And once again this thread is getting overtaken by personal attacks. @uzi and @wolfpup, you two are frequent offenders, something I’ve had to issue notes on several times upthread. First, @wolfpup - you know the following is out of place for P&E:
That’s a personal attack, if not as blatant as some, and again, not the first time in this thread.
As for @uzi, you too are dipping into personal attacks:
So everyone who argues against you on these subjects isn’t sane? Not to mention this is another pattern for you, as you were noted and then warned 6 months ago for other personal attacks on fellow posters when it comes to support for Carney by other Canadians.
To both of the posters I’ve just named - this stops NOW. I’ve cautioned the thread without naming names deliberately before, but the two of you are the ones that keep pushing. If I see more of this behavior from either of you it’ll be a warning next time, even if it’s another mild case. And very possibly a thread ban.
To be clear, I’m very carefully not stepping in to the accuracy of the the claims any poster is making, that isn’t, and shouldn’t be the mods job under most circumstances. I do note that @uzi has also been dismissive of all sources but his own, and while I think that’s a highly questionable debating tactic for P&E, it’s not banned. But the frequency of the attacks, especially in light of my prior notes, IS unacceptable in P&E.
I don’t think I’ve made a comment about anyone else’s sources. I may have even quoted from those sources myself. But I do question any source’s partiality that is paid for by the governing party of a country while the other party has stated that they will defund that organization. But I also question my own sources as well, but you don’t see me not posting something. In this particular portion of the thread I was asking why someone doesn’t know about what the other major party in Canada’s platform is and why it wasn’t getting out there for everyone to see. Could it be that it isn’t being promoted like the Liberal platform by that most Canadian of broadcaster the CBC? Why would that be? That is a valid question to ask. How is the government’s position being disseminated and not the oppositions?
Nor was I saying that people who disagree with me aren’t ‘sane’. You could safely change that word to ‘reasonable’. Nor am I making reference to people in this thread. I am making a reference to people who are more interested in opposing all things Trump and the political theatre of doing so e.g. ‘Elbows up’ (the Chicken Dance), than being concerned with the livelihoods of their fellow Canadians.
Was the neutrality of CBC only an issue over the last 10 years? During the Harper or Mulroney years did it only espouse a right wing view?
The vast majority of our media outlets are owned by centre/centre-right conglomerates. Postmedia is owned by a Chatham Asset Management, a US private equity firm. The Post and various Suns seem to have blind support for the Conservatives
The repeated claims that CBC is our version of Pravda that controls the hearts and minds of Canadians has no factual basis.
Uzi is correct here; there actually isn’t yet much evidence to support this assertion. The guy looks and sounds statesmanlike, but the results are not yet evident in sufficient numbers to support your claim. The wins so far are very minor.
I included the mention of dismissing cites as propaganda more as a guidance, but since you insist on this statement:
A few direct counter examples.
Your protest is noted, but these are far more than indicating bias which you do mention as a concern, but don’t use such language for your own sources. However, I did not include an instruction for you to change your habits.
As for the personal attacks, I’ve now had to note this thread several times and you are almost always central to it. I am repeating myself that each attack was mild in severity, and that in some cases you were the clear victim. But you also are pushing back with low level attacks, and as I noted that is a pattern both in this thread, AND one just six months ago on the same basic subject. I had hoped I’d stop it right now before this escalated further.
But here we are today and you’re disputing moderation in thread, even though previously it was just a note. So, since a note isn’t sufficient, this is an Official Warning for Disputing moderation in thread. Since that’s a separate clear violation, please understand that you are still on note for making attacks on other posts in this thread, but are not banned from the thread at this time.
To all - as I just mentioned, there have also been veiled and not so veiled attacks on Uzi earlier, which is why he was not the only one named. Challenge the facts, challenge the assumptions, do not insult your fellow posters.
Except there were similar issues with the Liberal party in the past - Sponsorship scandal for one (and to be fair, the Conservatives haven’t been saints which goes to my point). So, why make it even easier for abuse to happen? Some projects get special treatment if the PM approves them rather than make a level playing field that allow all projects the same chance with reasonable regulation that doesn’t make us uncompetitive? So, the Pm either approves them on merit (his definition) or on other criteria. You’d not trust PP to do the same, would you? So why set the precedent?
That’s your concern? A comment about virtue signaling? Not mismanagement causing Canada to be uncompetitive? Not 1000’s of job losses? Not billions of dollars of investments moving south? But I guess kind of hard to argue with those.
Okay then. How about declaring a Palestinian state BEFORE prerequisites are met? Will we ‘unrecognize’ it when Hamas doesn’t comply with some/all/any of the conditions?
Actually it seems the hated Trump is making progress, unlikely to last imho, and not Carney with his announcements (or is he quietly and competently working behind the scenes making this happen perchance?).
Seriously, though, about the Stellantis move. Although the auto pact was removed a couple decades ago, the reasons for it and how it has continued in spirit are not there anymore. The US is moving production back to itself and doesn’t need Canada’s manufacturing cars anymore for their market. I don’t think this will be the last plant closure and the industry itself is in jeopardy.
I dunno. We’ve been arguing pretty well against all your previous claims of “mismanagement”. And the Stellantis move is both largely in response to Trump’s tariffs and likely in violation of a legal agreement with the government, but at least it lets you point and go “See? Carney bad!” without much substance to the argument. (I also noticed that you managed to slip in some praise for Trump. Again.)
The tariffs won’t last in their current state, and Stellantis is likely to find that the grass is a lot browner on the other side of the fence, given Trump’s propensity for changing his mind and for whacking huge tariffs on things US manufacturers need which is how he fucked over the manufacturing sector in his first term.
And the reason I asked about “virtue signaling” is that it’s also a largely meaningless term and certainly not applicable here.
This…is nonsense. Recognizing the Palestinian state wasn’t “virtue signalling”; it was about acknowledging the ongoing genocide Israel are still engaged in. Why would it be “unrecognized”? And why is recognizing it in the first place “virtue signalling”? Is opposing genocide not worth doing on its own? Why do you doubt the sincerity of it?
And no, Trump isn’t making much progress of it, as we see. He’s making a lot of claims about what he’s done, but the reality remains at odds with most of it.
Haven’t Ford, GM, and Stellantis been manufacturing cars in Canada for over a hundred years? Trump isn’t returning jobs to the US; the US never had those jobs in the first place.
That’s my understanding. Stellantis and the government of Canada had a deal, and now Stellantis wants to break it in order to please Trump. This matter will raise the ire of Unifor at best, and end up with Stellantis losing in the courts at worst.
I’ve been posting sources such as statistics Canada supporting my position. Please post evidence of doing well. Opinions that he is quietly competent is not evidence. Adding bureaucracy is not evidence of competency. Doubling budget deficits is not evidence of competency.
And the Stellantis move is both largely in response to Trump’s tariffs and likely in violation of a legal agreement with the government, but at least it lets you point and go “See? Carney bad!” without much substance to the argument. (I also noticed that you managed to slip in some praise for Trump. Again.)
Of course they are at least partly in response to tariffs. That is a goal of trump to get manufacturing back into the US. Seems to be working. Carney’s goal is to keep manufacturing in Canada (a bold assumption on my part, I know). It doesn’t seem to be working. Which one is competent again?
This…is nonsense. Recognizing the Palestinian state wasn’t “virtue signalling”; it was about acknowledging the ongoing genocide Israel are still engaged in.
There is no substance to the announcement. The very definition of virtue signaling.
Again when Hamas doesn’t comply with the requirements that Carney set, do we unrecognize them? Want it not to be virtue signaling? Say if you do these x number of things THEN we will recognize you as a state.
From Chatgpt: The Auto Pact was formally removed (terminated) in 2001 after a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling — but its economic principles were effectively absorbed and replaced by newer, broader trade agreements like the Canada–U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), NAFTA, and later USMCA.
But now the US has added net jobs and Canada has subtracted them, correct?
That’s my understanding. Stellantis and the government of Canada had a deal, and now Stellantis wants to break it in order to please Trump. This matter will raise the ire of Unifor at best, and end up with Stellantis losing in the courts at worst.
Stellantis has broken it, whatever it was. I’m sure they have savvy lawyers, risk managers, and accountants that ensure they come out better than if they had stayed in Canada and have calculated all the benefits (and negatives) of the move to the south including the risk of pissing off a union in Canada. Short term cost vs long term gain.
See, this is why Canada has to do what it needs to do to remain competitive. You aren’t going to sue companies and expect to be prosperous. More will go and many more won’t come. Mindsets have to change.
You’ve been posting assertions not supported by your sources and then claiming they “prove” your point. At this point your claims of mismanagement are on par with the “Thanks, Obama” meme.
We’ve been posting evidence that he’s been doing well. You’ve simply disagreed with them, even when doing so contradicted your previous statements.
Still Carney, given that the companies are supposed to be tied to Canada and given the absolute trashing Trump is wreaking on the economy and on the manufacturing sector in particular, much as he did in his first term. The only bold assumption you’re making is that Trump is competent in any form, because it goes against all the actual evidence.
Tell me you don’t understand what diplomacy is without telling me you don’t understand what diplomacy is. Recognizing Palestine IS doing a thing. A BIG thing.
And you seem to have this weird idea that recognizing the existence of Palestine as a state is somehow contingent on the status of Hamas and the current peace treaty. They are separate things.
The Auto Pact was formally removed (terminated) in 2001 after a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling — but its economic principles were effectively absorbed and replaced by newer, broader trade agreements like the Canada–U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), NAFTA, and later USMCA.