Moonbox

Sweden's population was around 7 million at the time. What Sweden did would be the equivalent of Canada building over 6 million homes over the next 10 years. Even Carney's plan doesn't match that, but 500,000/year would at least have an effect. I think we need to abandon the illusion that platitudes about skills training, subsidies and tax incentives are going to solve this problem. Out of control immigration made the problem worse than it needed to be, but the status quo on house-building in Canada has been broken for a long time.

Sweden built a million homes from 1965 to 1974 when they faced a housing crisis. If a much smaller country with technology and methods from 50+ years ago could do it, there's no reason we shouldn't have been able to get going with this. At a certain point, you just have to get it done, and agonizing over the details and planning is something that cities should have worked out already if they were managed properly. 🤷‍♂️

He says, spending his entire day online fighting with people on the internet, with nothing and nobody in his life outside of that... 🤣

It speaks to his recognizing it was an unpopular policy, and nothing else. You're basically trying to argue that not doing the stupid thing that everyone knows is stupid is plagiarizing, because someone else called it stupid already. 🥴

True enough, and Carney's been pro taxing carbon for a long time. Even so, is Carney a "thief" for ditching an unpopular Liberal policy, and not giving Poilievre the easy target he'd prefer?

The carbon tax was unpopular. The only "idea' Poilievre had was to campaign against it, and it was good fodder for him. Now that Trudeau is gone and Carney has walked away from the carbon tax, PP is just punching at air, and that's what you're probably more upset about than anything. Now he has to come up with something better than a low-brow 3-word slogan. To say it's "stealing" to abandon bad policy is really weird logic.

I heard a rumour that Pierre Poilievre isn't actually a biological male, and that he goes to furry conventions. It might not be true, but we should definitely talk about that too. 🤡

So unless he keeps doing the thing you think is dumb, he's stealing? 🤔

Napoleon said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he's making a mistake". Up until a couple days ago, PP was still spending millions on pamphlets and advertisements squawking juvenile three-word slogans in a political environment deeply and negatively focused against the master of juvenile three-word slogans. This sort of self-inflicted injury is a gift to his opponents, and they're wise to just step back and let him hurt himself as long as it lasts.

I would too, if not for the fact that he posts 40+ times a day and is at all times derailing at least a half a dozen threads with his belligerent stupidity. 🙃

Always funning seeing people share "news" off Twatter.

It's a pretty sad commentary on your life that you imagine people on an internet forum "obsessing" over you when they don't respond right away. 🥴

So your assumption is that I sat at my computer for "days" finding the quote you said that didn't exist, rather than that like most functioning adults, I don't spend my whole day arguing with people on the internet? Nobody does a better job making you look like a deadbeat than you yourself do here. WELL DONE! 🤣

Here you go muppet, as requested: Once again, a quick little search is all it takes to make a clown out of you.

I said it when he took control of the Conservatives, but Poilievre was pretty much the only guy who could lose the next election for the Conservatives. If they win the election, it'll be in spite of him and because of the Liberals' shitty record. If the Liberals win, it'll because of Carney, and in spite of the Liberal's shitty record. Weird contrast.

Yeah, you quoted it, and you those are some pretty funny mental gymnastics you're doing to take that, and turn it into what you say it means. 🙃 As I already mentioned, if he was against free trade, why would he be promoting expanding it with Europe? That's a question you won't answer, because it doesn't fit in with your worldview.

You keep quoting me and dragging me into these "debates", and then you keep whining and crying when you don't like where it goes. Pretty goofy shit. 🤡

Yes, I'll refer you to eyeball's response: What you're saying is demonstrably not true. Carney's opposed to the chaos that Trump's tariff circus causes, and the fact that he's made it clear we can't trust the USA to uphold the deals they make. If he was opposed to free trade, why has he been talking about expanding it in Europe? When you can answer that question, maybe we can take what you're saying seriously.

What comments are those, exactly? The fact that the US is proving itself (and not just to Canada) to be a fickle, unreliable partner is wrong somehow? Trump has ripped up the trade deal that he pushed for in the first place. Why would Canada want to continue relying on that sort of nonsense for its economic well-being? He sounds like he's reacting to Trump's retarded protectionism. "Like, come on man, knock it off" is the contrast you want to see? Come on...

What's the relevant point here? Whether Trump has actually applied any meaningful pressure, or my wording of my phrase? Since even you know that these sanction threats amount to little, the only thing you have left is to obfuscate and play your usual word games. Which one is that? That this wasn't a massive propaganda win for Putin, handed on a platter by Trump? OOookay. 🤡

It's not downplaying if the threat is basically meaningless. Please keep pretending that more American sanctions are really going to dial up the pressure on Russia though. That's totally credible. 🙃 Yes, whack-a-mole indeed. Even the most feeble deflection you can manage counts as a big victory in your little cult-brain. Let's pretend you had a point then: Your argument is that because Trump hasn't handed any further massive propaganda wins to Putin, that means...what, exactly? Beyond your usual word games, what was your point here?

I wonder why? If PP somehow manages to lose this election, it'd historical for mostly comical reasons.

Yeah, just like Putin can keep threatening to "escalate" against Ukraine. The threats hit a point of diminishing returns at a certain point, both practically and rhetorically. He legitimized it, publicly and unequivocally. That's toothpaste you can't put back in the tube - permanent damage to Ukraine's position and a permanent gift to Putin's propaganda. "He said a stupid thing" is a pretty feeble response, all things considered. Pretty massive "oopsy" if that's all it was. 🙃

Nope, because Mark Carney has an economics doctorate from a prestigious economics program, and you're trying to tell us he's not an economist somehow, or that he's never used his degree? Either statement you're making is categorically retarded, especially considering monetary policy itself is an important part of macroeconomics....something they teach in...economics. 🤡👌 Keep digging your heel in on this one though. You're only making yourself look like more of a loser.

...and yet, I'm the only one still debating the other person's points, while you've descended into your usual sulking and ad-hominem. For someone who could do with less of me, wtf do you keep quoting me and dragging me into debates with you? There are two easy options here. You could either just not quote me and not engage, or you could put me on ignore. I'd be more than fine with not hearing from you. 🙃 Instead, you persist in this pathetic routine of picking fights, subsequently crying and b*tching about them as if you didn't dive in head-first, and then coming back for more and repeating it over and over again. What sort of weak babyshit is this?