What's more, there's another way of possibly interpreting the health-care decision, from a macroeconomic perspective, which is that maybe the Supreme Court ruling removes one very large uncertainty from the discussion.
At 10:48 a.m., Reuters wealth editor Lauren Young tweeted: "'Employers are relieved. They can move forward. It removes some of the uncertainty,' source at big consulting firm says."
This is one of the biggest, most head-smacking confabulations we come across in society. People on the far right of the political spectrum are all about independent strength, competition, etc. Direct, free-market competition is what drives economies forward, they say. But then they talk about investor confidence and the need for measures of certainty.
Direct competition leads to nothing but uncertainty. It's why campaigns matter. Markets don't like uncertainty, challenges, etc; they want sure thing investments. Safety nets provide stability and stability is what feeds confidence. In fact, the private sector is all about stability; that's why they plan, poll and invest in long-term benefits by doing such things as donating to politicians. They want to know what's around the corner and if they're smart, they try to stack the deck in their favour through outreach initatives that, broken down, look an awful lot like altruism.
Trudeau won despite the physical odds because he planned ahead. He trained against opponents of Brazeau's size, he focused on endurance, all the while knowing that his opponent wasn't engaging in any kind of strategic planning at all. In short, Justin Trudeau studied the ground, understood himself and his opponent, and planned accordingly. Stephen Harper did the exact same thing - he didn't win because of attack ads, he won because he courted demographic groups the Liberals were ignoring. It was because the Harper Conservatives proactively invested in relationships with broader swaths of Canadians (while the Liberals were becoming "efficient" in that they were neglecting increasing chunks of their base) that success was acheived.
There isn't a single example in history of one strong, stagnant, oppressive regime that has lasted forever. It's simply not a possibility. The more any government (of any stripe) tightens its grip, the more control slips through its fingers. Reactive, individual competition is taxing. Proactively, it's strategic collaboration that leads to growth.
If you want to go fast, go alone - but if you want to go far, move