WestCanMan

OMG, look at myata suddenly opening his gutless little mouth! 🤣 And look at his supporting links! Just kidding, he just came here to lie again. Shocker.

If anything it was the CBC that he "outwitted", but the CBC wanted Carney anyways. It's like the fish just jumped in the boat, and all the CBC had to do was whack it over the head with an oar. In the end, maybe we can all win. If the west separates (Sask and AB) then Canada will definitely have one-party rule.

The Atlantic provinces actually have way more voting clout than they should based on their population. Some of them get about 1.4 votes compared to Albertans IIRC. I did the math on that during the 2021 election.

https://www.westernstandard.news/opinion/morgan-carneys-liberals-are-eyeing-your-home-equity/63897 The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) is the federal government arm managing home financing. The CMHC has been tasked multiple times and spent hundreds of thousands of tax dollars studying how to implement a home equity tax on primary residences. Each time this leaked into the public, the Liberals denied they were considering such a tax. Then they would dig into the issue again. The CMHC tapped the wisdom of an extreme activist named Paul Kershaw who manages a group called Generation Squeeze. His focus is on intergenerational wealth redistribution and he sees taxing home equity as a means to his ideological end. Kershaw referred to homeowners are “lottery winners” and said people who owned homes gained equity while sitting around watching TV. It is a gross insult to the people who scraped and saved to get into the home ownership market and dedicated thousands of hours of their lives to maintaining and upgrading their properties. Kershaw demonstrates the vilest of politics of envy, where he refuses to acknowledge the right of others to enjoy the fruits of their labour and feels it’s the role of the state to take that equity away from them. Kershaw counselled the Liberal cabinet directly in a retreat they held on Prince Edward Island less than two years ago. You don’t bring somebody as extreme as Kershaw to lecture your top government lieutenants without a plan to embrace his teachings. Most of the cabinet ministers who sat in on that retreat are still with Carney’s team today. The money that Carney needs to fund mass-immigration will come at the expense of Canadians who have lived and worked here for generations. Best part for him is, if he steals a chunk of your equity when you go to move to a different house, then you'll need to get a loan for that amount just to buy another house that costs the same amount.

Libbies aren't exactly soft. Libbies in the US did billions of dollars of damage to homes and businesses, assaulted and killed citizens, scalped a ret4rded kid, assaulted thousands of cops, and even assassinated cops. Some of their crimes were so serious that Kamala Harris couldn't get them out of jail, and the bail fund she promotes put killers on the street. After all that, our PM said that the BLM movement was a perfect example of the type of protest that he supports... So all this time you could have been assaulting and killing people but instead you were just smearing your feces on Teslas and then licking the windows 😉

@BeaverFever Did you read^^ that^^, left4rd? Do you finally understand that words came out of the Carney's gob that were the exact opposite of the truth? Do you know what that means? If I told people that I helped you write your stupid post, would you just say "That's close enough to the truth, I can live with that"? Do you understand that's the exact same thing that Carney did, when he said "It was my privilege to work with Paul Martin when he balanced the books and kept the books balanced"? If you still don't understand all this, don't worry. The English language is just too complex and nuanced for illiterate cultists to fully understand. Just nod your head and F-off. People are used to seeing you do that now.

By "Fighting Economic Growth"? You said the quiet part out loud, Libbie.

If anyone's going anywhere it's you, b1tch.

Martin was just the finance minister for Chretien when he balanced the budget: The latest nose stretcher from Carney is that he helped Paul Martin balance the budget. “It was my privilege to work with Paul Martin when he balanced the books and kept the books balanced,” Carney said during Tuesday’s debate. Here’s the problem with that statement: Mark Carney, according to his own resume on his LinkedIn profile, never worked with Paul Martin while he was balancing the books as Jean Chretien’s finance minister. Martin introduced his first budget to take Canada back to balance on Feb. 27, 1995, and over the next several years did the hard work so that it was balanced in 1998. The plan was to make changes to Canada’s economy and government spending to bring about the first balanced budget in nearly 30 years. He never said he was just a central figure. That would have been ok. He just said that he did it. He has allowed others to make the claim while he didn't deny it, and he has talked about it as if he did it himself. Wrong. He did nothing to stop our banks from adopting failed bank policies - that was legislated before he got that job. as early as the 19th century, Canadian and American banking systems took different paths. Canada set up a strong, single-regulator-concentrated banking system which they say, “absorbed the key sources of economic risk — mortgage and investment banking,” while the U.S. developed what they refer to as a “relatively weak, fragmented, and crisis-prone” banking system. In contrast to Canada, what emerged in the U.S. was a lightly to unregulated banking system and ultimately many more smaller and less stable banks. the relative stability of Canada’s banking system in comparison to the U.S. during the 2008 crisis was not a “one-off event,” as Canadian banks were able to avoid other financial crises experienced in the U.S. from 1863-1914 (a period of panics and recessions) and the Great Depression of the 1930’s for the same reasons. These circumstances pre-date Liberal leadership and prime ministerial-hopeful Mark Carney by over a century. That being said, the historical differences were not enough to stop two Alberta banks in the 1980’s — Northland Bank and Canadian Commercial Bank (CCB) from diverging from regulatory practices and engaging in behaviours similar to those that fuelled the U.S. 2008 financial crisis. But the individual who stepped in to investigate and address these practices was not Mark Carney, who was living in Alberta and 21 years-old at the time, but former Supreme Court judge Willard Estey. Estey was ahead of his time and instrumental in making recommended changes to Canada’s banking system that protected the country from the 2008 crisis. Carney can make no such claim. Carney entered his role as Bank of Canada Governor in 2008, after the practices that caused the financial crisis in the U.S. were already in full swing. So, he could not have set up any protections against it. Thank you National Post.

How much did the gov't of China like the fact that Poilievre lost in his own riding? If they didn't support fanjoy, I'm Julius Caesar.

Who cares? He's an id10t. The less he says here, the better. Anyways, F unity. Liberals are worse than cancer. I have no more interest in uniting with Liberals than the Taliban.

What? Notley was NDP. I thought that you were some kind of commie...

From what I can see, that's just a video of a guy's lap, and maybe some other guy is bringing a turtle home. Not even the LPOC could be that blatant about election tampering.

It's a "F* Canada" moment. Carney is just a symptom of a much larger problem. If the MSM's propaganda carnival with Trudeau was a one-off, because our MSM was in love with the family name or something, that would be one thing, but there was no great reason for the MSM to go into propaganda beast mode in favour of Carney as well. It's clear that Liberal candidates can lie as much and as blatantly as they want, they can divide Canadians by race & vax status when it helps the party, and they can run us into the ground financially, but the MSM will continue to portray them as the saviours of democracy and Canadians will eat from the palm of their hand. Canada had a good run, but religions, tribes/clans, nations, forms of governance, etc have come and gone for all of human history and that's normal. No one prays to Athena anymore. Aside from the Scots and the native peoples who just came out of the stone age recently, no one in the western world knows what clan or tribe their ancestors were in. In my lifetime Czechoslovakia was split into two countries, Yugoslavia became maybe 6 countries? I don't even know. Monarchies, with their various forms and names, seem to go back forever. In 1500 it seemed like they were here to stay. Now there are are just a few odd ducks like NoKo where hereditary rulers wield real power. Is democracy already crumbling... and leading to what? Anyways, the notion that Canada would just last in its current form until the sun goes supernova was just naive. Something was bound to happen. 500 years from now there might be 15 countries between Mexico's southern border and Baffin Island. Who knows? All I know is that Canada is no longer a healthy, functioning democracy and I'm not interested with whatever perverted little thing this has become. I don't know if that means two Canadas, 3 Canadas, some provinces break off and maybe unite into a new country or not, some provinces leave and join America, whatever. I just don't care, as long as it's not "this". I'm not interested in seeing how much larger the homeless crisis can get, or how much harder it will become for Canadians to own homes, or what changes the LPOC is eventually going to make to our current form of home ownership or with their new equity taxes, etc. Of course Canada was going to change eventually, I just don't like where we're headed. None of the LPOC's changes have been good. Canada was just a far better place to live in 2014 than it is in 2025, and regression was never supposed to be the plan. F* Canada.

Uhhh, thanks for posting random facts, but the budget was balanced before Carney got there. That's the point is that Carney had nothing at all to do with balancing the Martin budget. The other point is that Carney wasn't the main person responsible for averting the '08 recession either. Those are just two of his major lies.

Here's what a stupid little turd like you doesn't understand: some of us were able to predict the "sudden tightening of the race just before election day" because we've seen it time again in election polls on both sides of the border. "Kamala/Hillary/Trudeau/Carney is way ahead", MSM uses the fake polling data 2,000x a day to explain how awesome their favourite candidate is followed by "Trump/Carney/Scheer is making it close in the last couple of days", but no reason is given for the miraculous recovery The polling ends up at the outside edge of the "margin of error" Every, single, time. And you guys are shocked every time by how awesome they are 🤣

I know some people with businesses who are really wigging out over this. It's not a small deal for people who have had a hard time under the Trudeau gov't, and now the new guy is even more of a liar and sellout than sock-boy was. Just like there are foreign influencers putting a lot of money into buying off LPOC politicians and FN Chiefs and whomever else they can to make pipelines impossible, as well as harming Canadian businesses in other ways, now there are a lot of people with money and influence who are extremely intent on separation/breaking Canada apart, including the president of the United States. I'm betting on Trump. The west is very willing to leave Canada, even if that doesn't include joining the US.

Here is a collection of childish posts: https://repolitics.com/forums/profile/117613-treebeard/

I wonder if Canada can keep becoming more and more divided without something major happening.

He did like him, and I'm not saying that he hates him. I've never even said that Carney wasn't good at his job here. He just didn't avert the '08 crisis. He was the #3 or 4 guy on the totem pole when that happened.

Aside from what's already developed, that ALR here is what's left that you could realistically build on. We have developed the sides of mountains before - the British Properties being a prime example of land that wasn't great for building which was turned into some of the most expensive homes in the country - but it only makes sense around highly developed areas with lots of amenities, coastal views, etc, etc. Compare "building on the side of one of the Selkirk mountains" to places like Texas, Wyoming, Ohio, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Georgia, Florida, Utah, N & S Dakota, Montana... You can't swing a dead cat down there without it crossing a major Hwy, river system or railroad. Everything is interconnected AF. There's major infrastructure within a few miles of everywhere down there. They don't have to build on the sides of mountains there, and none of those places are cold and dark like Fort Mac, Flin Flon, Buffalo Narrows... We're as big as the US but have mountains, ice, and the outback. Building here isn't the same.

Trudeau killed over $130B worth of projects that were already approved and ready to go. He cost Alberta over 100,000 high-paying jobs, and then he created the DPA law and tried to force JWR to save the jobs of 5,000 crooks in Mtl. FYI when the Libs and NDP say "It will take 10-15 years to get tose pipelines built and Trump won't be there anymore", what they fail to realize is that we wouldn't be 10-15 years away if we didn't elect la Turd. What makes you believe everything, Boges? The CBC. The CBC made people believe in carney. His own lying didn't do that.

There is land left, but what isn't developed BC is in the ALR. https://governmentofbc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=87dee902dc5e443fbff8ca7b4311b407

We didn't build enough housing to bring back 450,000 ex-pats a year, dummy. What do you think happens when you bring in more people than you have houses for? That will be me on Parliament Hill soon lol.

Thanks, dummy. 1) The reason that he wasn't talking about woke BS this year (CBC even noted that) is because left4rds turned down their woke rhetoric after Kamala lost. Left4rds used to think that being a useless liar with some fake polling and 24/7 MSM propaganda was enough to win elections, but actual polling in the US showed that crap like "people shouldn't be allowed to say 'mom' anymore" wasn't winning hearts and minds. That's how dumb you guys are ffs, you needed to conduct polls to figure that out. 2) If he was talking about wokeness when his popularity theoretically surged to infinity and beyond, then it didn't bring him down to the popularity of dogcrap and cancer just because of Trump, and then suddenly make a miraculous recovery right before the election becauuuuuse, what? Why the surge in the polls at the end, if not just to make the polls seem more accurate?