Embed Notice
HTML Code
Corresponding Notice
- Embed this notice@sun
> but this isn't fact-checkable material
except that everything i found was found within 30 seconds of googling, discounting the actual time spent reading it to make sure it wasn't saying the opposite of what i thought it was saying
what you're saying about confidential meetings and anonymous sources is true in general in principle, but in this situation a big tax policy like this can't be just unilaterally decided in some backroom somewhere, if this had been formally proposed at all we'd have trudeau, singh and poilievre on record talking about it for months until we were all sick of it
a "reportedly discussing" that can't even reach that level is less than meaningless
EDIT: there's also the context that i've seen
so
many
hoax emails of a similar sort to this, always unfalsifiable in its literal meaning but insinuating something much worse that does turn out to be false, typically namedropping trudeau, that get passed around conservative boomer circles up here that this instantly set off my bullshit alarms even though i knew this might not be as clear to someone unfamiliar with canadian politics