The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - CBC Host Gets Absolutely Owned Trying to Spin Mark Carney's Recession

00:00:00.000 Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here, and welcome back to the National Telegraph YouTube channel.

00:00:06.300 Since Prime Minister Mark Carney led Canada into a recession, I think the biggest story within the story

00:00:13.260 has been the legacy media, especially the CBC's, willingness to employ weasel terms like technical recession

00:00:21.500 in place of just saying recession.

00:00:25.100 We all know if the prime minister was a conservative, the legacy media would just be calling it a recession

00:00:30.920 and wouldn't be hosting panel discussions of hack economists discussing whether this even matters at all

00:00:37.680 and regurgitating liberal propaganda about this being transitory and other defense spending not being out the door yet

00:00:44.700 and all these other stipulations to soften the blow that Carney has indeed led us into a recession

00:00:51.140 despite the fact that he was supposed to be some sort of financial guru.

00:00:55.520 One of the people I have to give a lot of credit to on this topic

00:00:58.440 has been former NDP leader Tom Mulcair,

00:01:01.980 who directly called out the media's willingness to bend language in favor of Carney.

00:01:07.700 It's a huge political issue,

00:01:09.980 and I love the way the word technical crab walked its way sideways

00:01:15.440 and attached itself to the word recession.

00:01:17.880 because i don't know about you guys but i'm trying to find any textbook that

00:01:21.720 gives a definition of a technical recession yes officer technically i was speeding but it was only

00:01:27.840 a few miles an hour above the speed limit a recession is a recession is a recession

00:01:33.680 two consecutive quarters negative growth recession not a technical recession so

00:01:38.860 poylev is right to go hard on that i always find tom mulcair to be pretty fair and at the end there

00:01:45.940 of course, he starts going into how Pierre Polyev should absolutely be hammering on this every

00:01:50.500 single day. Remember, this guy used to lead the NDP and he's saying absolutely Polyev is right

00:01:55.920 to be drilling down on this issue. At the same time, you have hacky liberal commentators coming

00:02:02.280 on these different panel shows to say, well, Polyev is taking too much glee and attacking

00:02:07.520 the prime minister over this. In fact, he should basically be standing next to Mark Carney looking

00:02:13.140 at his shoes solemnly and just lamenting the fact that Donald Trump has done this all to us.

00:02:18.740 Tom Mulcair also defended Pierre Polyev when he didn't want to get the security clearance

00:02:22.920 that Justin Trudeau was trying to force him to get to look at the information about which MPs

00:02:29.280 were potentially compromised by foreign governments, because Tom Mulcair rightfully

00:02:33.180 pointed out even if Pierre Polyev jumped through all the hoops in order to get the security

00:02:39.100 clearance, the security clearance would preclude him from ever talking about the information he

00:02:44.160 would then see, even if outside information confirmed something that he read in the report.

00:02:49.200 So although I don't always agree with Tom Melker, obviously, I find that he's very politically

00:02:55.000 neutral in the way he actually sees, you know, events that happen. He tends to apply the same

00:03:02.240 consequences of events to every single politician, no matter what their party is. If you fail as

00:03:07.880 Prime Minister, he's not going to downplay it. But anyways, this video is really about hacking on

00:03:14.500 my favorite hacky CBC host, and that is David Cochran. Sorry, Rosemary Barton. He has taken

00:03:22.320 the throne as the worst CBC host. He had a truly abysmal interview recently with conservative MP

00:03:30.220 Adam Chambers, where again, he just starts like almost begging and like trying to like,

00:03:37.300 I guess, negotiate with Adam Chambers into letting Prime Minister Mark Carney off the hook.

00:03:43.540 Because really, David Cochran and Rosemary Barton and most of the people at the CBC

00:03:48.560 are liberal flack catchers. They're not even exactly propagandists. I believe that would

00:03:53.860 imply a certain amount of skill that people like David Cochran do not possess. They are flack

00:03:59.420 catchers. They're simply there to try and stop the outrage from coming at the Liberal Party too

00:04:05.580 hard. In just a second here, I want to go through a lot of this interview. Then I want to talk a

00:04:10.300 little bit about what I think the consequences of the recession and some of the other things

00:04:15.160 that Mark Carney has been doing recently are going to have on the polls. But before we get

00:04:19.840 into it, I just want to remind you guys, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on this

00:04:24.160 video. Subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber. Leave a comment with what you think about all

00:04:29.760 this. It does help the channel's analytics if you do comment, and I do read through a lot of them.

00:04:34.780 And, of course, if you want to do more for the channel and contribute monthly, making me less reliant on the very fickle YouTube algorithm, you can always hit the join button below the video and become a channel member for a few dollars a month.

00:04:47.860 Anyways, let's get into this interview, and don't have any sharp objects around yourself. You might be tempted.

00:04:55.040 Adam Chambers, always good to see you. Thanks for coming in today, sir.

00:04:57.240 Great to be back, David.

00:04:57.980 Your leader, your party has been saying these bad economic data as a result of the 15 months of Mark Carney's tenure as Prime Minister, David Dodd says it's really more like the 15 to 20 years of failure of government policy. How do we square those differences?

00:05:10.720 The last 15 to 20 years. Notice how the last 15 to 20 years would just conveniently include Stephen Harper's era. It's not even just Justin Trudeau. 15 to 20 definitely captures Stephen Harper in part, if not the entirety of his time as prime minister.

00:05:30.540 I find this immediately. He's just so obvious in what he's doing. It's just a structural issue

00:05:39.220 that Canadian government has had forever. It's just a policy issue that we've been working

00:05:44.120 through for over 20 years. So can you really get mad at Mark Carney for working through a policy

00:05:49.240 issue that's been in the making since Harper and back in 2006? It's annoying. It's frustrating,

00:05:55.620 guys well i think you know i listened to uh your interview with uh mr dodge who's a very well

00:06:01.200 respected economist in canada of course um but i would say some of the messages that he's giving

00:06:06.960 today about well we should wait to see and he thinks that the government is on the right track

00:06:10.680 sounds a lot like the david dodge in 2015 who said that large deficits were going to produce

00:06:15.560 a lot of growth and economic uh stimulus for the country when prime minister trudeau was proposing

00:06:20.460 them. So, and even David Dodge himself suggested he might be wrong in his estimation. So I think

00:06:25.980 it's fair to point out that the prime minister made a very specific promise during the election,

00:06:31.080 which was delivering the strongest economy in the G7. So I think it's our duty to remind people

00:06:36.940 and the prime minister that that's the promise that he made and the results and report card are

00:06:40.820 in. How is Adam Chambers doing a better job at David Cochran's hosting job than David Cochran?

00:06:49.760 He was able to fact check the previous guest on his predictions around Trudeau's deficit spending in 2015 that David Cochran, I watched it, did not bring up. 0.81

00:07:03.580 And David Cochran just kind of threw that one across the plate, assuming that Adam Chambers would just be dumb enough to accept the premise.

00:07:10.140 Well, this old retired economist said that this could all just be OK.

00:07:13.840 So why don't you just say it's all OK?

00:07:16.320 Right. Look, there's no question he made that promise.

00:07:18.360 It's 13 months into a, you know, potentially 60-month mandate, so we'll see.

00:07:22.760 But, you know, David Dodge isn't alone in his analysis of where things are. 0.98

00:07:26.700 Wow, there's other stupid people who are saying the same thing as David Dodge? 1.00

00:07:30.560 Oh, my goodness. 1.00

00:07:32.160 The technical recession data is not as serious as people would think.

00:07:36.060 It could be revised.

00:07:37.500 StatsCan's already predicting a 0.4% rebound in April alone.

00:07:42.600 Most of the major banks agree with him.

00:07:44.840 It's the Conservative Party that's out there saying full-blown recession.

00:07:48.360 not the people whose job it is to watch the economy for a living.

00:07:52.660 Well, the same groups were predicting that we were going to grow in the first quarter.

00:07:57.660 And now they're saying, well, yeah, we didn't grow in the first quarter of 2026 like we predicted,

00:08:03.900 but we're saying in April we might rebound by 0.04.

00:08:09.080 It's like, okay, so I guess we're back to like neutral.

00:08:13.320 I don't even think that gets us to neutral.

00:08:15.060 like maybe neutral, if not infinitesimally small growth. And that's if their prediction even holds

00:08:22.180 up. But again, what is this? We're now debating whether, oh, well, what's with the Conservatives

00:08:27.440 not agreeing with a bunch of allies of the Prime Minister? Why don't you agree with Stats Canada

00:08:34.140 predictions that were previously not correct, and we just saw them deliver negative growth numbers

00:08:39.940 for the last quarter? Why don't you agree with them, Adam Chambers? Well, the data says it's a

00:08:44.040 recession and frankly even if there's a revision up of the quarter we just had so that there is

00:08:50.120 you know we're technically out of the recession we're still talking about low and anemic growth

00:08:55.360 and certainly nothing to write home about and certainly not leading in the g7 and and so i think

00:09:00.200 uh it uh we should not accept or we should refuse to accept and and shrug our shoulder and say well

00:09:06.560 it might take three or four years to work uh its way out there are things and policy actions that

00:09:11.320 the government can take immediately to help on this front. And frankly, the prime minister's

00:09:15.920 economic plan hasn't really taken any bold steps. I mean, you've mentioned investments in defense,

00:09:21.900 of course. But if you think about structural reforms to taxes or regulation, we are still

00:09:26.740 waiting to see them. Yeah, look, no one is saying the economy is in good shape.

00:09:30.800 Wow. Adam, stop making good points on David Cochran's show. Who do you think you are?

00:09:35.920 piece some elective official you know get it why are you why are you even here why are you even 0.89

00:09:42.520 here it's not like I invited you here and now you're making good points on my show bigot Nazi 0.55

00:09:48.320 like well the thing is he's just like kind of like shifting around Adam Chambers point I'm like yeah

00:09:54.200 it's been over a year since he's been prime minister other people have become the leaders

00:09:59.620 of other countries and turn it around within months it's not like Canada was some like debt

00:10:04.640 basket case like Argentina was that Javier Mele really had to dig into and slash spending and

00:10:11.220 cut regulations and taxes in order to make that economy work. If Carney, let's just say, reduced

00:10:16.000 taxes across the board by like 8%, he would actually probably have spurred on some real

00:10:22.740 organic growth. He cut taxes under $50,000 by 0.5%. Our pockets are overflowing with all the

00:10:33.240 abundance that that mark carney has given us what else has he done some regulatory reform that's

00:10:38.260 like unnoticeable hasn't even gotten rid of the anti-development policies he implemented the clean

00:10:44.160 energy standard he tried to throw in a digital services tax and a streaming tax that the only

00:10:50.260 reason it was stopped because donald trump stopped it so donald trump has lowered more taxes and

00:10:54.680 eliminated more taxes than mark carney has for canadians don't get me wrong right i know i know

00:10:59.960 you're someone who would bring up, oh my goodness, the tariffs, I'm obviously just meaning domestic

00:11:03.240 taxes. You know, it is at best kind of in neutral right now, idling before it maybe potentially

00:11:09.940 takes off or goes in reverse. We don't know. But the definition of a recession, I know the

00:11:15.720 technical definition, the criticism of that is that it's not really a precise enough measurement.

00:11:21.180 And CD House says you need to look at duration, that it needs to be sort of prolonged, the

00:11:25.440 amplitude it must be significant enough to you know be prolonged the whole point is that you

00:11:31.840 measure two quarters because that would indicate it's been prolonged it's not just you know one

00:11:36.920 month you're down and then the next month you're actually way up it's been two straight quarters

00:11:41.300 in fact over the last four quarters we've shrunk so what is he trying to what's he trying to pull

00:11:47.000 here by like pretending like well cd howl says you need to look at other metrics the other metrics 0.95

00:11:52.240 suck. So which other metric do you want to choose, David Cochran? This is basically like he's

00:11:58.660 looking at, he's trying to play Russian roulette with a fully loaded revolver here.

00:12:03.500 A genuine contraction, not just a minor temporary rounding error, which this could be. And it has

00:12:08.800 to be broad-based. Do you think that's where the economy is right now? I know there are pockets,

00:12:12.940 I know there are sectors, and I know there's real hardship. But is the Canadian economy in that

00:12:17.140 States? Well, let's just look at the employment numbers. 112,000 people in the last number of

00:12:22.320 months are no longer employed today and looking for work. So that is a proof point. Exactly.

00:12:27.980 6.9% unemployment. Those are real people, right? So it doesn't 0.72

00:12:31.520 screw those people. They're probably racist or something. 0.98

00:12:33.680 Matter, frankly, if the economy grows by 0.1%, 0.5% or down by 0.5%, you have unemployment going

00:12:41.620 up in the wrong direction is a challenge for all families, including those who are unemployed. So

00:12:47.520 I don't believe the economy is in the healthiest form that it could be, or that it should be. And

00:12:54.540 I think, as we pointed out, there are some immediate steps that the Prime Minister could

00:12:58.020 take to provide that economic stimulus to get investment moving again in this country. And I

00:13:05.440 say, you know, we're still waiting to see the benefits of the economic credentials that the

00:13:10.340 prime minister ran on. Right. So David Dodge's analysis, and it aligns with what we've heard

00:13:15.600 from a lot of the major banks, is that the immigration cuts, which was something your

00:13:19.720 party also championed because it had gotten out of control, that affects things because a lot of

00:13:25.580 the really modest growth that we had as a country was driven by students and other temporary

00:13:30.860 workers, temporary residents coming in. Yeah, that's not a defense. That's in fact a strong

00:13:36.440 indictment of how bad the economy was under justin trudeau and let's say it under mark carney he was

00:13:43.720 justin trudeau's economic advisor for five years do you ever think that mark carney walked into

00:13:48.480 justin trudeau's office or gave him a phone call and told him what he should do and justin trudeau

00:13:53.620 was like nah i got this one i don't think that justin trudeau ever made a decision for himself

00:13:59.460 without someone advising on it first and so the whole idea that we're like gonna now like

00:14:05.040 you know wave away just magic trick away all the criticism of the current bad economy saying well

00:14:10.720 you know he's doing what you wanted on immigration now the gdp numbers are going down

00:14:14.840 like okay yeah that means the economy always sucked and we were like pasting wallpaper over

00:14:21.240 like the smelling rotting walls and now that we've gotten rid of it maybe we can clean it up

00:14:26.120 and carney since lowering immigration which has been one of his modest wins although actually

00:14:31.320 Justin Trudeau was doing it before him, and he just continued it. He's revealed all the rot behind

00:14:38.580 the walls, and he's just looking at it and doing nothing about it. That's Adam Chambers's point.

00:14:43.680 Yes, the economy sucks because there's no actual change. What is going to make an investor put a

00:14:50.700 dollar into the economy? What's been the actual thing to attract these people in? Because apparently

00:14:58.700 like mark carney thinks that like people are going to show up for his subsidy economy because

00:15:03.620 that's effectively his plan we're just going to subsidize the heck out of certain industries

00:15:07.880 to keep the jobs here to keep them from going to the u.s or elsewhere something something something

00:15:13.540 profit like that's all we have going for us right now the government is willing to dump stimulus

00:15:19.060 money into the economy which no foreign investor is really going to show up for yes we're getting

00:15:23.680 some foreign investment in heck we're dumping a bunch of money on the floor so of course some

00:15:28.100 people are going to show up, but it's not long-term growth. It's not long-term sustained

00:15:34.160 economic growth with jobs that are going to be permanent. They'll be here as long as the subsidy

00:15:39.700 money is rolling in and subsidies don't fuel an economy. It has a very muted effect compared to

00:15:45.780 a real dollar entering the economy because everyone knows it's kind of fake at the end of

00:15:50.060 the day. We're gaining jobs simply because we're spending a lot of military. We're gaining jobs

00:15:54.460 simply because we threw money at the auto sector and the steel sector and whatnot.

00:15:59.600 If we just slashed corporate taxes, we wouldn't be able to stop people from running into the

00:16:04.240 economy to expand in Canada. And also the change in government spending,

00:16:07.860 sort of a shifting away from the recalibration that's happening there.

00:16:12.820 We've actually been increasing spending, so I don't even know what he's talking about here.

00:16:15.940 Like, well, you know, Mark Carney's been more fiscally conservative. No, he hasn't.

00:16:19.900 He's adding more money on top of what Trudeau was spending in an economy where the GDP is shrinking.

00:16:25.860 So it's way outpacing inflation right now, the increasing government spending.

00:16:30.940 Sort of a shifting away from the recalibration that's happening there is part of the reason for the flattening.

00:16:37.580 And this restructuring to move towards the defense policies, for example, is going to take some time and should pay off.

00:16:44.240 So that's what they say.

00:16:46.080 It should pay off. That's what they say.

00:16:48.080 At the same time, he just says it. He then just shifts to like, well, they say this. I'm like, just say they say this. But every time, I hate David Cochran because as you listen to him, you'll see him just kind of pushing premises as if it's just true. And sometimes later, he'll say, well, that's what they're saying.

00:17:05.220 It's a bit of time for it to gain some traction. So in the intervening time, what is it you think they could do right now that would jolt things without messing up the budget even more?

00:17:15.120 Well, absolutely. Here's a few ideas. We ran on this during the election, but produce a large tax cut for companies that sell assets that produce gains, capital gains tax. We've said this. If you reinvest those assets in Canada, those proceeds in Canada, you should be rewarded to keeping those proceeds in Canada instead of investing in other jurisdictions like the United States.

00:17:39.340 We've seen up to a trillion dollars of investment leave the country over the last 10 years.

00:17:44.280 That would be an immediate incentive for businesses to reinvest in Canada.

00:17:50.240 Number one, regulation.

00:17:52.840 That doesn't cost the government any money.

00:17:55.000 Some of these large regulatory impediments to natural resource development, as an example, we've said to get rid of.

00:18:01.600 If you've heard the oil sector and gas sector, the attractive sector recommend changes to the red tape or regulatory reforms, like those are immediate solutions.

00:18:12.900 Unfortunately, from the government, we have seen a wait and see, well, we need a major projects office and it's going to take us some time to set it up.

00:18:19.900 And, you know, you're going to have to apply to it and get through.

00:18:21.840 So what I think we would recommend is immediate things that the government can do.

00:18:27.480 This is actually a similar pattern that we saw with inflation.

00:18:30.520 You'll recall the government refused to acknowledge that inflation was a big problem.

00:18:34.500 It was happening around the world. It wasn't our fault.

00:18:36.720 The government has no no options and nothing to do.

00:18:40.140 We're just an innocent bystander, except they were late to the party then.

00:18:44.080 And I think they're going to be late to the party on this.

00:18:45.980 Right. Well, there is a difference in focus on the economy versus the Trudeau era and Freeland era lack of focus on inflation.

00:18:53.520 I think that that's fair to say.

00:18:55.000 He just walks past Adam James's point here. He's saying that we've heard the same story before that this is all just, you know, it's something that's just going to wean its way out of the economy. It's just going to go away. It's happening everywhere. And it's eventually going to stop here. And then it didn't happen. And we still have bad inflation. Yes, it's not 7% like it was in some COVID years. I hate when people find like the highest year, and then they compare the current year to it. And they're like, see, it's not that bad.

00:19:20.920 If you're at 2.3% inflation and the economy based on GDP is shrinking, yeah, that's really bad.

00:19:28.440 When grocery prices are going up like 6%, and again, the average person is not gaining a wage

00:19:34.600 increase, the GDP is shrinking. That is a really big problem. And by the way, I just want to throw

00:19:42.160 one criticism here for the federal conservatives. They need a more coherent tax cut plan. I really

00:19:50.480 don't like their buy Canadian reinvestment plan. It's not because I don't want to be able to buy

00:19:54.500 Canadian or invest in this country. It's because it's convoluted. Just take the corporate taxes

00:19:59.300 and cut it 18%. Cut it 20%. Give a 20% personal income tax cut across the board. And heck,

00:20:06.380 just for the fun of it, take one point off the GST. That's how you attract people. The macro

00:20:11.800 tax burden is going down. Not that if you sell the stock, well, we won't tax you capital gains

00:20:18.800 on most of it if you then take the money and put it over here some people do want the it to be

00:20:23.520 liquid they don't want to just reinvest into another company just cut taxes just cut court

00:20:28.640 capital gains taxes just slash it so that people will want to invest their money into this economy

00:20:35.200 we are on the wrong side of the laugher curve right now if you know what the laugher curve is

00:20:39.680 do i bring out the whiteboard to explain it if you've never seen it i'm okay i'm gonna do it

00:20:44.160 guys, we're going to do it. This is what the conservatives need to be running on. They need

00:20:49.080 to be running on the Laffer curve. The fact that right now we are taxing people so much that we

00:20:56.300 are chasing away more tax revenues than we are actually bringing, like the higher rates are

00:21:02.360 actually chasing more people away than collecting from. Basically the whole idea is on one side of

00:21:09.200 the curve, you have 0% taxes and you also have 0% tax revenues, because if you tax people 0%,

00:21:19.640 you're not going to bring any money in. And then similarly, if you tax people 100%,

00:21:24.500 you're not going to bring anything in because who's stupid enough to work and then give all 0.99

00:21:28.800 your money to the government. It's communism at that point. And even communism technically let 1.00

00:21:33.780 you keep some amount of money for your own discretionary spending. But the whole idea is

00:21:38.700 that somewhere in the middle here is the perfect equilibrium between the rate and the revenues.

00:21:46.040 And the whole idea is if you get to 90% taxes, you're still not going to bring that much in

00:21:50.140 because who the heck's going to work when 90% of your money is going to the government?

00:21:53.660 You're not going to bring that much tax revenue in if taxes are only 3%. It's just not going to

00:21:58.580 be a lot no matter how much people are growing their businesses and working more and being more

00:22:03.380 productive. The whole idea is that there's no specific number. But the whole idea is that

00:22:08.800 usually you just basically like not higher is not always better. So right now, I would propose

00:22:15.960 since higher high end tax rates are oftentimes like above 50%. I think the current Canadian tax

00:22:22.740 system puts us around here, where a lot of people making above like a 200,000 $250,000 a year are

00:22:30.600 paying like 53% taxes, if not more, not even counting sales tax and whatnot, where we bumped

00:22:37.420 their taxes down to like, you know, overall 36% or 30% provincial and federal combined, you would

00:22:45.300 be getting rather than this much tax revenue, you would be getting this much tax revenue on a lower

00:22:52.780 rate. So small economics lesson there, if you didn't already know that, probably David Cochran

00:22:59.340 didn't know it. So if he's watching, that's great. But the conservatives run on reducing the

00:23:03.980 corporate federal corporate income taxes from whatever it is right now, like 18% or whatever,

00:23:09.040 to like 15, just lowered significantly so that to perk up the ears of businesses and like the

00:23:14.900 people who actually earn a lot of money and be like, huh, well, these guys actually kind of get

00:23:18.800 the economy better than Mark Carney, the supposed guru economist. Anyways, okay, that was a bit of

00:23:24.700 tangent to everyone let's get back to david cochran being dumb minister was a advisor to 0.88

00:23:30.300 prime minister trudeau i'm not sure how much of that advice they took well it was during 0.99

00:23:35.660 no they took a lot of his advice that's why the economy sucked i hate the stupid idea that oh 0.97

00:23:40.780 trudeau must have not listened to mark carney a lot because if he did things wouldn't be as bad 0.94

00:23:45.100 a advisor to prime minister trudeau i'm not sure how much of that advice they took well it was

00:23:49.740 during the inflationary period and the prime minister said we shouldn't worry about inflation

00:23:53.180 so right but well i mean we've seen the that it was something to worry about but on where yes and

00:24:00.060 carney was wrong about he was the one who said the inflation wasn't going to be a problem things are

00:24:05.100 with the economy you're the only only group calling it a full-blown recession like who else in the

00:24:11.980 country is calling it a full it's not cd howe it's not the bankers it's not the business groups it's

00:24:15.900 not the business community my goodness david your commentary here is giving me full-blown aids

00:24:20.220 who cares if the conservatives are the only ones saying it's a full-blown recession

00:24:25.160 it is a full-blown recession based on every metric it's been two quarters of shrinking economy

00:24:31.020 we have 112 000 jobs missing since the beginning of the year mostly full-time jobs being lost the

00:24:38.620 amount of people defaulting on the debts are going up the amount of people not being able to pay

00:24:43.060 their mortgages are going up food bank use is going up i feel like i'm giving a pure poly of

00:24:47.760 speech by citing all these things, but they're kind of those objective top line metrics of

00:24:52.060 economic health that you look for. Even per capita, I think per capita income is up slightly,

00:24:59.660 but that's just the consequence that you wiped out a bunch of minimum wage TFWs and sent them home. 0.94

00:25:04.560 And so naturally, the average worker is now technically higher, but nobody's actually

00:25:10.480 making any money. So average worker income is up, but not because anyone's being paid an extra

00:25:15.780 dollar we just removed we just lowered the denominator of people that were considering

00:25:20.740 and mostly wiped people out from the bottom end part of being a credible steward of the economy

00:25:27.140 as a government in waiting is to like properly analyze assess and define what is happening in

00:25:31.300 the economy you're the outlier here so the implication is that you're doing a bad job

00:25:36.260 because you don't agree with organizations that are obviously trying to curry favor with the

00:25:40.580 the current government they have a majority not a fairly one majority but they have one so you're

00:25:46.160 going to as a you know you're as all these different banks are going to start thumbing

00:25:51.720 their nose at mark carney well no of course they're going to massage it a little bit for the

00:25:56.680 guy they're trying to work for uh whether they're trying to work with and the conservatives are just

00:26:01.620 being they're following the dictionary definition of recession and somehow they're the bad guys here

00:26:05.660 And David Cochran is like acting like, can you guys really run the government while you're not giving Mark Carney every single excuse under the sun?

00:26:14.800 That's government stuff.

00:26:16.460 That's government stuff to do.

00:26:18.260 Just making up like making up excuses for the prime minister.

00:26:22.240 That's government material.

00:26:24.720 Oh, my goodness. 0.98

00:26:25.640 I hate this guy.

00:26:27.020 Well, two consecutive quarters of negative GDP is the definition of a recession.

00:26:31.440 A technical recession.

00:26:32.120 And it's three.

00:26:32.580 Full-blown recession is the language you're using.

00:26:34.000 And it's three.

00:26:35.080 Same thing. It's a recession. He's saying full-blown recession to combat you saying

00:26:40.980 technical because there's no such thing as a technical recession. There is a recession or

00:26:45.120 not a recession. You could say we're almost in a recession because maybe after two and a half

00:26:52.680 quarters, we know we're going to shrink, but we're not quite there. So it's kind of technically we're

00:26:56.540 in a recession because we haven't had the final numbers come in, but we kind of know what they're

00:27:00.000 going to look like. That's maybe what you could call technical recession. They hit the dictionary

00:27:04.480 definition of recession. I am less offended by saying a full-blown recession when it is literally

00:27:09.360 a recession, rather than saying, well, it's technically a recession when we have hit the

00:27:14.180 dictionary definition. Three quarters out of the last four, I recall the technical recession,

00:27:23.120 if you want to call that, in 2015, when the last year of Prime Minister Harper's government,

00:27:28.840 I'm not sure we spent as much time about the technicality of that recession.

00:27:33.360 then. So I think it's completely fair and honest to point out that, you know, the data indicators

00:27:40.760 are suggesting significant weakness in the economy. If we want to disagree about whether

00:27:45.380 it's a technical recession or a real recession, fine, but the economy is not as strong as what

00:27:51.000 Canadians would like it to be. Absolutely. No argument there. But when 75% of your exports go

00:27:55.780 to the U.S. and the U.S. is turning the world upside down and shaking it to try to get change

00:28:00.300 out of its pockets. How do you avoid a bigger hit than the other G7 comparators, even the other G20

00:28:06.320 comparators who are... Mark Carney said we have the best trade deal. He reiterated that just today

00:28:18.220 saying, don't worry, guys, we have the best trade deal with the US right now. You can't suddenly

00:28:23.740 bring logic into the room and say, well, we do trade the most with them out of all the G7

00:28:29.440 countries, so that's maybe why we're in a recession, but we have the best deal. Oh, so us having the

00:28:34.620 best deal doesn't matter that much when we trade with them this much? Okay, well, why aren't we

00:28:39.880 down in Washington trying to get a trade deal? Now, I know Dominic LeBlanc slithered down to

00:28:45.200 Washington to now beg Trump after we fall into a recession, but we promised to have a trade deal

00:28:51.160 done by end of July last year. And as you might notice, we are in June, not 2015, doesn't have

00:28:59.120 another month or two left. It's June, 2026, unfortunately. So if it was such a big deal

00:29:07.300 and it didn't matter that we have the best, best darn trade deal on planet earth with America,

00:29:14.600 maybe we should have been down there trying to negotiate something, you know, making demands,

00:29:19.900 making concessions, demanding things from them. They'll demand concessions from us. We'll demand

00:29:24.020 concessions from them. But if we just stayed down there and we hammered it out and we are lowering

00:29:28.540 our own taxes and regulations at home, making ourselves have more leverage. We could have had

00:29:33.980 something by now. It may have not been beautiful, but it would have been something. And then we

00:29:38.260 could maybe have then, during the KUSMA-USMC renegotiation, tried to whittle it down a little

00:29:44.580 bit more as our economy improves. It could have happened. But we were talking about how it didn't

00:29:50.740 even matter. We're going to diversify our trade. I'm going to strike out from my parents' basement

00:29:57.260 here and go and trade with the world. And then it didn't work out very well because it turns out

00:30:02.240 you can't replace like 78% of your trade with 5% China and like point nothing Indonesia. Who could 0.91

00:30:09.980 have guessed guys? Who could have guessed? It's a mystery of the Sphinx. Aren't as deeply integrated

00:30:14.140 with the United States as we are. It's a great question and a very good point. But what about 0.62

00:30:18.020 Mexico? Is Mexico in recession? No. I think the structure of their economy, the standard of living

00:30:23.060 there, their wage cycles, that's all very different. I would say, but they're very trade

00:30:26.380 exposed to the US. They should be. It should be easier to fall into a recession as a developing

00:30:30.680 economy compared to a developed economy. It's always easier as like poorer countries to fall 0.99

00:30:36.540 into a recession because you never had the structure and stability that, you know, Western

00:30:41.040 developed countries had. Yes, as we are. Of course, Canada is going to see some difficult challenges

00:30:49.480 given our exposure to the US. But remember, it's this government that says we have the best trade

00:30:54.060 deal with the US and 85% of the Canadian goods actually go into Adam Chambers gets the Wyatt

00:30:58.780 Claypool award today of mentioning the thing that I've been mentioning over the past like two or

00:31:03.720 three days because it was for a while the Conservatives just kept hitting Carney on his

00:31:07.780 like economic promises which is good but no one kept no one was bringing up that he kept saying

00:31:11.860 that we had the best trade deal with the US which is something that Polly have in question period

00:31:15.920 should have been slapping just like just decking Carney across the face with the fact that you 0.96

00:31:20.440 said we had the best, so you were in no hurry. Now we have Dominic hurrying down south to try

00:31:26.860 and get something after you pretended it was no big deal, but now it suddenly is now that

00:31:31.880 we're in a recession. You wanted to implement the digital services tax, but then when Trump

00:31:35.840 complained about it, you got rid of it. You did the same thing now with the tripling of the

00:31:39.720 streaming tax. It's almost like you don't know what you want, Mr. Prime Minister, but thank you

00:31:45.720 again to adam chambers for making that point and if you're in simcoe north make sure support this

00:31:51.660 guy i think he is yeah it's simcoe north he had a very tight election last time only one by four

00:31:56.260 percent defend this man because he's a holder of the prestigious wyatt claypool award right now

00:32:01.580 which yes is made out of you know talc and tears but you know it's it's what it is to the u.s

00:32:08.020 tariff free so if like can all these things be true at once it's possible uh but i think it's

00:32:14.640 fair and, frankly, our duty to point out that the economy should be a lot stronger and there's

00:32:19.000 things the government could do to make that happen. Yeah, those strategic sectors that are

00:32:22.660 getting hammered, though, that's painful stuff. Just quickly, because we've got Minister Mark

00:32:26.180 Miller standing by, I want to ask him about what's going on with the big digital streamers.

00:32:30.540 The U.S. is threatening another tariff on forced labor. Right now, Canada is broadly exempt from

00:32:34.520 that because the Kuzma curve-out applies to this latest one. This seems like a backdoor way to get 0.93

00:32:39.120 the tariffs Trump wanted on the world that the court took away from him. Canada can adapt to

00:32:44.160 this by maybe doing a reverse onus on importers to force them to show they're not using forced

00:32:49.220 labor? What do you think the solution is here to permanently avoid this threat? Well, I heard the

00:32:52.540 prime minister saying that they're now looking at something. I don't think we should look at

00:32:56.040 something because the Americans are asking us to look at it. We do have a problem. The Canadian

00:32:59.940 Border Services Agency has only stopped two shipments in five years. In one year in the

00:33:05.360 United States, they stopped almost 7,000 shipments. We have been talking about this issue at the trade

00:33:11.080 Committee for a long time. It's nice to see that the prime minister is finally showing up,

00:33:15.840 but there are things that we can do. I do agree with you, by the way. I think this is a back

00:33:20.200 doorway for the U.S. to apply tariffs, but there are things that we should be doing to prevent

00:33:26.060 forced labor. But again, the government's in a really tough spot because their new strategic

00:33:30.500 partnership with China puts them in a very difficult position because this is where parts

00:33:35.860 of the world uh that have uh goods produced with forced labor yeah and we know that which is why

00:33:41.460 the conservative to liberal floor crosser michael ma put so much effort into trying down downplay

00:33:47.760 and then humiliate somebody who was raising the flag of forced labor in provinces in china it's

00:33:55.560 in fact in every province in china but it's very acute in the areas where they have concentration 0.96

00:34:00.760 camps for people like Uyghur Muslims, it is a problem. A problem that, frankly, the legacy

00:34:07.280 media doesn't put that much attention on. We just kind of accepted the fact that we were going to

00:34:11.620 just partner with China. Yes, there was some pushback. There was some little red flags of

00:34:17.480 hypocrisy that were put up. But it doesn't last very long when, again, if this was a conservative

00:34:22.520 government, if this was Stephen Harper, you would never hear the end of it, that he was working with

00:34:27.260 authoritarian governments, even if it was like the mildest of such. And it was on a very limited

00:34:32.980 sort of trade, like trade prospect that we're just trading with them for this particular good

00:34:38.600 that you really can't get anywhere else. So we have to do it. They would still be skewering him.

00:34:42.580 We don't need to be working with China. And we are anyways. But because, you know, 0.98

00:34:47.600 Orange Man bad, we just kind of bypassed all the problems with Mr. Reno, Winnie the Pooh,

00:34:52.100 Xi Jinping. The squeeze between the two superpowers. It's a tough spot to be in. Adam Chambers, 0.78

00:34:56.740 trade critic for the conservatives. Always appreciate it, man. Thanks for coming in.

00:34:59.780 So hopefully Adam Chambers is still alive and David Cochran didn't then sneak into his house

00:35:05.260 later at night to murder him for humiliating him on television. Imagine David Cochran,

00:35:10.400 just a glutton for punishment every single day, head comes off the pillow and decides, 0.99

00:35:15.000 I'm going to go into that studio and make a fool of myself yet again. His commentary sucks. He is 1.00

00:35:21.540 a negotiator on behalf of the liberal government. Again, probably propagandist is too skillful for

00:35:27.760 him. He's a flat cutcher and he is a negotiator. He is there very transparently to say, can I get

00:35:34.460 you to be a little less critical of Mark Carney? What do you think about this line? Okay, you're

00:35:38.780 not buying that one. What about that? Well, bankers out there aren't blaming him for it. Maybe you

00:35:45.860 don't want to blame Mark Carney either. He never grills liberals. Yes, he has to push on them on

00:35:51.120 some topics because it would be pretty ridiculous if he didn't. He'll sometimes ask questions,

00:35:55.960 but never does he actually follow up and try and weasel around the kind of point at hand

00:36:03.480 with liberals, but he does it consistently with conservatives. I had a 40-minute video,

00:36:09.560 and this one's turning into a 40-minute video too, where I watched his segment with Alberta

00:36:13.980 Premier Daniel Smith, where he kept trying to say, well, you're putting this Alberta separatist

00:36:19.220 referendum on the ballot. You chose to do this. You did this. Because he kept trying to subtly

00:36:24.580 imply that she herself is a secret separatist, no matter how many times she says she's a federalist

00:36:29.260 and will vote to remain in Canada. But his agenda that day was to help out Mahid Nenshi and the

00:36:34.880 Alberta NDP and probably give Mark Carney and the BC Premier David Eby a pretext to kill the

00:36:41.260 pipeline. Because you can't trust this lady. She's trying to secretly separate our province because 0.99

00:36:46.220 She put the separatist referendum, which is really a question about a question. 0.99

00:36:50.660 She kind of has to do it that way.

00:36:51.860 But she was the one who did it, even though she's just effectively putting on the ballot because democracy was robbed by a judge saying, well, First Nation rights, ergo, you have to do like 10,000 years of consultations before we can determine whether or not this can actually go on a ballot.

00:37:08.060 But she did the right thing. And David Cochran took the entire interview to keep trying to snake around her points to come back to, hey, you're kind of like the Adolf Hitler of Alberta separatism, aren't you, Miss Premier?

00:37:22.960 And then no matter how many times she said the correction, he kept trying to come back from another subtle angle, making the implication to his audience that she is like an untrustworthy, unscrupulous separatist character.

00:37:37.360 Anyways, I'm done.

00:37:40.200 This is actually 2 a.m. I'm filming this thing because I don't have a life.

00:37:43.600 But sometimes you just have to work with what you're handed, and I've been handed insomnia tonight.

00:37:48.460 And so I am putting myself to sleep, making me cry myself to sleep by watching David Cochran clips on the CBC's YouTube channel.

00:37:58.980 Well, with all that being said, thank you guys for watching.

00:38:02.520 Like, share, subscribe.

00:38:03.540 If you like the show, consider hitting the join button and becoming a monthly contributing member.

00:38:08.760 I only have, I have like the top tier of the Ahoy Club.

00:38:11.860 I think it's like locked off for like $9 a month that you can possibly give me.

00:38:15.740 I think it might be technically $10.

00:38:17.360 I'm not actually sure what the tiers are, but it's like $4 or $3.

00:38:21.440 It's like $6, $5 or $6, and it's like $9 or $10.

00:38:24.760 That's the maximum amount of money I allow people to give me because I am not Netflix,

00:38:29.620 although maybe my content is technically higher quality than the trash you got on Netflix these 0.88

00:38:34.440 days. But I don't want to, there's some people's channels. I know this one really obnoxious guy

00:38:40.000 who runs the Dominion Society, Greg Wycliffe, who barely ever uploads anything on his channel.

00:38:44.940 And I was just poking around it. And he, and one of his tiers for his membership is $150 a month.

00:38:50.960 And it's like, okay, slow down there, James Cameron. You film shaky vertical videos sitting

00:38:56.760 in a truck that you're renting. I'm not sure if that's exactly $150 a month worth. And I think

00:39:04.020 it's always, you know, contingent on YouTubers to properly price themselves. This channel is still

00:39:10.600 free. Everything's going to remain free. If you're a senior living on a fixed income, do not join the

00:39:15.780 program. It's just, you should never sacrifice any of your own comfort for this channel that does not 0.91

00:39:21.780 need it. It's only, only ever donate because you watch every day and you're giving out of abundance

00:39:27.380 and you really want to, that's it. But I still think maximum you can give a month is like nine

00:39:33.880 bucks. Cause again, I'm not worth 30. I'm not going to sit here and be like, guys, you know,

00:39:38.920 if you really love me, you give $30 a month. It's like, what is like, it's like a cup of coffee

00:39:44.300 worth a month. That's really it. The whole point is the audience is big. And if a bunch of people

00:39:48.120 give three dollars it turns into a decent a sustainable monthly income for the channel

00:39:53.000 that helps me you know hold me over on the months where like youtube's just kicking me in the face

00:39:58.080 repeatedly for no reason anyways that's a bunch of random backdoor youtube stuff that you didn't

00:40:04.180 have to hear about but i know some people are probably trying to go to sleep listening to this

00:40:08.480 video and me ranting about nothing is helping you achieve that goal well salutes to you see you guys

00:40:16.020 later.

The National Telegraph - Wyatt Claypool - June 04, 2026

CBC Host Gets Absolutely Owned Trying to Spin Mark Carney's Recession

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript