• Boing@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    1 day ago

    LOL Yeah Right Carney you start first. When you move 94% of your investments back to Canada from the United States, Stop Gas-Lighting Canadians on the trade deals. Green light #NorthernGetaway and remove all restrictions affecting its production. Then I will start relying more on Canadian business

    • Reannlegge@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      He does not know what his investments are in and has no access to them, they are in a blind trust.

      • Boing@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        A blind trust isn’t BLIND. He can still see them in fact he has already bought military equipment for our army from one of his investments… He Knows what he has and where it is. LOL

        • Oderus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          lol… yet it is. You fiscal Conservatives don’t know shit.

          Definition of a Blind Trust A blind trust is a legal arrangement where the trustor (the person who creates the trust) transfers control of their assets to a trustee (the person managing the trust) without retaining knowledge of how those assets are managed. This setup is designed to prevent conflicts of interest, particularly for individuals in sensitive positions, such as politicians or corporate executives.

          How a Blind Trust Works Key Roles Trustor: The individual who establishes the trust and places assets into it. Trustee: An independent party who manages the trust assets without input from the trustor. Beneficiary: The person or entity that benefits from the trust, often the trustor themselves. Asset Management Once the trust is established, the trustee has full discretion over the assets. The trustor does not know what investments are held or how they are managed. This separation helps ensure that the trustor’s decisions in their professional role remain unbiased.

          • Boing@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 day ago

            I know exactly what it is and how it works. Go watch the Committee meetings that have been going on about Carney’s Conflict of Interests all ~104 of them. Remember during the election when he was asked about his conflicts and he said “What possible conflicts?” LOL https://youtube.com/shorts/P8uH7_gef4A

            • Oderus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              14 hours ago

              No, you don’t know how it works.

              “The trustor does not know what investments are held or how they are managed. This separation helps ensure that the trustor’s decisions in their professional role remain unbiased.”

              They don’t know how they are managed so they can’t influence them.

              And that YT video is nothing but Carney saying he is following the rules. How does that prove anything? Don’t be a Conservative stooge and use your brain.

              • Boing@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Yes, yes I do and I have been following the committee meetings about his COI and his screen What about the purchase of 26 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems? A “Carney conflict” refers to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s potential conflicts of interest related to his past financial holdings with the investment firm Brookfield, which includes investments in defense companies like Lockheed Martin. This was brought into focus with the Canadian government’s recent plans to purchase missile launcher systems from the U.S… You were saying something…

                • Oderus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  No, you still don’t because having stock in Brookfield is something many people do, like Pierre Polievre. You’re making something from nothing and it’s funny because it just shows how little you know. If Pierre was Prime Minister, you wouldn’t care about him owning several houses and profiting by making policy that benefits him. You Conservatives are just bigly mad because the Liberals have someone well versed in finance and your leader is a career politician that has no policy and always resorts to name calling. Big please, keep telling us what a fiscal master you are.

            • Jhex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              14 hours ago

              oh well if the moose on the lose says it… i mean, that is hard evidence right there! hahahahaha

              • Boing@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Prove him wrong. He has a challenge on his data for anyone to prove any of his sources and links to be wrong So go ahead

              • Boing@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                Scared of the truth? Contact him if you don’t believe him he is willing to be proven wrong on any piece of his data. Bitch The funny thing is the chart was just a small chart to start now it’s Charlies mess on the wall