Moonbox

I do understand all of that, and I don't even disagree with what you're saying. That doesn't make the article you quote any less of a useless stream-of-consciousness rant in the opinion section of a rag newspaper. The article offers nothing but angry conjecture, supposition and retarded conclusions - chicken soup for the ignorant. Of course you posted it here. 🥱

I use to subscribe to the National Post...10+ years ago. That was back when it did some semblance of journalism and wasn't just a depository of useless, ranting opinion pieces.

Speaking of narratives... "The Canadian economy appears to have achieved a soft landing: inflation has come down almost to target, while a recession has been avoided, with GDP growth cushioned by surging immigration even as per capita income has shrunk." https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2024/07/16/pr24276-canada-imf-exec-board-concludes-2024-art-iv-consult "Fastest growing economy in the G7" sounds great, but the IMF didn't say that. Their economists know to dig a bit deeper and put those numbers in context.

Where did I admit that? 🤔 I'm just acknowledging your expertise, and how 7-10 years of formal study in medicine etc pales in comparison to your rigorous interweb research.

Ser, I think you need to leave this sort of data analysis to our qualified experts. There are 84 pages of rigorously reviewed data here, from the finest graduates of Facebook School of Medicine. Do you even do your own research?

Some of the climate scientists and doctors (particularly the vaccine specialists) on this forum are pre-eminent in their fields. Did you not read the 84+ page thread on how deadly the COVID vaccines turned out to be? HELLO!???

I'm not? I'm referencing a very recent, but far larger, refugee crisis in the region where we Canada only took in ~42k, while you're drawing up scenarios were a million Gazans come to Canada. "real talk".

Why would it be? Aleppo had roughly the same population as Gaza back in 2015, and we've only taken in ~42,000 refugees from all of Syria since 2015. "real talk". 🙄

Calling it "real talk" doesn't make what you're saying less nonsensical. There are only 2M Palestinians in Gaza. Blackbird is worried about half of them being relocated to Canada? What's the "proper amount of reverence" for jews?

What's that "growth" worth if it's only achieved by exploding our population upwards? That "growth" is coming with the extra costs and expenses of all of those new bodies, so as a measure of prosperity and overall well-being it's close to useless. There's a lot more to it than *clap* *clap* "number go UP!"

They're not. They're just reporting the data. The poor conclusions that people draw from that data have nothing to do with them.

Sometimes they do, especially if they're talking about standard of living, equality, affordability or the polarization of wealth. For this topic and this discussion, it's not relevant. Your claim that GDP per capita is deceptive is misguided. No economic measurement is deceptive on its own, but rather in its presentation, framing and context. The IMF reporting that Canada's economic growth will be the highest in the G7 isn't misleading, but anyone trying to attribute that number to economic performance would be. When adjusted for our rapidly expanding population, our economic growth lands us well below the G7 average.

The IMF has already weighed in on this: "The IMF projects 2024 GDP per capita growth of 1.4 per cent for Canada compared to 2.1 per cent for the United States. Canada is set to lag behind the U.S., yet again, by more than 30 per cent. Alarm bells should be sounding — Canada’s productivity crisis is set to get worse not better over the next year." https://macdonaldlaurier.ca/canada-has-a-productivity-crisis-heres-how-we-can-get-back-on-track-jon-hartley-in-the-toronto-star/#:~:text=The IMF projects 2024 GDP,better over the next year. The Bank of Canada has also raised the issue: "Senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers gave a speech in Halifax on Tuesday in which she sounded the alarm on Canada’s lagging productivity rates." Who's "they"? Not the IMF, as far as I can tell.

This was "just an opinion": 🙄 ??? Calling it "your opinion" doesn't magically make it less of an insult. It also came out of nowhere. Insulting people when they disagree with you rather than addressing their argument is textbook Fox. It's also exactly what you did here. If you don't want to be compared to "the most objectional person on this forum", then don't behave like him. What do you fancy your respect was ever worth, if I can't even disagree with you without you going straight for the throat with insults? Boo-hoo for me....I guess? What a tragedy. 🥱

I was honestly trying to debate and disagree with you civilly. That set you off for some reason, and you came back swinging with insults. Considering how often you've criticized Fox for this sort of behavior, it's interesting how you give yourself a free pass when you're doing the same. When you can show me what I said to provoke insults out of you, maybe then we can talk about dignity. Until then, you're the one holding hands with Fox in this thread, and you own the fact that you couldn't handle someone disagreeing with you without getting personal. 🙃

Riiight. Just like Fox, you're foiled by the quotation function. You're doing terrific here. 🙄

Nobody here said they should, did they? This seems like a red herring (a Fox specialty). There's a long list of alternatives between doing nothing, and what you're talking about. I'm not sure why you keep bringing it up. and yet even on this topic, solutions and suggestions have been provided/cited (in this thread, and in others), but rather than discuss those, you've defaulted to ad hominem and hyperbole (also like Fox, LOL). Excuse me for not being convinced, considering how quickly you went for the insults. 🤷‍♂️

Except your "opinion" was immediate ad-hominem as soon as someone disagreed with you, with no attempt to debate the points presented...so just like Fox. Right...I'm the one who does nothing but complain about the government, while you complain about the government in this thread and present goofy, hyperbolic scenarios about potential interventions or changes to policy. That makes so much sense. Something about this topic makes you really, really touchy. I won't presume to know why, like you do. 🙄

This is such a useless post, when I read it I assumed it was Fox. 🙄 I guess he's rubbed off on you.

It was the only option you presented. Because apparently, if the government invests in housing, all of the sudden we're talking about it becoming Canada's largest landlord, and private investment becoming unprofitable? Why? Pretty sure we've had this discussion before, and I've already referred you to pieces like this: https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/the-great-rebuild-seven-ways-to-fix-canadas-housing-shortage/ The capacity to build is the present-day problem. Bad projections, combined with poor planning and no contingencies, is what led us here. Canada built 273,000 units in 1976. Are we supposed to believe that with almost double the population, today, we couldn't have matched that?

Your point is all over the place, and it doesn't seem like you're really sure what you're trying to say. Your source was a summary of the Battle of Moscow. There were quite a few factors involved in the Soviet victory there, only one of which was "continuous counterattacks". Somehow, in your mind, that supports the effectiveness of attritional human wave assaults, despite never mentioning anything of the sort. 🤔 The penal battalions were a propaganda tool and a way to deliver death sentences and enforce discipline. If you want to argue that sending political prisoners and deserters to trample minefields was an effective war tactic, I'd love to hear you try. Think apples and oranges. The way the Soviets fought back the Germans is literally the exact opposite of what they're trying to do against the Ukrainians. In the WW2, they executed a defense-in-depth by ceding territory (+1000km deep, across a 3000km front) and then struck back against an over-extended and exhausted opponent. In Ukraine, they're smashing their faces into fortified positions and losing ~30000/month to achieve marginal advances that we have trouble seeing on a map. They are nothing alike.

I'm not sure why you automatically went to that as the only option. Again, this is a strange and binary line of reasoning, supposing that the only option the government has is to be come the nations largest rental agency, and that getting involved is going to somehow make private sector investment automatically unprofitable. There's not much to work with here for forming a response. 😐

That's a pretty odd thing to say, considering all the money that people have been making on housing over the last 14 years. Nothing is ever just supply or just demand-driven. Our housing issue is a +10 year old problem that started getting ugly before Trudeau even became PM. It was a failure of projecting and planning properly, and what Trudeau is guilty of is making it much worse, not causing it in the first place. Is that so? 🤔

Yep, sounds like a real tax-and-spend Liberal. 🙄

Maybe you can find some examples of his tax-and-spend liberal tendencies? Environmentally conscious, perhaps, but tax-and-spend liberal, after what he said about the 2024 budget? Yeah god forbid we aim for competence and credentials. Three-word slogans are all we need for politics. Axe...the...Tax!