Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[MolsonExport]

Who would pay something like $1.5 million for a 80m² bungalow in a suburb of Vancouver?

Who would pay something like $1.4 million for a 80m² bungalow in a suburb of Toronto?

[CivicBlues]

Originally Posted by mousquet

British Columbia is the province where a random bungalow sells for the price of a decent house in Beverly Hills or in the affluent suburbs of Paris, but they still like it somehow...

Ok, landscapes of the countryside out there may be pretty, but frankly, their real estate standards are a mere scam.
Who would pay something like $1.5 million for a 80m² bungalow in a suburb of Vancouver?
That makes no sense.



Lol, that's actually funny. I wouldn't blame on that guy.

Why would tourists and residents of other provinces give a shit about housing prices in another province? Let alone use that as a main criterion for "liking" a place. That makes no sense.

BC, in the minds of other Canadians, is incredibly scenic, unspoiled, and accessible. British Columbians are generally seen as diverse, tolerant, amicable, non-confrontational and welcoming. The worst stereotypes being that we're a bit hippy-dippy and lax with our drugs/homeless situation. Other than that, what's not to like?

[mousquet]

^ Yeah, that's a point. I saw plenty of photos and videos about the landscapes of the province, that's pretty. No one would deny.

But locals must think real estate is an unbearable pain over there. I don't even know whether Switzerland would be that overpriced.
I was just thinking about locals. Not so much about tourists or strangers from other provinces or countries
When real estate gets to this point, it's worth building real bigger things, while Vancouver has been kinda shy.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by mousquet

When real estate gets to this point, it's worth building real bigger things, while Vancouver has been kinda shy.

There are a bunch of factors, some obvious, some not. Building is maybe 20% of what is going on and building alone could not solve the problem.

- Vancouver is isolated and there aren't a lot of alternatives if you have local connections here. Either you pay a lot or you start over. Even rural BC is expensive.

- Canada is very open to foreign capital flows and immigration and so many people buying real estate here don't have a lot of affordable alternatives (may be somewhat wealthy but not allowed in the US or Europe).

- Because the prices went up so much there is a fear of missing out and a sense that housing will generate $$$. Buy for $1.4M now, sell for $2.8M later. People have been skeptical about high prices here forever, and lots of people got locked out because they didn't buy.

- There are a lot of restrictions that aren't NIMBY based but have to do with agricultural land or approvals for infrastructure. Any long-distance transportation here is abysmal by developed world standards. This also makes people want to pay more to be in a better location.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by mousquet

Who would pay something like $1.5 million for a 80m² bungalow in a suburb of Vancouver?

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Who would pay something like $1.4 million for a 80m² bungalow in a suburb of Toronto?

Easily answered: “Anyone who thinks some sucker will in the near future want pay at least $2 million for the exact same shitty bungalow.”

[Acajack]

Interesting comment on Twitter: most of the people voting for the CAQ today in Québec are the same ones who voted for the NDP in 2011.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Interesting comment on Twitter: most of the people voting for the CAQ today in Québec are the same ones who voted for the NDP in 2011.

I don't find that particularly shocking if true. At the end of the day real social program spending is more important than Culture War stuff. Been talking about the NDP losing their way for a while now.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by niwell

I don't find that particularly shocking if true. At the end of the day real social program spending is more important than Culture War stuff. Been talking about the NDP losing their way for a while now.

That, and it also speaks to the "flavour of the month" character of a decent chunk of the Quebec electorate. Or at least (more positively, perhaps) an openness to trying out new things politically.

[Martin Mtl]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Interesting comment on Twitter: most of the people voting for the CAQ today in Québec are the same ones who voted for the NDP in 2011.

Quebec voters are so volatile and gullible. It's depressing.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

Quebec voters are so volatile and gullible. It's depressing.

Gullible?

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Interesting comment on Twitter: most of the people voting for the CAQ today in Québec are the same ones who voted for the NDP in 2011.

Given that the NDP near swept Quebec in 2011, it stands to reason that the probable near sweep of the CAQ today will follow that same trend, no?

The difference being that the NDP of 2011 was more a fluke, and the CAQ of 2022 had 4 years of (seemingly successful according to voters) governing history.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Gullible?

Maybe fickle would be a better term? Quebec voters generally seem to be the most shrewd in the country. If they're gullible it doesn't say much for the rest of the country.

[Martin Mtl]

They are gullible because they accept la CAQ's lies and misinformation without questioning it, otherwise they would no be so ready to give them such a massive majority. La CAQ is the worst of the PQ and the Liberals rolled into one party. And now even Eric Duhaime is having some kind of momentum in some parts of the province. It's unbelievable.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

They are gullible because they accept la CAQ's lies and misinformation without questioning it, otherwise they would no be so ready to give them such a massive majority. La CAQ is the worst of the PQ and the Liberals rolled into one party. And now even Eric Duhaime is having some kind of momentum in some parts of the province. It's unbelievable.

The people gets the government it deserves.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Haha, I was just going to say that I feel way more judged and get treated differently in Quebec based on how I am dressed! (Compared to, say, Ontario or the ROC where people seem to care a lot less.)

It's the same in Europe: France vs England. The French dress better than the English, pay more attention to how they look, and are judged by their fellow Frenchmen on how they dress, whereas English people in general have bad dressing tastes (except for the uppermost class), and don't look at how other people dress. There's even a verb for that in French, "toiser quelqu'un", or "dévisager quelqu'un", whereas English has no equivalent verb, which is quite telling.

Whenever I travel to London and Paris, I'm always amazed at how elegant Parisian women look, compared to their London counterparts. The British press is always full of jealous sartorial articles about how Parisian women always seem to be effortlessly elegant.

For example this one in The Guardian, which is a typical example:

Parisian chic in 10 easy steps

Ever wondered just why the French look so good? After her people-watching expedition to the style capital Hadley Freeman offers a DIY guide

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2004/mar/05/fashion.france

I wonder whether it was already the same when the British arrived in Québec in 1760.

[New Brisavoine]

Originally Posted by Acajack

https://twitter.com/CanadianPolling/status/1564650410807562242

PQ 2% up in the polls.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Interesting comment on Twitter: most of the people voting for the CAQ today in Québec are the same ones who voted for the NDP in 2011.

The abnormality there is 2011, not 2022. In other words, if by some magical process every voter had perfect knowledge of parties’ platforms at voting time, the Layton Crush wouldn’t have happened but the current CAQ would still be popular.

The NDP’s popularity was only skin-deep, but the CAQ’s is deeper - even their politics are popular, not just their leader’s charisma.

(And that’s why it’s durable - unlike the NDP’s.)

[lio45]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Gullible?

Agreed, it’s not the term I’d use for voters giving a second mandate to an administration that’s done the job decently well.

[MolsonExport]

It would be hard to argue that Quebec is doing poorly, relatively speaking. Has the unemployment rate (as sketchy and flawed as that statistic is) ever been as low as it is now? Quebec has had years of sustained superior economic performance relative to many other Canadian provinces. Montreal is booming after years of modest growth. It is natural to attribute some of this virtual cycle to the governing party.

[New Brisavoine]

Interesting op-ed in Le Devoir about Canada's and Québec's immigration policies. Should Québec open the floods of immigration like the federal government, to be like the toad that wishes to be as big as the ox, as the journalist puts it, and keep a 20% share of the Canadian population, or should Québec restrict immigration to remain a distinct society, and risk becoming insignificant in Canada, and eventually only an assimilated folkloric theme park like Louisiana?

https://www.ledevoir.com/opinion/editoriaux/753405/immigration-bataille-de-chiffres

Si l’immigration doit faire partie des moyens pour répondre aux pénuries de travailleurs dont souffrent les entreprises en particulier, elle fait augmenter la demande de main-d’oeuvre pour l’ensemble de l’économie. On n’a qu’à regarder la situation en Ontario et écouter son premier ministre, Doug Ford, se plaindre de la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre, même si la province, participant allègrement à la politique fédérale d’accueillir bientôt 451 000 immigrants par an, en reçoit quatre fois plus que le Québec.

Sur le plan de l’enrichissement, les économistes qui se sont penchés sur la question ont conclu que, bien que l’immigration forcément fasse croître l’économie, elle a peu d’effets sur le niveau de vie des gens ; elle influe peu sur le produit intérieur brut par habitant. Ces études donnent raison à François Legault, qui a rappelé le sort enviable des petits pays comme la Suisse, la Suède ou le Danemark. Il serait illusoire de tenter de suivre l’exemple du Canada, dont on peut douter du bon sens de la frénésie migratoire. Même si cette politique, à laquelle le Québec n’a pas souscrit, a pour conséquence de réduire son poids démographique et politique au sein de la fédération, la grenouille que nous sommes n’a pas intérêt à devenir plus grosse que le boeuf. Et nous verrons à quelle réflexion collective cette évolution néfaste nous conduira.

Les mérites de l’immigration à un niveau soutenable ne reposent pas sur des arguments économiques. Des considérations humanitaires interviennent, mais il s’agit surtout de poursuivre l’aventure de la nation québécoise avec des gens venus d’ailleurs qui veulent y participer, et ainsi l’enrichir. C’est un moyen de faire rayonner le Québec de l’intérieur, pour ainsi dire, de mettre en valeur sa culture, sa société, en français. La question est là, à savoir si cet épanouissement est possible dans le contexte canadien ou si c’est l’insignifiance folklorique et la lente assimilation qui nous attendent.