Odd questions today in the house

Heidi watched the debate on CPP changes today and one thing caught Heidi’s attention. A member said that he had gone door to door in his riding and asked the elderly how they were doing financially. Well for the most part they were not doing all that well and wished the CPP was a bit better because after paying down their home educating their children and paying medical bills they had little or nothing left to save for retirement. In response to this the opposition said these changes will not help anyone for at least forty years so the member opposite had no case.
Perhaps the opposition doesn’t realize that if you do not learn from history you will repeat it. All these twenty something’s just hitting the work force will be worse off than today’s elderly.Heidi says this because the  industries with an in house pension plan are disappearing and full time jobs are being replaced with full time contract jobs. Couple this with out of control housing and food costs these folks will need all the help they can get forty years from now.
Moving on to question period. Opposition members based most of their questions on what the President elect will do when he is put in office. Concerns about free trade and climate change were raised based on what the President elect had said during his campaign. Personally Heidi believes the President elect has no idea what he is going to do. Conservative members should realize that until transition is completed the lawyers interviewed (as to legalities of dismissing treaties) and international meetings with heads of state have taken place nothing will change.

Just to conclude opposition members do not seem to realize that the Canadian side of Key Stone XL is a done deal and that to get the US side done the pipe line builders need to reapply after the President elect has taken office.
Appears again the opposition is grasping at straws to find ways to be negative.
That’s what Heidi thinks , tell your MP what you think.




2 thoughts on “Odd questions today in the house

  1. ONE UP ON TAX EVASION … A TAXPAYER BORROWERS BONUS : ” Why Trudeau’s infrastructure bank is a big mistake – you’ll pay more! ”
    ” The problem is that private investors in these schemes demand a much higher rate of return than the government borrowing rate. Private asset managers typically expect a return of 7-9% from infrastructure investments when the government can borrow long-term at 2%. ”
    Posted by Ethan Phillips on November 14, 2016 |

    • Yes they want as a number 7 to 9 % return but is that return on borrowed capital or is it on a return on investment such as docking fees if the cash improves a harbor or could the return be on tolls if the investment builds a bridge. In both cases the income from investment would be shared by both the federal government and the investor for a net cost to you and I of zero over the long term. If we only look at the negativity of a project we never see the entire picture. Least that is how Heidi looks at things (look at both sides of the coin)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s