What a crazy surprise. Who would have thought that paying an organization to do the same thing as another while also making a profit would cost more?

  • cramola
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Big surprise. Tories want to defund social/public services and funnel funds that were meant for it into the private sector…pricks just want to ruin everything and join the aristocracy. Same old same old. Ruin public infrastructure, prop up your buddies’ for profit operations, maybe get a kickback, call it a day. Having a conservative government is like having organized crime in power.

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This always has been and remains a colonialist nation. It was designed and created by corporations and oligarchs. A colonialist government exists specifically and explicitly to extract natural and human resources from its nation and transfer that value to entrenched capital. The Liberals are every bit as dedicated to this as any conservative party is. They have slightly different plays, but it’s no coincidence that we have among the most expensive telecom, food and housing costs; it’s mainly because of Liberal policies that they either implemented themselves or continued to expand when they had the opportunity.

      When they start trying to ban abortion and sexual practices, you can blame the conservatives. This? This is just Canada.

      • cramola
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I disagree with the conceit that everything and everyone in this place is all about exploitative behavior. I do agree that that tends to be the nature of our politicians. I’m not stumping for the Liberal party, and certainly they’ve allowed whatever private sector forces free reign to gouge us in the past, that’s just a feature of our “wonderful capitalist system”. The common ideology between lib/con forces is that they both expect to profit off of being in power, the difference is that the cons tend to want to do it at any cost, and hate social services. They both love to cozy up to private interest, but the cons will actively seek the destruction of any social service. There are reasons to try to convince folks to not support them even if the alternative kind of blows. I would rather neither as well, but what exactly are you advocating for?