oh yeah, ive been watching some of this hearing. what a mess.
|
|
|
Those politicians….
- Thread starter mimico_polak
- Start date
Partly because of funding and partly because nobody cares. It's pretty obvious at this point that there is no amount of corruption, waste or excessive spending that can bring down the government. As long as they include some of the crooks in other parties, the *&^*show continues.
Shaman
Well-known member
I agree with both of you, but it should not be this way. They've legislated themselves out of accountability.
It's disgusting what has become of our government, the RCMP and CSIS.
Ask about it in question period and Freeland plays the air accordion.
She learned the air accordion when she was standing up to Trump. He's one of the best players in the world.
I wouldn't say no one cares it's just that the people at the bottom are preoccupied with grass root problems of their own.
Take a buck private in WWII, the war between the Axis and the Allies. If you make a box graph the next layer down will be individual countries vs other individual countries with various crossovers. The next layer down will be the various fronts. Then come the divisions, units and eventually Pvt John Smith in his fox hole, dodging bullets.
Pvt John Smith's job in all of the above is to say alive while trying to kill Pvt Johan Schmidt of the German army.
Like Pvt Smith, those in the lower layer of the totem pole are too preoccupied with dodging mortgage bullets, food cost bullets, fuel cost budgets, crime budgets etc.
If he had the internet back then and got an email saying it's OK to come out now, is it genuine or an ambush?
To survive, the Johnnys keep their heads down.
The homeless, welfares, ne'er do wells take a day of their life to protest at QP. They weren't doing anything anyway.
People with jobs and funding them can't afford to take a day off to protest.
Citizens care (well many of them that aren't drinking too much of the koolaid) but no politician with the ability to do something cares and the governor general definitely doesn't care. The ones that can actually effect change are addicted to the budget balancing itself spending. If a few more billions get wasted along the way, that's fine as long as they get their own personal cut too. They all belong in jail.
sburns
Well-known member
Exactly they are the worse kinds of criminals, the ones who make the rules and who bend them. Our country keeps suffering for it.
The good ones don't want the job. It would be like being handed the helm of the Titanic ten seconds before it hit the iceberg. "It happened on your watch."
I may not have the whole story but earlier in his career Warren Buffet took over a small town company about to go bankrupt. He turned it around by cutting redundant staff and ridiculous inventory policies. The town wanted him hung because some people lost their jobs.
If it wasn't for him EVERYBODY would have lost their jobs. PP may well have to face that issue.
We can dream. In practice, I expect him to waste money differently. Very few politicians have had a holistic fiscally sound policy.
The magic number is likely eight years/two terms.
Change the colour of the pigs in-charge at the trough you change the grift.
It takes a few years to get the grift running full speed, usually somewhere near the end of the first or into the second term.
For other policies one term usually is not long enough to get things fully done.
For policies if they don't something done in two terms it is unlikely they are getting it done or they are just jumping the shark.
So while one term may minimize the grift as they are just about full speed we sort of need the second term to get other things done. Little value in a third term policy wise, big downside due to the full speed grift.
Change the colour of the pigs in-charge at the trough you change the grift.
It takes a few years to get the grift running full speed, usually somewhere near the end of the first or into the second term.
For other policies one term usually is not long enough to get things fully done.
For policies if they don't something done in two terms it is unlikely they are getting it done or they are just jumping the shark.
So while one term may minimize the grift as they are just about full speed we sort of need the second term to get other things done. Little value in a third term policy wise, big downside due to the full speed grift.
The other major obstacle is the last guy spent all of your first term money. Any policy decisions should be required to spend at least as much of your money as the next guy. You can't commit billions starting after you have left. If you believe a policy justifies a 5B investment over five years, you need to kick in at least 1B during your last year in office (at a minimum).
They all go on a spending spree on the way out to try to buy votes and set poison pills so their graft extends for a decade after they get fired.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
While PP would love an election tomorrow, he's patient enough to wait. What he's not going to do is prostrate himself to either the liberals or NDP to expedite the election. Delays give him more hammer time -- he'll keep hammering as long as it increases his lead.
At this point, the NDP are just clinging to their paychecks, an early election stops the grave train for a lot of them.
The BLOC is in a tricky spot, they're not worried about losing their jobs, they are concerned the Legendary QC pandering from the Liberals is low-hanging fruit for the PC chopping block. When that happens, BLOC takes the long term hit for not protecting Quebecers.
Ever get a call from someone wanting something fixed but they don't have any money because they gave it all to the incompetent that did the original job? I've got the tee shirt.
I actually think this is a brilliant move for PP.
The cons motion is simply “The House has no confidence in the Prime Minister and the Government.”
So there is no wiggle room for the NDP and BLOC to say there was another part of the bill that they disagreed with.
They will have to simply say that they do have confidence in this government and that looks bad to the average citizen.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I think citizens care, and I don't think they are to busy trying to tread water to make an informed decision.
Canadians get almost no civics training, how can you expect average Jenny and Joe to understand the roles of government and their role in a democracy? I think that's by design, it's a lot harder to please people who understand than those who don't.
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Shaman
Well-known member
Funny you say that. I'm seeing in the news today that the NDP is $21M in debt and cannot even keep staff to manage their volunteers.
Double bonus for delaying election. More income/graft, more time for fundraising, chance of passing campaign finance amendments and more time to try to pay off loans from last time before spending a fortune again.
Are these commercial loans with interest or do the citizens loan these entitled morons money at zero percent?
|
|
|
|
|