Opinion
Misleading polls may produce more damaging federal policies
From the Fraser Institute
By Jason Clemens and Jake Fuss
72 per cent of respondents in Canada supported a new narrowly-targeted tax on wealth for the top 1 per cent to pay for new government services and/or a guaranteed annual income. But support dropped to only 16 per cent when the plan relied on increasing the GST to 20 per cent. The implications of the data are clear—Canadians support new and expanded programs when they believe someone else will pay for them.
In the wake of the 2024 federal budget, several public opinion polls have been released with potential implications for the future direction of federal policy. But unless the polls are interpreted correctly, the results could be misconstrued and lead to further damaging federal policies.
Most polls continue to show the federal Opposition significantly outperforming the governing Liberals and their partners in government, the NDP. Moreover, polls completed after the Trudeau government released the federal budget earlier this month indicate Canadians generally do not agree with the overall policy direction of the Trudeau government.
For example, according to a recent Leger poll, 56 per cent of Canadians believe the country is “headed in the wrong direction,” 59 per cent “perceive the economy as weaker,” only 19 per cent agree the government’s strategy “will benefit their personal finances,” and only 33 per cent believe the government is “taking positive steps to grow the Canadian economy.”
These results align with a recent Angus Reid poll, which found that 59 per cent of respondents think federal spending had grown too large and spending cuts were needed.
A number of pollsters, however, have noted the gulf between the overall lack of support for federal policies (including the recent budget) and strong support for individual initiatives in the budget. According to the Leger poll, for instance, 73 per cent of respondents support the new $6 billion Canada Housing Infrastructure Fund, 71 per cent support the new National School Food Program, and 67 per cent support the new $15 billion Apartment Construction Loan Program.
But these results are misleading because they only reflect one side of the question—the benefits. In other words, the polls ask respondents if they support specific programs but exclude any costs. When Canadians understand the costs, their attitudes change. They’re concerned about the level of federal spending because they see the costs—rising taxes, mounting debt and increasing interest costs.
Not surprisingly, when pollsters connect new or expanded programs with their costs, support for those programs declines. Consider a 2022 Leger poll that asked respondents about their support for pharmacare, dental care and the federal $10-a-day daycare program.
Support for the three programs is strong when no costs are attached: 79 per cent for pharmacare, 72 per cent for dental care and 69 per cent for daycare. But the level of support plummets when an increase in the GST is attached to the new program. Support for pharmacare drops to 40 per cent, support for dental care drops to 42 per cent, and daycare support drops to 36 per cent.
This general idea of supporting programs—when someone else pays for them—aligns with a 2022 poll, which found that 72 per cent of respondents in Canada supported a new narrowly-targeted tax on wealth for the top 1 per cent to pay for new government services and/or a guaranteed annual income. But support dropped to only 16 per cent when the plan relied on increasing the GST to 20 per cent. The implications of the data are clear—Canadians support new and expanded programs when they believe someone else will pay for them.
This is an important consideration because the Trudeau government has borrowed to pay for most of its new and expanded programs, meaning that the effect of the new spending would be more apparent if the government raised taxes—rather than borrowed—to pay for it. The costs of the government’s approach, however, are showing up in Ottawa’s debt interest costs, which this year will reach a projected $54.1 billion—more than the federal government spends on health-care transfers to the provinces.
As Nobel laureate Milton Friedman said, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. When polling data treat new and expanded programs as costless, they provide misleading results and policy signals to politicians. It’s essential that policymakers understand the degree to which Canadians—after they understand the costs—actually support these initiatives.
Authors:
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
I’ve written frequently here in recent years about the financial fiasco that has hit Ford Motor Company and other big U.S. carmakers who made the fateful decision to go in whole hog in 2021 to feed at the federal subsidy trough wrought on the U.S. economy by the Joe Biden autopen presidency. It was crony capitalism writ large, federal rent seeking on the grandest scale in U.S. history, and only now are the chickens coming home to roost.
Ford announced on Monday that it will be forced to take $19.5 billion in special charges as its management team embarks on a corporate reorganization in a desperate attempt to unwind the financial carnage caused by its failed strategies and investments in the electric vehicles space since 2022.
Cancelled is the Ford F-150 Lightning, the full-size electric pickup that few could afford and fewer wanted to buy, along with planned introductions of a second pricey pickup and fully electric vans and commercial vehicles. Ford will apparently keep making its costly Mustang Mach-E EV while adjusting the car’s features and price to try to make it more competitive. There will be a shift to making more hybrid models and introducing new lines of cheaper EVs and what the company calls “extended range electric vehicles,” or EREVs, which attach a gas-fueled generator to recharge the EV batteries while the car is being driven.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
“The $50k, $60k, $70k EVs just weren’t selling; We’re following customers to where the market is,” Farley said. “We’re going to build up our whole lineup of hybrids. It’s gonna be better for the company’s profitability, shareholders and a lot of new American jobs. These really expensive $70k electric trucks, as much as I love the product, they didn’t make sense. But an EREV that goes 700 miles on a tank of gas, for 90% of the time is all-electric, that EREV is a better solution for a Lightning than the current all-electric Lightning.”
It all makes sense to Mr. Farley, but one wonders how much longer the company’s investors will tolerate his presence atop the corporate management pyramid if the company’s financial fortunes don’t turn around fast.
To Ford’s and Farley’s credit, the company has, unlike some of its competitors (GM, for example), been quite transparent in publicly revealing the massive losses it has accumulated in its EV projects since 2022. The company has reported its EV enterprise as a separate business unit called Model-E on its financial filings, enabling everyone to witness its somewhat amazing escalating EV-related losses since 2022:
• 2022 – Net loss of $2.2 billion
• 2023 – Net loss of $4.7 billion
• 2024 – Net loss of $5.1 billion
Add in the company’s $3.6 billion in losses recorded across the first three quarters of 2025, and you arrive at a total of $15.6 billion net losses on EV-related projects and processes in less than four calendar years. Add to that the financial carnage detailed in Monday’s announcement and the damage from the company’s financial electric boogaloo escalates to well above $30 billion with Q4 2025’s damage still to be added to the total.
Ford and Farley have benefited from the fact that the company’s lineup of gas-and-diesel powered cars have remained strongly profitable, resulting in overall corporate profits each year despite the huge EV-related losses. It is also fair to point out that all car companies were under heavy pressure from the Biden government to either produce battery electric vehicles or be penalized by onerous federal regulations.
Now, with the Trump administration rescinding Biden’s harsh mandates and canceling the absurdly unattainable fleet mileage requirements, Ford and other companies will be free to make cars Americans actually want to buy. Better late than never, as they say, but the financial fallout from it all is likely just beginning to be made public.
- David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
President Trump on Tuesday ordered a “total and complete” blockade of all sanctioned oil tankers moving into or out of Venezuela, sharply escalating pressure on the socialist regime of Nicolás Maduro and framing the move as a national security response to terrorism, drug trafficking, and the theft of American assets.
In a Truth Social post, Trump announced that his administration has formally designated the Venezuelan regime a Foreign Terrorist Organization and directed U.S. forces to interdict sanctioned oil shipments tied to Caracas. He said Venezuela is now “completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America,” adding that previously announced airspace restrictions remain in effect. Trump accused the Maduro government of using oil from “stolen Oil Fields” to finance “Drug Terrorism, Human Trafficking, Murder, and Kidnapping,” warning that the blockade will only expand until the regime returns “all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.”
“For the theft of our Assets, and many other reasons, including Terrorism, Drug Smuggling, and Human Trafficking, the Venezuelan Regime has been designated a FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION,” Trump wrote. “Therefore, today, I am ordering A TOTAL AND COMPLETE BLOCKADE OF ALL SANCTIONED OIL TANKERS going into, and out of, Venezuela.” Trump also tied the move to immigration enforcement, saying the “Illegal Aliens and Criminals that the Maduro Regime has sent into the United States during the weak and inept Biden Administration are being returned to Venezuela at a rapid pace,” and adding that America “will not allow Criminals, Terrorists, or other Countries, to rob, threaten, or harm our Nation.”
The announcement comes days after U.S. forces seized a sanctioned oil tanker off the Venezuelan coast, an incident that sparked an angry response from Caracas. Maduro denounced the seizure as piracy, comparing it to “Pirates of the Caribbean,” and, moments before Trump’s statement was released, called for a coordinated international protest by oil workers. Speaking at a regime event, Maduro urged labor groups and maritime organizations to mobilize against what he called U.S. “piracy,” saying the oil working class must defend Venezuela’s right to trade its main export in international forums.
Following Trump’s order, the Maduro regime issued an official statement condemning what it called an “irrational naval blockade” and accusing Washington of attempting to steal Venezuela’s national wealth. The statement said Venezuela’s ambassador to the United Nations would denounce the action and urged people in the United States and abroad to “reject this extravagant threat by any means necessary.” Trump’s move marks one of the most aggressive steps yet in his renewed confrontation with Maduro, signaling a willingness to use direct military and economic pressure to choke off the oil revenue that keeps the regime afloat.
(AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
The Recall Trap: 21 Alberta MLA’s face recall petitions
Taxpayers Federation calls on politicians to reject funding for new Ottawa Senators arena
Canada’s free speech record is cracking under pressure
Albertans give most on average but Canadian generosity hits lowest point in 20 years
100 Catholic schoolchildren rescued, Nigeria promises release of remaining hostages
Canada considers creating national ID system using digital passports for domestic use
Claims about ‘unmarked graves’ don’t withstand scrutiny
-
Daily Caller1 day agoParis Climate Deal Now Decade-Old Disaster
-
armed forces2 days agoOttawa’s Newly Released Defence Plan Crosses a Dangerous Line
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s huge oil sands reserves dwarf U.S. shale
-
Business19 hours ago
Ottawa Pretends To Pivot But Keeps Spending Like Trudeau
-
Energy18 hours agoLiberals Twisted Themselves Into Pretzels Over Their Own Pipeline MOU
-
Censorship Industrial Complex16 hours agoHow Wikipedia Got Captured: Leftist Editors & Foreign Influence On Internet’s Biggest Source of Info
-
Indigenous1 day agoResidential school burials controversy continues to fuel wave of church arsons, new data suggests
-
International1 day agoFBI didn’t think it had cause to raid Trump but DOJ did it anyway