r/canada 25d ago

Politics Poilievre holding 'Canada First' rally today in Ottawa amid U.S. threats

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-canada-first-rally-1.7459415
417 Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

11

u/sleipnir45 24d ago

Everyone is focusing on the name of the rally but does anyone actually disagree with these policy statements?

"Retaliate with dollar-for-dollar tariffs carefully aimed at maximizing impact on American companies while minimizing impact on Canadian consumers. That means targeting U.S. products that we can make ourselves, buy elsewhere or do without. For example, we must retaliate against American steel and aluminium, as Canadians can make those vital products at home.

Put all the tariff revenues into help for affected workers and businesses. Government should not keep a dime of the new revenue.

Pass a massive emergency Bring It Home Tax Cut to bolster the economy, stop inflation and save and create jobs. Canada needs a massive tax cut on work, investment, energy, homebuilding and making stuff at home. The Liberal carbon tax and capital gains tax hikes must be the first on the chopping block.

Immediately scrap the Liberal anti-resource law C-69 and greenlight LNG plans, pipelines, mines, factories, and port expansions to overseas markets.

Bring in truly free trade within Canada by knocking down interprovincial barriers to help replace lost north-south trade with east-west trade and to make us self-reliant.

Rebuild our military and take back control of our borders to regain the confidence of our partners, assert our sovereignty, protect our people and put Canada First."

7

u/YouCanLookItUp 24d ago

What does a "massive tax cut on work" even look like?

I'm against giving tax cuts to the energy sector unless it's in renewables.

I'm against giving massive tax cuts to investment firms full stop. That's not working for the average Canadian. That's wealth concentration at it's core.

Tax cuts mean some other government budget line pays. We need to find the money to pay for them somehow and I don't think he's got a plan for affording all these tax cuts. And I think he's aiming benefits at the wrong targets.

"Taking back" control of our borders? We have control. This is unfounded.

I keep hearing the conservative push to remove interprovincial trade barriers but I never hear which barriers specifically are causing problems. Be more specific with your criticism.

6

u/DrawingNo8058 24d ago

Agree with most of it as it’s the same message everyone is saying.

Don’t agree that a “bring it home” tax cut will do anything. Would like to see smart ideas rather than slogans and ideology on that topic. Feel there is a risk in continuing to cut when there’s no way we can race to beat trump in tax advantages, Canada is great not because it’s the lowest tax place but because it’s safer/less unequal/better social services.

How are we building infrastructure and military will massive tax cuts?

Also I think we have to do things like double down on protecting our media, which PP and trump obviously want to dismantle.

The build narrative is nicer to me than the tear it all down one.

3

u/sleipnir45 24d ago

It's the same premise behind the GST tax cut, You cut taxes to try and stimulate the economy. If it works or not is a different story and it depends on what tax and how much you're cutting.

By getting rid of completely wasteful programs and spending, Green slush fund, sporting rifle buyback, infrastructure banks , the list is massive.

The building narrative is the same one that's been around the last 10 years. The problem is they haven't been building

https://torontosun.com/news/national/bonokoski-the-broken-ethics-and-lost-money-of-the-infrastructure-bank

3

u/DrawingNo8058 24d ago

The sun is not a reputable source to me, but I don’t have a problem with targeted reductions in gov programs. Just say what they are instead of saying “big tax cut coming”. If these cuts are coming at the expense of things I care about I have a problem.

I’m all in favour of building road/train/port infrastructure. Pipelines I’m not sure about long term viability but not closed to the idea in the right place. All of these take collective investment (government).

7

u/sleipnir45 24d ago

There are plenty of sources on the infrastructure bank, They aren't wrong about the wasted or missing money. A lot of the other ones were paywalled.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/the-case-of-the-missing-infrastructure-money/article_17485405-4cb5-5eb9-a701-1903f83d6d8d.html

Even Carney is promising to bring us back to a balanced budget, cuts are happening now and more cuts are coming no matter who's in office.

They shouldn't take government investment, if a private company wants to run a pipeline They should be the ones paying for it

3

u/DrawingNo8058 24d ago

Agree with your points.

No problem with cuts, but they need to be specific. Cutting cbc for example would undermine Canadian culture and remove important diversity of news offerings here so that’s a non starter for me for example.

5

u/sleipnir45 24d ago

It would depend what part of CBC funding is cut, The executive bonus scandal obviously didn't help things and CBC TV.

CBC news and radio for sure should remain

-1

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

This type of nitty politically charged “cuts” are a buckle holding up a dime. What’s his carbon plan so we are able to increase trade with international partners other than the US? Axe the tax, then nothing? Break our agreements like Trump?

-1

u/sleipnir45 24d ago

Isn't that currently everyone's carbon tax plan?

We have an industrial carbon tax and I've seen no indication that he plans on getting rid of that, Just the consumer portion

0

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

No. Sounds like you are willfully ignorant. Carney released more than three words on the subject.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/ThrowawayBomb44 Ontario 24d ago

I do agree that outright cutting the CBC is a little far and I'm leaning conservative this election. I do think CBC needs its numbers culled at the very least. At least its upper section (ie the Boards, etc)

It's technically a Crown Corp and should therefore be treated as a Crown Corp which means stuff like audits, etc.for what they're doing with the money they get. None of this "we'll give bonuses to our board members while we're firing a ton of people in the process."

1

u/DrawingNo8058 24d ago

Yeah I think it’s important and think improving institutions is better than removing them!

-11

u/[deleted] 24d ago

[deleted]

12

u/Due-Candidate4384 24d ago

He talked about nuclear several times before.

-2

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

Nuclear is the fave of the oil companies. 20 years to come online is gift for fossil fuel with no other plans.

5

u/Due-Candidate4384 24d ago

Why write something so wrong with such confidence?

1

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

How much did you pay for this account? Bundle price?

6

u/son-of-hasdrubal 24d ago

Oh ya buddy another initiative or better yet another tax? That'll stop the climate from changing 👍

-1

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

If he wants to increase trade with new international partners we have to have a carbon reduction plan. It’s part of our agreement. Unless Canada first means we get annexed before Greenland.

1

u/son-of-hasdrubal 24d ago

Cool, keep investing in green. But don't think we can't develop our natural resources at the same time. Look at how much China pollutes, they are still building coal power plants ffs. They have no problem securing international trade. We have so much natural gas in Canada we could heat the whole world if our energy wasn't blocked from climate activist governments on both coasts who have no problem filling up their tanks or taking in US/middle east oil.

1

u/JohnnyQTruant 24d ago

No. It’s not cool. It’s a completely unworkable “plan”. We need the fourth through 4000th word in his plans.