I am Groot

I remind you that the majority of people in many of our bigger cities are now foreign-born. In less than 15 years more than half the country will be foreign-born. And we have been telling them for decades to not adapt, to not integrate, that Canada is a terrible country on stolen 'occupied' land that committed genocide and is irredeemably racist to the core. And many would have gone to the US if they could have gotten in.

Or devolve. Wonder how long it will take when foreigners are the majority for all the most precious leftist demands to fall by the wayside. Abortion? Not allowed. Women's equality? LOL. Forget that! Gay rights? Nope. The cultures you are flooding the country with are extremely religious and socially conservative. They despise your beliefs.

Sorry, but if there's anything Canadians have demonstrated over the last 50 years it's that they absolutely have no interest in making sacrifices. What is this 'way of life' of which you speak? More than half the population will be foreign-born within 15 years. What is their 'way of life"?

This is sooo tired, cliched and, well, dumb. Why does the Left think it's fine to say "You're not a real Canadian if you weren't born here five thousand years ago!" but at the same time say "The instant you get off a plane and get your passport you're a 100% Canadian and as good as anyone else born and raised here!" Because they're DUMB.

We are already losing our sovereignty to foreigners who are flooding in, not integrating, and slowly taking over the country. We are forecast to be a minority in this country in fifteen years. The foreign-born will be in complete control then.

Because of what the Liberals have done to their future chances here. And what they are continuing to do in importing masses of immigrants to crowd into available housing and healthcare lines and take their jobs.

Pakistan IS, by almost any measure, a shithole country. I mentioned a whole bunch of things. Pick one and tell me how it's okay.

Why do you say it's evil? You were just praising the Canadian healthcare system!

LOL. I was almost going to say in that last post that it's clear your ignorance makes you angry and that's why you lash out when it becomes obvious. It's a predictable part of you. Any time you get contradicted you get angry. You're like a mean drunk. Okay until you've had a couple, then you get angry and bitter. Another predictable mannerism is how you try to swagger about how amazingly successful you are at debating people who disagree with you after you lose.

No. I just acknowledge reality. Wow! Really! That never happens elsewhere in the world! You're pathetic. Because we HAVE healthcare, and it's not like the Americans, well, that's good enough for you! People dying in ERs waiting to see a doctor? Dying at home waiting months or years in pain to see a specialist? People killing themselves because they can't get medical care? Millions unable to get a family doctor? The worst wait times in the OECD? Good enough. It didn't cost us anything personally! Only through taxes! Good enough. You and your complacency are what's ruining this country. Good enough. It'll do. Ah, it's better than the Americans (not even true anymore). This country is rotting away, sliding down the ladder as other nations pass us by, and the complacent are just "Ah, we're still better than Zimbabwe. So good enough." I was in pain for months last year. All I needed was an injection. But they're only given by surgeons. And the surgeons had an 18-month wait for non-urgent cases. I called a fee-charging clinic in Montreal, got an appointment for two days later, had the shot ($1500), and went home and got better. You have no idea and no interest in how many people all across this country are living in pain while they wait and wait and wait to get a consult with a specialist. But I hope one day you become one of them. "Hey, I got a surgeon for free! I have to wait three years for the operation but... good enough!"

Only if you decide to take it that way. And you haven't told me what's not broken.

It seems to be called for an awful lot by Liberals. But ONLY for things others have done and NEVER for things they have done. I note Carney blames all economic issues on Trump rather than the last 10 years of incompetent Liberal government. What is it in Canada that is working well? Police and the legal system? Nope. Our healthcare system? Nope. Government? Bloated and inefficient, with high deficits and a growing debt, so nope. Media? Biased and lazy. Nope. Our economy? Definitely not. Society? More and more divided, less and less polite and friendly, growing ethnic enclaves demanding others adjust to their values and culture, growing hostility between various foreign cultures we have allowed to grow here. No sense of unity. Threats to separate from multiple provinces. Ongoing foreign influence being ignored by government. Military? Lol. What is working, Michael, in your estimation? The city can't even fill potholes and paint lines on the bloody roads, and public transit is a mess. Tell me what is working impressively well in Canada? Calling out things that aren't working is worse than cursing our ancestors for things we'd have done no different were we there?

I think I've made it quite obvious for years that while I intend to vote Conservative I'm not a big fan of Poilivre. No doubt that's because of how little you understand about politics and government.

For me, the other reason for not bringing in huge numbers of people has to do with our culture, who we are as a society and people. We've brought in too many too fast to hold onto that. Instead of immigrant kids intigrating as they grow up in our schools and learn to be like Canadian kids from their peers, it's Canadian kids learning to be like immigrant kids from their peers because in most cities now the overwhelming number of kids in schools are immigrants. A friend of mine speaks of her son who just graduated high school. He's much more socially conservative than she is, particularly with regard to LGBT people. Why? Because he's one of about six white kids in his class. The rest come from the third world and mostly from countries where sexual minorities get killed, or at least beaten and arrested. These peers are also extremely misogynistic by our standards. Women exist for sex, babies, and housekeeping, and nothing more to them. And they are mostly very religious, especially the Muslims. The more such people we bring over, the more those and similar attitudes will grow.

Hmm, no. Hiring and promotion on merit, not race is the norm throughout the world. Only in woke countries do they hire and promote despite a LACK of merit, based entirely on race and gender. I and others have already posted our definition of woke. And no, I don't like Trump and I don't think he's woke. I don't like Putin or Xi either, and they're not woke. Stop sniveling about me disagreeing with you. We absolutely have DEI in every government and corporation to ensure discriminatory hiring and promotion takes place. Is that how you got hired? Businesses hire unqualified people to virtue signal to customers and because government, while there is no law, strongly pressures them to. The federal cabinet was put together strictly through DEI, not merit. And the public service has been hiring on race and gender for some time. I'm not in it anymore but many people I know are. Hiring incompetent Blacks seems to be giving way to hiring incompetent Indians, which is causing some further issues as most of them are not exactly people-friendly managers and don't know what they're doing. Was just hearing from an EX last week about a new ADM who was brought in with no previous federal public service experience straight from a municipality, who hasn't got a clue and is busy screaming at her underlings and making unreasonable demands the way Indians do back home I guess.

I have no argument with much of this. The problem is it's wishful thinking. Only 27 countries out of about 200 are working on that, and they do not include the biggest emitters of carbon. Two-thirds of emissions now come from the developing world and they don't have to be carbon neutral for another 45 years. The US never even signed the treaty and definitely isn't working on it. China is certainly doing a lot with renewables - so it can basically sell them to everyone else and control the market, which they pretty much do. But two thirds of their electric energy comes from coal and that's not changing anytime soon. Nice try. Didn't work. Won't work. So time for something new.

I'm curious. Does it give you an stiffy every time you post the same tiktok video of this angry old bearded guy?

I grasp that you have no idea what you're talking about.= Okay. So you don't even know what MPs and cabinet ministers do. Well, I don't have time to give you the kind of education you ought to have gotten back in grade school, but in summary, the job of an MP is to look after constituent affairs. This is an often time-consuming task that involves speaking with and meeting constituents, both in Ottawa and in their riding. It involves helping them out with certain issues by making calls or sending emails to different ministers. They will also keep up to date on ongoing government/political issues that are in the public eye or soon will be. And, of course, they have to do the usual back home, visiting festivals and barbeques and other local celebrations, and meeting people at churches, temples, community halls, or whatever, listening to their concerns, giving speeches, glad-handing,etc. They might also be given tasks by the party. They might be on a committee, for example, which involves preparing for hearings, reading up on subject matter, researching and perhaps meeting with party colleagues and advisors on strategy, on potential witnesses to call, etc. If he/she is in the shadow cabinet, which Poilievre was, then they have to keep up to date on all ongoing programs and policies of the ministry they are going to be monitoring and critiquing. They need to meet with the party leader and other shadow cabinet members, as well as caucus to discuss policy and what strategy to take on questioning/attacking the government. Clearly this is reversed for cabinet ministers. Who also meet regularly and are in nearly continuous contact with ADMs and other high ministry officials, and have a group of policy advisors in their office to help deal with ongoing issues involving their ministry. They will also regularly attend cabinet meetings to discuss ongoing policy issues and problems. If a minister wishes a change made to something major they will bring it up back channel with the PMO, and then, if okayed, bring it up in cabinet for discussion. My point was that as Poilievre was almost always a high-profile MP, member of the shadow cabinet, and cabinet minister, he had no need to initiate private members bills to get attention. I have been making less than him for fewer years than him and I'm probably worth about $2.5 million. Hiis 'family fortune' was listed as $1.5 million ten years ago. How did it grow to $90 million? https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-google-questions-justin-trudeau-1.3248582

Carney has not canceled the carbon tax. He pretended to cancel the way in which carbon was taxed, though he didn't because that piece of paper he signed was for show and of no legal value. He still intends to tax carbon only at a higher rate, through taxes on business and industry which will be pushed downward to consumers through higher prices. Canceling the still-not-passed-into-law capital gains tax increase is good. But it's not enough to satisfy the criteria I set forth. What I said was "single way in which he differentiates from the Liberal policies of the past ten years" Not "Any program change he might make. So what is meant by Liberal policies of the past ten years? Spending hundreds of billions on climate change - not one particular program. Mass immigration from the third world. Focus on income redistribution - as opposed to one single program. Spending taxpayer money to buy off ethnic groups for votes. DEI and 'woke'. Negligence regarding foreign interference in our politics, society, and educational systems. Negligence regarding our national security. Negligence regarding crime - and not a single particular law. Negligence regarding the military.

Let me ask you this. Which is the better policy to combat climate change? A: Spend two trillion dollars to lower our emissions by 40% below 2005 level. B: Buy everyone a green hat. A will have a profoundly negative impact on our economy but make no difference to climate change. B will have no negative impact on our economy and make no difference to climate change. I vote for B. Don't try to make that a morally inferior choice to yours. I can easily turn that around as "You're willing to kill people in pursuit of a pointless goal that will help no one.

Do you mean economic or social left? In term of climate change yes. He seems to be very supportive of DEI and 'woke' too. Whether he's 'more' supportive of DEA than Trudeau remains to be seen. Clearly 'trans' friendly. Clearly pro choice. Clearly pro-mass-immigration. Has no problem sending $100 million to Gaza to help fund Hamas' rearmament program. In terms of fiscal, we'll have to see. Has shown no particular interest in balancing the budget anytime soon. Still waiting for how the present Conservatives have policies further to the right than the PCs did.

Okay, I didn't mean the whole globe would shatter and spring off into space. But he is a purveyor of the kind of climate alarmism that says the planet will burn up and civilization will end due to global warming.

I'm not sure how you believe this contradicts what I wrote above. Private members bills are just MPs making a statement to get their name in the local paper. Only a fraction of a fraction of them even pass on to be examined on their merits. And none get passed unless the government of the day wants them to be. Maybe Poilevre didn't feel the need to do something so that people would remember he's actually an MP, like most of the back bench MPs who propose private members bills. Why do you think that's a lot of money? He's been making a very good salary for many years. Here's a better question. Justin Trudeau's net worth was given as $1.2 million in 2015. After ten years as PM his net worth has someone ballooned to $96 million. How did that happen? Or more to the point, in what way could that be done legally?

In what way have I exaggerated or spoken a mistruth? Go ahead. Enlighten me.

Maybe they're not the far right bunch so many lefties have been shrieking about, hmm? And as for me, my problem with Carney is first, he has not come up with a single way in which he differentiates from the Liberal policies of the past ten years and second that he intends to double down on economy-killing climate policies.