Danielle Smith just sold out the LGBTQ community. Who’s next? (www.nationalobserver.com)

submitted 1 year ago by CaractacusPotts@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] FunderPants@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 year ago

Fiscal conservatism, in the strictest sense, has always been a means of conserving the favored hierarchies. We don't fund social programs, and as a result we maintain the rich/poor dynamic for example. This definition has nothing to do with prudent effective spending, I think.

What we think of as traditional Canadian fiscal conservatism is more correctly prudent fiscal liberalism. A willingness to engage in the use of fiscally measures for social gain so long as the funding is effective.

It's a shame that fiscal conservatism has somehow become synonymous with wanting to spend money wisely.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

What we think of as traditional Canadian fiscal conservatism is more correctly prudent fiscal liberalism.

Oh 100%: Justin Trudeau's policies are either taken directly from the Con party (Carbon Tax credits, etc), or are directly in line with their values. The Con party has voted in favour/alongside the Liberal party in something like 95% of all votes taken since Trudeau came to power.

They just don't like him. That's fine, I don't either. The issue is that, also as you've stated, they keep inventing this idea that 'fiscal conservatism' A) has worked in the past, and B) will work now. They shuffle past the fact that when they were at their best they were Neoliberals.