Make of this what you will, but it always puzzles me why the American dollar is so valued, while ours is not.
And under The Land of Opportunity For Some rubric, there is this:
Reflections, Observations, and Analyses Pertaining to the Canadian Political Scene
Make of this what you will, but it always puzzles me why the American dollar is so valued, while ours is not.
And under The Land of Opportunity For Some rubric, there is this:
.... I always turned to trusted sources for perspective and commentary - editorial cartoonists. My favourite by far is Theo Moudakis:
Things are unfolding at a rapid rate, so I shall just post a few excerpts from Stephen Maher's piece published in The Star just a few minutes ago.
In a speech to a feminist political charity in Ottawa Tuesday night, Justin Trudeau lamented the election of Donald Trump as a setback for women’s progress.
“I want you to know that I am, and always will be, a proud feminist,” he said. “You will always have an ally in me and in my government.”
On Friday, the proud feminist had a meeting with Canada’s first female finance minister, Chrystia Freeland, and told her that he intended to replace her, presumably with Mark Carney, on Tuesday.
First, though, Trudeau wanted Freeland to present the government’s fall economic statement, featuring a gimmicky $2.7 billion holiday tax break the PMO had persuaded her to include. She would have to humiliate herself on her last day on the job by announcing a measure she opposed, missing the deficit target she had set herself in May. Trudeau had thus created a situation where it was easier for Freeland, his single closest and most important cabinet ally, to denounce him and quit, rather than do as he asked.
The departure of the long-suffering Freeland, the consummate team player, reminded me of the departure in 2019 of former justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, who quit hours after the prime minister told reporters “her presence in cabinet should actually speak for itself.”
In both cases, the proud feminist put women who had shattered glass ceilings in a position where they were better off resigning rather than let Trudeau continue to humiliate them.
Taken together, the two incidents make Trudeau look like a narcissistic gaslighter, a fake feminist who thought he could subordinate talented women to his will based on his own excessive self-confidence.
With her departure, the whole operation now seems like a farcical mess.
On Monday, Trudeau huddled with his remaining cabinet. No minister who left the meeting would say out loud whether they still have confidence in him as prime minister. Five or six more ministers were rumoured to be ready to follow Freeland out the door.
The proud feminist now looks like a one-trick pony, a narcissist whose leadership was only effective while his charisma was working. Now that his charm has worn off, he is left with nothing, performing progressivism as if a breathless world was still waiting for his latest charming quip while everyone just wants him to go.
As they say, there is much more to come, so I'm sure we'll all stayed tuned with the aphoristic "bated breath".
I have never been fond of the American aphorism, "My country, right or wrong." On the surface, it suggests a reflexive, unbending and blind loyalty to and pride in one's nation, no matter its shortcomings. This can lead to all sorts of excesses, as U.S. history so amply demonstrates. However, love of and pride in a person's country of birth is, or can be, quite a different thing.
I've been thinking about national pride in light of what Charlie Angus recently had to say. He reminds us of how that pride informed our past politicians, whether in government or opposition, in their relationship with the Americans. While that relationship has mostly been cordial, it has never been servile.
Now comes word of a new poll by Angus Reid that shows a steep decline in national pride.
In 1985, 78 per cent said they were “very proud” to be Canadian. This dropped to 52 per cent in 2016 and now by another 18 points to 34 per cent. The proportion who say they are either proud or very proud of their nationality has dropped precipitously from 79 per cent to 58 per cent over the past eight years.
The Star's Kevin Jiang offers some analysis:
These numbers could indicate Canadians feel the country isn’t living up to their expectations, Ramos said, especially in the years after the COVID-19 pandemic.
“You don’t have to look very far across the Toronto Star headlines to see that there are issues around stagnant wages, around affordability, around housing,” [political sociologist Howard] Ramos said. “This is a big part of what’s being observed in this trend.”
As well, there are key demographic differences.
Older Canadians were significantly more likely to feel deeply attached to Canada, with 63 per cent of men and 66 per cent of women over 55 echoing that sentiment. In contrast, just 39 per cent of men and 26 per cent of women aged 18 to 34 answered the same.
Political party affiliation also plays a role.
Conservative voters were most likely to want to see the country split up or take up Donald Trump’s offer to become the 51st state; 11 per cent of Conservative supporters said they want to join the U.S. while eight per cent said they’d prefer to “see the country split up into two or more smaller countries.”
There can be little doubt that disaffection is widespread, for the above stated economic reasons, as well as things like wait times for medical service, etc. As well, I can't help but wonder about the effect of right-wing podcasters on Canadians' views, especially younger ones, of our country.
Is there a way of reversing this trend? Obviously, politicians are in key positions to influence our national vies. The constant harping about the brokenness of Canada by opportunists like PP certainly contribute to the negative sentiments, a view echoed by Richard Nimijean, a Carleton University professor:
“National identity is not static,” Nimijean said. “If things are tough all over and if our leaders are talking about things being bad ... it’s not surprising we get these kinds of results.”
But Ramos believes these results may also indicate the country is in need of a clearer definition of what it means to be Canadian. He points to a 2015 interview with the New York Times, where Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there was “no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.”
“Maybe it’s time for us to begin to think about what is that identity,” Ramos said, “and what we should be proud of.”
And that, of course, is a topic fit for any number of blog posts, but perhaps it is time for a refresher course on our country and why it is so dear.
I shall end now by wearing my heart on my sleeve, something I am usually loathe to do. There is no other country on earth I would rather be a citizen of. It was this country into which I was born and have been nurtured, and it will have my undivided (but not uncritical) loyalty until my days are done.
Here is a reminder and a jolt from Charlie Angus, one that should be heard by all who would appease the mad king, Trump, at the expense of our national pride and nationhood:
UPDATE:
Here are a few more words of wisdom from Charlie Angus:
Before delving into that, I highly recommend David Graham's latest post, An Unsympathetic Death. Graham provides outstanding information about the health insurance business in America, and the daily perils Americans face even when they have healthcare insurance. It is a reminder of how fortunate we are, despite its shortcoming, to have socialized medicine in Canada.
In its refusal to 'blame the victim', mainstream media have sanitized certain facts.
The business run by Thompson brought in $281 billion in revenue last year, making it the largest subsidiary of the Minnetonka, Minnesota-based UnitedHealth Group. His $10.2 million annual pay package, including salary, bonus and stock options awards, made him one of the company’s highest-paid executives.
If you read Graham's post, you will see that much of that profit and bonus accrued from United Health Care's 33% denial rate of medical insurance claims. One need not have a particularly vivd imagination to see the emotional and physical toll this would have on the 'insured'.
However, there is much more to Brian Thompson's story.
UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was facing a lawsuit accusing him and other executives of insider trading related to an ongoing Justice Department investigation before he was fatally shot outside a New York City hotel on Wednesday.
Thompson, 50, was one of three UnitedHealth Group executives named in a class action lawsuit filed in May that accused them of dumping millions of dollars worth of stock while the company was the subject of a federal antitrust investigation, which investors say wasn’t immediately disclosed to shareholders.
“UnitedHealth was aware of the DOJ investigation since at least October 2023. Instead of disclosing this material investigation to investors or the public, UnitedHealth insiders sold more than $120 million of their personally held UnitedHealth shares,” the suit filed by the City of Hollywood Firefighters’ Pension Fund alleges.
Nearly $25 billion in shareholder value was erased once the investigation was publicly revealed in February. Thompson was able to sell off more than $15 million of his own UnitedHealth shares [emphasis mine] before the value dropped, however, the suit states.
In my view, mainstream media's withholding of such information is both a disservice to loyal viewers and additional fuel for the almost endless criticism directed at the legacy outlets. Even I, an unrepentant supporter of such media, have had my faith shaken.
Life in the United States is often described as "dog eat dog." It would appear that some dogs live a charmed life, until they don't.