DEREK ELLIOTT for NIAGARA
@elliott4mp.bsky.social
Politician. Previous Candidate for Nipissing MPP and North Bay City Council. Former 2x Deputy Leader of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
The city council is making a classic mistake: focusing on feel-good symbolism rather than actual cost to the citizens. Changing names is pure govt waste. The estimated $750k cost to taxpayers and the burden on 1,400 residents is indefensible. Leave the names alone and cut the nonsense spending.
November 20, 2025 at 1:37 AM
The city council is making a classic mistake: focusing on feel-good symbolism rather than actual cost to the citizens. Changing names is pure govt waste. The estimated $750k cost to taxpayers and the burden on 1,400 residents is indefensible. Leave the names alone and cut the nonsense spending.
You're mistaken. Private charity and voluntary donations are exactly what a free society does best. It's not about state handouts... it's people freely choosing to support causes. That's the voluntary action the market thrives on. No one's forcing you to give, mate.
November 20, 2025 at 12:38 AM
You're mistaken. Private charity and voluntary donations are exactly what a free society does best. It's not about state handouts... it's people freely choosing to support causes. That's the voluntary action the market thrives on. No one's forcing you to give, mate.
This final point confirms your distrust of private-sector solutions, yet government monopolies are what truly fleece consumers via involuntary taxation. Compassion isn't lacking... Charity and voluntary insurance are morally superior to coerced, bureaucratic systems.
November 20, 2025 at 12:36 AM
This final point confirms your distrust of private-sector solutions, yet government monopolies are what truly fleece consumers via involuntary taxation. Compassion isn't lacking... Charity and voluntary insurance are morally superior to coerced, bureaucratic systems.
You know all those things can and are able to be provided privately without tax funding, right? Why should the government resort to theft to pay for something you want but can't convince others to fund voluntarily?
November 19, 2025 at 8:15 PM
You know all those things can and are able to be provided privately without tax funding, right? Why should the government resort to theft to pay for something you want but can't convince others to fund voluntarily?
'Cutting taxes' isn't enough the government needs to stop spending and dramatically reduce its size. The state didn't give us a break they just stole less of our rightful earnings. True relief comes from less regulation and unfettered markets not political handouts.
November 19, 2025 at 4:13 PM
'Cutting taxes' isn't enough the government needs to stop spending and dramatically reduce its size. The state didn't give us a break they just stole less of our rightful earnings. True relief comes from less regulation and unfettered markets not political handouts.
"Reinvestment" means more spending and higher taxes. The state's defence job is minimal protecting borders not running an industry. Let the free market handle production and cut the bloated budget government overreach always costs us more.
November 19, 2025 at 3:52 PM
"Reinvestment" means more spending and higher taxes. The state's defence job is minimal protecting borders not running an industry. Let the free market handle production and cut the bloated budget government overreach always costs us more.
If I came into your house and against your approval took all your stuff and gave it to the homeless, the fire department and the private companies building the roads, would it be called theft?
November 19, 2025 at 3:27 PM
If I came into your house and against your approval took all your stuff and gave it to the homeless, the fire department and the private companies building the roads, would it be called theft?
No, for everyone. Taxation is theft.
November 19, 2025 at 11:36 AM
No, for everyone. Taxation is theft.
No, you, as a consumer, decide what is best for you without interference or influence from the government. That is not their role.
November 18, 2025 at 11:28 PM
No, you, as a consumer, decide what is best for you without interference or influence from the government. That is not their role.
We have those things because consumers are willing to buy them knowing what they know and don't care enough to get an American or Canadian alternative. People forget RIMs dominance before smart phones with touch.
November 18, 2025 at 9:34 PM
We have those things because consumers are willing to buy them knowing what they know and don't care enough to get an American or Canadian alternative. People forget RIMs dominance before smart phones with touch.
While trade is vital... government-to-government co-operation often means corporate welfare and picked winners. True trade momentum comes from reducing tariffs and regulation... not from political agreements. Get the state out of the way.
November 18, 2025 at 9:12 PM
While trade is vital... government-to-government co-operation often means corporate welfare and picked winners. True trade momentum comes from reducing tariffs and regulation... not from political agreements. Get the state out of the way.
I don't believe in one size fits all legislation. I want legislation that protects everyone including those in their 20s without mental capacity to consent. You want to declare someone at an arbitrary age meets that every time. I'm comfortable with my position on this issue.
November 18, 2025 at 9:01 PM
I don't believe in one size fits all legislation. I want legislation that protects everyone including those in their 20s without mental capacity to consent. You want to declare someone at an arbitrary age meets that every time. I'm comfortable with my position on this issue.
I stand by everything I believe and say, yes. Not what some seem to believe I believe, though.
November 18, 2025 at 8:59 PM
I stand by everything I believe and say, yes. Not what some seem to believe I believe, though.
Ask bsky. Good luck in your future endeavours!
November 18, 2025 at 8:54 PM
Ask bsky. Good luck in your future endeavours!
I didn't delete anything. Maybe you should ask bsky where it went.
November 18, 2025 at 8:53 PM
I didn't delete anything. Maybe you should ask bsky where it went.
Lies and bribes! That statist way!
November 18, 2025 at 7:29 PM
Lies and bribes! That statist way!
I didn't delete anything. Good luck in your future endeavours!
November 18, 2025 at 7:01 PM
I didn't delete anything. Good luck in your future endeavours!
Thank you for clearing up that she is reported to be in hospital. Hopefully she feels better. The original point still is valid though.
November 18, 2025 at 5:49 PM
Thank you for clearing up that she is reported to be in hospital. Hopefully she feels better. The original point still is valid though.
Focusing on state-managed projects to "supercharge" the economy is a flawed model. The best way to create careers and attract investment is to slash taxes and regulation across the board. Not by picking government winners and losers... Trust the market
November 18, 2025 at 5:48 PM
Focusing on state-managed projects to "supercharge" the economy is a flawed model. The best way to create careers and attract investment is to slash taxes and regulation across the board. Not by picking government winners and losers... Trust the market
All the proof you need is watching the vote. Scheer avoided voting on purpose until they knew whether he could vote no without forcing an election. An election they would lose. This is why they also had a member call in sick instead of having to explain an abstained vote. Now you go.
November 18, 2025 at 3:24 PM
All the proof you need is watching the vote. Scheer avoided voting on purpose until they knew whether he could vote no without forcing an election. An election they would lose. This is why they also had a member call in sick instead of having to explain an abstained vote. Now you go.
If you're going to question the validity of my post, back it up with proof.
November 18, 2025 at 11:03 AM
If you're going to question the validity of my post, back it up with proof.
Your budget passed because the Conservatives feared an election, not because the House or the Public had faith in your "vision."
November 18, 2025 at 1:03 AM
Your budget passed because the Conservatives feared an election, not because the House or the Public had faith in your "vision."