February 28, 2016

"The government is misleading the Canadian people" about what they mean by "infrastructure"

Brian LilleyRebel Co-Founder
 

Professor Dr. Ian Lee came on this week to talk about what the Liberals really mean by "infrastructure" spending.

Most of us think of "infrastructure" as temporary projects like the creation of roads and bridges.

However -- as I've been warning for months -- it's clear that Justin Trudeau's Liberals are referring to permanent pet projects like a national daycare program.

WATCH my entire conversation with Dr. Lee HERE.

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-03-01 16:15:49 -0500
  • what the Liberals really mean by “infrastructure” spending.
commented 2016-03-01 16:13:56 -0500
Reminds me of Slick Willy (president Clinton)
well it all depends on what you mean by "BY"infrastructure
LOL LOL and now his Old Lady wants to be President hahaha hahaha
commented 2016-02-29 17:25:37 -0500
Nathan W: " More freedom for women to work, if they so choose, will grow GDP, no?"

No. If that were true then the economy would have grown already in this 21 century.
With exception of urban streets and sewers all the national infrastructure, ie; bridges, Transcanada highway, intercontinental RR, hydro dams, communications networks,etc etc were constructed years before women were a large part of the workforce or paid labor contingent.
Oddly,we are living off the legacy of our forebears and can hardly even do the maintenance and/or upgrade what they built as we pursue more debt to financially enslave our descendants with obligations to the Chinese and other foreign investors. furthermore we are endangering our very core culture to the ravages of another enslavement to Islam sharia culture by PM Islamamour.
So sad to have voters enthralled by a mindless wimp as our present Prime Minister.
commented 2016-02-29 13:48:50 -0500
All those who worship a false idol are condemned to hell already!
commented 2016-02-29 13:10:55 -0500
Social infrastructure implies long-term commitments. If anyone felt misled, it’s people who would never dream that social infrastructure might even grow the economy.

More freedom for women to work, if they so choose, will grow GDP, no?
commented 2016-02-29 11:57:48 -0500
Just more greasy misdirection in our system of institutionalized fraud.

These are only visible to and create outrage in people who have an awareness level and ethical makeup greater than a Taber Turnip.
commented 2016-02-29 11:50:59 -0500
Rebel – Please lead us in a Tax Revolt! It’s the only way to stop this nonsense.
commented 2016-02-29 03:53:16 -0500
When Lieberals mislead us with “social infrastructure” what they are really talking about is a sustantial increase in the size of the public service and, hence a substantial increase in unfunded pension liabilities. But that’s okay, I guess, because like some third world countries it’s perfectly legitimate to force your kids to pay off the debts incurred by the parents.

Which suggests another point. Is it actually ethical to force future generations to pay for a social program that they never had an opportunity to vote for?
commented 2016-02-29 00:32:02 -0500
PERRY BOURQUE : “manufacturing jobs would be awesome if we could afford the production costs. We traded quality made in Canada goods that would last a lifetime if maintained for cheap box store garbage mass produced in China that within a year or two, ends up in a landfill. We are a throw away society, all to benefit those “developing nations”, that seem to be perpetually developing.”

Also factor in how much mark-up needs to be in place for those same cheap consumer goods to be made in Canada. That would require factoring in a potential labour union and/or our higher wages. China has been exploiting this for decades and even strategically manipulate their currency value to make it even worse. We simply cannot compete in the manufacturing sector without renegotiating our trade deals with the rest of the world. Even the US exploits us simply because they can. NAFTA was and is an economic disaster for us.

I do truly worry for Canada because we have a PM who will potentially provoke whomever becomes the next POTUS, be it Trump, Clinton, or Sanders, into one-sided tariffs or increased cross-border tensions as happened under Chretien when Bush Jr. was POTUS. This may be especially bad for us if Trump becomes POTUS. He seems easily provoked…
commented 2016-02-28 23:21:19 -0500
That is what Liberals’ do been that way since day one, what they say and what they do is two different things – they talk and charge expensive, what they deliver to the people is cheap and uneconomical usually costing high fees for many years’ down the road and into the future! That is the trademark of Liberal and NDP Socialist Government!
commented 2016-02-28 17:31:48 -0500
One of my frustrations with politicians but especially this current Liberal government is the very simplistic approach to issues like economics. I know that I am not a particularly sophisticated thinker on many topics and do not have the formal education required to offer substantial analysis on many of the complex and serious portfolios of government. This is why I am frustrated and perplexed by not just Mr. Trudeau but also by his supporters. It would be nice if once in a while Mr. Trudea could put together a reasoned, coherent, and substantial case for his policies and proposals. In an attempt to be objective, I would like to have more of this from all politicians. With that said, from my biased right leaning view, conservatives do a much better job of this.
I believe that issues should be approached from a classical philosophical approach. We should start with a premise. In the case of Mr. Trudeau and his approach, I assume the premise is spending tax payer dollars on government programs. It would be nice if he could begin by telling us which programs and projects he wants to spend tax payer dollars on. Then, if he could elevate his thoughts it would be good to get a coherent argument on how and why this spending is good for Canadian citizens? This would involve a set of premises that supported a conclusion. Hopefully, a conclusion that made sense.
Like most conservatives, I dislike governments spending my money on initiatives and programs that are forced on me. Now, I have to check myself here. I am not against all government programs and spending. I recognize the value of things like EI, welfare, accessible health care, etc. But where should it end and where should it begin? It would be nice if it began with a government being honest in its intentions and agenda. And, it would be nice to know there was an end or a limit! With every successive progressive government there is another social spending project that is measured in ever increasing base units of one billion dollars. The money is one thing but then there is the inexorable push by governments to engineer society and control its citizens. The reason I like Canada (besides its geography and riches of natural resources) is that it is still a free country. I want to be free and especially free of government. I would also like to be free to keep the money that I earn. I want to be free from someone imposing their philosophies on me. If a couple wants to put their kids in daycare then that is their choice but don’t make tax payers foot the bill.
Going back to the larger concept of government and clear policy making I want to adapt an idea from Kevin O’Leary. He said something along the lines that government is where money goes to die. He is dead on. For every dollar government collects in taxes there is a cost to the business that generated that revenue. Then there is a cost to collect that money, there is another cost to administer that money and manage it. Finally there is the very inefficient process of reinvesting that money in ways that are often unfair and counterproductive. Federal governments collect taxpayer money that gets transferred to provinces which gets transferred to municipalities which gets transferred to organizations that issue contracts to private corporations that have been lobbying all three levels of government for the contracts that were driven by special interest groups driving an agenda set out by a politician who wants your vote.
At least when Chrétien and Martin were in control of the Liberal party they had decent conservative fiscal sense. I’m still waiting for Trudeau to make any kind of sense.
commented 2016-02-28 16:49:38 -0500
Next dinner party you are at ask for a show of hands how many people now trust government? In less than one year the Liberal party has demonstrated it is morally bankrupt and deficient at all levels in managing even a lemonade stand.
commented 2016-02-28 16:35:35 -0500
Edward Jobin-manufacturing jobs would be awesome if we could afford the production costs. We traded quality made in Canada goods that would last a lifetime if maintained for cheap box store garbage mass produced in China that within a year or two, ends up in a landfill. We are a throw away society, all to benefit those “developing nations”, that seem to be perpetually developing.
commented 2016-02-28 15:30:33 -0500
Trudeau is just a puppet of the UN, they control his every move.

The Marxist controlled UN is instructing Trudeau to swamp Canada with Muslims.

Muslims will take over the Canadian Police Force and will enforce Sharia Law on the populace.

UN Marxist will take over the finances of Canada and any Canadians that are still alive, will be paying UN Tax and Islamic Tax.

All none Muslims will be quickly eliminated. Live Burial, Stoning, Thrown off roof tops, (Watch out Wynne, it’s the CN Tower for you).

Solution? Perhaps if there was a large enough petition, stating that the people of Canada have strong doubts in the ability of this Government to run this Country, the petition could then be sent to the Governor General, who by law has to forward it to the Queen, who has the power to recall Parliament and call a new Election. Worth a try?
commented 2016-02-28 15:17:35 -0500
If you look the financial adviser Peter Schiff he explains how even building roads is not a way to grow your economy. Once the roads are finished you need jobs to drive to. What we need is manufacturing jobs which is what made our countries prosperous. It is the same thing that is now making China wealthy. When you build roads the only money the government makes is the taxes it gets back from the workers but when you have manufacturing jobs you not only tax the employees and the companies but each time a product is sold the government makes more money. This is why we should be wanting fair trade not free trade so our manufacturing jobs stand a chance at competing.
commented 2016-02-28 14:36:42 -0500
Misleading? Lying? Seems random Brian.

Well it’s not.

Socialists have historically promised heaven and delivered hell. Hitler did it. Pot Pol did it. Mao did it. Stalin did it. Castro did it. Kim Jung X did it.

All socialists do this. Socialists promise the utopia (heaven for short) and deliver murder, rape, pillage, blunder, theft (hell for short).

You chose this prick Trudeau Canada – you deserve the misery that is coming.
commented 2016-02-28 14:06:40 -0500
when they are through we wont remotely recognize…our once great country…
commented 2016-02-28 13:37:42 -0500
Canada needs a new political party. The Liberals have become socialists and made the NDP more irrelevant than ever and Harper’s Conservatives were too Liberal. What we need is a new right of centre party that, in all considerations be they economic, environmental or security, will put the interests of the Canada and the Canadian people first.

The clear speaking Brad Wall of Saskatchewan would be an excellent choice for a leader. And if named the “CANADA FIRST” party, the goals of the party would be unambiguous and self-evident.

If Mr. Wall undertakes to set up such a party, I would contribute the first $100.00.

As a last thought, keep Preston Manning out of it. Remember what happened in Alberta because of his meddling – the NDP won government.
commented 2016-02-28 13:32:32 -0500
Liberal Gov. announced this morning that it’s allocating $228,0000 for affordable housing facility in Saskatoon. Is that more taxpayers gift for the “not so refugee” refugees ??
commented 2016-02-28 13:05:43 -0500
The Liebranos misleading taxpayers! Gasp!, Gasp! Tell me it ain’t so!
commented 2016-02-28 13:02:47 -0500
Governments mislead people about everything- that’s what they do – they create problems where there are none so they can offer solutions which advance agendas which favor their best interests.

Liberal governments are the worst for this deception because the elements of it that are not openly in it for themselves have a deluded idea that their interests are Canada’s interests and time and again this has proven false in scandal after scandal.

Like Paul Martin being finance min and PM and still the head of CSL – that was no conflict of interest when CSL received special tax exemptions – it was in the interests of Canadian shipping industry – even if CSL fly foreign flags to avoid Canadian taxation – It’ fer Canada doncha see.
commented 2016-02-28 12:51:55 -0500
Just plain gobbledygook to mask billions of dollars in spending that will amount to absolutely nothing in the end. Definitely will NOT be value for taxpayers’ hard-earned money. Will absolutely NOT help the economy whatsoever! We have witnessed it at work in Ontario over the past number of years. We are witnessing it now in Alberta. Canada is now a wreck of its former glory!
commented 2016-02-28 11:05:58 -0500
@ Perry Bourque
that was just maddening as hell !
sure…trudeau is doing just wonderful things with the economy.
we need to turn our enemy against the powers that be and let them do the dirty work.
then we clean up the rest.
commented 2016-02-28 11:02:34 -0500
trudeau thinks infrastructure is the seating arrangement in the theatre in his house.
commented 2016-02-28 10:39:13 -0500
Already a $20 billion + deficit is predicted, with annual increases well beyond that. I’m predicting that by the next election, the total debt portion will be well over $120 billion +. You can buy a lot with that amount of money, including “Islamist Infrastructure”. You know, things like mosques, schools (Muslim only) and special education centers. This is be the first step toward the creation of the North American Islamic super-state.

It should noted that concerns about Canada’s pro-Islamist positions are beginning grow. Even Canada’s inclusion in the last GOP debate, identifying Canada has a threat to US national security, it timely and entirely warranted.
commented 2016-02-28 10:27:03 -0500
DEBORAH GRAUPNER

Those mosques will be included in the pork…
commented 2016-02-28 08:25:22 -0500
I think he’s referring to building mosques on the public dime!
commented 2016-02-28 07:12:43 -0500
Infrastructure means pork and that’s what’s going to happen.

There will be infrastructure spending for political purposes, this means roads where they are not needed, bridges to nowhere, and public transit that no one will use.

Billions and billions of it. Tens of billions, hundreds of billions, it doesn’t matter. It’s not JT’s problem. He has one mission and one mission only: recreate an Islamic super-state in North America.