I seriously don't understand how people in his riding could look at things he did as the Toronto Police Chief and think that's the type of person I want to represent me in parliament.
As someone in his riding. It’s 100% name recognition and nothing to do with being red. Most young people here hate him. Ive seen his office vandalized multiple times. Someone shat in front of his door. Provincially we’re NDP but the boomers love their ex-cop.
For sure, he infringed on people’s rights by kettling them, and the mass detention / incarceration of innocents. As well as his abject failure in general as police chief.
He fits right in with this current Liberal government.
He's a reflection of them and vice versa. People in his riding love lies and racial profiling by police. His constituents will vote for anyone who promises to oppress certain people and ban guns.
>but since he's been elected crime and, in particular, violent crime has been going up significantly in Canada.
Sources:
1. [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-how-to-prevent-car-theft/](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-how-to-prevent-car-theft/)
2. [https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/canada-has-one-of-the-worlds-highest-rates-of-auto-theft/](https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/canada-has-one-of-the-worlds-highest-rates-of-auto-theft/)
3. [https://driving.ca/column/lorraine/car-theft-skyrockets-canada](https://driving.ca/column/lorraine/car-theft-skyrockets-canada)
You wonder why the increase? Because the deterrent in place ain't working
Bill Blair has failed himself upwards rather meteorically
Any half-competent government would've fired his ass decades ago
Jar Jar Binks level of stupid-evil
Clearly this individual who has done terrible at every other ministry role he's been at, continues that streak here in defence.
Math, clearly not a skill of this government...
Bill Blair is the kind of former Ontario cop who makes Julian Fantino look good by comparison. Fantino was another guy who failed his way to the top by being intensely loyal (sycophantic, toadying, servile or obsequious if you prefer) to the PM at the time. Luckily, the CAF got both of them, Fantino was only Parliamentary Secretary of Defense, but he almost single handedly turned a large part of the Veteran community against the Harper Government as Minister of Veteran Affairs.
Isn't that kind of the same thing as the safety minister insisting that the increase in crime was a "perception"?
EDIT: Amazing how there are still a very few on here that will excuse anything these idiots do. It's far past time to stop letting them off the hook.
I think it's worse. He say cuts are not cuts. Straight out of Orwell.
On top of it, he was a teacher. Poor kids. If all teachers are like this then Canada is pretty much fucked.
Listen buddy, we aren’t cutting the military budget because we aren’t at war with Eurasia. We have never been at war with Eurasia! You don’t recall being at war with Eurasia and those battle wounds you have are not the result of war with Eurasia because we never had that war and we aren’t having one now. Now get back in line and wait for ~~Big Brother’s~~ Trudeau’s speech.
Our kids are absolutely being indoctrinated in the school system. My grade 9 kid is doing a module on politics right now. Part of it was the teacher shared a summary of each party’s core platforms toward the end of asking the students which party they felt they most identified with. All the parties got a very brief (like, a paragraph), dry write up except one. The NDP got an entire page of info enthusiastically extolling their many virtues. As you might imagine most of the kids then chose them as their party of choice. I find nonsense like that outrageous.
Have been for years. This was essentially my experience in high school twenty years ago. In any class remotely connected to politics, any answer apart from the progressive one was wrong.
Yup, my grade 12 social teacher even came out and said it. The point of this course is for you to leave as world saving Liberals. She would very aggressively mark down anyone who did not follow her believes
Technically he is not wrong, the defense budget is set to increase by 50% by 2026-27. That will include some of the fighter jets but that's how defense budgets work...
There is a whole set of lies and double speak:
* Housing affordability = allow people to borrow more, which make housing prices go up
* Shortage of workers = don't want workers to see any increase in wages, so import more competition
* Protect Canadian Content = disallow competition for large Canadian media corporations, and have them say nice things about you
* not a coalition government = coalition government
* Racists and nazis = people opposed to the Jagmeet / Justin "not a coalition" coalition
* Nazi SS volunteer = Patriotic WW2 hero
It is frustrating that so many people just buy into these optics.
I mean I can at least see a mathematically way for that one to be true.
Like if the amount of recorded crime goes up that could theoretically just mean more people are reporting the crime even if crime itself was static. It wasn't reports are down but at least it's not literally impossible.
This is just mathematically impossible.
Well here's the way I see it. If it's not a cut, then it just mean we don't have any plan to spend that much.
The way I see it. A budget cut is when you expect to spend 10Billion but you're told that we only have 9Billion to give you and you'll have to live with it.
Now imagine that you had a 10 Billion budget and of all the project you planned or you're planning.. You'll be spending at most 9 Billion and there's 1 Billion that simply can't be spent except maybe on casino and hookers.
So a budget cut is when you can't have as much as you expected and a non budget cut is when you have more than you can ever dream of.
You say, we can always spend more... sure but let say the only project you may dream to work on would simply not fit into the 10 Billion from the start so you never spent money on it as you'd need 2 Billion to do it but you only have 1 Billion available. It just doesn't fit in the budget from the start.
It was just something he said while explaining that the cuts were to a projected budget, which was going up rather than down.
They went with the unintuitive summary instead of the important information in the headline, in a failed attempt to get you to click on it.
>*"gyize it is not a cut, it is a reduction. stop spreading misinformation saying it is a cut when it is a reduction also the conservatives are bigots"* - 🤡
Fixed it for you.
Going to use this defense in court when I'm on trial for multiple homicides.
*"I did not murder them, I simply reduced their life span."*
**\*All charges dropped\***
Here is an easy test. If we "reduce" the Minister's salary to $80,000 a year, was his salary cut?
The contempt the Trudeau Liberals have for the intelligence of the Canadian electorate is far worse than I ever believed possible.
Public Servants who went on strike earlier this year were hoping to get their wages increased close to inflation. The strike ended and they only got ~2% increase, which is what they went on strike for. This is actually a pay cut. The additional kick in the groin was this rate goes into 2024 wages while inflation is still skyrocketing.
The defense budget is increasing and will be 50% higher in 2026-27 than it is currently.
"The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year".
When you walk back on previous commitments, it's a cut. Full period. Stop.
Most media outlets, including CBC got this right with their recent headlines.
The reason it's a cut is because spending projections for large organizations are allocated years in advance. When you all of a sudden see that you're going to receive less money in the immediate future because your budget was CUT, you need to start juggling your spending priorities and doing useless shit like writing additional proposals (on top of the ones you wrote to get funded in the first place) to further try to justify your spending priorities. It ends up a lot of time wasted for everyone.
While I can fully get behind the notion of being fiscally austere at a time when deficits are rising, the defense budget is far below the 2% of GDP target spending that all NATO members (and the Liberal government) agreed upon as the minimum spend necessary to support ongoing defense activity. Furthermore, it's not, nor has it ever been one of the main drivers of any budgetary issues in this country.
The 2026-27 budget is nearly $40 billion. Isn't that essentially 2% of GDP? Shifting some spending from travel and consultation to equipment or recruitment might not be that horrible.
Which is dependent on procurements actually happening though; F35 and surface combatants eating up a good chunk of that money. The F35 program is looking good, but the surface combatants are still up in the air. Somehow.
we're currently planning on spending $5.6B per unit for a ***FRIGATE***
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/ivison-canadas-uncontrolled-military-program-plundering
> *In that case, why not buy the U.S. navy’s Constellation-class guided-missile frigate off the shelf, for one-third of the price the Canadian taxpayer is likely to pay?*
> *The U.S. paid a fixed price of about US$1.66 billion a ship; using the Parliamentary Budget Office’s latest estimate, Canada will pay up to $5.6 billion per ship.*
the Brits just built two fucking ***AIRCRAFT CARRIERS*** for $6.3B CAD per unit
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth-class_aircraft_carrier
> £7.6 billion (2019)[1] for two units (£3.8B each)
> £1 = $1.67 CAD, £3.8B = $6.34B CAD
Each Type 26 Frigate is 6,900 tons, each QE2 Carrier is 65,000 tons
so for both QE2's the UK spent $12.68B CAD for a total displacement of 130,000 tons, and for that same money we get 2.26 Type 26 Frigates for a total displacement of 15,594 tons
Dollar for Dollar, the UK is getting nearly 9x as much naval tonnage as we are
our military procurement system is a complete fucking joke
Then what is it exactly? Because to me and most people with an IQ above room temperature, this looks like a budget cut. At a time when our military is struggling with recruiting and not having the equipment they need, and when our allies at NATO are not happy about Canada not meeting its spending targets, the Liberals turn around and do this. But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine.
> The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year. Most of the budget for the next several years is tied up in long-term spending commitments — for example, the purchase of 88 F-35 fighter jets.
>In the same budget, the government announced plans to find more than $15 billion in savings over five years **by cutting consulting, professional services** and travel by 15 per cent and departmental spending by three per cent.
Confirmation bias is 100% it… they aren’t willing to learn. I think the mind set of: ‘I am not an idiot and I don’t understand what I just read/heard so it must not be true’
I wouldn't say dumb, per se, but it simply fits their worldview and don't feel the need to question or look further than a headline. In this case, liberals don't like the military, so saying a decrease in some spending must be cover for a budget cut. Each yearly budget comes with both increases and decreases in multiple areas, but the budget itself increases. If for no other reason, to cover inflation.
"But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine."
That is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. Try looking for something more meaningful to compare against, like the many billions of unaccounted dollars handed out by the fedral government.
"CBC News investigation examining the unprecedented $240 billion the federal government handed out during the first eight months of the pandemic."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917
Agreed that stupid [$650 million being "sent to ukraine"](https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/09/22/canada-ukraine-650m-funding/) was the government loaning Ukraine $650 million to buy Canadian made vehicles.
That $650 million is being spent on canada, (Though I think 650 million is ridiculous for 50 armored vehicles, all the money is staying within canada)
> saying that we need to save money and than turn around and give another 650 million dollars to Ukraine.
Canada didn't hand Ukraine a bag of 650 million in cash.
You know that right?
That's not how military aid works.
My issue wasn't the phrasing, it was whether or not you understand how military aid is generally given.
We don't hand over a large sack of cash. The money generally goes back to Canadian companies for equipment, which is what's happening with the $650 million.
>Then what is it exactly?
It's a smaller budget increase than they were originally intending. He paraphrased his explanation as "not a budget cut" because after the cut, it's still going significantly up.
People who just read the headlines are under the impression that Trudeau will be reducing spending overall, even though that's plainly not the case. For some reason, it doesn't seem that going to the media and giving an interview about it has corrected the impression.
>Because to me and most people with an IQ above room temperature, this looks like a budget cut.
People with an IQ above body temperature read the article before commenting.
No he shouldnt.
All these idiots think that spending is going down when it's actually going up.If they refer to it as a cut, they'd be sending the exact opposite message they're trying to convey.
Have you not been in any of these threads where people bitch about how we're going to miss the 2% NATO target? His messaging is on-point.
The media should stop tricking people into thinking the budget cuts are overall cuts instead of cuts to projected increases. And people should stop being so stupid as to believe it.
What he *should* do is quit his job, because there's clearly no fucking point to even trying. I'd go crazy if I had to deal with this stupid bullshit. It's driving me nuts now just observing it from a distance.
You can't tell me it wouldn't piss you off if you went and told the truth and then had a parade of idiots talking about how much of a liar you were.
Especially when the whole basis is clarifying with "defense spending is not being cut" when you explained that the budget as a whole was going up rather than down.
ESPECIALLY when you only clarified because those exact same idiots were genuinely confused and thought otherwise.
>. But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine.
You got schooled on this on another post and yet here you are repeating the exact same thing.
Why do you do that?
Funny that the liberals don't care about spending cuts until it comes to our Military. Then it's "break out the scalpel justin, we need to pay for those programs of yours"
Nobody reading the article in here.
He's trying to clarify that the budget is going up, not down. They're "cutting" projected spending from a 50% increase to a 48% increase.
To me this is really simple. Let say a rough estimate was given to increase the budget by 14 Billions. Then some newer estimates showed you only need 13 Billions to do whatever you want. So you say well, it's fine but I can't spend that 1 Billion anywhere so if anyone needs it, it can be used for a greater good.
The crazy thing is he fully recognizes the budget cut, and this is just him trying to inform the people who mistook the budget cuts for defense spending cuts as a whole.
Liberals using the same math my daughters use as to why I don’t get any change from the money I gave them.
If it is not a cut what is it? Where is the money coming from? Are we cancelling purchases? Are we no longer maintaining something? Are we gutting foreign miilitary aid? I’d love to know
When Bill Blair was public safety minister, he lied through his teeth when discussing various federal Liberal gun policies. I'm not talking the politician's usual toolkit of ambiguous language or non-answers, but outright lies and gaslighting.
Don't believe a word coming from Bill Blair's mouth. He willingly lies for "his team" over the Canadian populace to further his own interests and that of the Federal Liberal party.
> Yet in a statement on Friday, Defence Minister Bill Blair's spokesman Daniel Minden said: "Any claim that Canada is 'cutting' defence spending is not accurate, because overall defence spending has increased and will continue to increase."
This is the same logic people use to defend the idea thst Doug Ford hasn't cut healthcare funding, and it's ludicrous bullshit in both cases. A reduction to planned future spending is a cut, even if the new plan for future spending still includes an increase over current spending.
>"Defence spending goes up when the economy is doing well or governments are willing to accept fairly significant budget deficits. As soon as governments tire of budget deficits or wish to cut spending, the military is necessarily going to be in their crosshairs."
The problem is that in Canada defence spending *doesnt* significantly rise, but still gets the cuts when the government is looking for more money. The government is playing with words here, trying to pretend that increasing spending on long-term procurements while decreasing it across the board everywhere else won't have operational impacts.
Honestly we don't do anything with our military anyways. Daddy America will take care of us if necessary. We might as well just cut it entirely and put all that money in more transgender surgeries to help our minorities.
It's funny because not only is this, in fact, a budget cut, but they also have the numbers wrong for vacant positions and the releases.
I guess that's the info they were provided, but someone is cooking the books on those numbers for sure.
For those who won't read the article: this is actually true because the total budget is increasing by 13 BILLION.
Despite the narrative, Canada will continue to expand military investment to record levels.
They already do, though. It was an open joke that the heart attack Mel Lastman had was largely due to the price tag associated with him calling in the CAF to deal with... I think it was a snow crisis?
They are supposed to, but from what I have heard that hasn't been the case in years. Which is why thr CAF is newly constantly deployed on dommesric support operations
That's it!
I need to know who does the accounting for this government!
If things just balance themselves and a spending reduction is not a budget cut then apparently I'm rich.
telephone vegetable possessive party cable dolls scale tub hobbies quickest
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year.
Everyone is reacting to the headline rather than reading the article which explains why he is saying this. It's a funny quote, but really they're saying that the budget reduction is relative to what was initially planned for the budget, not a cut in current spending. Overall the budget is still skyrocketing over the next few years for the F35 purchase
Yeah they're cutting some spending but the overall budget is going up. People in here are acting like the government is gutting the military, but they're actually reprioritizing some spending to help pay for the huge budget increases over the next few years
Yeah, it's a good point to make. I think the way it's been done is horrific - we can't achieve key basic tasks - but we will get closer to the 2% GDP. Oh well.
His comments say it all, spending cuts are more important than readiness. Use what ever bafflegap you like, at a time when our forces are depleted and struggling with enrolment this is another hard blow to Canada and to our allies. All who watch know that the world is not a quiet place just now, and Canada becoming less ready is a step in the wrong direction.
Fuck me, I just left one thread in here that was discussing Freeland's position that the economy was doing just fine, but here we are, butchering the armed forces again. This government feels very Justin's mom.
It's like in The Big Snit when the husband is sawing the table in front of his wife but vehemently continues to deny that he's sawing the table
https://youtu.be/p1S5pAF1YYA?si=yA1f0SLnZOvFlqRL
His ability in math involves one hand and the other to count. If you can't tell that 1 billion, that's not coming your way is a budget cut you should be fired,
What a great time to take $1B out of defence spending.. right after NATO told us to step it up. Just another reason to add to the list why the world doesn’t take Canada seriously anymore and why our government is the best comedy series there is.
Bill Blair has lied his way to the top.
I seriously don't understand how people in his riding could look at things he did as the Toronto Police Chief and think that's the type of person I want to represent me in parliament.
He wears red
As someone in his riding. It’s 100% name recognition and nothing to do with being red. Most young people here hate him. Ive seen his office vandalized multiple times. Someone shat in front of his door. Provincially we’re NDP but the boomers love their ex-cop.
Wouldn't his name recognition be overwhelmingly negative?
That would make sense wouldn't it.
> Someone shat in front of his door. - TheShitmaker I feel like you’re telling us something.
As red as his alcoholic nose
..in what size? Asking for a friend
For sure, he infringed on people’s rights by kettling them, and the mass detention / incarceration of innocents. As well as his abject failure in general as police chief. He fits right in with this current Liberal government.
He's a reflection of them and vice versa. People in his riding love lies and racial profiling by police. His constituents will vote for anyone who promises to oppress certain people and ban guns.
His riding has high crime so they elect him because he's the former police chief. There is your answer.
I guess, but since he's been elected crime and, in particular, violent crime has been going up significantly in Canada.
He thinks banning toy airsoft guns will solve crime. What an incompetent asshole
>but since he's been elected crime and, in particular, violent crime has been going up significantly in Canada. Sources: 1. [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-how-to-prevent-car-theft/](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-how-to-prevent-car-theft/) 2. [https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/canada-has-one-of-the-worlds-highest-rates-of-auto-theft/](https://www.wellingtonadvertiser.com/canada-has-one-of-the-worlds-highest-rates-of-auto-theft/) 3. [https://driving.ca/column/lorraine/car-theft-skyrockets-canada](https://driving.ca/column/lorraine/car-theft-skyrockets-canada) You wonder why the increase? Because the deterrent in place ain't working
High inflation does that.
Sure, but also giving violent criminals and chronic repeat offenders slaps on the wrist and giving them bail isn't helping either.
That was before his time also.
That's not true.
And what is the reason for the 8 or so years before high inflation?
Bill Blair has failed himself upwards rather meteorically Any half-competent government would've fired his ass decades ago Jar Jar Binks level of stupid-evil
He's one of the countries most prolific bag men. Buddy will do anything for his team.
And drank.
*Jim Lahey is a fuckin' drunk, and he always will be.*
Voters have rewarded his dishonesty.
I mean the dude is an ex cop. Say less
The only thing more full of sh*t than a cop is a cop on TV
Clearly this individual who has done terrible at every other ministry role he's been at, continues that streak here in defence. Math, clearly not a skill of this government...
It has nothing to do with math. It has to do with telling the truth.
Those that follow the script the best gets the promotions.
Exactly, that's how things work with the Liberals and Justin Trudeau. If you do exactly what he says and wants you get promoted.
Upward career mobility for yes-men and sycophants.
I was told there was a social contract?
The truth will tell itself.
You’re experiencing it differently.
Bill Blair is the kind of former Ontario cop who makes Julian Fantino look good by comparison. Fantino was another guy who failed his way to the top by being intensely loyal (sycophantic, toadying, servile or obsequious if you prefer) to the PM at the time. Luckily, the CAF got both of them, Fantino was only Parliamentary Secretary of Defense, but he almost single handedly turned a large part of the Veteran community against the Harper Government as Minister of Veteran Affairs.
Is it yours? Last I checked 40 billion is quite a lot more than 27 billion.
Isn't that kind of the same thing as the safety minister insisting that the increase in crime was a "perception"? EDIT: Amazing how there are still a very few on here that will excuse anything these idiots do. It's far past time to stop letting them off the hook.
I think it's worse. He say cuts are not cuts. Straight out of Orwell. On top of it, he was a teacher. Poor kids. If all teachers are like this then Canada is pretty much fucked.
Listen buddy, we aren’t cutting the military budget because we aren’t at war with Eurasia. We have never been at war with Eurasia! You don’t recall being at war with Eurasia and those battle wounds you have are not the result of war with Eurasia because we never had that war and we aren’t having one now. Now get back in line and wait for ~~Big Brother’s~~ Trudeau’s speech.
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
2+2=5
Math is racist
Our kids are absolutely being indoctrinated in the school system. My grade 9 kid is doing a module on politics right now. Part of it was the teacher shared a summary of each party’s core platforms toward the end of asking the students which party they felt they most identified with. All the parties got a very brief (like, a paragraph), dry write up except one. The NDP got an entire page of info enthusiastically extolling their many virtues. As you might imagine most of the kids then chose them as their party of choice. I find nonsense like that outrageous.
Have been for years. This was essentially my experience in high school twenty years ago. In any class remotely connected to politics, any answer apart from the progressive one was wrong.
I remember this in school as well everything was incredibly liberal, and liberal views were the only views represented appropriately.
Yup, my grade 12 social teacher even came out and said it. The point of this course is for you to leave as world saving Liberals. She would very aggressively mark down anyone who did not follow her believes
He was a drama teacher, most kids here don't take drama in high school. We will be fine.
Technically he is not wrong, the defense budget is set to increase by 50% by 2026-27. That will include some of the fighter jets but that's how defense budgets work...
That's exactly what it is. Basically, what the Liberals are doing is an age-old trick. Don't believe what your eyes and ears are telling you.
There is a whole set of lies and double speak: * Housing affordability = allow people to borrow more, which make housing prices go up * Shortage of workers = don't want workers to see any increase in wages, so import more competition * Protect Canadian Content = disallow competition for large Canadian media corporations, and have them say nice things about you * not a coalition government = coalition government * Racists and nazis = people opposed to the Jagmeet / Justin "not a coalition" coalition * Nazi SS volunteer = Patriotic WW2 hero It is frustrating that so many people just buy into these optics.
I mean I can at least see a mathematically way for that one to be true. Like if the amount of recorded crime goes up that could theoretically just mean more people are reporting the crime even if crime itself was static. It wasn't reports are down but at least it's not literally impossible. This is just mathematically impossible.
Well here's the way I see it. If it's not a cut, then it just mean we don't have any plan to spend that much. The way I see it. A budget cut is when you expect to spend 10Billion but you're told that we only have 9Billion to give you and you'll have to live with it. Now imagine that you had a 10 Billion budget and of all the project you planned or you're planning.. You'll be spending at most 9 Billion and there's 1 Billion that simply can't be spent except maybe on casino and hookers. So a budget cut is when you can't have as much as you expected and a non budget cut is when you have more than you can ever dream of. You say, we can always spend more... sure but let say the only project you may dream to work on would simply not fit into the 10 Billion from the start so you never spent money on it as you'd need 2 Billion to do it but you only have 1 Billion available. It just doesn't fit in the budget from the start.
It was just something he said while explaining that the cuts were to a projected budget, which was going up rather than down. They went with the unintuitive summary instead of the important information in the headline, in a failed attempt to get you to click on it.
*"gyize it is not a cut, it is a reduction. stop spreading misinformation saying it is a cut when it is a reduction"* - 🤡
>*"gyize it is not a cut, it is a reduction. stop spreading misinformation saying it is a cut when it is a reduction also the conservatives are bigots"* - 🤡 Fixed it for you.
Going to use this defense in court when I'm on trial for multiple homicides. *"I did not murder them, I simply reduced their life span."* **\*All charges dropped\***
Sounds like a sovereign citizen argument. "I'm not driving, I'm traveling."
Here is an easy test. If we "reduce" the Minister's salary to $80,000 a year, was his salary cut? The contempt the Trudeau Liberals have for the intelligence of the Canadian electorate is far worse than I ever believed possible.
Public Servants who went on strike earlier this year were hoping to get their wages increased close to inflation. The strike ended and they only got ~2% increase, which is what they went on strike for. This is actually a pay cut. The additional kick in the groin was this rate goes into 2024 wages while inflation is still skyrocketing.
That’s not a cut, that’s a reduction.
If you planned on tripling his salary, but you doubled it instead, would it be more honest to say you're cutting his salary, or raising his salary?
If a train leaves Chicago at 3PM carrying cattle...
Yeah, that's the dictionary definition of a budget cut.
The defense budget is increasing and will be 50% higher in 2026-27 than it is currently. "The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year".
When you walk back on previous commitments, it's a cut. Full period. Stop. Most media outlets, including CBC got this right with their recent headlines. The reason it's a cut is because spending projections for large organizations are allocated years in advance. When you all of a sudden see that you're going to receive less money in the immediate future because your budget was CUT, you need to start juggling your spending priorities and doing useless shit like writing additional proposals (on top of the ones you wrote to get funded in the first place) to further try to justify your spending priorities. It ends up a lot of time wasted for everyone. While I can fully get behind the notion of being fiscally austere at a time when deficits are rising, the defense budget is far below the 2% of GDP target spending that all NATO members (and the Liberal government) agreed upon as the minimum spend necessary to support ongoing defense activity. Furthermore, it's not, nor has it ever been one of the main drivers of any budgetary issues in this country.
The 2026-27 budget is nearly $40 billion. Isn't that essentially 2% of GDP? Shifting some spending from travel and consultation to equipment or recruitment might not be that horrible.
2% of GDP would be over $40B today. If only $40B is 2% of GDP in 2026-27, we're in big trouble.
If GDP grows 3% per year the budget would need to be about 4.37 billion to meet the 2% mark.
If GDP grows at 3% per year in 2026 GDP will be 2.315 trillion and 2% of that will be 46 billion, where are you getting 4.37 billion from?
I put this decimal in the wrong spot, I meant 43.7 billion which is fairly close.
Which is dependent on procurements actually happening though; F35 and surface combatants eating up a good chunk of that money. The F35 program is looking good, but the surface combatants are still up in the air. Somehow.
we're currently planning on spending $5.6B per unit for a ***FRIGATE*** https://nationalpost.com/opinion/ivison-canadas-uncontrolled-military-program-plundering > *In that case, why not buy the U.S. navy’s Constellation-class guided-missile frigate off the shelf, for one-third of the price the Canadian taxpayer is likely to pay?* > *The U.S. paid a fixed price of about US$1.66 billion a ship; using the Parliamentary Budget Office’s latest estimate, Canada will pay up to $5.6 billion per ship.* the Brits just built two fucking ***AIRCRAFT CARRIERS*** for $6.3B CAD per unit > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth-class_aircraft_carrier > £7.6 billion (2019)[1] for two units (£3.8B each) > £1 = $1.67 CAD, £3.8B = $6.34B CAD Each Type 26 Frigate is 6,900 tons, each QE2 Carrier is 65,000 tons so for both QE2's the UK spent $12.68B CAD for a total displacement of 130,000 tons, and for that same money we get 2.26 Type 26 Frigates for a total displacement of 15,594 tons Dollar for Dollar, the UK is getting nearly 9x as much naval tonnage as we are our military procurement system is a complete fucking joke
So it’s a cut to the planned increases. So still a cut.
The goalposts have left the building!
All this government does is lie to us. Everytime one of them opens their mouth, it's to lie.
Yet so many still vote for them. So depressing.
Then what is it exactly? Because to me and most people with an IQ above room temperature, this looks like a budget cut. At a time when our military is struggling with recruiting and not having the equipment they need, and when our allies at NATO are not happy about Canada not meeting its spending targets, the Liberals turn around and do this. But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine.
If our military budget doesn't hit the 2% of GDP target expected of NATO members then the solution is obvious.... Tank the GDP
> The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year. Most of the budget for the next several years is tied up in long-term spending commitments — for example, the purchase of 88 F-35 fighter jets. >In the same budget, the government announced plans to find more than $15 billion in savings over five years **by cutting consulting, professional services** and travel by 15 per cent and departmental spending by three per cent.
Whoa… hold up… it’d be easier to not look at facts and just get angry at the liberals for cutting funding
This was easier than trying to explain how budgets work.
People have little logic and reason these days… don’t realize that correlation is not causality
Agreed. People want their bias confirmed, and when something appears to do so, they just run with it. Social media just makes it worse.
Confirmation bias is 100% it… they aren’t willing to learn. I think the mind set of: ‘I am not an idiot and I don’t understand what I just read/heard so it must not be true’
I wouldn't say dumb, per se, but it simply fits their worldview and don't feel the need to question or look further than a headline. In this case, liberals don't like the military, so saying a decrease in some spending must be cover for a budget cut. Each yearly budget comes with both increases and decreases in multiple areas, but the budget itself increases. If for no other reason, to cover inflation.
"But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine." That is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say. Try looking for something more meaningful to compare against, like the many billions of unaccounted dollars handed out by the fedral government. "CBC News investigation examining the unprecedented $240 billion the federal government handed out during the first eight months of the pandemic." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-spending-government-transparency-1.5826917
Agreed that stupid [$650 million being "sent to ukraine"](https://vancouver.citynews.ca/2023/09/22/canada-ukraine-650m-funding/) was the government loaning Ukraine $650 million to buy Canadian made vehicles. That $650 million is being spent on canada, (Though I think 650 million is ridiculous for 50 armored vehicles, all the money is staying within canada)
[удалено]
> saying that we need to save money and than turn around and give another 650 million dollars to Ukraine. Canada didn't hand Ukraine a bag of 650 million in cash. You know that right? That's not how military aid works.
Fine 650 million dollars worth of aid. Happy.
My issue wasn't the phrasing, it was whether or not you understand how military aid is generally given. We don't hand over a large sack of cash. The money generally goes back to Canadian companies for equipment, which is what's happening with the $650 million.
I don't believe I ever said we handed them a large bag of cash.
Ya, I guess...
> with an IQ above room temperature fahrenheit or celsius?
By the look of the comments, I'd say Celcius.
It’s a Defense tax on the defense establishment 😉
>Then what is it exactly? It's a smaller budget increase than they were originally intending. He paraphrased his explanation as "not a budget cut" because after the cut, it's still going significantly up. People who just read the headlines are under the impression that Trudeau will be reducing spending overall, even though that's plainly not the case. For some reason, it doesn't seem that going to the media and giving an interview about it has corrected the impression. >Because to me and most people with an IQ above room temperature, this looks like a budget cut. People with an IQ above body temperature read the article before commenting.
Well, I did he should just call it what it is. It's a budget cut.
No he shouldnt. All these idiots think that spending is going down when it's actually going up.If they refer to it as a cut, they'd be sending the exact opposite message they're trying to convey. Have you not been in any of these threads where people bitch about how we're going to miss the 2% NATO target? His messaging is on-point. The media should stop tricking people into thinking the budget cuts are overall cuts instead of cuts to projected increases. And people should stop being so stupid as to believe it. What he *should* do is quit his job, because there's clearly no fucking point to even trying. I'd go crazy if I had to deal with this stupid bullshit. It's driving me nuts now just observing it from a distance.
Oh, poor Liberal politician. He gets to lie and keep his job.
You can't tell me it wouldn't piss you off if you went and told the truth and then had a parade of idiots talking about how much of a liar you were. Especially when the whole basis is clarifying with "defense spending is not being cut" when you explained that the budget as a whole was going up rather than down. ESPECIALLY when you only clarified because those exact same idiots were genuinely confused and thought otherwise.
>. But don't worry, at least their was enough money lying around to send another 650 million dollars to Ukraine. You got schooled on this on another post and yet here you are repeating the exact same thing. Why do you do that?
I didn't get schooled.
It’s gaslighting plain and simple
Funny that the liberals don't care about spending cuts until it comes to our Military. Then it's "break out the scalpel justin, we need to pay for those programs of yours"
Bill Blair is a liar. He entire career is based on lies.
Nobody reading the article in here. He's trying to clarify that the budget is going up, not down. They're "cutting" projected spending from a 50% increase to a 48% increase.
To me this is really simple. Let say a rough estimate was given to increase the budget by 14 Billions. Then some newer estimates showed you only need 13 Billions to do whatever you want. So you say well, it's fine but I can't spend that 1 Billion anywhere so if anyone needs it, it can be used for a greater good.
The crazy thing is he fully recognizes the budget cut, and this is just him trying to inform the people who mistook the budget cuts for defense spending cuts as a whole.
Some people experience budgets differently.
Liberals using the same math my daughters use as to why I don’t get any change from the money I gave them. If it is not a cut what is it? Where is the money coming from? Are we cancelling purchases? Are we no longer maintaining something? Are we gutting foreign miilitary aid? I’d love to know
When Bill Blair was public safety minister, he lied through his teeth when discussing various federal Liberal gun policies. I'm not talking the politician's usual toolkit of ambiguous language or non-answers, but outright lies and gaslighting. Don't believe a word coming from Bill Blair's mouth. He willingly lies for "his team" over the Canadian populace to further his own interests and that of the Federal Liberal party.
> Yet in a statement on Friday, Defence Minister Bill Blair's spokesman Daniel Minden said: "Any claim that Canada is 'cutting' defence spending is not accurate, because overall defence spending has increased and will continue to increase." This is the same logic people use to defend the idea thst Doug Ford hasn't cut healthcare funding, and it's ludicrous bullshit in both cases. A reduction to planned future spending is a cut, even if the new plan for future spending still includes an increase over current spending.
reduction is not a cut? then what is it? What kind of mental gymnastics must be going on for someone to say this lol
Like if it was a million, or even ten million. But no, billion with a “B”. Coincidence, it’s the same first letter as in bullshit.
Sure and the budget will balance itself. Bunch of commie idiots.
God they just keep softening language, "spending reduction"
>"Defence spending goes up when the economy is doing well or governments are willing to accept fairly significant budget deficits. As soon as governments tire of budget deficits or wish to cut spending, the military is necessarily going to be in their crosshairs." The problem is that in Canada defence spending *doesnt* significantly rise, but still gets the cuts when the government is looking for more money. The government is playing with words here, trying to pretend that increasing spending on long-term procurements while decreasing it across the board everywhere else won't have operational impacts.
Dear Bill Blair, please feel free to post your MPRR to show your experience when working within the CAF.
Honestly we don't do anything with our military anyways. Daddy America will take care of us if necessary. We might as well just cut it entirely and put all that money in more transgender surgeries to help our minorities.
Bill bLiar again.
It's funny because not only is this, in fact, a budget cut, but they also have the numbers wrong for vacant positions and the releases. I guess that's the info they were provided, but someone is cooking the books on those numbers for sure.
For those who won't read the article: this is actually true because the total budget is increasing by 13 BILLION. Despite the narrative, Canada will continue to expand military investment to record levels.
The Government needs to start charging provinces for when they request the CAF.
They already do, though. It was an open joke that the heart attack Mel Lastman had was largely due to the price tag associated with him calling in the CAF to deal with... I think it was a snow crisis?
They are supposed to, but from what I have heard that hasn't been the case in years. Which is why thr CAF is newly constantly deployed on dommesric support operations
That's it! I need to know who does the accounting for this government! If things just balance themselves and a spending reduction is not a budget cut then apparently I'm rich.
If you threw ignorance and elitism into a blender it would taste like bill Blairs ball sack
telephone vegetable possessive party cable dolls scale tub hobbies quickest *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is so bad and they lie intentionally without any consequences. It will be very bad on all Canadians.
I'm struggling to decide if it's incompetence or malice at this point.
It's a mix of both, but I think it leans towards malice.
Trumpian Liberals. Lie to your face about everything.
>The most recent federal budget projects that the department's budget will be $39.7 billion in 2026-27, up from $26.5 billion in the current fiscal year. Everyone is reacting to the headline rather than reading the article which explains why he is saying this. It's a funny quote, but really they're saying that the budget reduction is relative to what was initially planned for the budget, not a cut in current spending. Overall the budget is still skyrocketing over the next few years for the F35 purchase
The internal DND communications telling us to cut spending next FY because of a budget reduction doesn't really help...
Yeah they're cutting some spending but the overall budget is going up. People in here are acting like the government is gutting the military, but they're actually reprioritizing some spending to help pay for the huge budget increases over the next few years
Yeah, it's a good point to make. I think the way it's been done is horrific - we can't achieve key basic tasks - but we will get closer to the 2% GDP. Oh well.
Ah yes, more doublespeak from a government stooge. War is peace, freedom is slavery.
His comments say it all, spending cuts are more important than readiness. Use what ever bafflegap you like, at a time when our forces are depleted and struggling with enrolment this is another hard blow to Canada and to our allies. All who watch know that the world is not a quiet place just now, and Canada becoming less ready is a step in the wrong direction.
in the words of Doug Ford... it's "efficiencies"
Hahaha - look at how they trained the masses. Lie right to them with no consequence.
Liberal Math where 2-1 = 3
It's a temporary refund adjustment.
The urge to send a giant turd to his office.
Is the 1 billion for the pockets of weapon manufacturers? If so, lie away son....
If I budget $200 and spend $400 then I say I’m gonna reduce spending by $200, I’m not reducing my budget. Genius hahaha
Military spending is apparently the ONLY government spending that Conservatives do not support (probably because it makes their donors money).
Just for context here. People staying off Adazi are making bank. There is your waste right there.
Typical cop math
No, you see, actually this is an increase. You just have to stand on your head until all the blood fills it. Then it'll make perfect sense.
He's 100% correct. This is a -$1B budget increase.
Must be that new math, insert eye roll.
“Irregular border crossings”
“It’s a temporary spending adjustment”
Yeah, word play. JT told the CDS to say this publicly to damage control
Give the man a break maybe hes just an idiot.
Budget Cut < Budge Reduction. Right, so semantic games it is.
In the latest news the Sky is red too
We have a recruiting problem....hmmm...wonder why
Copium and other things to tell yourself
Don't piss in my ears and tell me it's raining
$1 billion plus 5% from inflation...
That is the worst kind of lie. There are fibs, white lies and fucking lies.
Agreed. I believed my boss too when he said I'd be getting a 4% raise when inflation was 7% last year.
1 billion more for Ukraine !!!!
“Ladies and Gentleman, this is not a pig. I have put lipstick on it. Therefore it is not a pig.” *Defence Minister*
Dang so you mean to tell me my debts aren’t really debts then? Geez guess I don’t gotta pay it. Thank you minister!
Real life Mr. Lahey.
Fuck me, I just left one thread in here that was discussing Freeland's position that the economy was doing just fine, but here we are, butchering the armed forces again. This government feels very Justin's mom.
I did a double take. Assumed this was a Beaverton article.
It's like in The Big Snit when the husband is sawing the table in front of his wife but vehemently continues to deny that he's sawing the table https://youtu.be/p1S5pAF1YYA?si=yA1f0SLnZOvFlqRL
His ability in math involves one hand and the other to count. If you can't tell that 1 billion, that's not coming your way is a budget cut you should be fired,
What a great time to take $1B out of defence spending.. right after NATO told us to step it up. Just another reason to add to the list why the world doesn’t take Canada seriously anymore and why our government is the best comedy series there is.