UNCLE PIZZA AGEGE BREAD

 Canada has long prided itself on responsible governance, yet a closer examination of the country’s fiscal record over the past two decades reveals a troubling pattern of deficit spending that transcends political lines. From Paul Martin’s $13.2 billion surplus to Justin Trudeau’s ballooning deficits, successive governments have failed to exercise fiscal prudence, leaving taxpayers to shoulder the burden without seeing corresponding benefits.   When Stephen Harper took the reins in 2006, he inherited a healthy surplus from Paul Martin’s Liberal government. However, by the time Harper’s tenure ended in 2015, that surplus had been transformed into a $2 billion deficit. While the global financial crisis of 2008 necessitated some emergency stimulus measures, the years following showed little appetite for returning to fiscal balance.   Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government has taken deficit spending to unprecedented levels. Campaigning in 2015 on “modest” deficits to s...

In a world that is more connected than ever, the opportunities for mutual understanding have never been greater. Yet, paradoxically, we find ourselves retreating into echo chambers, where ignorance festers and biases grow unchecked. This troubling dynamic is exacerbated by a societal climate that discourages curiosity and genuine inquiry about race, culture, and identity.   We live in a time when freedom of speech is lauded as a cornerstone of democracy. But this freedom is increasingly tempered by fear—fear of offending, fear of backlash, and fear of being labeled ignorant or worse. As a result, many people hesitate to ask honest questions about race and culture. They remain trapped in misconceptions that could be easily dispelled through dialogue.   The consequences of this reluctance are profound. When people are too afraid to ask questions, they fall back on stereotypes and half-truths. These misconceptions, left unchallenged, solidify into prejudices. Over time,...

Canada prides itself on being a nation that cares for its citizens, offering a safety net for those who follow the rules and contribute to society. But recent experiences show that this safety net is riddled with holes, leaving some of the most vulnerable Canadians—mothers and newborns—dangling precariously.   I recently encountered a young mother in a mall, her 10-day-old baby crying in her arms. When I stopped to ask if she was okay, she explained that she had run out of money. Despite doing everything right—working, paying taxes, applying for Employment Insurance (EI) and the Canada Child Benefit (CCB)—she had been informed that her EI payments wouldn’t start until January 20 and her CCB wouldn’t arrive until January 29. Meanwhile, her baby needed food now.  There was not any delay when it was time to collect taxes from her.  This mother’s plight is emblematic of a broader issue in our country: a government system so bloated with inefficiency that even those who f...

  In an era where sensitivity and inclusivity dominate social discourse, many institutions have adopted what’s commonly referred to as “wokeness.” While the intent behind this cultural shift is often rooted in goodwill—seeking to avoid offense and create more inclusive spaces—the unintended consequences can sometimes undermine efficiency, clarity, and ultimately, sustainability.   Let me illustrate this with a real-life scenario. For this purpose let's assume 1 word is equal to $1:   I was at a church function, wearing a cap. A woman approached me, presumably to ask me to remove it. But instead of simply saying, “Please remove your cap,” a concise, four-word, $4 interaction, she opted for a lengthy preamble:   “Is it your culture to wear caps in a church? I thought I’d ask because in many cultures they wear caps, and it may be offensive to ask to remove the cap, so I thought I’d ask first.”   This turned a straightforward request into a 28-wo...

The recent pardon of Hunter Biden by President Joe Biden has reignited a perennial debate in democratic governance: where should the line between legality and morality be drawn? While the president’s use of the pardon power is constitutionally unassailable, its application in this instance has raised eyebrows, even among staunch defenders of the administration.   Presidential pardons are deeply rooted in American tradition, granting leaders the ability to correct injustices or extend mercy. Yet, the act of a sitting president pardoning his own son—especially in a case laden with political and ethical implications—risks undermining public trust. Even if no laws were broken, such an action inevitably invites accusations of favoritism and a conflict of interest.   The framers of the U.S. Constitution granted the pardon power with the expectation it would be wielded judiciously, not as a tool for shielding close associates or family members from accountability. History h...