Canadian Money Forum banner
41 - 60 of 89 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,992 Posts
The main difference with Canada is that Trudeau is a lightweight by any measure. And his partner, the NDP loves spending other people's money more than him.
Yes, he's a lightweight, but that doesn't mean he isn't problematic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,293 Posts
Yes, he's a lightweight, but that doesn't mean he isn't problematic.
I was reflecting on the US being proud of their checks and balances in the four branches of government. Canada makes no pretence of being democratic aside from an election every four years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
Trudeaus power grab attempt(s) weren't as far reaching and were much more limited.


Honestly I think he's simply getting bored, and will likely move on anyway.
Total control over government spending and government income? What's left?
You can literally do absolutely everything with that.

I simply have zero-tolerance for authoritarianism. I understand others might have different opinions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,784 Posts
If the goal is a functional government, then Canada has the best democratic system.

Trudeau is the leader of the Liberal government elected by the people. They have the mandate from the people to make all the decisions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
541 Posts
hfp75
Trump taught us all that the checks and balances are largely an illusion, Being able to ignore demands for his personal finances, taking steps to make his family richer, making the AG his personal pawn, loading the Supreme Court and many more...

We have not seen the end of it!
Dont think illusion, it all worked. Messy but very functional. Reality is that courts don't rewrite laws, at times they are forced to interpret and define terms.

As for the Supreme Court, the Democrats would have done the exact same thing if they held the Senate. Often people will reference the death of Scalia and portray Obama as a Saint saying he left that seat for the Republicans (Trump). Not the case, Obama would have never succeeded, the Democrats did not have a majority in the Senate (which you need). If they did, Gorsuch would NOT be there. Obama did the right thing by not winding up the American Political animal by trying. He knew it would not be successful, and the only outcome would be ignorant Democrats that don't understand, getting all wound up.

Its hard to see and accept failure. Obama was a bigger man (just leaving the seat empty) vs Trump... as trump incited a mob in DC... poor taste, poor looser...

I'd love to play Monopoly with Trump one afternoon and win....

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
541 Posts
Here is more a philosophical point....

Who here likes to lose? Probably no one.....

Dont you think that the political parties like to capitalize on that ? Is that why we are passionate about political things that sometimes really have no impact on us ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,784 Posts
When the PMO announces that Trudeau will make a public announcement, all the media attend.

When Andrew Scheer announced he would be holding a press conference........1 reporter showed up.

The worst day in government is better than the best day in opposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fstamand and hfp75

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
If the goal is a functional government, then Canada has the best democratic system.

Trudeau is the leader of the Liberal government elected by the people. They have the mandate from the people to make all the decisions.
Both US and Canada had enough functional organizations to stop authoritarian attempts from Trudeau and Trump.
Good on institutions of both countries.

Since you went through education system here I do have to clarify though: there are more than two countries in the world. It doesn't end on US and Canada. There are multiple countries with much superior democracies, in which wannabe tyrants like Trudeau or Trump wouldn't be allowed to even try and introduce authoritarianism.
Look at Switzerland, France for example
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,784 Posts
The problem with the Swiss model is self evident in their inability to address major issues, such as a myriad of environmental concerns.

A decentralized government creates a NIMBY quagmire, where nothing is accomplished on national issues.

Canada ranks among the top countries politically, without all the inherent problems of de-centralized government.

Think about how difficult it is to build a pipeline today across a few Provincial boundaries, and extrapolate that over dozens of local authorities.

Canada's land mass is too large and the population too spread apart for a fully de-centralized government approach.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
What in the world are you talking about? Switzerland is much purer democracy. The referendum day is brilliant. It forces majority of issues to be addressed through direct democracy.
If something isn't dealt with, it is precisely because majority of citizens didn't want it to be dealt with! That's the entire idea of democracy.

You are simply a huge fan of tyranny, aren't you? That's why you idolize the corrupt wannabe tyrant we currently have in office? Stalin, Hitler, Mao - they were all very effective and had ability to address all major issues they wanted to without having to worry about getting support of majority of population - you have some sick ideas of democracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,784 Posts
De-centralized governments prioritize local issues, which works in a tiny country like Switzerland.

But such a political system would never work in a country as large and diverse as Canada.

Switzerland fits into Southwestern Ontario.

Switzerland is approximately 41,277 sq km, while Canada is approximately 9,984,670 sq km, making Canada 24,089% larger than Switzerland. Meanwhile, the population of Switzerland is ~8.4 million people (29.3 million more people live in Canada.

Zoom out and see how insignificant that is in land mass.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,992 Posts
If the goal is a functional government, then Canada has the best democratic system.

Trudeau is the leader of the Liberal government elected by the people. They have the mandate from the people to make all the decisions.
They literally don't.

The people elected a Liberal minority, which means that the people "want" another party to agree with what the Liberals propose. They very clearly said "we don't want you to have unchecked power".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,992 Posts
De-centralized governments prioritize local issues, which works in a tiny country like Switzerland.

But such a political system would never work in a country as large and diverse as Canada.
Actually that's WHY we need decentralized government.
Most issues we face are local issues and they vary widely by region.

It makes no sense for some far away bureaucrat to make decisions on the day to day lives of the people.

This is why we actually contracted our government to give most of the power to the provinces, and only limited powers to the federal government.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,784 Posts
Our government is fine as it is. I predict some big things coming soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hfp75

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,992 Posts
Our government is fine as it is. I predict some big things coming soon.
That's what I'm afraid of.

They're already trying to kill the economy, stoke racism, and restrict speech.
I'm not sure how many more bad things we can expect?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,717 Posts
Discussion Starter · #56 ·
Introduced legislation that he can unilaterally, without input or vote from parliament, make any decisions that have to do with revenue or spending of the government (so pretty much any decision) until end of 2022.
That is very definition of authoritarianism
This has absolutely nothing to do with seizing power in an illegal or corrupt election process. The legislation of the government was also within the bounds of existing rules; it's allowed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,717 Posts
Discussion Starter · #57 ·
I think people are failing to appreciate the threat to the US posed by Trump and the Republicans.

There is an ongoing process to install Trump loyalists throughout the government system (in states for now) and the Republicans have also now proven that they are committed to overthrowing a legitimate election.

This isn't going away. In the next US elections, there is a very good chance that the Republicans will try to illegally seize power and take over the USA. The Republicans are becoming an insurgency movement.

There's a good chance Trump will end up as dictator of the USA. Nothing like this has ever been seen in modern times.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,281 Posts
This has absolutely nothing to do with seizing power in an illegal or corrupt election process. The legislation of the government was also within the bounds of existing rules; it's allowed.
Yes. The enabling act of 1933 was also legal. Doesn't mean it was good. We don't need anymore tyrants, whether they introduced authoritarianism legally like in 1933 and Trudeau tried in 2020 or illegally through a coup or what Trump tried in 2021.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
The Republicans probably won't have to do anything illegal to seize power, they'll get voted in. Never underestimate the ____ of the American voting public.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,992 Posts
I think people are failing to appreciate the threat to the US posed by Trump and the Republicans.

There is an ongoing process to install Trump loyalists throughout the government system (in states for now) and the Republicans have also now proven that they are committed to overthrowing a legitimate election.

This isn't going away. In the next US elections, there is a very good chance that the Republicans will try to illegally seize power and take over the USA. The Republicans are becoming an insurgency movement.

There's a good chance Trump will end up as dictator of the USA. Nothing like this has ever been seen in modern times.
I think you're overstating the threat of Trump.

The electoral college voted, nobody is suggesting any of their votes were illegitimate.
They could find a pile of ballots and see that Trump won 99.9% of the popular vote and that would still be irrelevant.

There is virtually no chance that Trump will end up as a dictator.
1 Presidential power is limited by the other branches.
2. It would require constitutional amendments, which just aren't going to happen.
3. He's really old.

Lots of stuff like this is seen all the time, around the world, nearly continuously for all of human history.

The real threats are the ones that aren't front page news.
 
41 - 60 of 89 Posts
Top