This is f-tier social media rage bait. Her reasoning boils down to ‘generational investments’ involve tax breaks to businesses, therefore generational investments are the devil.
This is literally the most garbage way to inform yourself about the budget. Go read the Guardian, or CBC, or any actual journalism. Here’s a hint: it will talk specifically about what the money is being spent on and what is being cut, it won’t just be some ranting into a camera to get clicks.
She is a journalist. She used to work for the CBC as I said. Not only was she a parliamentary press gallery reporter, but she was also a fact checker for the CBC. She was fired because of pressure from conservative groups who didn’t like to be called out for their lies. Mainly Polievre’s conservatives.
She knows what she’s talking about and found a format that could better reach today’s audience.
Maybe you’re pissed because what she said doesn’t fit your narrative? Or you don’t think women can be journalists?
No, what she said was vacuous and a broad sweeping generalization that you can learn nothing from.
The literal most basic economic comparison is that of opportunity cost, and she did not even touch on what Carney is spending the money on beyond that it must be bad because some of it is our required NATO defense spending, and some of it involves tax breaks to businesses.
Again, this is vacuous rage bait. There is a reason that serious financial and technical reports are written down and not just yammered at people, so that you can properly see and compare everything at once, using actual numbers and specifics.
She’s an actual journalist who used to work for the CBC. She’s not just some Youtuber.
Lmao. That is not actual journalism.
This is f-tier social media rage bait. Her reasoning boils down to ‘generational investments’ involve tax breaks to businesses, therefore generational investments are the devil.
This is literally the most garbage way to inform yourself about the budget. Go read the Guardian, or CBC, or any actual journalism. Here’s a hint: it will talk specifically about what the money is being spent on and what is being cut, it won’t just be some ranting into a camera to get clicks.
How about you take a chill pill.
She is a journalist. She used to work for the CBC as I said. Not only was she a parliamentary press gallery reporter, but she was also a fact checker for the CBC. She was fired because of pressure from conservative groups who didn’t like to be called out for their lies. Mainly Polievre’s conservatives.
She knows what she’s talking about and found a format that could better reach today’s audience.
Maybe you’re pissed because what she said doesn’t fit your narrative? Or you don’t think women can be journalists?
No, what she said was vacuous and a broad sweeping generalization that you can learn nothing from.
The literal most basic economic comparison is that of opportunity cost, and she did not even touch on what Carney is spending the money on beyond that it must be bad because some of it is our required NATO defense spending, and some of it involves tax breaks to businesses.
Again, this is vacuous rage bait. There is a reason that serious financial and technical reports are written down and not just yammered at people, so that you can properly see and compare everything at once, using actual numbers and specifics.