both.
Well done. I generally agree with you when it comes to the unseriousness of Justin T's political party, but it seems like many Canadians are still willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. Which suggests that your next column could plausibly consist of interviews with scholars who lament the unseriousness of Canada as a whole...
And, yes, I'm definitely old enough to remember how I felt about Pierre Elliott T. Definitely a more serious, more credible man.
As for the choice facing Albertans, well, let's just say that the epidemic of unseriousness is not restricted to the Liberal Party of Canada. D Smith seems to be the epitome of unserious (or should that be "seriously unhinged"?). As unsettling as the NDP can be at the federal level, at the provincial level (and in Alberta specifically--under Rachel Notley's leadership), it seems to be the only sane choice.
I never thought I'd write something like that, but it reflects how terrifying the prospect of four more years of faux-Republican Party voodoo libertarianism really is to me. Pity poor Alberta--I don't envy them such a premier and such a prospect.
Take a pill, and quit fretting.
I have owned an AR15 since "the dawn a time" ... never killed anybody ... had major fun at the local/legal gun range just blasting-away at soup cans ... and the carefully collecting the mess afterwardsKim .
I'll never get to fly a jet like Tom cruise, or (with all due respect) fuck Kim Basinger ... all virtually ... but ... who wouldn't?
On the gun issue, I totally agree with your theorizing that the Liberals are planning to go the OIC route once again. It's guaranteed. They would have obviously *preferred* to "do the deed" via legislation (Bill C21) because an OIC can be easily reversed by a future government ... unlike an actual law.
But, for the time being they'll take whatever they can get ... and everybody knows that this is really all about generating theatre for their loyal peeps for upcoming election time. And, perhaps even more significant ... for Trudeau and Mendocino ... this is now PERSONAL ... after they very publicly got their asses handed to them. I suspect that they may harbour some seriously bitter feelings.
I vote and will continue to vote. I can't tell if the world has changed or I'm just making my inevitable shift towards a grump old man. But, no party seems serious anymore. Dig deep and *maybe* they'll be some thoughtful policy proposals, but mainly it's a bunch of emotional appeals to things that have very little likelihood of coming to pass. Or poorly written policy (some highlighted here) that seems rushed and aimed solely at claiming "we did something."
That policy seems to be heavily shaped by two groups: large corporate interests with the dollars to lobby and small interest groups that again can raise money and have the intellectual infrastructure to lobby governments. And, the first tends to also play in the second with funding.
The end impact: most people are turned off politics because what politicians are selling doesn't speak to their concerns.
It would be lovely to find a way to reduce the influence of small groups of people with the time and money to essentially design polity to fails to address things that matter to people and our collective pressing issues. Ultimately the only answer is for more regular to get involved but most of us don't have the time to offset people who lobby the government professionally!
It seems like all of the federal political parties have given up attempting responsible government and have instead pursued paths driven by pure id. The NDP lost it first: the death of Jack Layton and the disappointment of losing official opposition status in 2015 led to them abandoning attempts at responsible centrism for the left-wing fantasy Leap Manifesto. The Conservatives broke in 2021 after Trudeau won another minority, diving into the sewer of angry, paranoid populism. The Liberals have given into utter, unearned arrogance. "Canada's Natural Governing Party" used to be a magnet for ambitious, talented people. Their mastery of the government used to deliver them a string of electoral and policy successes (implementing them, that is - not necessarily the consequences of the policies) which built that habit of arrogance. However, the Liberal Party has been declining for decades, and the current arrogance has about as much foundation as a school kid from a formerly-rich family who still puts on airs about being superior thanks to his name, despite a mediocre academic record.
I don't think the NDP or Conservatives are going to snap out of their fugue states until responsibility is forced on them when they have to form a government. If the NDP can shed their feckless leader, I think they'd be able to build up a reasonably competent team drawing from veterans of the Layton/Mulcair Orange Crush and provincial governments. The Conservatives would also be able to pull it together - being in power would placate and temper the populist rhetoric, and they've still got a lot of institutional strength to draw on. I don't know if the Liberals can be saved at this point - there doesn't seem to be much of anything left of the party other than a personality cult built around Justin Trudeau. They've got little to point to after 8 years other than legalizing marijuana (which let's note hasn't actually been the fiscal boon they pitched, nor much of a curb on the black market.)
I can't comment on his article as comments are closed off, but regarding Rahim Mohammed's article this morning, I doubt that BC's rejection of the name "Liberal" has anything to do with a rejection of economic and/or social liberalism. I suspect it is more a rejection of Justin Trudeau's version of liberalism and rejection of Justin Trudeau's corruption.
The majority of Canadians are ideologically liberal and most of their differences amount to whether they put the emphasis on social liberalism or economic liberalism. Other influences: Corruption and influence peddling in the Liberal Party have soured Canadians on the Liberal Party; ham fisted idiocy on the part of the Conservatives on fiscal policy and bungling the financing for the technology industry under Harper have soured Canadians on the Conservative Party. One of the reasons that Nortel went down is because Harper refused to provide the level of long term funding for technology that is provided in both the US and China.
Years ago, when Alberta was rolling in cash, I always thought they would roll some of that money into developing a technology industry. They did a little bit, but not nearly enough, and not with a long term strategy.
Rahim Mohammed states in his article that parliamentary democracies don't allow for centrist parties. He points to the UK as an example. But Canada is not the UK. In any case, in the recent elections a week ago, it is exactly the liberal party in the UK that picked up most of the votes from the conservatives (not the Labour Party).
https://samf.substack.com/p/realignment-realigned-the-local-election
The problem between having only a choice between Labour/NDP and various conservative parties is that governments then vacillate between two completely irreconcilable systems. The advantage with liberalism is that it seeks to reconcile the needs of business, the needs of working people and the need to set policy in the long term to allow both businesses and people to thrive.
So, yes, perhaps Justin Trudeau will soon have an appointment with reality, but I doubt that liberalism is dead in Canada.