For my Canadian friends

Those North of the U.S. / Canadian border may mistakenly believe their Southern neighbors neither know nor care about Canada's plight.
We are about to explode this myth of U.S. indifference:
"15,000 New Jobs For Albertans" #119
Who is Albertans, and why does he need 15,000 new jobs?
 
1747168603055.png

Caroline Boudakian

perotsdSno017hac0cut33c214g15t9c795uahh43m3l7h4t53740ml5fc8g ·
By: Ron Ledohowski
- - -
“Politics should not be a lifelong career,” wrote a 20-year-old Pierre Poilievre in 1999. “Elected officials should not be allowed to fix themselves in the halls of power of a nation.”

And yet, 25 years later, Poilievre has done precisely that.

Since first being elected in 2004 at the age of 25, Poilievre has been a full-time federal politician—and little else. With more than two decades in office, he’s the epitome of the career politician he once criticized. And the benefits have been substantial: Pierre Poilievre is now entitled to a taxpayer-funded pension valued at over $200,000 per year, beginning as early as age 55. Indexed to inflation, that lifetime payout could exceed $3.4 million.

For contrast, the average Canadian won’t qualify for full Canada Pension Plan (CPP) benefits until age 65, and even then, the maximum payout in 2025 is about $1,364 per month—just over $16,000 annually. Many receive far less.

So while ordinary Canadians work into their 60s (or longer) for modest retirement income, Poilievre is on track to receive a six-figure annual pension decades earlier—funded by those same taxpayers.

But the story doesn’t end with irony—it deepens into farce.

After leading the Conservative Party into a historic and unexpected defeat in the 2025 federal election—losing both nationally and in his own riding to Prime Minister Mark Carney—Poilievre has been handed a lifeline: parachuted into a guaranteed-safe Alberta seat, despite not having lived in the province for over 25 years.

The cost to Canadians? Millions of dollars. That includes the by-election expenses, Poilievre’s salary and benefits, and the public-funded Ottawa residence he’ll continue to occupy—even while ostensibly representing Alberta. All this, for a man who built his political identity around decrying government waste, entitlements, and political elites.

It’s a move so egregious it would have had the younger Pierre Poilievre foaming at the mouth.

In the end, the hypocrisy isn’t just personal—it’s systemic. Poilievre has become the very embodiment of the entrenched political class he once condemned. He railed against government privilege and careerism, only to entrench himself deeper into it than most ever do.

And now, Canadians are left paying the price—literally—for a man who, by his own words, should have known better.

1747168646106.png
 
"... a limit of two terms" Poilievre #122
There's nothing in the middle of the road except yellow lines and dead armadillos. Jim Hightower
I want what's best for the People.

In the U.S. the Republicans instituted a two term limit on the U.S. president, apparently out of bitterness for Democrat FDR's 4 terms. BUT !
Republicans shot themselves in the foot with it, they'd have loved to run Reagan for a third term.

Fred Thompson was a successful actor in the wildly popular Law & Order television series. Thompson also served in the U.S. senate.

The appeal of the citizen legislator is obvious. BUT !
Due to congressional rules, a voting district may multiply its own power by re-electing incumbents, because
members of congress accrue seniority with reelection, and seniority can be a prerequisite to leadership positions such as committee chairman.

I've got no dog in the Canadian parliament term limit issue. As a layman, I'm not sure what's best. There are benefits and disadvantages to either. BUT !
The Polilievre hypocrisy hasn't escaped my notice.
 
Back
Top