News   Nov 22, 2024
 522     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 1K     4 
News   Nov 22, 2024
 2.6K     7 

PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

GM is reinventing itself. Its cutting 15% of its salaried workers and shutting 5 plants in North America

The usual ratio of USA to Canada is 9:1. The ratio of job losses is 3:2. For whatever reason, USA fared much better than Canada.

In respect of the manufacturing cuts announced today, that is accurate.

But worth adding is that GM is already moving to cut 18,000 salaried staff, (overwhelmingly non-factory jobs), and these will be much more substantial in the US.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/c...10/31/gm-buyouts-salaried-workers/1831530002/
 
Last edited:
Who's that? All the Andy Doodys I see online look like competent folks.

Is this some kind of slag against Andrew Scheer? Using other people's legitimate names doesn't seem to cut it as an insult. It's akin to called the PM Jason Trudeau.

Ok, maybe I was harsh, but Scheer is generally incompetent and anyone who thinks he would be a good PM is fooling themselves

.https://www.surreynowleader.com/new...EW8OR4VRY0r82xZosiGLO7xCaqC0AELJDzIFUiKtIKpbs

Elizabeth May is engaged to the brother of Margot and Janet Kidder.
 
Last edited:
Not that I think his idea is going anywhere, but I'm amused no one has mentioned Olive's column in the Star.

He's calling for nationalization of all of GM Canada.

https://www.thestar.com/business/op...ime-for-canada-to-have-its-own-automaker.html
It is surprising that with only about 35% more population that South Korea has come to a top tier position in home owned and branded automotive and shipbuilding, whilst Canada has doing nothing than be a supplier to the US and others. Any branded industrial manufacturing we do have, from Massey tractors to Bombardier C series get sold off on the global market and shut down locally.

But, having been to South Korean for work, I can attest they work a lot harder for less than we do. Office workers, like me, work six days a week.
 
The problem with Andrew Scheer is that he's just yet another careerist who barely ever had any kind of career outside politics. Basically he's just one of those poli sci major types who got involved in the campus party association and never left (you know, not the ones who are doing their honours thesis and planning on grad degrees or law school). Stephen Harper wasn't altogether different. Either way, he's never spent much time as an actual adult outside politics.

Of course, it says something about the CPC that his main competitors include Bernier - with his own history of incompetent, irresponsible behaviour - and a loudmouth like Kevin O'Leary who basically doesn't even live in the country.
 
2015*. US election occurred in 2016.

In all fairness to the Canadian electorate, Trump wasn't in the picture when we elected Trudeau.
So when is the right time to vote for an idiot.?
  1. When you think that for the next 4 year no other international leader or incident will put Canada under a difficult situation.
  2. When the previous guy did such a great job and left things in such great shape that you can afford to vote for an idiot who will start the destruction from a higher point so it still can be recovered after 4 years. .
 
Last edited:
Not that I think his idea is going anywhere, but I'm amused no one has mentioned Olive's column in the Star.

He's calling for nationalization of all of GM Canada.

https://www.thestar.com/business/op...ime-for-canada-to-have-its-own-automaker.html

Olive's article starts off with an incorrect state about proposing "Canada's first automaker". I'm not exactly sure what 'designing autos specifically for the Canadian market' is supposed to mean and how they would be relevant for the export market. That was one of the problems with the development of the Avro Arrow; we designed a single role aircraft specific to our needs at the time without considering the export angle. We are too small a market for a major and enduring production run unless they are going to mandate that it is all we can buy.


Ok, maybe I was harsh, but Scheer is generally incompetent and anyone who thinks he would be a good PM is fooling themselves.

Elizabeth May is engaged to the brother of Margot and Janet Kidder.

Is this supposed to make a point?
 
Olive's article starts off with an incorrect state about proposing "Canada's first automaker". I'm not exactly sure what 'designing autos specifically for the Canadian market' is supposed to mean and how they would be relevant for the export market.
There is no country our size with its own auto maker. Sweden’s Volvo is now Chinese, Saab is bankrupt. Czech Republic’s Skoda is now part of VW, etc, etc.

What Canada should have done is bought a share of a brand, and then exported it to the US as part of the Auto Pacrt. That’s why Volvo made cars in Halifax. For example, Studebaker was made in Hamilton for years after it closed in the USA. Canada should have bought that brand, they made some cool looking cars in Hamilton.

STUDEBAKER_LARK_DAYTONA_1964_1.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2488/3834937059_8064afe1bf.jpg
 
Last edited:
Olive's article starts off with an incorrect state about proposing "Canada's first automaker". I'm not exactly sure what 'designing autos specifically for the Canadian market' is supposed to mean and how they would be relevant for the export market. That was one of the problems with the development of the Avro Arrow; we designed a single role aircraft specific to our needs at the time without considering the export angle. We are too small a market for a major and enduring production run unless they are going to mandate that it is all we can buy.




Is this supposed to make a point?

I found it interesting.

Canada Post is back to work. The bill just became law.
 
Honestly I am surprised that Trudeau is doing as well in the polls as he is. i mean I care a lot about the immigration issue(which he is completely failing on) which clearly isn't gaining enough traction in Canada for some reason. But even ignoring that I fail to see what issue he has got completely correct. He didn't completely fail on NAFTA (only lost a little from a mad negotiating position) and he legalized marijuana though without the actual regulatory framework needed. So that totals up to about one positive thing that he has done, and he has been completely fail on everything else. Now he is bribing the media with peoples tax dollars.
Then again I thought the same about Harper and he kept getting elected. So I guess I don't want what Canada wants.
 
Honestly I am surprised that Trudeau is doing as well in the polls as he is. i mean I care a lot about the immigration issue(which he is completely failing on) which clearly isn't gaining enough traction in Canada for some reason. But even ignoring that I fail to see what issue he has got completely correct. He didn't completely fail on NAFTA (only lost a little from a mad negotiating position) and he legalized marijuana though without the actual regulatory framework needed. So that totals up to about one positive thing that he has done, and he has been completely fail on everything else. Now he is bribing the media with peoples tax dollars.
Then again I thought the same about Harper and he kept getting elected. So I guess I don't want what Canada wants.
Harper had the best economic growth and best job creation in the G7. If you didn't want that - you should be happier now. (we are #2 and #4).
Maybe you would be ecstatic if we could drop to #7.
 
There is no country our size with its own auto maker. Sweden’s Volvo is now Chinese, Saab is bankrupt. Czech Republic’s Skoda is now part of VW, etc, etc.

What Canada should have done is bought a share of a brand, and then exported it to the US as part of the Auto Pacrt. That’s why Volvo made cars in Halifax. For example, Studebaker was made in Hamilton for years after it closed in the USA. Canada should have bought that brand, they made some cool looking cars in Hamilton.

Mainly because GM bought out the outstanding stake in Saab and proceeded to run it into the ground (and then blocked a Chinese bid for ownership).
 
Harper had the best economic growth and best job creation in the G7. If you didn't want that - you should be happier now. (we are #2 and #4).
Maybe you would be ecstatic if we could drop to #7.
The average Canadian got nothing form Harper. I know he as able to keep job growth high by importing Temporary Foreign workers to do low paying jobs and bailing out companies like GM who pocket the money and then leave anyway 10 years later. But he never solved any real major cultural or economic issues Canada faced and he LOST to Trudeau despite these amazing stats you listed.

But honestly after seeing Trudeau's performance I would have him back. I think hypothetically he would have shifted to a more populist style of government if he won in 2015 considering the global trends.
 
I voted in support of Harper three times. Maybe it was being in a minority government that kept him in check, but he had my support. When he was given a majority, I didn't like what he became and couldn't support the CPC. Plus, he seemed to think that he could beat Laurier's record, which was arrogant.
 
Last edited:
I voted in support of Harper three times. Maybe it was being in a minority government that kept him in check, but he had my support. When he was given a majority, I don't like what he became and couldn't support the CPC. Plus, he seemed to think that he could beat Laurier's record, which was arrogant.

Let me start out by saying I was not a Harper fan.

That said, I've never been one to criticize 'arrogance' unto itself. Arrogance is confidence that someone in hindsight deems to be misplaced or overreaching.

I could care less about records, if any PM deserved 4 terms or 5, based on their accomplishments, I'd be fine w/that.

Its all about the results.

That's not to say process is irrelevant. We can all point to obnoxious and illegal extremes.

But assuming we are not discussing those, I'm very much about outcomes.

I don't think Harper, at the end of the day had much to brag about.

But the reality is very few PMs (or their governments) have been part of or lead indisputably positive change on a grand scale.

The dawn of CPP; or medicare would strike me as tremendous achievements.

On balance I'd be willing to accord similar status to the Charter.

While I don't think his many terms were un-ending glory, I do think Trudeau ought to get credit for that.

But I can't think of a PM since the early 80s, of either of the two parties which have held government at the federal level who have had comparable accomplishments to those I've listed.

We could largely compare and contrast variations on maintaining the status quo, or making modest improvements in one space, generally at the expense of another.

I'll happily tolerate a leader's outsized ego, providing they can come reasonably close to backing it up.

Which, PS, is not about how bright they are or aren't, though I certainly prize intelligence; nor how bull-headed they are, ( I tend to prefer nuance...but can respect stubbornness in the right context)

For me its all about your real, measurable, accomplishment and effects.
 

Back
Top