Carney secures highest approval ever

[StarstruckIllusion 53,719]

After whacking Trump back with strong tariffs earlier this month, and flirting with becoming the first independent sovereign member of the EU, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney has united the country and broken Canada’s approval rating record.

Now at 70%… a number not seen in 32 years since September ‘94 under fellow Liberal PM Jean Chrétein’s 66% - Carney has seen praise from the last 2 Prime Ministers, Harper and Trudeau, who are on opposite sides of the political spectrum.

Well… what do yall think Europe’s hottest new world leader? 

 

[hamartia 3,326]

The EU address was crazy. It felt like people were gonna start throwing their bras and panties at him 

[Lord Mayhem 3,675]

The juxtaposition of Trump having his lowest approval ratings sharing a border with a PM with the highest is just...

[djfreemymind 1,342]

i'm in school and we keep reading his speeches, my professors love him and i'm thinking of moving there tbh lmao y'all got room?

[gumzy3000 7,992]

I really admire him. He has a vision and he’s not playing around. He’s actively pursuing investments in Canada and wants to make us an energy superpower. 

While I’m a bit nervous of the future, since Canada is at a major crossroads in its history right now, I have a lot of hope because of Mark Carney. 

[monstertoronto 11,887]

So happy he’s leading our country at this pivotal and difficult moment in history.

Edited Friday at 04:37 AM by monstertoronto

[Guillaume Hamon 7,054]

I'm not sure most of them want to join... But that would be cool to welcome Canadians in the EU. 

[Murakami27 8,915]

8 hours ago, hamartia said:

The EU address was crazy. It felt like people were gonna start throwing their bras and panties at him 

What stopped them?

[SavetheEarthNow 300]

Absolutely false. He has not "united the country", there are people pushing for separatism in more provinces than ever - Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec, British Columbia. Alberta, Northern British Columbia and Saskatchewan for similar reasons, Quebec to preserve the French Canadian culture. People want to act like the separatist thing is strictly Alberta, but it is not. The approval rating doesn't actually come from Canadians, there is no survey sent out asking people what we all think of the Prime Minister. Majority of these things are sent out to a specific group of people and the question asked by a specific source that is only accessible to a certain group of people. In addition, Canadians don't want to join Europe, just like we don't want to become part of America. 

Edited Friday at 09:58 AM by SavetheEarthNow

[Economy 53,144]

7 hours ago, monstertoronto said:

So happy he’s leading our country at this pivotal and difficult moment in history.

Hes actually so intelligent and pragmatic.

 

He also seems to genuinely also be trying hard to finally do something about Canadas stagnant economic growth, lagging productivity and investment, and issue that largely went ignored under Trudeau and to some extent was already souring by the end of Stephen Harpers last term.

 

Hes making tax changes to encourage more investment in ways where you get the most bang for the buck. For example increasing tax write offs for major new investments. But not actually severely lowering overall corporate tax rates. I think thats pragmatic and smart because with Corporate short term behaviour big upfront costs can be a major deterent from investing, this helps but without lowering the long term rates they pay once an operation is up and running. Hes trying to reduce red tape and approval times etc. Hes balancing operating budget so that deficits are exclusively for growth investments that pay for themselves

 

At the same time hes doing all this without screwing middle class like a conservative would, not cutting on essential services, cutting on assistance benefits or anything like that

 

I also like that hes working to get major infrastructure like pipelines, ports, terminals etc up and running asap so we get better world access and pricing for our products and natural resources yet he has not done dumb political things some do when they champion resources like getting in the way of green investments. In fact renewable energy and green projects very much remains part of his platform to continue getting Canadas emissions down (tho admittedly a little slower than under Trudeau but if it avoids slow economic suicide by 1000 cuts ill take it)

 

Im 33 years old now. Ive never had a politician I was as excited for as Mark Carney. Hes not perfect and at the end of the day hes still a politician (which means I still expect him to do and say sh*t for political reasons from time to time that is disapointing). But overall on the grand scheme of things hes as good as they come imo

Edited Friday at 12:12 PM by Economy

[Bronco 27,987]

He's doing a good job. 

But I do find it funny that the guy who sat and watched the UK economy collapse under the neoliberal agenda of rampant privatisation has decided that's the solution to the issues facing the Canadian economy. 

[Economy 53,144]

19 minutes ago, Bronco said:

He's doing a good job. 

But I do find it funny that the guy who sat and watched the UK economy collapse under the neoliberal agenda of rampant privatisation has decided that's the solution to the issues facing the Canadian economy. 

Im a big believer personally thats its not just what strategy you use but also how you implement it. Theres examples of Countries both ends of political spectrum that are successful and failures. Scandivanian Countries chose to tax more and actively manage a higher percentage of the Countries wealth and manage it to invest it in its people and it largely worked. Other Countries that did something simmilar in South America between incompetence and corruption squandered those resources they took and impoverished their nations instead

 

Im against extreme left or extreme right wing politics, but in between the extremes of the spectrum i think it matters just as much how well you execute it not just where exactly in the spectrum you are

 

For example, selling assets to raise money to reinvest in other useful infrastructure and keeping a stake in it to try and still have a say services benefit its people is different from selling the whole thing to waste money on garbage while the government now has 1 less asset

 

I will point out too that at one point Toronto Pearson was one of the most if not most expensive airport to land in the world (which raises ticket prices) and it is still pretty uo there. So just because its Government owned does not always guarantee better cost or service if the Government innefficiencies they tend ti have over private sector are severe enough. If those inneficiencies manage to be greater greater than the profit margin companies will target, costs to consumers will still manage to be worse under 100% Government management in those cases

Edited Friday at 12:35 PM by Economy

[Bronco 27,987]

4 minutes ago, Economy said:

Im a big believer personally thats its not just what strategy you use but also how you implement it. Theres examples of Countries both ends of political spectrum that are successful and failures. Scandivanian Countries chose to tax more and actively manage a higher percentage of the Countries wealth and manage it to invest it in its people and it largely worked. Other Countries that did something simmilar in South America between incompetence and corruption squandered those resources they took and impoverished their nations instead

 

Im against extreme left or extreme right wing politics, but in between the extremes of the spectrum i think it matters just as much how well you execute it not just where exactly in the spectrum you are

 

For example, selling assets to raise money to reinvest in other useful infrastructure and keeping a stake in it to try and still have a say services benefit its people is different from selling the whole thing to waste money on garbage while the government now has 1 less asset

 

I will point out too that at one point Toronto Pearson was one of the most if not most expensive airport to land in the world (which raises ticket prices). So just because its Government owned does not always guarantee better cost or service if the Government innefficiencies they tend ti have over private sector are severe enough. If those inneficiencies are greater than the profit margin companies will target, it will still manage to be worse under 100% Government management

There's no denying things needed to change from the existing Canadian system. 

But a lot of what Carney is doing is straying dangerously close to what the UK did with PFI, and PFI has effectively destroyed so much of what it was actually used to build. And I'm not convinced Carney has learned the lessons of PFI. 

[Economy 53,144]

10 minutes ago, Bronco said:

There's no denying things needed to change from the existing Canadian system. 

But a lot of what Carney is doing is straying dangerously close to what the UK did with PFI, and PFI has effectively destroyed so much of what it was actually used to build. And I'm not convinced Carney has learned the lessons of PFI. 

Lets see what happens. I will say privatization of government assets or usage of private companies for precument is among the policies im less certain of will work out. On the privatization side, best case scenario, the raised money is used well enough to build new assets as beneficial as the ones it lost.

 

That said, hes not gonna make only good decisions, im not some blind supporter. But on net overall i still think hes the best PM weve had in a long time

[Red 99,597]

In stan twitter language: Carney is in his The Fame Monster era