Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like but I doubt that ordering the media out and leaving the PA on was an accident. Trump is his wedge to win the next election for the liberals.
Sadly, it appears to be working. Hopefully we will wake up before it’s too late this time.
I think it probably *was* an accident. However, I think ordering the media out was largely schtick intended to flatter the business audience to feel like they're privy to confidential, private thoughts from Trudeau. "Look, these are special, sensitive things I can share with YOU but not the great unwashed masses!" is totally on brand for the Liberals. The fact that it's all anodyne, relatively banal stuff that Trudeau mistakes for profound insight is totally on brand for Trudeau.
I don't understand how you could think it's working. They are still way, way down in the polls. Even if support has ticked up a bit since Trudeau resigned, their best bet is to hold the Conservatives to a minority and that doesn't seem likely IMO.
It stopped the bleeding, give them hope. Trends matter. I remember pre VP debates Trump and Harris where almost neck and neck. Post VP debates it was clear the trump team had hits its stride. And even polls were neck and neck, Trump's team was clearly hitting the mark even after the Puerto-Rico gate comment.
I've seen too many liberal / GTA friends clap about Trudeau's speech (Hello its just words I still can't get beer between provinces let alone a pipeline), PP not finding his groove / break through the MSM (I think it will come back), and Carney MSM all-in, as enough of hope for the Liberals.
The betting markets still have PP winning BUT this is my point whenever people are like "Why don't the CPC have policy?" Its because of this. They aren't the government, and it DOESN'T matter. The O'Toole campaign taught them (rightly so) govern after you win because if you don't win, you don't get to govern.
One big topic you could do interviews about is the state of childhood math education in Canada and how it differs from the research on what works. Canada has two fantastic experts on this topic: Anna Stokke and John Mighton. My view is you interview both of them on separate episodes.
Canada getting not being able to teach math as well as it could has massive implications to our economy and our future.
Yes!! And also Literacy - we're currently using the "whole language method" rather than phonics. The Ontario Human Rights Council released a scathing report detailing how we are failing students at a scale that amounts to a human rights violation
People in fact can emotionally and psychologically hear it. Many of us out here in listener-land also feel we are screaming into the sun. Please give us more credit. Why do you think we are here?
Maybe someone close to Trudeau (if there is any such person) should warn him that Canadians as a rule don’t wait for his official ‘reality’ certification before deciding what’s real and what isn’t. In my own case, I was making up my mind about that for myself long before he was born.
Your final four words in the podcast were the most accurate and predictive in your whole - entertaining and highly accurate - podcast. You ended with "God help us all."
Just before that benediction you noted that you had no idea of what more you (as a self-appointed representative of all Canadians) could do given that you had been cajoling, calling for action, yada, yada, yada (yet another Americanism that has crept into our speech) our (non) leaders to lead, to demonstrate resolve, to put aside differences, to make compromises appropriate to the times, to do SOMETHING constructive in the situation. And no response from any such political (non) leader. Crickets.
The answer seems to me self evident. First, these (non) leaders have absolutely proven themselves unable to lead [hence the term (non) leaders]; they have proven themselves to have no imagination; they have amply demonstrated no vision to actually find common ground to lead - that concept again! - Canada our of this morass. That leads to the second point: we are totally at the mercy of the US and it's (non) merciful leader.
Now, in the case of Jen and in my own case, that is not entirely awful as we both live in Alberta and it seems to me that DJT will covet us and (particularly) our resources. Of course, given his history, it is not necessarily a positive thing for anyone to be coveted by DJT! Nevertheless, the real lesson to be drawn will be that DJT will head for the "consummation" of an "arrangement" with Alberta but the rest of Canada? You're all fucked!
Similar to what I am thinking. Canada now is a weak country, staggering along barely conscious to what is happening to it and around it. If the Trump bunch delivers several well aimed ruthless punches and kicks to Canadian economy and body politics, Canada might be over by the end of this Trump term. Alberta within the US boundary, the other pieces to be picked up later at much lower cost and on different terms. ..... and, take your Laurentian phoney patriotism and shove it.
Well, that sounds like a grand idea - tax free, I mean. The problem is that free is damned expensive (in anything, but very much in taxes also). If we were to do that and to not pay taxes that would mean that we would be reaping a wonderful benefit and then our grandchildren's grandchildren would have to pay big time. Much better to pay reasonable (by whatever definition) taxes now, build up the Heritage Fund and be able to deal with the future that way.
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not levy state income taxes, while New Hampshire doesn't tax earned wages.
I have no idea how they manage that, but I want in.
The way that they manage is that they have noticeable state sales taxes. Given that Albertans are so (foolishly in my mind) against a provincial sales tax that method is unlikely to be available.
What would be available is to use all royalty income instead of provincial income taxes (at least in part) but that would harm the savings.
Therefore, it seems to me that paying a reasonable rate of income tax is the most reasonable way forward.
I am going to send my premier a letter suggesting he be the first one to do the ice bucket challenge. I will credit The Line. The letter may or may not be read but I will send it anyway.
Hard to believe that after 10 years of misguided, destructive and divisive government anyone could possibly contemplate returning this pack of ideologues to government but then for some bizarre reason they have managed to cling to power for all that time. Now they’re all busy recanting the very ideas and actions they hung their tight fitting hats on in a desperate attempt to stay in power. The Liberal / NDP coalition pose a far greater threat to Canada than Trump.
I'm reminded a bit of the end of the Mulroney PC government in 1993. It was the same exhausted, scandal-ridden, ineffectual mess, complete with a desperately unpopular leader who resisted leaving for far too long. For months, it had seemed a foregone conclusion that the Liberals were going to sweep the next election, especially with a new face in the form of leader Jean Chretien. Then Mulroney left, Kim Campbell won the leadership and became Canada's first female prime minister, and it seemed like there was a fresh breeze in the sails of the PCs and Chretien was looking like yesterday's man. As we know, the PCs ended up reduced to 2 seats and lost official party status.
Mark Carney feels a bit like the Kim Campbell of 2025. A new face with a bit of a celebrity profile, but lacking the political chops of the departed leader. Also, irrespective of what abilities they bring to the job, they're still being handed a flaming bag of dog crap going into the next election.
No, we do NOT have that choice. For a few minutes, think like a realistic, hard-nosed, experienced US security professional who is excellent at geography.
I'm sticking with "the knock-off effects of Trump could be the best thing to ever happen to this country". And I'm adding, "taking what Trump says at face value and trying to appease him in that regard" will in certain circumstances actually be very good for us. This is true despite the fact that, yes, you can't ever take ANYTHING he says at face value.
Now as ever, the number one rule with Trump is to ignore what he says and pay attention to what he does. But if he starts warbling (as he did this week) about how unfair the dairy cartel is and we react by dismantling the dairy cartel, how is this anything but great for the country? Regardless of why we did it? Now, a betting person still has to bet against this happening anytime soon. FFS just this week Joly was BOASTING about the Liberal Party's commitment to maintaining it. This ought to be immediately disqualifying for any party in this coming election - the problem of course being that one would expect the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc to all concur in that wretched opinion. Again, dismantling the cartels is nothing more than table stakes at this point. I'm sorry, if we can't even do that then we absolutely deserve whatever we get (Mencken cite, again).
Similarly, if Trump starts criticizing our embarrassing financial contribution to NATO, or our refusal to allow competition in the airline and telecom markets and we respond by addressing the issue then this is also good for us. And yeah, he is going to forever move the goal posts but when he moves the goal posts right off the field we just ignore him - call his bluff or live with whatever stupid tariffs he imposes. In the meantime we keep taking the steps to become a serious country. Matt's ice bucket challenge is an awesome idea - step up Premiers. And yes, pipelines everywhere. It is very possible that it is now or never for Canada - time to stop being smug and grow the fuck up. There's a slogan for PP. I'd buy the t-shirt.
I know I'm putting myself at risk here after listening to this viewpoint get relentlessly mocked. But I don't understand the supposed sequence of events on annexation. It always sounds like:
1. U.S. inflicts economic and other pain on Canada.
2. ???
3. Canada annexed by U.S.
What is #2? Canadian politics suddenly reverses and voters start wanting to join the U.S. to alleviate the economic pain instead of the opposite? The U.S. physically invades with troops? Neither seems very plausible to me.
I'm quite worried about #1 both because Trump and some of his people believe it leads to #3, and because they like protectionism for its own sake anyway (even Dems do to a degree nowadays). Plus Canada wasn't in great economic shape even on the assumption of reliable free trade. The economic situation can get very nasty very quickly, and our inevitable reaction (that we just need to Liberal even harder) won't help.
Nevertheless, my defective imagination can't conjure up a plausible path to either voluntary or involuntary annexation. Yes, I know Trump would like that outcome. I know he says it again and again. He said again and again that he'd repeal Obamacare and replace it with the greatest health plan ever. Didn't make it happen.
Canada responds with matching tariffs and the USA escalates. Canada chooses a further path of escalatory response and limits energy and critical mineral exports - effectively destroying Western Canada’s economy, all capital investment, and jeopardizing the entirety of Alberta’s future ability to export to the Southern USA refining complex it relies upon. Covid like financial supports are announced, but the weakness of the dollar (now at $0.55 USD), and our current federal financial position causes a further inflationary spiral and dramatically increasing interest rates. Then, the US makes a deadlined offer… any provincial jurisdiction which elects to separate from Canada will be automatically offered American statehood, and a 1v1 dollar conversion. It’s a one time offer, and whoever leaves gets to join the US as the 51st state, but whoever elects to stay- well the deal is off the table and will not be re-offered.
My view is that if Trump tried more carrot and less stick and instead wined and dined us about how great it would be to be part of US he might get some folks warmed up to the idea. But guess he thought that would take too long.
What kind of threat, and how likely is it? Something like a Russian invasion, which the U.S. tolerates to put pressure on Canada, despite it creating an incursion onto the continent and utterly dismantling NATO? Or maybe a completely catastrophic debt crisis? Anything I can think of that's severe enough that people would willingly abolish the country to address it seems farfetched.
I don't have an answer. Economic insecurity may be persuasive enough for a common currency, this argument has worked for the creation of the Schengen zone, so it has modern president.
The world will be different 25, 50, 75 years from now - there could be threats from this rapidity of charge that are not a concern now. Its all a guess.
Honestly, not an unreasonable line of questioning; I don't want to rule out too many possibilities (because who the hell actually knows what's going to happen?) but one thing I note that's really interesting is that the political backlash on the MAGAts actually works to curb the likelihood of tariffs. Couple that with the second effect of boosting Canadian nationalism (which leads to marginal but tangible demand reduction on USA products) and you have an interesting combo of economic-political feedback loops.
Stephen, as I understand it Ford is kinda, possibly, maybe threatening to cancel the Ontario government's Starlink contract. Further, again as I understand it, if an individual has their own Starlink contract, whether in Ontario or elsewhere, what Ford does or does not do would not affect their connectibility.
The Starlink contract made no sense to me. The price tag was enormous but since Ontario was essentially bringing Starlink a huge bulk internet deal, it should have been Starlink offering Ontario a great price on its service subject perhaps to a guaranteed minimum number of subscribers.
If you look at the prices paid by non-consumers for Starlink, they're sharply higher than what the company will charge consumers directly for terminals and service. This suggests that the price consumers pay directly is actually a subsidized by the *company* to attract subscribers and grow the business.
Never a more precise end to yet another frustrating and accurate podcast. I said after last week’s podcast that I had hope. I’m not sure I do anymore. The only hope I have now is that I’m proven wrong lol. Great podcast guys. Looking forward to Tuesday.
Sad to say but you two are correct on so many points - not that it is sad that you are correct but, rather, that we are as Canadians blindly wnadering down the path of being oblivious to the crisis in front of us.
JT didn't 'accidently' leave the mike open - he wanted that reported verbatim to use the Liberal "let's scare Canadians and we'll win" tactic. Problem is that they have tried to scare us too many times and the little boy who cried wolf is going to be eaten by the electorate. Carney may get a bump but he is not able to communicate in anymeaningful way in front of a microphone - hence we don't hear him out in the wilderness. His claim of being the saviour of Canada and the UK is open to debate especially in the UK where they are actually warning Canada not to elect him as leader let alone PM. What I find amazing is that people are prepared, if the polls are to be believed, that Carney or any Liberal leadership candidate is going to repudiate the policies they have stood for for ten years!!!! I hope we are not THAT stupid but beginig to wonder.
I could go on but what is the point. I will sum up with the old saying that tough times breed tough leaders which leads to good times and weak leaders which leads to bad times ... and the cycle continues. Seems to me we are in tough times right now - the cookie jar is mt and the next government will be looking under the cushions for change to pay for anything just when we need a pile of ready cash to actually do shit in this country!
ohh the number one rule to remember is people are stupid, period. They will vote the new incarnate of liberal pm into office "cause he is the only one that can save us - the other guy is "scary" They don't know why he is "scary" but he is.
What I see as the real problem is the citizens of this fair rock do not have the will, ability to give up or curtail all those entitlements in order to pay for what needs to be done. You know birth control and insulin for a small group is more important than defending our country or building a pipeline that would pay for all those drugs.
I hear you Dawn and you may be right as in "you'll never go broke underestimating the stupidity of people" but I have to hold out some HOPE that people will take a look at the sudden reversal on 10 years of policy and actually buy that Carney will somehow make it all better. The best indicator of future action is past action. If we give up hope then we are doomed.
I want hope so bad but looking a comments sections and polling data kind of drive it away. I seem to have more in common with our immediate neighbor to the south than the urban eastern folks that rule this country and that is scary. Its a bit hard to see why my father and grad parents choose here but the outlook was different in 1958 than now I guess.
Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like but I doubt that ordering the media out and leaving the PA on was an accident. Trump is his wedge to win the next election for the liberals.
Sadly, it appears to be working. Hopefully we will wake up before it’s too late this time.
Good call Marcie. The libs will do anything to stay in power and their favourite tactic is scaring Canadians.
I agree with your theory. Trudeau’s behaviour history would support it as well. Mr. ‘mic’romanager did that on purpose.
I had the same thought...not necessarily a conspiracy theory, as so-called 'leaks' are pretty commonly planned and organized these days.
It could also just be incompetence.
A leak is just a way to distribute something so it can't be critiqued.
Of course. It’s the only chance they have and people are falling for it.
I think it probably *was* an accident. However, I think ordering the media out was largely schtick intended to flatter the business audience to feel like they're privy to confidential, private thoughts from Trudeau. "Look, these are special, sensitive things I can share with YOU but not the great unwashed masses!" is totally on brand for the Liberals. The fact that it's all anodyne, relatively banal stuff that Trudeau mistakes for profound insight is totally on brand for Trudeau.
I was coming on here to say the same thing!
I don't understand how you could think it's working. They are still way, way down in the polls. Even if support has ticked up a bit since Trudeau resigned, their best bet is to hold the Conservatives to a minority and that doesn't seem likely IMO.
It’s an emotional response, much like Jen’s banging the desk, not rational. I am much encouraged after listening to the whole thing.
It stopped the bleeding, give them hope. Trends matter. I remember pre VP debates Trump and Harris where almost neck and neck. Post VP debates it was clear the trump team had hits its stride. And even polls were neck and neck, Trump's team was clearly hitting the mark even after the Puerto-Rico gate comment.
I've seen too many liberal / GTA friends clap about Trudeau's speech (Hello its just words I still can't get beer between provinces let alone a pipeline), PP not finding his groove / break through the MSM (I think it will come back), and Carney MSM all-in, as enough of hope for the Liberals.
The betting markets still have PP winning BUT this is my point whenever people are like "Why don't the CPC have policy?" Its because of this. They aren't the government, and it DOESN'T matter. The O'Toole campaign taught them (rightly so) govern after you win because if you don't win, you don't get to govern.
Mission accomplished, though. Rachel Gilmore ran with it.
One big topic you could do interviews about is the state of childhood math education in Canada and how it differs from the research on what works. Canada has two fantastic experts on this topic: Anna Stokke and John Mighton. My view is you interview both of them on separate episodes.
Canada getting not being able to teach math as well as it could has massive implications to our economy and our future.
Bigtime. Also is my main beef with Canada's education system for a long time now; my pity to the many decent teachers trapped in this system.
Great idea. Thanks! JG
Yes!! And also Literacy - we're currently using the "whole language method" rather than phonics. The Ontario Human Rights Council released a scathing report detailing how we are failing students at a scale that amounts to a human rights violation
Sam Cooper.
https://open.substack.com/pub/thebureau/p/exclusive-how-the-rcmp-cbsa-and-trudeau?r=9e6zd&utm_medium=ios
People in fact can emotionally and psychologically hear it. Many of us out here in listener-land also feel we are screaming into the sun. Please give us more credit. Why do you think we are here?
People like us are a minority by the looks of things.
Maybe someone close to Trudeau (if there is any such person) should warn him that Canadians as a rule don’t wait for his official ‘reality’ certification before deciding what’s real and what isn’t. In my own case, I was making up my mind about that for myself long before he was born.
Well ..........
Your final four words in the podcast were the most accurate and predictive in your whole - entertaining and highly accurate - podcast. You ended with "God help us all."
Just before that benediction you noted that you had no idea of what more you (as a self-appointed representative of all Canadians) could do given that you had been cajoling, calling for action, yada, yada, yada (yet another Americanism that has crept into our speech) our (non) leaders to lead, to demonstrate resolve, to put aside differences, to make compromises appropriate to the times, to do SOMETHING constructive in the situation. And no response from any such political (non) leader. Crickets.
The answer seems to me self evident. First, these (non) leaders have absolutely proven themselves unable to lead [hence the term (non) leaders]; they have proven themselves to have no imagination; they have amply demonstrated no vision to actually find common ground to lead - that concept again! - Canada our of this morass. That leads to the second point: we are totally at the mercy of the US and it's (non) merciful leader.
Now, in the case of Jen and in my own case, that is not entirely awful as we both live in Alberta and it seems to me that DJT will covet us and (particularly) our resources. Of course, given his history, it is not necessarily a positive thing for anyone to be coveted by DJT! Nevertheless, the real lesson to be drawn will be that DJT will head for the "consummation" of an "arrangement" with Alberta but the rest of Canada? You're all fucked!
Similar to what I am thinking. Canada now is a weak country, staggering along barely conscious to what is happening to it and around it. If the Trump bunch delivers several well aimed ruthless punches and kicks to Canadian economy and body politics, Canada might be over by the end of this Trump term. Alberta within the US boundary, the other pieces to be picked up later at much lower cost and on different terms. ..... and, take your Laurentian phoney patriotism and shove it.
Works for me, Sir.
Ezra Levant suggested that Alberta should offer Trump a 50 year oil and gas deal so that the US has energy security.
That would give Alberta a lot of security and more money for our politicians to waste. I wonder if we could become a tax free province.
Hmmmm ......
Well, that sounds like a grand idea - tax free, I mean. The problem is that free is damned expensive (in anything, but very much in taxes also). If we were to do that and to not pay taxes that would mean that we would be reaping a wonderful benefit and then our grandchildren's grandchildren would have to pay big time. Much better to pay reasonable (by whatever definition) taxes now, build up the Heritage Fund and be able to deal with the future that way.
Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not levy state income taxes, while New Hampshire doesn't tax earned wages.
I have no idea how they manage that, but I want in.
The way that they manage is that they have noticeable state sales taxes. Given that Albertans are so (foolishly in my mind) against a provincial sales tax that method is unlikely to be available.
What would be available is to use all royalty income instead of provincial income taxes (at least in part) but that would harm the savings.
Therefore, it seems to me that paying a reasonable rate of income tax is the most reasonable way forward.
I am going to send my premier a letter suggesting he be the first one to do the ice bucket challenge. I will credit The Line. The letter may or may not be read but I will send it anyway.
You need to make your Premier Challenge a short so we can share over and over..! Best idea I've heard yet!
Hard to believe that after 10 years of misguided, destructive and divisive government anyone could possibly contemplate returning this pack of ideologues to government but then for some bizarre reason they have managed to cling to power for all that time. Now they’re all busy recanting the very ideas and actions they hung their tight fitting hats on in a desperate attempt to stay in power. The Liberal / NDP coalition pose a far greater threat to Canada than Trump.
I'm reminded a bit of the end of the Mulroney PC government in 1993. It was the same exhausted, scandal-ridden, ineffectual mess, complete with a desperately unpopular leader who resisted leaving for far too long. For months, it had seemed a foregone conclusion that the Liberals were going to sweep the next election, especially with a new face in the form of leader Jean Chretien. Then Mulroney left, Kim Campbell won the leadership and became Canada's first female prime minister, and it seemed like there was a fresh breeze in the sails of the PCs and Chretien was looking like yesterday's man. As we know, the PCs ended up reduced to 2 seats and lost official party status.
Mark Carney feels a bit like the Kim Campbell of 2025. A new face with a bit of a celebrity profile, but lacking the political chops of the departed leader. Also, irrespective of what abilities they bring to the job, they're still being handed a flaming bag of dog crap going into the next election.
Further, I completely agree with your analysis but we have a choice as I see it, the US or China. I think the US is a much better outcome.
No, we do NOT have that choice. For a few minutes, think like a realistic, hard-nosed, experienced US security professional who is excellent at geography.
I'm sticking with "the knock-off effects of Trump could be the best thing to ever happen to this country". And I'm adding, "taking what Trump says at face value and trying to appease him in that regard" will in certain circumstances actually be very good for us. This is true despite the fact that, yes, you can't ever take ANYTHING he says at face value.
Now as ever, the number one rule with Trump is to ignore what he says and pay attention to what he does. But if he starts warbling (as he did this week) about how unfair the dairy cartel is and we react by dismantling the dairy cartel, how is this anything but great for the country? Regardless of why we did it? Now, a betting person still has to bet against this happening anytime soon. FFS just this week Joly was BOASTING about the Liberal Party's commitment to maintaining it. This ought to be immediately disqualifying for any party in this coming election - the problem of course being that one would expect the Conservatives, NDP and Bloc to all concur in that wretched opinion. Again, dismantling the cartels is nothing more than table stakes at this point. I'm sorry, if we can't even do that then we absolutely deserve whatever we get (Mencken cite, again).
Similarly, if Trump starts criticizing our embarrassing financial contribution to NATO, or our refusal to allow competition in the airline and telecom markets and we respond by addressing the issue then this is also good for us. And yeah, he is going to forever move the goal posts but when he moves the goal posts right off the field we just ignore him - call his bluff or live with whatever stupid tariffs he imposes. In the meantime we keep taking the steps to become a serious country. Matt's ice bucket challenge is an awesome idea - step up Premiers. And yes, pipelines everywhere. It is very possible that it is now or never for Canada - time to stop being smug and grow the fuck up. There's a slogan for PP. I'd buy the t-shirt.
I know I'm putting myself at risk here after listening to this viewpoint get relentlessly mocked. But I don't understand the supposed sequence of events on annexation. It always sounds like:
1. U.S. inflicts economic and other pain on Canada.
2. ???
3. Canada annexed by U.S.
What is #2? Canadian politics suddenly reverses and voters start wanting to join the U.S. to alleviate the economic pain instead of the opposite? The U.S. physically invades with troops? Neither seems very plausible to me.
I'm quite worried about #1 both because Trump and some of his people believe it leads to #3, and because they like protectionism for its own sake anyway (even Dems do to a degree nowadays). Plus Canada wasn't in great economic shape even on the assumption of reliable free trade. The economic situation can get very nasty very quickly, and our inevitable reaction (that we just need to Liberal even harder) won't help.
Nevertheless, my defective imagination can't conjure up a plausible path to either voluntary or involuntary annexation. Yes, I know Trump would like that outcome. I know he says it again and again. He said again and again that he'd repeal Obamacare and replace it with the greatest health plan ever. Didn't make it happen.
I’ll take a stab at #2.
Canada responds with matching tariffs and the USA escalates. Canada chooses a further path of escalatory response and limits energy and critical mineral exports - effectively destroying Western Canada’s economy, all capital investment, and jeopardizing the entirety of Alberta’s future ability to export to the Southern USA refining complex it relies upon. Covid like financial supports are announced, but the weakness of the dollar (now at $0.55 USD), and our current federal financial position causes a further inflationary spiral and dramatically increasing interest rates. Then, the US makes a deadlined offer… any provincial jurisdiction which elects to separate from Canada will be automatically offered American statehood, and a 1v1 dollar conversion. It’s a one time offer, and whoever leaves gets to join the US as the 51st state, but whoever elects to stay- well the deal is off the table and will not be re-offered.
I can see a scenario where thy inflict so much economic pain that we go to them hat in hand.
My view is that if Trump tried more carrot and less stick and instead wined and dined us about how great it would be to be part of US he might get some folks warmed up to the idea. But guess he thought that would take too long.
Number 2 is if there is a greater threat and the US persuades Canada its the only path to mutual survival.
What kind of threat, and how likely is it? Something like a Russian invasion, which the U.S. tolerates to put pressure on Canada, despite it creating an incursion onto the continent and utterly dismantling NATO? Or maybe a completely catastrophic debt crisis? Anything I can think of that's severe enough that people would willingly abolish the country to address it seems farfetched.
We aren’t getting invaded by Russia. They have more land and resources than they can develop. Nothing in it for them.
I don't have an answer. Economic insecurity may be persuasive enough for a common currency, this argument has worked for the creation of the Schengen zone, so it has modern president.
The world will be different 25, 50, 75 years from now - there could be threats from this rapidity of charge that are not a concern now. Its all a guess.
Honestly, not an unreasonable line of questioning; I don't want to rule out too many possibilities (because who the hell actually knows what's going to happen?) but one thing I note that's really interesting is that the political backlash on the MAGAts actually works to curb the likelihood of tariffs. Couple that with the second effect of boosting Canadian nationalism (which leads to marginal but tangible demand reduction on USA products) and you have an interesting combo of economic-political feedback loops.
Cancelling Starlink would be cutting off my phone . I live 30 min from cell service and internet service . I hope B.C. doesn’t do that
Stephen, as I understand it Ford is kinda, possibly, maybe threatening to cancel the Ontario government's Starlink contract. Further, again as I understand it, if an individual has their own Starlink contract, whether in Ontario or elsewhere, what Ford does or does not do would not affect their connectibility.
The Starlink contract made no sense to me. The price tag was enormous but since Ontario was essentially bringing Starlink a huge bulk internet deal, it should have been Starlink offering Ontario a great price on its service subject perhaps to a guaranteed minimum number of subscribers.
If you look at the prices paid by non-consumers for Starlink, they're sharply higher than what the company will charge consumers directly for terminals and service. This suggests that the price consumers pay directly is actually a subsidized by the *company* to attract subscribers and grow the business.
I hope that is also true . I haven’t heard of B.C. was following Ford or not but I guess we will have to wait and see what happens .
God help us all.
Never a more precise end to yet another frustrating and accurate podcast. I said after last week’s podcast that I had hope. I’m not sure I do anymore. The only hope I have now is that I’m proven wrong lol. Great podcast guys. Looking forward to Tuesday.
Doug Ford is both the luckiest & the dumbest politician of the last 50 odd years (ie, my adult life).
My thought is that Doug Ford is good in a crisis, but when he doesn’t have that to focus him he makes terrible decisions.
No, Doug is useless at all times. He can talk a lot, but there's nothing behind it.
Sad to say but you two are correct on so many points - not that it is sad that you are correct but, rather, that we are as Canadians blindly wnadering down the path of being oblivious to the crisis in front of us.
JT didn't 'accidently' leave the mike open - he wanted that reported verbatim to use the Liberal "let's scare Canadians and we'll win" tactic. Problem is that they have tried to scare us too many times and the little boy who cried wolf is going to be eaten by the electorate. Carney may get a bump but he is not able to communicate in anymeaningful way in front of a microphone - hence we don't hear him out in the wilderness. His claim of being the saviour of Canada and the UK is open to debate especially in the UK where they are actually warning Canada not to elect him as leader let alone PM. What I find amazing is that people are prepared, if the polls are to be believed, that Carney or any Liberal leadership candidate is going to repudiate the policies they have stood for for ten years!!!! I hope we are not THAT stupid but beginig to wonder.
I could go on but what is the point. I will sum up with the old saying that tough times breed tough leaders which leads to good times and weak leaders which leads to bad times ... and the cycle continues. Seems to me we are in tough times right now - the cookie jar is mt and the next government will be looking under the cushions for change to pay for anything just when we need a pile of ready cash to actually do shit in this country!
ohh the number one rule to remember is people are stupid, period. They will vote the new incarnate of liberal pm into office "cause he is the only one that can save us - the other guy is "scary" They don't know why he is "scary" but he is.
What I see as the real problem is the citizens of this fair rock do not have the will, ability to give up or curtail all those entitlements in order to pay for what needs to be done. You know birth control and insulin for a small group is more important than defending our country or building a pipeline that would pay for all those drugs.
I hear you Dawn and you may be right as in "you'll never go broke underestimating the stupidity of people" but I have to hold out some HOPE that people will take a look at the sudden reversal on 10 years of policy and actually buy that Carney will somehow make it all better. The best indicator of future action is past action. If we give up hope then we are doomed.
I want hope so bad but looking a comments sections and polling data kind of drive it away. I seem to have more in common with our immediate neighbor to the south than the urban eastern folks that rule this country and that is scary. Its a bit hard to see why my father and grad parents choose here but the outlook was different in 1958 than now I guess.
The only thing I’ve heard from Carney is that the carbon tax has the wrong ‘vibe’ and so he’ll rename it and we’ll keep on paying it.