this post was submitted on 17 Apr 2025
142 points (90.8% liked)

Canada

9527 readers
959 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Election Interference / Misinformation

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

C'mon guys this is such an easy win for us as a country. Justin went a little too far with his style of governing for a lot of you and now the liberals have voted this guy to be it's leader and new PM. This is who we want to lead us into the second half of the 20th century, this guy is so fucking smart. Pierre just sings slogans and simple pretty things that sound nice but in reality he's just going to sell us off to American interests and cut the things that help working people.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

He hasn’t done anything yet lol. Maybe these clowns wouldn’t rob you blind and give it all to corporations if you were so won over by nothing but talking points 🤦‍♂️

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago

I don't think the liberals are just offering talking points. They are talking unity, which is what we need right now, and even before Carney the liberals were taking strides to fix our problems but you were all just eating up instagram and tiktok reels with Pierre spitting bullshit at you like: THE CARBON TAX ELECTION

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago

what has PP done that isnt a talking point?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

1.5 million immigrants in a year isn't a "little too far". The UN called it modern slavery.

Carney also seemingly wants to continue it.

When asked whether Canada can afford a pro-immigration policy, Carney responded, “The short answer is yes we can – and arguably, we can’t afford not to.”

Carney emphasizes integrating the 4+ million newcomers who arrived in recent years, focusing on transitioning temporary residents (TRs) to permanent residents (PRs).

If you want to help the poor then reducing demand is the first step, obviously matching immigration to housing supply would have been smart.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I believe the foreign temporary worker program was definately being abused and that's what they were talking about.... Regular immigration is not bad and Canada needs it desperately

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Youth unemployment in Toronto is near 15%.

Unless you mean we need something resembling slave labor with poor salaries, worker rights, and housing to increase corporate profits?

There was a labor shortage, as per the Phillips curve, but the Bank of Canada raised rates to cool the economy and to lower the money supply. The shortage is long gone.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

1.5 million immigrants in a year isn’t a “little too far”. The UN called it modern slavery.

This is misleading and arguably just a lie. AFAICT, the UN did not infer anything from the amount of immigration, only from the conditions and treatment of the immigrants: https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1140437 -- those two things may have some connection, but it is obviously mediated.

If you want to help the poor then reducing demand is the first step

According to what economic or social theory? Why isn't progressive taxation, redistribution, improved social welfare, stimulating industry, or improving education the first step?

Why do you assume that the problem is caused by the poor people seeking opportunity rather than caused by the landlords and corporate oligarchs extracting profit?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Its very simple, you're importing people faster than you're building homes. What level of brain rot do you have to have to deny that is dramatically increasing demand, are you eating road kill like RFK?

Heck the CMHC and the bank of Canada have outlined it clearly, do you deny our own institutions as well?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Demand-side economics is not what we need; we need supply-side economics. The market isn't making enough houses on its own.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Why put the cart before the horse, increase housing FIRST.

I swear you people just hate the poor. The single mother needs to be sacrificed at the alter of GDP growth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 hours ago

I'm not sure I understand. Increasing housing is what I am arguing in favour of.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Justin was the right leader at the time he was elected, but his 'best before' date had certainly come and gone. Politics really wears one down. American politics wears down a Canadian leader even more. But Justin did stand up to Trump and won in the last round of trade negotiations with America.

Fell flat on his face in the Meng Wanzhou, affair, however. The Michaels were clearly targeted because of their American connections - one with the Democrats the other seriously tied to the Republicans. Lawful and legitimate targets for the Chinese, they fit perfectly into the requirements - influential Canadian citizens who were very close to American politicians and under the American State Department umbrella. Justin knew (or should have known) that, and he fell right into an American cesspit that there was absolutely no good way out of for Canada.

Methinks also his Catholicism and the political fighting between the Pope and China at the time had something to do with the animosity, as well. Really, selecting as the Canadian ambassador to China, a devout Roman Catholic official who is a staunch supporter of and even leader in the Roman Catholic Church bid for domination of the world religious order, during this crucial time? Smells entirely of Justin putting his religion ahead of sound international diplomacy. China never got over that slight, and held it over Justin and Canada ever since. China hit Canada hard, economically, for that.

The world has changed since he was first selected as PM, and the new era requires a different leadership style. A 'just watch me' decisiveness of his dad, but without the arrogance. Carney has that style. When he lead the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, he got things done while outmaneuvering the politicians. And he understands more than any other world leader today about how money and the economy work. A 'social responsibility conscience'. we will have to wait and see, but that is what the Green party is for.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (3 children)

This is who we want to lead us into the second half of the 20th century,

I can't make this sentence make any sense.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Clearly we made a wrong turn and should start heading back towards 1999 as quickly as possible.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I believe it was clearly meant to be 21st century lol

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So Carney is going to be around for another 25 years until the second half of the 21st century, lol clearly?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago

It's 2025. Letting the foundation now would indeed set us up to be ready by 2050 and beyond...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

"this is the man that we want leading us into the second half of the 20th century"

But we're not in the 20th century and we're only just crossing into the second quarter.

load more comments
view more: next ›