Canadian Federal Election

[Loco101]

I'm sticking with these numbers that I predicted. My guess is that the LPC will be on the edge of a majority once most of the results are in for the Newfoundland, Atlantic and Eastern time zones.

Originally Posted by Loco101

I'm going to do a breakdown by province and territory using the numbers I predicted over Easter weekend:

LPC: 197

CPC: 125

BQ: 13

NDP: 7

GPC: 1

-----------------

NL: 7 LPC

PE: 4 LPC

NS: 8 LPC, 3 CPC

NB: 7 LPC, 3 CPC

QC: 54 LPC, 13 BQ, 10 CPC, 1 NDP

ON: 84 LPC, 36 CPC, 1 NDP, 1 GPC

MB: 6 LPC, 6 CPC, 2 NDP

SK: 13 CPC, 1 LPC

AB: 31 CPC, 5 LPC, 1 NDP

BC: 23 CPC, 18 LPC, 2 NDP

YT: 1 LPC

NT: 1 LPC

NU: 1 LPC

[BlackDog204]

Pierre Poilievre says he’ll end ‘woke ideology’ — he isn’t saying what that means

OTTAWA — Pierre Poilievre is vowing to eliminate “woke ideology” from the public service, federal funding for university research and military culture. But what does he mean by “woke,” exactly? The Conservative leader doesn’t seem keen to define the term. When asked recently to explain what he considers “woke,” Poilievre gave a nearly two-minute answer that touched on most of his campaign talking points.

“Very simply, after a lost Liberal decade of dividing Canadians, turning people against each other and weakening our Armed Forces, we need to put Canada first,” he said, pointing to what he called the Liberals’ “woke criminal justice agenda” and “woke agenda on spending.”

Poilievre has threatened to pull back federal funding from universities over their alleged ideological slant. On March 26, when the party released its Quebec platform, he said a Conservative government would “put an end to the imposition of woke ideology in the federal civil service and in the allocation of federal funds for university research.”

source: https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-...ideology-he-isnt-saying-what-that-means/

---

I would be embarrassed if this man was PM.

[BlackDog204]

Stay classy, online Conservative social media influencers. .

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by EnvisionSaintJohn

Harper was basically selling Canadian passports for $250k at one point, except it wasn’t even “sold” for $250k… it was $250k invested in a “business” much of which would later be recouped.

Also milking foreign students for all that they could became a major component of most post secondary institution’s business model under Harper.

There were also a lot of international students under Harper, and earlier under Martin. I get the sense some people think international students in Canada are a new phenomenon since 2015.

We had plenty of international students in my program at Western, I’d say about 30% of the program, mostly from China. And this was in 2006.

People were coming to Canada to learn English as a second language back then too.

[manny_santos]

Originally Posted by lio45

No one cares about nominal home prices. (Well, except people who already bought at previous prices, obviously. But that's not the point.)

People care about rents (for renters) and how much real estate costs per month (for buyers), and both these metrics skyrocketed under JT, which is why we now have a housing crisis, while back under Harper housing was affordable, landlords gave free months to try to attract tenants, and there were no tent cities.

I recall housing prices were already a major issue in Toronto when I moved there in 2015. A lot of young people flooded into Toronto from other parts of Ontario, particularly the Southwest following the recession when Toronto was booming while London had record high unemployment, and I was on the tail end of that migration; I recall the people who moved to Toronto 1-3 years before I did had no problem finding a place to live and were paying hundreds of dollars less per month than what I was able to find. Many of my colleagues back then were completely puzzled that I couldn’t find an apartment a similar price to what they had downtown, but they’d gotten into the market during 2012 or 2013. I remember some people downtown were paying $900 or $1000 per month while by mid-2015 downtown apartments were going for $1400 and up. Of course today $1400 sounds like a steal for a downtown Toronto apartment, but it was still shocking coming from a city where rent averaged $700/month in 2015.

As I recall back then the media coverage of high housing prices emphasized that this was a Toronto and Vancouver issue at that time. It was definitely not a national issue at the time the way it is now, but it was an issue insofar that working remotely was very uncommon and it was often necessary for people to leave then-affordable cities like Windsor, London or Kingston to find work that paid more than minimum wage, so the high prices in Toronto became an issue for people like me. Nowadays with remote work the demand for housing in those smaller cities is higher.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Stay classy, online Conservative social media influencers. .

"Conservative" or just conservative?

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

"Conservative" or just conservative?

Good point.

A completely classless social media post BTW.

Conservatives (either small c or large C ) do themselves no favours by posting drivel such as this.

[travis3000]

Originally Posted by Loco101

I'm sticking with these numbers that I predicted. My guess is that the LPC will be on the edge of a majority once most of the results are in for the Newfoundland, Atlantic and Eastern time zones.

Interesting prediction! I will do mine now. I think you are a bit optimistic for the LPC but hey, it's within the higher end range of possibilities.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Pierre Poilievre says he’ll end ‘woke ideology’ — he isn’t saying what that means

OTTAWA — Pierre Poilievre is vowing to eliminate “woke ideology” from the public service, federal funding for university research and military culture. But what does he mean by “woke,” exactly? The Conservative leader doesn’t seem keen to define the term. When asked recently to explain what he considers “woke,” Poilievre gave a nearly two-minute answer that touched on most of his campaign talking points.

“Very simply, after a lost Liberal decade of dividing Canadians, turning people against each other and weakening our Armed Forces, we need to put Canada first,” he said, pointing to what he called the Liberals’ “woke criminal justice agenda” and “woke agenda on spending.”

Poilievre has threatened to pull back federal funding from universities over their alleged ideological slant. On March 26, when the party released its Quebec platform, he said a Conservative government would “put an end to the imposition of woke ideology in the federal civil service and in the allocation of federal funds for university research.”

source: https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-...ideology-he-isnt-saying-what-that-means/

---

I would be embarrassed if this man was PM.

Good to see that Poilievre is still focused on the most important things, like the strawman woke boogieman, and ending the carbon tax.

Verb-the-Noun!!!

[lio45]

Originally Posted by BlackDog204

Stay classy, online Conservative social media influencers. .

The huge factor that they missed there, is that Boomers in general, and the Canadian "Landed Gentry" more specifically (including some Millennials not just Boomers!), are Al-Qaeda in the analogy. So yeah, that's like half the country being enthusiastic about the second plane

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

If that's your takeaway then you missed 90% of my prior posts. You missed when i pointed out how we don't know the total number of temp workers in the country or their effect on population growth just by looking at the numbers coming in without also looking at the numbers leaving. So their status most certainly does matter since if you have 800k coming in one year and say, 600k leaving from a prior term ending, then the effect would be that accommodations are needed for an additional 200k people rather than the 800k figure alone would suggest. And you also missed when i pointed out that many temp workers are based outside housing crisis hotspots since many are agricultural or natural resource workers. And also missed when i pointed out that the accommodations temp workers need may be quite different than permanent residents. Mainly since it's much more reasonable for people to stay at dorm-like residences, work camps, or other temporary worker accommodations rather than conventional housing since it isn't meant to be long term and they may not bring their families (or choose to start families) depending on the work term duration. In other words, it may not be "the same" housing pool at all.

So no, it's certainly not as simple you suggest. Which is why i pointed out the need for more info to make sense of it.

According to Statcan, 45.4% of TFWs work in ag/forest/fishing. But looking at temporary residents as a whole (They combine TFW, International Mobility Program, and Study Permit), it's only 6.8%

Mining, O+G is 0% TFW / 0.3% Total

Construction is 4.8% TFW / 3.3% total, and i don't think the majority of those are remote camp jobs, but some could be.

"Unstated: is 3.3% TFW / 1.3% total.

The rest are fields that would be in normal towns and cities, competing for housing. So if we split construction in half, it's about 10.05% that could be remote camp / bunkhouse jobs. The other 90% of all temp residents add to the demand side.


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/36-28-0001/2023012/article/00005-eng.htm





Is there any proof that significant numbers of TFWs actually leave every year? Given how it, and the student visas, are seen as a "back door" to immigration, I wouldn't be surprised if a significant amount never leave.

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by jonny24

Is there any proof that significant numbers of TFWs actually leave every year? Given how it, and the student visas, are seen as a "back door" to immigration, I wouldn't be surprised if a significant amount never leave.

No.

That's what the CIBC report I linked to took issue with in Stats. Can's reporting.

They don't track actual exits from the country at border control points.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by bodaggin

Omg.

So tell me. If house prices fell by 50%, would you still be pounding the table that we need to build more homes? And that a housing "shortage" exists?

If rents were high and vacancy was low, yes. Supply/Demand is not demand for purchasing a home, it's demand for a roof over your head.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Hecate

So the Governor Generals privy council, appointed by recommendation of the prime minister is pushing fake news…

You guys are priceless.

Show us in the report where it says we will be living in shanty towns foraging for food in 2040.

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Show us in the report where it says we will be living in shanty towns foraging for food in 2040.

The report being discussed, but not linked to....... is this one:

https://horizons.service.canada.ca/en/2025/01/10/future-lives-social-mobility/index.shtml

[dleung]

Social conservatives getting all chicken little until the moment their preferred party wins, nothing new here

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by dleung

Social conservatives getting all chicken little until the moment their preferred party wins, nothing new here

yeah but what about Carney and Ghislaine Maxwell?

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

yeah but what about Carney and Ghislaine Maxwell?

You should suspend yourself for repeatedly bring it up… over and over again

[Northern Light]

Originally Posted by Hecate

How come no one is talking about the privy council report except the conservatives?

Upward mobility is dying in this country. Along with peoples hopes and dreams. They are predicting Canadians will be resorting to foraging for food and hunting to keep themselves fed by 2040.

This is the privy council! And you guys want the same people driving the bus… FFS

The myopia is astounding.

You mean the report you didn't link to? (but I did)

You mean the report you didn't read? (but I did)

Maybe follow the link below and carefully read it and consider what it says.

Its not what you think.

https://horizons.service.canada.ca/en/2025/01/10/future-lives-social-mobility/index.shtml

[WarrenC12]

Here's the entire conclusion of the brief report. The whole thing is worth a read.

4.0 Conclusion
Declining social mobility could create serious challenges for citizens and policymakers. What people believe matters as much as the reality. It is often the basis for decisions and actions. Currently, most Canadians still believe that they have equality of opportunityFootnote6. This may change.

People may lose faith in the Canadian project. They may reject policies that promote education, jobs, or home ownership. The usual levers may seem misguided and wasteful to those who have abandoned the idea of ‘moving up’. They could lose the drive to better themselves and their communities. Others might embrace radical ideas about restructuring the state, society, and the economy.

But loss of belief in social mobility could also make space for positive ideas. People could rethink what ‘prosperity’ means, or ‘fulfilment’. They may reject conspicuous consumption. They may focus on policies that promote human flourishing. This could include healthcare, housing, the environment, and education for its own sake.

Upward social mobility may never be as difficult or rare as suggested in this scenario. However, social stagnation and downward mobility are plausible elements of the future. Exploring them supports anticipatory governance by helping policymakers think through potential challenges and opportunities.

Wealth inequality is a huge problem. AI will not be the solution. Billionaires are not your friends.

Curious how the right is jumping on this as a huge issue, when it's basically their playbook. The NDP should be throwing this in everyone's face. This is their bread and butter. It's almost a socialist report...