At least that game qualified as a positive playoff growth experience for most of the Raptors’ youngish core (Ingram aside), which is probably the best hope for this series (and more than could be said for Game 1).
And it seems to be a particularly large gap with Ford. Every reversal is treated by pundits as another indication he’s unserious, while many Ontarians (who are half paying attention, at most) are just glad he’s not doing the thing they don’t like, and quickly move on.
I think there’s often a big perception gap around politicians’ climb-downs. Political commentators tend to see them as signs of weakness, whereas the broader public can find them reassuring or at least vastly prefer them to the alternative.
I would’ve thought that how they look in their first post-season game of the year, and how a team that’s new to the playoffs looked, would both be of interest. (I grant that the game itself was pretty ugly.)
Weren’t you picking the Cavs to win the East like a month ago?
(The speech is here, should you wish to read it yourself, and find out about things like Carney having newly introduced a carbon tax, or learn again about how the main cause of inflation has been money printing.) www.conservative.ca/poilievre-la...
I should add that (a) despite his current misfortunes I think Poilievre still has a pretty decent changes of one day being PM and (b) having now read the full speech, I’m more disconcerted by all the distortions of past and present policies than by a passing line of attack he’ll probably drop soon.
This is such an odd line of attack. Among the possible reasons voters could eventually turn on Carney, a belief that he’s not economically knowledgeable strikes me as rather low on the list. www.thestar.com/politics/fed...
I didn’t mean it would make implementation easier. Just trying to think through whether that kind policy could theoretically be well designed to incentivize companies to reinvest (or complement incentives) - which I think is a frustration for the current government, particularly apropos oil sands.
We could also ask Australia and the EU, both of which are openly considering windfall taxes at the moment. Not to say they, or we, should necessarily go ahead. But like I said, it’s telling if the subject is totally verboten here, even as federal revenues take a hit for relief at the pump.
Well, yeah, I’m not saying it would be politically smart necessarily. Like I said, the order of things…
Yeah, my main takeaway as more of a Raptors fan was an acute feeling of dread. (Not that Rogers didn’t already start their work on that side of things with the Masai firing, obviously. He just left behind a team and organization in relatively good shape.)
Thanks for the thoughtful thread, Kevin. What I also wonder about is if this could effectively be combined with other measures aimed at spurring production-related investments. (Setting aside qualms some of us may have about additional O&G investment, since it does seem to be a government goal.)
Yeah, that’s the best argument I can think of against it - it would be hard to do quickly without messing it up somehow. It’s just striking that there’s no indication of the government even considering it, unlike in some other countries.
It’s fairly telling of the order of things that Canada almost immediately defaulted to the government taking a financial hit to provide gas price relief, without paying for it through a windfall tax even being floated as a serious possibility.
Mark Carney has a lot of strengths but I don’t think understanding normal working people’s jobs, and what makes them more or less interesting and rewarding, is one of those strengths.
And I’m very grateful for the new opportunity, from Star leadership that’s injected that paper with fresh energy and purpose, and can’t wait to get started.
I’m really excited to help those readers make sense of the extremely confusing times that we’re living through, while also hopefully surfacing and interrogating ideas (including from outside the current corporate-Canada consensus) for how we can confront those challenges together.
I think the Star has a tremendously important role to play in both my city and my country - including reaching not just powerful people in government and the private sector, but also people for whom the economy isn’t working as well.
But I’m at a stage of my career where it’s important both to challenge yourself in new ways and to assess where you can provide the greatest value, particularly in my line of work at this moment in time.
This is not a decision I’ve taken lightly. Being at the Globe for nearly 19 (!) years has been an incredible experience, and I’ll forever be indebted to the amazing editors and colleagues who entrusted me, inspired me and made a better journalist.
Some big news for me, if not in the context of everything else happening in the world right now: I’m moving to the Toronto Star, where I’ll be writing a business column focused on the intersection of politics and the economy.
Also, here’s to sending JD Vance to campaign for tinpot autocrats everywhere.
I visited Hungary - from which my mother’s side of the family came here in 1956 - back in the ‘90s, when its post-Soviet prospects seemed exciting. It’s been extremely depressing to watch what’s happened since. Here’s to young Hungarians who believe in something better reclaiming their future.
Yes. And why pretend for a moment that if it were dropped, there wouldnt be a hassle over something else? www.cbc.ca/news/politic...
I feel like the biggest immediate consequence of the flareup around possibly turning the Brampton plant into a knockdown Chinese EV plant may be to make Stellantis’s commitment to continue manufacturing in Canada look even shakier than it did before.
Whether or not you think Fortress North America was a good idea, Canada tried pitching it in the early months of Trump II, got cross-border economic warfare in return, and here we are.
I’ll be participating in this fairly timely Q&A tomorrow, should you also wish to partake. www.theglobeandmail.com/business/art...
