Mass immigration wont help with that, which is something all left leaning parties support right now.
In the 70s they blamed unions for causing wage inflation, and created laws to prevent wage negotiations, now we just do mass immigration when the phillips curve inverts. Regardless of existing housing shortages.
Well if you're mad about this he also decided not to fire the MP who wanted to ship a Canadian to China for breaking Chinese laws. Where he would likely face execution, as a Canadian tweeting truthful rhetoric in Canada that goes against Chinese propaganda.
Canadians oil and natural gas can and have displaced large amounts of coal, lowering US emissions. Heck BC still imports energy from the US produced using coal.
Pierres plan is to force municipals to rezone by withholding funding, which makes mass transit actually possible, and our urban sprawl is a big reason our emissions are so high. The Liberals plan hasnt worked for 10 years, and Carney is promising the exact same thing, which is a non-functional plan given the large immigration numbers they want to have.
The liberals were just found distributing pins with stop the steal; like the MP who wanted to ship a Canadian to Hong Kong for execution Carney did not fire them, but rather reassigned them. There are some very heinous acts, I'm surprised they need to make things up.
Heck parliaments been prorogued for months due to a terrible budget that went over the Liberals guardrails ending in Freelands letter, Sean Fraser quit and came back after ruining the countries immigration system, and I wouldnt be surprised if Randy Boissonnault comes back too. People must be really desperate to de-industrialize to fight climate change, as per his book, and Germany's success with that plan.
Excerpt from Values: The speed at which the adjustment to a net-zero economy occurs is uncertain and could be
decisive for financial stability. There have already been a few high-profile examples of jump-to
distress pricing because of shifts in environmental policy or performance. The combined market
capitalisation of the top four US coal producers has fallen by over 99 per cent since the end of
2010, with multiple bankruptcies. To meet the 1.5°C target, more than 80 per cent of current
fossil fuel reserves (including three-quarters of coal, half of gas, one-third of oil) would need to
stay in the ground, stranding these assets. The equivalent for less than 2°C is about 60 per cent
of fossil fuel assets staying in the ground (where they would no longer be assets).
When I mentioned the prospect of stranded assets in a speech in 2015, 22 it was met with howls
of outrage from the industry. That was in part because many had refused to perform the basic
reconciliation between the objectives society had agreed in Paris (keeping temperature increases
below 2°C), the carbon budgets science estimated were necessary to achieve them and the consequences this had for fossil fuel extraction. They couldn’t, or wouldn’t, undertake the basic calculations that a teenager, Greta Thunberg, would easily master and powerfully project. Now recognition is growing, even in the oil and gas industry, that some fossil fuel assets will be
stranded – although, as we shall see later in the chapter, pricing in financial markets remains
wholly inconsistent with the transition.
We need low interest rates and skyrocketing asset prices so that people pay 2% more to buy this next year. Consumption must go up so that people have worthless jobs producing trash that our politicians call economic growth, as people applaud their stocks rising.
It is mental junk food, its addictive, which is why I think it will be so effective. If you can make learning addictive then its bound to raise the average global IQ.
Mistakes will be less in the future, and its already pretty good now for subjects with a lot of textbooks and research. I dont think this is that big of an impediment, it will still create geniuses all over the globe.
You want a circlejerk with no barriers, whereas I wish we could discuss the reasons why hes putting in tariffs and cutting spending. Project 2025 versus ETS2 for instance, or the fact China is buying fewer and fewer treasuries every year; leading to higher borrowing costs on leveraged economies globally as money is sucked into the US, to fund the spending they also cant afford.
Even the global demographics look bleak given the amount of debt we've taken on, and people are still living in an MMT fantasyland as they roll over their mortgages from 2% to 6%.
I am just stating what I think is happening, and what their plans seem to be. Trump has denounced the project 2025 plan, but its from the heritage foundation and yet it talks about implementing a border wall, so its pretty obvious that it is Trumps plan given the absurd ridiculousness of a border wall. It also lines up with what he is doing, Musk and John Kennedy made speeches recently that all countries should remove all barriers to the US if they want the tariffs taken off themselves.
Europe meanwhile has a full policy listed, where they say they will tariff foreign emitters, and then create a "social climate fund" for social goals. As they rush in a CBDC for October to push expiring stimulus and inflation quotas in the guise of carbon quotas to control monetary policy. Canada's PM has already said they intend on signing onto this foreign emitter tariff system as well, and I'm sure other countries will be too.
Maybe you can explain where I am misreading or misunderstanding the situation, I find it interesting and would love additional insight into whats happening globally, we are clearly in an era of upheaval.
As far as I've read Europe wants a global carbon credit system that they are rolling out, while Trump is pushing to erode barriers to trade including eroding those climate tariffs. Everyone is now competing in a changing world order where debt is more expensive, due to aging global demographics, and China and Saudi Arabia no longer recycling their profits into US treasuries. Trumps plan seems to be following Milton Friedmans ideology of free trade, low regulation, and stable money supply growth, while the EU attempts to financially repress their citizens via carbon tariffs in order to perform economic central planning.
Is US social security not the definition of a ponzi scheme, where new money pays for old money, as they obfuscate the fact its totally unfunded outside of current year debt accumulation?
Can somebody correct me where I'm wrong here, and why it is sustainable in a rising interest rate environment and aging demographics where debt is more expensive to roll over. It seems to me if you even made it optional and allowed people to opt in the entire system would collapse, as it is entirely unfunded if not for the new entrants into the system, which again appears to be a ponzi scheme.
Well the overton window has shifted so much I'm not sure where any party is. Republicans are the so called conservatives, who happen to love larger deficits than the democrats for economic stimulus, so I'm not sure where that puts any party on a map. I'm just going by the labels most people know them by.
I'd support a ban on advertising in public spaces, but in digital spaces its a bit nonsense given it funds a lot of things people then dont need to pay for.
Central Bank QE skyrocketed asset prices and rents increased dramatically, and higher interest rates need to crash the economy to restore balance. Its all the ebb and flow of monetary policy, which has dramatically misallocated capital via cheap debt.
Ah, that could very well be true, we really printed a lot of money during Covid. In Canada the government is already buying 50% of all mortgage bonds, inflating the debt people can take in order to juice home prices.
Mass immigration wont help with that, which is something all left leaning parties support right now.
In the 70s they blamed unions for causing wage inflation, and created laws to prevent wage negotiations, now we just do mass immigration when the phillips curve inverts. Regardless of existing housing shortages.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfjrJ5kSLD0