The problem we’ve seen with technocracy over the past couple of decades is they are far too credulous of the models they’re using. They have trouble recognizing that the models are failing, and they don’t know how to reconcile them with reality.
I think the root is the people using the models (sometimes a theoretical construct, sometimes a mathematical model) don’t understand the assumptions that went into them or the limits of validation. You’ll see this frequently in science and engineering: an inexperienced person uses a model to generate some result or design that looks persuasive but turns out to be sometimes disastrously incorrect. Why? The model didn’t have the right physics, or they were extrapolating beyond the valid limits. Still, it looks fancy, contains a lot of detail, therefore *seems* like it should be correct!
If progressives have been more susceptible to the allure of technocracy, it’s because they’re heirs to the old leftist obsession with central planning. Mitigating this problem requires more humility on the part of experts, and also genuine expertise about how things work as opposed to a knowledge of how somebody else has explained their workings.
This hits the nail on the head. It's not so much that people are adverse to Philosopher King like technocrats, it's that Canada's just aren't that good and their motives aren't to be trusted. They are venal, selfish and fear accountability, especially from Americans. Quebec society is foundationally based upon this fact and English Canada isn't far behind, even in Alberta.
Idk if there's any other candidate, but Carney will carry a singular baggage he has to carry: BoC. BoC Governor can claim that they're independent from politics.
However, when a former BoC Governor runs as politician, they will be fair game.
It's one thing to claim that in the comfort of BoC building or business conference, facing business journalists or bankers. Another thing to face an average Joe and Jane in the eyes during town hall and explain why it is good that their mortgage payment goes up 50%, their salary shouldn't go up, and even better if some of them lose their jobs.
Maybe this is just the perspective of someone who was the target of Bosnian ethnic cleansing, but there is a big difference between those who rape and pillage and those who are bombing them back so they don't do it again. Irrespective of property claims, everyone deserve the right to exist and the right to defend themselves. Palestinians do not have exclusives rights to former British controlled and Ottoman lands. There is little daylight between anti-Semitism and those who claim Jewish people don't have a right to land or defending themselves.
At this juncture of a looming crisis within the Liberal Caucus and wider membership, Mr. Carney is a useful ally for those seeking a leadership change ASAP. Carney would be the atypical Liberal establishment candidate deluxe. (Including the bilingual option from the ROC, in keeping with some unwritten code of practice.)
As a casual observer to the broader mess, I have to wonder what would make the leadership of the Liberal Party attractive at this time? As The Line Editors have noted, the 2015 version of government is not fit for purpose today. What is needed is a reboot back to fiscal responsibility, “deliveroligy” that executes, wholesale cleansing of DEI in government operations and formulation of a military and foreign policy strategy that restores credibility with our allies.
Mr. Carney is a money man, accustomed to corporate environments and reaping the financial benefits of his expertise. Why he would leave those comforts to take on what could become a humiliating election defeat and rebuilding of the Liberal Party isn’t apparent. It certainly doesn’t seem to be a turnkey ascendancy to power to me.
i think Catherine Tait won the cage match......the two PC members who kept dog whistling the $ 1.4 billion comment were obviously aiming for the “gotcha” moment and you two have managed to help them along. it’s time that’s we stopped supporting these dramatic bar fights and start expecting our politicians to be reasonable adults . if the Conservative Party is actually believing the polls that suggest they will be the next governing body then they need to start acting like they know how to govern and stop trying to score points.
Ken, idealism in the political world is spelled realism. Idealism is a long term pursuit. Realism changes day to day. The CPC looks at the polls with glee but also with as much healthy skepticism as any other poll jaded Canadian. They aren’t elected yet, and part of a tried and true strategy to get elected is to keep scoring points by hammering your opponent’s faults when they are so kind as to offer many to choose from.
We all know that theatrics is a big part of the political game. We love to be nudged to wake up by a zinger every now and then while listening to the - boring to the unengaged - details in stupor. Act like the perfect boring mature adult too early and the electorate will get bored before the election. Best to save it for the real event, when the demands of the job will keep you perpetually jet lagged anyways.
Remember the Justin Trudeau MP Liberal versus Senator Patrick Brazeau Conservative boxing match in 2012? In your view did that cement that Justin was almost ready to govern or was it realism on the road to idealism?
Do you remember the Brian Mulroney "You had an option, sir." knockout blow in 1984?
That’s why Matt and Jen have to do entertainment on top of prim and proper journalism, and the parties have to do it before the election.
good points..I never could understand why no one stopped Trudeau from doing that boxing match. And I wonder when someone in the PC Party is going to pull the plug on the theatrics and start explaining to me why I should vote for them....what are they actually planning to do about Climate change for example other than chant ?
Unfortunately feelings trumps facts in politics. That's always been a truism.
As for the CBC, it's a dead man walking. The conservative base and the prairie heartland would do a Kenney to Pierre if he didn't execute on winding down the CBC immediately.
Each person's view of who won that cage match likely
depends on their political leanings. I think that the losers in that scrap are all of us Canadians.
As Jen and Matt point out, Tait wasn't wrong...but that might not matter. She seemed annoyed with Lantzman and the other woman because she knew that they were putting on a show in bad faith. They weren't looking for honest answers, they were looking for sound bites to feed to their faithful who don't understand why we actually need the CBC. It was started by Conservatives who understood why we needed it but these people are not the same kind of conservative. They're happy to tear things down in their quest for power. It's like the fading empire versus the barbarians at the gate.
Every country except, possibly, the US needs a public broadcaster. We need the CBC and we always will until the United States physically moves away from us. I agree that the CBC has a myriad of problems but it doesn't need destroying, it needs fixing! I'll vote for the person who promises to tear it back to the studs and build it back up properly.
Another thought provoking podcast. I would like to raise three points. With respect to the protests and their professionalism, I have lately been wondering why lawmakers have not addressed the targeting of Jewish places of worship, businesses, community organizations, schools and neighbourhoods. We have laws that establish safe zones outside of women’s reproductive health facilities, a good thing, why not have safe zones outside of identifiable ethnic or religious place of worship, etc.? On the CBC, the contempt Ms Tait showed for the committee was palpable. In terms of the CBC’s editorial choices, as far as I can tell (I listen to the morning CBC radio broadcast and look at the news app), the CBC has not been covering the ArriveCan and GC Strategy stories. The committee hearings have been riveting and this is an important story. Happy to be corrected, but between one thing and another they are certainly making themselves vulnerable to the charge that their coverage is overtly political.
To stay with the 'C' words - Catherine Tait is playing checkers while the Conservatives are playing chess. I don't think the Conservatives are very good chess players, but sadly, they don't need to be good when others are playing a different game.
i completely agree...its like a frat party where everyone is trying to be more cool than the other guy......I like the dispatch and actually appreciate their points of view but the podcast is a really hard listen.
I appreciate much of what you two do and I thank you for bringing your points of view to the table..... many of which I repeat throughout the next week ..but I much rather read you than listen to you .... and that is what keeps me being a paid subscriber
We originally started the podcast as a way of making use of our pre-Dispatch editorial meetings. Using all parts of the content cow, so to speak. Some people prefer audio, some visual, and some written. So we provide an option to suit all tastes. If you prefer the (more polished) written dispatches to the podcasts, that is no skin off our nose. Just glad to have you here. JG
Like you, I thought the op-ed calling for the Liberals to return to fiscal conservatism was interesting. I'm not sure, though, whether the denizen's of this generation of the Liberal Party of Canada are the sort who would favour--or even understand the need for--fiscal conservatism.
WRT Mark Carney, yes, I would support such a candidacy, but would Canadians vote for Mark Carney over Pierre Poilievre? The man is nearly 20 years older (and I hardly think that younger Canadians are immune to the "Boomer Hate" that has swept through the United States).
On the carbon tax, I'm very disappointed that the one thing that Trudeau's government got right on the fiscal side (not to mention the environmental side) has now been turned into political fodder. We need to get our country on track to lower GHG emissions. Abolishing the tax will put us on the wrong track.
Completely comprehensive circuitous cacophonic commentary creating comedic conclusions concerning categorically Canadian collection of cataclysmically clueless cock-ups calamitously compromising continued coherent Canuck civilization.
Classic.
Congratulations.
The problem we’ve seen with technocracy over the past couple of decades is they are far too credulous of the models they’re using. They have trouble recognizing that the models are failing, and they don’t know how to reconcile them with reality.
I think the root is the people using the models (sometimes a theoretical construct, sometimes a mathematical model) don’t understand the assumptions that went into them or the limits of validation. You’ll see this frequently in science and engineering: an inexperienced person uses a model to generate some result or design that looks persuasive but turns out to be sometimes disastrously incorrect. Why? The model didn’t have the right physics, or they were extrapolating beyond the valid limits. Still, it looks fancy, contains a lot of detail, therefore *seems* like it should be correct!
If progressives have been more susceptible to the allure of technocracy, it’s because they’re heirs to the old leftist obsession with central planning. Mitigating this problem requires more humility on the part of experts, and also genuine expertise about how things work as opposed to a knowledge of how somebody else has explained their workings.
This hits the nail on the head. It's not so much that people are adverse to Philosopher King like technocrats, it's that Canada's just aren't that good and their motives aren't to be trusted. They are venal, selfish and fear accountability, especially from Americans. Quebec society is foundationally based upon this fact and English Canada isn't far behind, even in Alberta.
Idk if there's any other candidate, but Carney will carry a singular baggage he has to carry: BoC. BoC Governor can claim that they're independent from politics.
However, when a former BoC Governor runs as politician, they will be fair game.
It's one thing to claim that in the comfort of BoC building or business conference, facing business journalists or bankers. Another thing to face an average Joe and Jane in the eyes during town hall and explain why it is good that their mortgage payment goes up 50%, their salary shouldn't go up, and even better if some of them lose their jobs.
Maybe this is just the perspective of someone who was the target of Bosnian ethnic cleansing, but there is a big difference between those who rape and pillage and those who are bombing them back so they don't do it again. Irrespective of property claims, everyone deserve the right to exist and the right to defend themselves. Palestinians do not have exclusives rights to former British controlled and Ottoman lands. There is little daylight between anti-Semitism and those who claim Jewish people don't have a right to land or defending themselves.
As for Trudeau resigning I can only say please stay on so we, the voting public, can fire your sorry butt in the next election.
At this juncture of a looming crisis within the Liberal Caucus and wider membership, Mr. Carney is a useful ally for those seeking a leadership change ASAP. Carney would be the atypical Liberal establishment candidate deluxe. (Including the bilingual option from the ROC, in keeping with some unwritten code of practice.)
As a casual observer to the broader mess, I have to wonder what would make the leadership of the Liberal Party attractive at this time? As The Line Editors have noted, the 2015 version of government is not fit for purpose today. What is needed is a reboot back to fiscal responsibility, “deliveroligy” that executes, wholesale cleansing of DEI in government operations and formulation of a military and foreign policy strategy that restores credibility with our allies.
Mr. Carney is a money man, accustomed to corporate environments and reaping the financial benefits of his expertise. Why he would leave those comforts to take on what could become a humiliating election defeat and rebuilding of the Liberal Party isn’t apparent. It certainly doesn’t seem to be a turnkey ascendancy to power to me.
Carney isn't stupid I don't think. Other than ego why would he want to be PM?
My guess he would be eviscerated at the polls like Ignatieff. PP would cut him to shreds in the cut and thrust of hardball politics.
i think Catherine Tait won the cage match......the two PC members who kept dog whistling the $ 1.4 billion comment were obviously aiming for the “gotcha” moment and you two have managed to help them along. it’s time that’s we stopped supporting these dramatic bar fights and start expecting our politicians to be reasonable adults . if the Conservative Party is actually believing the polls that suggest they will be the next governing body then they need to start acting like they know how to govern and stop trying to score points.
Ken, idealism in the political world is spelled realism. Idealism is a long term pursuit. Realism changes day to day. The CPC looks at the polls with glee but also with as much healthy skepticism as any other poll jaded Canadian. They aren’t elected yet, and part of a tried and true strategy to get elected is to keep scoring points by hammering your opponent’s faults when they are so kind as to offer many to choose from.
We all know that theatrics is a big part of the political game. We love to be nudged to wake up by a zinger every now and then while listening to the - boring to the unengaged - details in stupor. Act like the perfect boring mature adult too early and the electorate will get bored before the election. Best to save it for the real event, when the demands of the job will keep you perpetually jet lagged anyways.
Remember the Justin Trudeau MP Liberal versus Senator Patrick Brazeau Conservative boxing match in 2012? In your view did that cement that Justin was almost ready to govern or was it realism on the road to idealism?
Do you remember the Brian Mulroney "You had an option, sir." knockout blow in 1984?
That’s why Matt and Jen have to do entertainment on top of prim and proper journalism, and the parties have to do it before the election.
good points..I never could understand why no one stopped Trudeau from doing that boxing match. And I wonder when someone in the PC Party is going to pull the plug on the theatrics and start explaining to me why I should vote for them....what are they actually planning to do about Climate change for example other than chant ?
Unfortunately feelings trumps facts in politics. That's always been a truism.
As for the CBC, it's a dead man walking. The conservative base and the prairie heartland would do a Kenney to Pierre if he didn't execute on winding down the CBC immediately.
Each person's view of who won that cage match likely
depends on their political leanings. I think that the losers in that scrap are all of us Canadians.
As Jen and Matt point out, Tait wasn't wrong...but that might not matter. She seemed annoyed with Lantzman and the other woman because she knew that they were putting on a show in bad faith. They weren't looking for honest answers, they were looking for sound bites to feed to their faithful who don't understand why we actually need the CBC. It was started by Conservatives who understood why we needed it but these people are not the same kind of conservative. They're happy to tear things down in their quest for power. It's like the fading empire versus the barbarians at the gate.
Every country except, possibly, the US needs a public broadcaster. We need the CBC and we always will until the United States physically moves away from us. I agree that the CBC has a myriad of problems but it doesn't need destroying, it needs fixing! I'll vote for the person who promises to tear it back to the studs and build it back up properly.
Another thought provoking podcast. I would like to raise three points. With respect to the protests and their professionalism, I have lately been wondering why lawmakers have not addressed the targeting of Jewish places of worship, businesses, community organizations, schools and neighbourhoods. We have laws that establish safe zones outside of women’s reproductive health facilities, a good thing, why not have safe zones outside of identifiable ethnic or religious place of worship, etc.? On the CBC, the contempt Ms Tait showed for the committee was palpable. In terms of the CBC’s editorial choices, as far as I can tell (I listen to the morning CBC radio broadcast and look at the news app), the CBC has not been covering the ArriveCan and GC Strategy stories. The committee hearings have been riveting and this is an important story. Happy to be corrected, but between one thing and another they are certainly making themselves vulnerable to the charge that their coverage is overtly political.
Go Melissa Lantzman!!
Go for Taits’ jugular.
To stay with the 'C' words - Catherine Tait is playing checkers while the Conservatives are playing chess. I don't think the Conservatives are very good chess players, but sadly, they don't need to be good when others are playing a different game.
I think the 'Transatlantic Accent' is what Jen was reaching for. Very fitting for a caricature of this group of technocrats
I am so sorry that I signed up to listen to The Line.
What I am hearing sounds like evesdropping on a conversation on a party line ( ha ha what is that?).
How about sitting at a bar or a restaurant where it is impossible to ignore a conversation within ear shot.
I was hoping for a reasonably coherent and intellegent discussion about the state of affairs in our country but that's not here.
i completely agree...its like a frat party where everyone is trying to be more cool than the other guy......I like the dispatch and actually appreciate their points of view but the podcast is a really hard listen.
Ken has clearly never been to a frat party. This isn’t what they are like. Like AT ALL.
Actually, I lived in a frat house and it is exactly
What they were like
I have doubts.
I appreciate much of what you two do and I thank you for bringing your points of view to the table..... many of which I repeat throughout the next week ..but I much rather read you than listen to you .... and that is what keeps me being a paid subscriber
Works for us!
Fortunately, our podcasts are not mandatory!
We originally started the podcast as a way of making use of our pre-Dispatch editorial meetings. Using all parts of the content cow, so to speak. Some people prefer audio, some visual, and some written. So we provide an option to suit all tastes. If you prefer the (more polished) written dispatches to the podcasts, that is no skin off our nose. Just glad to have you here. JG
You beat me to it! I came to the comments specifically to ask if the transcript was available.
"shat the bed" - succinct and correct.
Thank you for this.
Like you, I thought the op-ed calling for the Liberals to return to fiscal conservatism was interesting. I'm not sure, though, whether the denizen's of this generation of the Liberal Party of Canada are the sort who would favour--or even understand the need for--fiscal conservatism.
WRT Mark Carney, yes, I would support such a candidacy, but would Canadians vote for Mark Carney over Pierre Poilievre? The man is nearly 20 years older (and I hardly think that younger Canadians are immune to the "Boomer Hate" that has swept through the United States).
On the carbon tax, I'm very disappointed that the one thing that Trudeau's government got right on the fiscal side (not to mention the environmental side) has now been turned into political fodder. We need to get our country on track to lower GHG emissions. Abolishing the tax will put us on the wrong track.
And yet you keep asking for feedback