grey_maniac

In a survey of Canadians under 35, 100% of the ones I asked recognized the trade war affects cost of living. They also asked me, "When was this election ever about restoring hope for young Canadians? Where did you hear that?"

I'm not confident the average adult will ever realize it. It's a horrible thought to me, but for the average US lower- or middle-class worker drone, how much would their actual daily life change?

Thanks. I've picked up a copy and will read it this week.

Before I spend time digging into it, does anyone know who thd main sources of funding are, and the backgrounds of the decision makers, for the Leaders' Debates Commission? (I don't follow debates, so I've never paid much attention to that, but I am now working to map out funding and influence networks in our country)

I absolutely agree. As a non first nations person, what can I do to help?

Perhaps a market approach to housing is the core of the problem. I don't know, and I'm just tossing out an idea triggered by the repeated explicit assumption you're making ("inside a market system"). I am tossing out the idea in the spirit of cooperative "yes, and..." discussion, I am not challenging your point, and I am not interested in debate, but rather, conceptual exploration to see what ideas might emerge. (If you know De Bono's work, what I am saying is, "po housing is not based on a market system").

I honestly think that's the most productive place to focus influence. I geew up in Saskatchewan, where the lieutenant governor reserved assent 70 times, sometimes explicitly stating the legislation was not in the best interests of the people. It's at least a viable line of defence against populism and corporate interests.

Good thing we still have the Governor General, then, who can block the use of the notwithstanding clause by withholding royal assent.

So if one were to make, say, a list of threats to tje future of democracy, it should include Robert Mercer, Steve Bannon, and Chris Wylie? You know, in case any pro-democracy fanatics are wondering.

Step one: stop Poilievre getting into power; Step two: actually solve the problem. Failure at step one makes step two moot.

"vouchers could be made available to help Canadians pay for costs such as long-term care or home care services"

This was how the conservative provincial government tried to sneak in privatization of long term care and home and community care in my province. (Source: I was one of the consultants brought in to assess the viability of the plan, and my contract was abruptly cancelled after I explicitly pointed out this was what they were doing)

Fortunately, COVID derailed the program, and a new government came in before it could be restarted. But, as a result, I am extra cautious and thorough anytime analysts mention voucher programs.

We should be making sure older people know Poilievre will try to take away their CPP and OAS. And privatize as much of their health care as he can.