Federal Government & Politics II

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Why do you think this is better? How is trucking all sorts of raw materials to factories where one set of workers builds pieces of houses, then those pieces of houses get trucked to housing developments hundreds of miles away where another set of workers puts the houses together more efficient than building them on site? Especially with labour shortages as they are, and your number 1 plan affecting that as well.

Modular is better because it is far more efficient. Can you imagine building cars the same way we did before Ford's assembly line? Of course not but that is exactly how we still build our housing.

Also, we live in a cold climate where there are months where little housing actually gets built made worse by the fact that cities don't allow construction outside businesses hours and nothing on weekends. This greatly curtails how much housing we can build. This is in stark contrast to modular housing built in a factory that can operate 24/7 365 days of the year. Modular housing also allows 2 pars of the housing unit to be built at the same time. One part can be building the foundation while the other part is building the house. Remember these are modular houses and not mobile ones so they can be built ANYWHERE a regular house is {you may be living next to one right now and not even know it} and qualifies forr all CMHC programs.

Obviously, modular housing is no good for high rises but it is for town/rowhomes and especially SFH. In Scandanavia, 40% of all new home construction is modular and Norway is at 50%.

[Hecate]

Housing used to be this way… many homes in the west were ordered through the eatons catalogue and built by the owner.

In reality there should be tiny home communities popping up all over the place, but the restrictions in place by municipalities are absolutely ridiculous.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Build.It

Well that didn't take very long at all. Government funded battery plants are already facing pressure from overseas, as predicted on here by myself and a few others. Rather than letting the market naturally adjust to what Canada is strongest at producing (ie. NOT batteries), we now require more government intervention to fix the last government intervention.

Both these interventions are to keep Chinese EVs out and not have our auto industry (90% exports) fall behind. Sorry, not sorry, that the government simply didn't let Southern Ontario become a rustbelt.

Originally Posted by jonny24

While we're at it, let's require Canadian construction companies be the ones who actually build the new plants.

https://www.cisc-icca.ca/funded-by-c...-by-canadians/

The majority of the jobs go to Canadian workers. People are making a mountain out of a mole hill over some home country expertise those companies brought here. How many Canadians have experience building multi-billion dollar battery plants before this?

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Both these interventions are to keep Chinese EVs out and not have our auto industry (90% exports) fall behind. Sorry, not sorry, that the government simply didn't let Southern Ontario become a rustbelt.

Yep. I’m pretty libertarian but there are limits. If we fully “leave it to the market”, we’ll be buying EVs built by whipped captured slaves at enormous environmental cost — they’ll be cheap tho.

[lio45]

This ties into the classic topic of Federal politics, the masses of warm body FNSs we take in nowadays — if you listen to Canadian employers, they’ll tell you they “need” the country flooded with disproportionate amounts of desperate Indentured Servants, otherwise economic catastrophe, but in reality, it’s not a need, it’s a wish.

[lio45]

Any bets on the outcome of that Toronto-area byelection? It’s apparently a tight race (in what should have been a red stronghold.)

[Marty_Mcfly]

Originally Posted by lio45

Any bets on the outcome of that Toronto-area byelection? It’s apparently a tight race (in what should have been a red stronghold.)

I'd love to see some polling out of there, I guess we'll see tomorrow if someone like Mainstreet comes in the clutch.

My guess is a very slim CPC win, maybe by 2 points or so. I think that would be an absolutely shocking result though.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by lio45

Any bets on the outcome of that Toronto-area byelection? It’s apparently a tight race (in what should have been a red stronghold.)

I think Conservatives will win and it won't be that close. Current polls extrapolated to the this riding make it close. Add byelection enthusiam gap, Liberals sending a message to Trudeau to go and most importantly a big shift in Jewish vote and turnout and I think it's a solid loss for Libs.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by lio45

Any bets on the outcome of that Toronto-area byelection? It’s apparently a tight race (in what should have been a red stronghold.)

I'm hoping for a tight LPC win and that JT uses that as a sign to stay on as I sincerely want him to lead the LPC in the next election. Not for vindictive reasons or wanting to see him lose, but rather I don't want to see a potential "good" future leader of the LPC get side swiped in 2025 and I think if just a warm body/potted plant steps in, the collapse would even be greater. As much as the polls are against JT right now, there are still many seats (mainly in the Mtrl area) where his name will still win the riding. IMHO, there is no way a Joly, Freeland or "fill in the blank" will be able to avoid the taint and bring in as many seats. Yes there are ridings where his name is poison, but at this juncture, I don't think anyone else can change those future losses.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by shreddog

I'm hoping for a tight LPC win and that JT uses that as a sign to stay on as I sincerely want him to lead the LPC in the next election. Not for vindictive reasons or wanting to see him lose, but rather I don't want to see a potential "good" future leader of the LPC get side swiped in 2025 and I think if just a warm body/potted plant steps in, the collapse would even be greater. As much as the polls are against JT right now, there are still many seats (mainly in the Mtrl area) where his name will still win the riding. IMHO, there is no way a Joly, Freeland or "fill in the blank" will be able to avoid the taint and bring in as many seats. Yes there are ridings where his name is poison, but at this juncture, I don't think anyone else can change those future losses.

Agree with you. But after listening to the Hurly Burly podcast, I don't think he's staying. They made the point that he cares about his brand and an undefeated record is worth something to him. They think he'll pull pin this summer. And I kind of agree.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by shreddog

I'm hoping for a tight LPC win and that JT uses that as a sign to stay on as I sincerely want him to lead the LPC in the next election. Not for vindictive reasons or wanting to see him lose, but rather I don't want to see a potential "good" future leader of the LPC get side swiped in 2025 and I think if just a warm body/potted plant steps in, the collapse would even be greater. As much as the polls are against JT right now, there are still many seats (mainly in the Mtrl area) where his name will still win the riding. IMHO, there is no way a Joly, Freeland or "fill in the blank" will be able to avoid the taint and bring in as many seats. Yes there are ridings where his name is poison, but at this juncture, I don't think anyone else can change those future losses.

I am not sure the overlap on the Venn diagram of 1) "good" 2) would still be a plausible candidate in 2029 and 3) wants to run this time around is very large.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Any bets on the outcome of that Toronto-area byelection? It’s apparently a tight race (in what should have been a red stronghold.)

Polls show a tie between Libs and Cons so I guess it will depend on turnout which is unpredictable in a byelection.

The Cons could definitely take it.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I am not sure the overlap on the Venn diagram of 1) "good" 2) would still be a plausible candidate in 2029 and 3) wants to run this time around is very large.

What would be interesting to understand is whether any potential leadership candidate has set up an exec team to run the party after a win. We all know the stories of JT+Butts (and Telford), and back in the day Martin had his team ready to go years before he replaced Chretien, but this time around, I'm not hearing any rumours of anything being set up.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Polls show a tie between Libs and Cons so I guess it will depend on turnout which is unpredictable in a byelection.

Historically by-elections tend to bring more negative voters than positive, and given the current climate ...

[niwell]

I predict a very slight Lib win, but really it could go either way. Note that a razor thin LPC win in this riding is basically a loss for the party - this isn't normally a contested riding.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I am not sure the overlap on the Venn diagram of 1) "good" 2) would still be a plausible candidate in 2029 and 3) wants to run this time around is very large.

I think it's Carney and maybe nobdoy else. What does still be a plausible candidate in 2029 mean? I think a few younger people might hold their powder dry for the next race where the election is more winnable but I'd guess this is Carney's only chance. Though Ignatieff got a second chance.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I think it's Carney and maybe nobdoy else. What does still be a plausible candidate in 2020 mean? I think a few younger people might hold their powder dry for the next race where the election is more winnable but I'd guess this is Carney's only chance. Though Ignatieff got a second chance.

I mean could lose the election, hang around for 4 years in (official?) opposition and be a credible candidate in 2029.

I just don’t see Carney wanting to do that. He has shown very limited interest in politics since returning to Canada and does not seem like someone who wants to be PP’s opposition for 4 years.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I mean could lose the election, hang around for 4 years in (official?) opposition and be a credible candidate in 2029.

I just don’t see Carney wanting to do that. He has shown very limited interest in politics since returning to Canada and does not seem like someone who wants to be PP’s opposition for 4 years.

Oh I think you are right it's doubtful on that front for sure. I guess he's also not someone with strong enough party base to not be at risk of being dumped after the election. So if Trudeau resigns post St. Paul loss or otherwise and Carney puts his name forward is he just delusional thinking he can win in 2025? OR hoping to hold them to a minority and win soon after? If he runs surely he must know what he is likely signing up for no?

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Oh I think you are right it's doubtful on that front for sure. I guess he's also not someone with strong enough party base to not be at risk of being dumped after the election. So if Trudeau resigns post St. Paul loss or otherwise and Carney puts his name forward is he just delusional thinking he can win in 2025? OR hoping to hold them to a minority and win soon after? If he runs surely he must know what he is likely signing up for no?

I just don’t think he would run. If he wanted to be a politician his window was the 2021 election.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by acottawa

In October 2022, IRCC introduced a temporary public policy allowing eligible study permit holders to work off-campus more than 20 hours per week. That clearly isn't an inertia, it is a proactive decision taken by the Minister for IRCC.

Now we can see first hand the havoc wreaked by Sean Fraser's decision:





https://x.com/BenRabidoux/status/1803414289715241249

It looks like his successor Marc Miller's promises are also all smoke and mirrors while the runaway train continues.