I have no question Mark Carney is the best person for Canada right now, in this moment. But I also have to deal with with this nagging intellectual argument in my head that maybe, just maybe, I’m about to get screwed.

There are obvious reasons to vote for Mark Carney. We are at a time of global economic upheaval. Mark Carney understands not only that this shift is occuring, but how it impacts, or can impact, regions beyond ours.

He won’t just sit back and be content with making and remaking deals with the United States. He’ll think boldly and creatively, something that’s necessary for our growth and survival.

I also really do believe he cares. About this country, and about all of us who live here. I believe he cares because of the way he talked about “faith and spirituality” in this clip after he called the snap election. He said he doesn’t talk about those things, but that his own “faith and spirituality” informs his sense of service and responsibility.

I believe him, and believe he’s sincere. But I am also a sucker for almost anyone who pairs the word “faith” (a throwaway gesture made by many politicians, especially those south of the border) with “spirituality” (a much more fundamental, experientially-based word that’s deeper than mere dogma). So let’s say he already had me, but he really had me there.

But let’s face it, he doesn’t know anything about class and, importantly, appears to pull out Conservative talking points when confronted with income inequality in this interview with Nate Erskine-Smith (a former Liberal cabinet member who’s currently running for re-election).

At about 22:00 in this interview, Erskine-Smith questions whether Carney could (as in, whether he had the political or personal capacity) talk to people outside of his normal business circles, as he would have to do in retail politics.

Carney’s answer is to say, admitting it wasn’t the best comparison, that as a central bank goveror you have to view the economy from the periphery — as an example, from the perspective of someone who’s unemployed. You have to ask whether the economy is working for them.

Fair enough.

But then near the end of this interview, starting at about 1:03:00 or so, Erskine-Smith asks him outright how he would deal with income inequality. The upshot of his answer is that Canada needs growth first (so business needs to be incentivized). Once that growth happens, Canada can decide what to do with it.

(Again, why isn’t he running as a Conservative?)

It’s not an elitist position, I don’t think. From his perspective at least, it’s a realist position. And you have to give him props for being honest.

There’s a moment where he says what he didn’t like about a recent political discussion around capital gains (the interview is from 2024) was the way it was toned, in “class warfare” type language. Investors aren’t bad people, according to Carney. They are just looking to be rewarded for their investment. We need business innovators to be successful.

Yeah, sure. Of course. And you get it. But you kind of wonder if Carney sees who’s going to get lost in the adjustment periods.

Here’s the “getting screwed” part. It’s hard not to think of all those poor Americans who voted for Donald Trump, and now are not at all getting what they voted for. I don’t think Carney is Trump. And he’s miles ahead of the competition in terms of who I want representing Canada, who has the intellect, experience, and sense of service to lead Canada.

But I worry about how he’ll make trade offs, since he doesn’t really know what it’s like to be, say, evicted from your apartment building because it’s going to be redeveloped or trying to keep up with cost of living increases when your ability to work is limited through no fault of your own.

What I hope is that these are areas of growth and learning for Mark Carney, and he’ll engage with that process. He’ll feel others’ experiences, I hope, so when it comes time to make choices, he won’t just reward those who know how to make a profit.