Lies, Lies, and More Lies from the Chinese Circus Carney and the CBC.

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Carney’s plan is way, way better than tax breaks for people who can already afford houses.  Poilievre’s plan would give rich people and landlords massive tax breaks the more houses they buy.  
 

The NDP seems to being in the right direction.  So if housing is your issue, the only choice is the NDP.  
 

 

Carney's plan will achieve absolutely nothing, but it will allow him to give $25 billion dollars to his own company for their division that builds modular homes. That's it.

The liberal hack you're quoting is always 100% of the time incorrect in his projections or his thoughts. I could see why you like him

[blackbird]

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Carney’s plan is way, way better than tax breaks for people who can already afford houses.  Poilievre’s plan would give rich people and landlords massive tax breaks the more houses they buy.  
 

The NDP seems to being in the right direction.  So if housing is your issue, the only choice is the NDP.  
 

 

Nope.  It was the whole Liberal/NDP ideology of control of the economy and blocking natural resource development, and mass immigration of around a million immigrants in a few years without having enough housing that drove the prices through the roof.  You would have to be blind to not see that.

[ExFlyer]

34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

...posting silly memes  

...

Nothing silly, they are all about you and your current state of mind. You melting down and obsession with me is truly a psychiatric condition. 

Get help before it gets worse

[CdnFox]

22 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Nothing silly, they are all about you and your current state of mind. You melting down and obsession with me is truly a psychiatric condition. 

Get help before it gets worse

LOL well thanks for proving my point, but honestly it really wasn't necessary .   Everyone knew already   

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Carney's plan will achieve absolutely nothing, but it will allow him to give $25 billion dollars to his own company for their division that builds modular homes. That's it.

The liberal hack you're quoting is always 100% of the time incorrect in his projections or his thoughts. I could see why you like him

Problem is none of their plans address housing speculation which has helped spike prices as well.  But the boomers wouldn't want that...

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Problem is none of their plans address housing speculation which has helped spike prices as well.  But the boomers wouldn't want that...

well in fact Both in theory would address housing speculation nicely. The liberal plan would too if it actually worked but there's no possible way for it to work. But if it did it would address it. The conservative plan definitely does.

The reason that speculation exists is because housing prices are going up, not the other way around. And the reason that housing prices are going up is because there is a shortage of supply.

A number of efforts have been made to determine whether or not there are many unoccupied homes. There are not, almost all the houses out there be the rental or owned are occupied. And my own experience echoes that. Which means that the speculation has not altered the fact that all of the homes are in use and we still don't have enough.

If we significantly increase the number of homes relative to the population, then that puts severe downward pressure on the pricing of homes. It also puts downward pressure on rents. 

Think of it, if I have four people and three apples and everyone's hungry, the price of an apple will be the maximum amount that the top three can afford. The fourth will not be able to match their pricing and will be left out and that's how pricing will be set. If I have five apples and four people then the price is going to radically change. And that's how the law of supply and demand tends to work.

So at the end of the day before anything else can be considered we have to increase the number of homes available to our population by a sizeable amount. Only the conservatives have put forward a plan that includes limiting population growth based on the number of homes being built to make sure that the situation doesn't grow any worse and in fact help it get a little bit better until their long-term plans have an effect. The liberals intend to keep up significant immigration and their plan is doomed to fail as a result

[Moonlight Graham]

5 hours ago, CdnFox said:

well in fact Both in theory would address housing speculation nicely. The liberal plan would too if it actually worked but there's no possible way for it to work. But if it did it would address it. The conservative plan definitely does.

The reason that speculation exists is because housing prices are going up, not the other way around. And the reason that housing prices are going up is because there is a shortage of supply.

A number of efforts have been made to determine whether or not there are many unoccupied homes. There are not, almost all the houses out there be the rental or owned are occupied. And my own experience echoes that. Which means that the speculation has not altered the fact that all of the homes are in use and we still don't have enough.

If we significantly increase the number of homes relative to the population, then that puts severe downward pressure on the pricing of homes. It also puts downward pressure on rents. 

Think of it, if I have four people and three apples and everyone's hungry, the price of an apple will be the maximum amount that the top three can afford. The fourth will not be able to match their pricing and will be left out and that's how pricing will be set. If I have five apples and four people then the price is going to radically change. And that's how the law of supply and demand tends to work.

So at the end of the day before anything else can be considered we have to increase the number of homes available to our population by a sizeable amount. Only the conservatives have put forward a plan that includes limiting population growth based on the number of homes being built to make sure that the situation doesn't grow any worse and in fact help it get a little bit better until their long-term plans have an effect. The liberals intend to keep up significant immigration and their plan is doomed to fail as a result

Housing builds (supply) have been pretty steady.  The house price problem occurred because of a large spike in demand caused by immigration including foreign students, and housing speculators have jumped on the bandwagon which has spiked demand even more.

Increasing supply will help but they need to also address the demand issues.  Homes should be for the people living in them, not speculators trying to make a buck who don't live in them.

Edited Thursday at 05:11 AM by Moonlight Graham

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Housing builds (supply) have been pretty steady.  The house price problem occurred because of a large spike in demand caused by immigration including foreign students, and housing speculators have jumped on the bandwagon which has spiked demand even more.

 

Honestly buddy this is my world. Speculation had absolutely nothing to do with it. You got it right the first time more or less. It's not actually immigration as much as it is the fact that our population is growing faster than our housing and yes that is due to immigration at the moment.

We have not been building enough homes for our population growth since 2016. A bank in 2021 wrote a paper on this demonstrating our problems. Since that time we've been building about 100,000 homes a year LESS than we needed to in order to match immigration.  At this point we're about a million homes short of where we'd want to be by the more recent estimates. 

Speculation FOLLOWS supply issues not the other way around.  Lack of supply causes speculation, speculation does not cause lack of supply.  Not when the homes are not sitting empty. 

Once we deal with the supply problem there will be no speculation issue.  Prices will not rise much more than inflation. 

You're right that construction has been steady but it's been steadily behind population growth. 

The only way out of this is that for a substantial period of time construction EXCEEDS population growth, and that has a number of issues. But that is the way out. Nothing else matters until that is brought under control, nothing else you do will matter till you get a handle on that. 

[eyeball]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The only way out of this is that for a substantial period of time construction EXCEEDS population growth, and that has a number of issues. But that is the way out. Nothing else matters until that is brought under control, nothing else you do will matter till you get a handle on that. 

Good luck.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Good luck.

https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

 

It might shock you to learn this, but Canada has something called borders  I know that's something that people on the left don't like to acknowledge about their countries but if you do some research you will find that they are a thing.

And if you enforce those borders and restrict who can come over and in what numbers you can in fact control immigration. And because currently immigration is the only reason we have population growth at all, by controlling immigration you control population growth.

Which brings us back to the conservative idea of tying population growth directly to new housing billsmedical services and hospital increases etc.

Now that does bring a few problems with it, but they're not that hard to solve. And for a. Of time if we play our cards right it will be possible for construction to exceed population growth and as that happens we reverse the trend.

You're obviously not going to build a million extra houses overnight and if you try and bring immigration to zero you're not going to build any houses at all because the developers aren't stupid and if there's nobody coming to buy then there's no point in them building. But with the right incentives and at a gradual pace we can ease the problem and make it better and better for people.

The other thing we can do that's practical and it will have an almost immediate effect is to really lean into promoting remote working. Both in government services and in the private sector we can incentivize investment in technology that will significantly make it practical and productive for people to work at home. That allows a large percentage of the population that is currently stuck living close to the city centers because of work to be able to move out to the less densely populated and less expensive suburb or even rural areas where it's easier to afford a home and wear over densification isn't an issue.

I mean there's no big secret in solving these problems. It just takes work and time. But that's something the liberals are not prepared to do

[WestCanMan]

New Carney lie - Trump phone call. 

*yawn*

[WestCanMan]

Seriously, there are a lot of people on this site who would still vote for Carney.

After the last decade of an increasing homelessness population, an economy in shambles, Chinese collusion, election campaign skullduggery, and constant lying from carney, there are still several people here who are still voting for the non-Canadian.

And unlike a lot of Canadians who probably get all of their info from CBC and the like, the posters here have been made aware of Carney's lying (even though they won't admit to it), his unseemly Chinese connections, etc, but they don't care.

How much further would the country have to sink before cultists bit the hand of their master? Is it even possible for them?

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Seriously, there are a lot of people on this site who would still vote for Carney.

After the last decade of an increasing homelessness population, an economy in shambles, Chinese collusion, election campaign skullduggery, and constant lying from carney, there are still several people here who are still voting for the non-Canadian.

And unlike a lot of Canadians who probably get all of their info from CBC and the like, the posters here have been made aware of Carney's lying (even though they won't admit to it), his unseemly Chinese connections, etc, but they don't care.

How much further would the country have to sink before cultists bit the hand of their master? Is it even possible for them?

The damage done to the country isn't relevant to those people. You and I think in terms like that but they think in terms of tribe. All they care about is their ideology and defending it, if that happens to make the country better than great if it happens to make the country suffer well that sucks but what can you do?

The NDP, who has spent the last 10 years going on ad nauseam about how all of the world's problems exist because rich billionaire corporate people are not paying their fair share of taxes are now set to all vote for a rich billionare corporate person who didn't pay his fair share of taxes. AND renovicted people, AND moved his business to the states. 

That's how irrational their hatred of "conservatives" is.  It's not about the country. It's not about rational decisions about policy. IT's about continually fuelling their hatred and spite and trying to find ways to justify it.  Everything else is secondary

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

The NDP, who has spent the last 10 years going on ad nauseam about how all of the world's problems exist because rich billionaire corporate people are not paying their fair share of taxes are now set to all vote for a rich billionare corporate person who didn't pay his fair share of taxes. AND renovicted people, AND moved his business to the states. 

If Trump came to Canada and ran for the LPOC, with Satan as his pick for Deputy PM, he'd still get their votes. The trade war would be forgiven.

[taxme]

On 4/21/2025 at 12:00 PM, WestCanMan said:

When Carney isn't doing deals with the Communist Bank of China, meeting with the Chinese Gov't, meeting with the Jiangsu Commerce Council of Canada, leading his board to vote to move high-paying jobs to NY, sticking up for his MP's who are making threats against their political opponents on behalf of the Chinese gov't, hiring new MP's who are brimming with love for mother China, or giving the CBC a Billion dollar raise right before the election, he's lying to Canadians. A lot.

You remember all the lies, right? Because CBC is talking about them. Kinda. Not really. Welllll, not at all. But it's not because CBC is biased, and we know that because Trudeau gave the CBC and other media toadies hundreds of millions of dollars to ensure media integrity during the elections. We're solid. Oh, and Carney even gave the CBC a Billion dollar raise when he announced the next election, so you know that CBC is honest too.

Wellll, except for that one time that Rosemary Barton lied a couple days ago. Either that or she thought that she remembered a mass grave of children being discovered in Canada recently.  

Let's be honest: did she lie, or did she really get so overwhelmed by all the CBC propaganda about "there just have to be some mass graves of indigenous children at rez schools, because Canadians are so racist, that's the kind of thing that people would here, and could get away with" that she just felt like she remembered a mass grave being discovered?

What's worse: if she actually lied, or if she was so overwhelmed by CBC's propaganda that she actually thought that she remembered the discovery of conclusive proof of a residential school mass-murder? We all remember that it was proven that there wasn't one in Kamloops, why didn't she remember that? Was CBC's coverage of that so scant that she forgot about it?

But enough about CBC's main political correspondent lying to Canadians, here's a refresher course on Carney's main, proven lies:

1. From Western Standard: "I do not have a connection with Brookfield Asset Management. I resigned all my positions because I am all in for Canada. The formal decision of the Board happened after I ceased to be on the Board." (Fact: Carney was the chairman of the board at Brookfield when the board voted to move to NY) The Standard goes on to say 'a December 1 letter to shareholders, signed by Carney, called the relocation “in the best interests of Brookfield Asset Management”.'
2. Same article: "Carney also declined to clarify his claim that he personally helped balance the 1998 federal budget. At the time, he was a 33-year-old economics student at Oxford, not working for the Canadian government".
3. Carney constantly lies about his role in helping Canada avoid the 2008 recession. He wasn't the main guy, he wasn't even close to being the number 2 guy. He was the number 3 guy, and our own laws prevented him from making the same kinds of mistakes that the US made. It's beyond revolting for him to try and take the credit for something that was obviously not his own doing
4. Carney actually slandered the Globe and Mail in his next lie. He said that he never met with the Jiangsu Commerce Council of Canada, but he did meet with them, and he even had pictures taken with them. (Toronto Sun) “Well, I’m sorry, but you can’t believe everything you read in The Globe and Mail,” Carney said. Is it worse if he lied, or he met with them unwittingly? 

Here's how the CBC broaches the topic of Carney's [main] lie about Brookfield. This is their own words, 100%. It's a pure, unedited "cut and paste" job:

1. Conservatives say Carney is lying about his role moving investment firm's office to U.S.

2. Formal decision to move Brookfield's head office made after he resigned, Carney says

3. Liberal leadership contender Mark Carney helped steer two G7 economies through turbulent times and his track record as a central banker earned him praise and offers to serve on the board of directors of some prominent businesses, non-profits and philanthropic organizations, including one of Canada's largest publicly traded companies, Brookfield Asset Management (BAM).

   Now, the Liberal leadership front-runner is facing scrutiny for some of the decisions taken by BAM during his time as board chairman — including one to move the company's head office from Toronto to the U.S.

   Carney downplayed his role in that decision at a news conference on Tuesday night after the Liberal leadership debate, saying it was a decision formally made by the board after he left the company in January.

4. But company documents show the board approved the move in October 2024, and the decision was affirmed by shareholders at a meeting late last month.

   The wording of the investor relations document announcing the office move in October makes it clear the company wasn't waiting for shareholder approval.

5. [later in the CBC article] A spokesperson for Carney told CBC News that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is "desperate to misrepresent Mark's serious experience in business because he has no economic experience whatsoever."

6. From waaaaay later in the article: "The formal decision of the board happened after I ceased to be on the board. I do not have a connection with Brookfield Asset Management and no longer have a role obviously as I resigned in the middle of January," he said.

7. "I'm all in for Canada, all in for this leadership, all in during this time of crisis to build our great country."

Here's how CBC's article ranks on the truthometer:

1. The conservatives didn't "accuse him", they "caught him". And that's based on documents that the CBC got access to.
2. They just quoted him, that part is 'fine'. 
3. The article starts off with a nice rim-job for Carney... I'd love for a CBC/Trudeau/Carney apologist to try to find an article by the CBC that starts off with unnecessary flattery of Pierre Poilievre
4. Eventually CBC got around to telling the truth
5. Doesn't seem like such a big deal, but it's the only quote from anyone in that article on the topic of whether or not Canadians believe Carney lied... what does that quote have to do with Carney's lie? Why did CBC just let them off on an obvious deflection from the topic? Why did CBC just allow that gratuitous slander against Poilievre into their article when it was just, again, an obvious deflection? Are there any random insults against Carney in that article, or just all that random praise from CBC themselves? Does the CBC really not have a quote from anyone in the Bloc, NDP, Greens, or anywhere else that calls that a lie? No one else on planet earth thinks that Carney lied? It's just "conservative party members" who think that? 
6. That quote is in the center of "pants on fire territory", right on the upper level of seriousness. It was a LIE. 100.0%. A total fabrication. Still, the CBC couldn't find a quote from ANYONE who wasn't a member of the conservative party, so it seems as if this just remains a "CPC accusation", as far as that article is concerned.
7. "I'm all in for Canada, all in for this leadership, all in during this time of crisis to build our great country". When he said that, it was part of a lie to Canadians which proved that he was actually more concerned about Brookfield than Canadian jobs. 

 

Summary:

Carney is a monumental liar.

CBC are monumental liars and propagandists. 

Has CBC, to this day, found anyone who thought that Carney was a liar, side from Conservative MP's?

 

Questions for leftists:

1. Do you agree that Carney is a serial liar?
2. If not, then how do you explain away all of these massive lies from just the last few months?
3. Can you name some similar lies that Poilievre was caught in, from his 21 years as an MP serving Canadians? 

 

Carney told more lies in TWO MONTHS than Poilievre told in TWENTY-ONE YEARS. 

Prove me wrong. 😘

We are in big time trouble if the WEF shill globalist Corney wins the election. This website could be gone and that would be a shame. Corney will not stand for any criticism  of him or the WEF globalists. All alternative Canadian conservative websites will be under attack and eliminated. That is my belief. Just my opinion. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

And unlike a lot of Canadians who probably get all of their info from CBC and the like, the posters here have been made aware of Carney's lying (even though they won't admit to it),

I was the first poster on this forum to point out Carney's first official lie - his implication there were better ways to curb CO2 emissions than the consumer carbon tax he axed.

I'll be voting NDP btw.

Edited yesterday at 07:44 PM by eyeball

[CdnFox]

37 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

If Trump came to Canada and ran for the LPOC, with Satan as his pick for Deputy PM, he'd still get their votes. The trade war would be forgiven.

I wish you were joking. but fact is you're dead right 

[Nefarious Banana]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'll be voting NDP btw.

Jughead's not likely to win his own seat.  

[eyeball]

10 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Jughead's not likely to win his own seat.  

Sucks to be him I guess. But hopefully it'll be my representative who holds the balance of power.

[Legato]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sucks to be him I guess. But hopefully it'll be my representative who holds the balance of power.

Not when the batteries flat.

[Nefarious Banana]

Carney's road show . . . 

[Army Guy]

On 4/23/2025 at 8:11 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

Problem is none of their plans address housing speculation which has helped spike prices as well.  But the boomers wouldn't want that...

Ya, lets blame the boomers...i mean f*ck ya, who else would you blame....lets not talk about the liberals and their policies...no lets point our fingers at the boomers because they are the only ones in a position to profit from all this mess....It's going to be the boomers that give their wealth to the next generation so they to can buy a home...

[taxme]

On 4/23/2025 at 4:11 PM, Moonlight Graham said:

Problem is none of their plans address housing speculation which has helped spike prices as well.  But the boomers wouldn't want that...

There ism one sure way to stop an housing shortage? Put a moratorium on immigration for at least five years. . It's that bloody simple. 5 million new immigrants in the past seven years has caused an housing crisis. Wake up, will ya. 

On 4/23/2025 at 4:22 PM, CdnFox said:

well in fact Both in theory would address housing speculation nicely. The liberal plan would too if it actually worked but there's no possible way for it to work. But if it did it would address it. The conservative plan definitely does.

The reason that speculation exists is because housing prices are going up, not the other way around. And the reason that housing prices are going up is because there is a shortage of supply.

A number of efforts have been made to determine whether or not there are many unoccupied homes. There are not, almost all the houses out there be the rental or owned are occupied. And my own experience echoes that. Which means that the speculation has not altered the fact that all of the homes are in use and we still don't have enough.

If we significantly increase the number of homes relative to the population, then that puts severe downward pressure on the pricing of homes. It also puts downward pressure on rents. 

Think of it, if I have four people and three apples and everyone's hungry, the price of an apple will be the maximum amount that the top three can afford. The fourth will not be able to match their pricing and will be left out and that's how pricing will be set. If I have five apples and four people then the price is going to radically change. And that's how the law of supply and demand tends to work.

So at the end of the day before anything else can be considered we have to increase the number of homes available to our population by a sizeable amount. Only the conservatives have put forward a plan that includes limiting population growth based on the number of homes being built to make sure that the situation doesn't grow any worse and in fact help it get a little bit better until their long-term plans have an effect. The liberals intend to keep up significant immigration and their plan is doomed to fail as a result

We have an housing shortage because of the millions of new immigrants being brought to Canada in the past seven years. The problem is with immigration. Canada needs a moratorium on immigration for at least five years. 

Edited 1 hour ago by taxme

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, taxme said:

There ism one sure way to stop an housing shortage? Put a moratorium on immigration for at least five years. .

That might seem like an easy answer but unfortunately it would actually make the problem worse.

The moment you said that every developer everywhere would pack up their bags and stop building anything that wasn't already in progress. Housing starts would come to an almost dead stop. Developers aren't stupid, they would know exactly what that would mean. There would be nobody to buy their homes.

Which would mean skyrocketing unemployment, a loss of Trades and Technical people and a general worsening of the situation as people held on to their homes and no new homes were coming on to the market.

It would stabilize housing prices but it would probably significantly reduce the average wage.

It's like driving in a car, if you're going way too fast and are about to lose control you need to slow down but you don't want to slam on the brakes or else you just go into an uncontrolled skid

You need to reduce immigration while at the same time making it easier and more profitable for builders to make new homes so that a small reduction in price isn't going to scare them away. There's a number of ways to do this but it does take a delicate hand

That's why we need someone skilled who understands how government works and Poilievre is the best choice for that

[taxme]

16 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That might seem like an easy answer but unfortunately it would actually make the problem worse.

The moment you said that every developer everywhere would pack up their bags and stop building anything that wasn't already in progress. Housing starts would come to an almost dead stop. Developers aren't stupid, they would know exactly what that would mean. There would be nobody to buy their homes.

Which would mean skyrocketing unemployment, a loss of Trades and Technical people and a general worsening of the situation as people held on to their homes and no new homes were coming on to the market.

It would stabilize housing prices but it would probably significantly reduce the average wage.

It's like driving in a car, if you're going way too fast and are about to lose control you need to slow down but you don't want to slam on the brakes or else you just go into an uncontrolled skid

You need to reduce immigration while at the same time making it easier and more profitable for builders to make new homes so that a small reduction in price isn't going to scare them away. There's a number of ways to do this but it does take a delicate hand

That's why we need someone skilled who understands how government works and Poilievre is the best choice for that

Not in my books. There will never be any need for any developer to leave the country because of a lack of building houses. There will always be the need to have builders around to build homes. Maybe not as many, but so what. It's only because we have brought in so many millions of unneeded and unwanted new immigrants that has caused the housing crisis. Before all of this housing crisis nonsense began, there was no problem in building homes. We just built fewer homes but at least homes were affordable. Now it is bloody ridiculous thanks to massive immigration. My opinion.