What The Liberals Did To Canada

[Gaétan]

3 hours ago, blackbird said:

So you have just admitted you are responsible for the continuing catch and release of criminals and repeated crime against businesses.  You sound proud to be allowing all the crime to continue.

Your excuse is the wealth distribution has to be changed or some kind of Communist system that gives the repeat offenders a better financial situation or more prosperous life.  That is your excuse for doing nothing to stop all the crime.  That is a really sad, deplorable way of looking at the world and a bizarre way of thinking.  

According to your thinking, criminals can just carry on with their crime and nothing will change unless some miracle happens to make all these repeat offenders financially well off.  That is really a terrible, perverse way of thinking.

You are actually more of a hindrance to building a safe, law abiding society than a help.  An example why Canada is in the mess it is in.   At least you are honest in admitting what your belief is.  I give you credit for that.  

But you do need help.  Perhaps find a good, Bible believing church where you can learn something about the truth about the fallen human nature and the need for repent.  Those who are responsible for evil such as the repeated offenders need to be taken off the streets to protect law-abiding citizens and businesses.   Why don't you care about the well-being of good people and care more for criminals?

Science and Jesus both show that your approach isn’t the right one — you must forgive without limit.

[CdnFox]

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It wouldn't be hypocrisy, it would be... Being wrong. 

 

It would be being wrong if you were unaware of it. When you are aware of it but ignore it yet it stole the virtues of Canadian cities as if it doesn't exist and it's hypocrisy.

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So I went to Google and picked out the first sources that came back for homicide rate.

And don't tell me you're not aware how dishonest that is. I specifically said removed the gang in criminal rates, but you chose to include it.   Criminals killing criminals isn't really what we're talking about here. 

5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

BUT... I did post something without checking first.

And have now posted something dishonest

For example, new york.  Everyone knows how dangerous new york is right, you can get killed just walking around

New York City (2024): As of early May 2024, there were 95 reported unprovoked attacks in New York City, according to NYPD data, with 50 of those victims being women.

Canadian stats are harder to come by because the cops don't like to track it that way (makes the public scared), but...

Vancouver Focus: In 2021-2022, Vancouver experienced a reported surge, with police highlighting over four stranger attacks per day.  (stranger attacks)

stranger attacks on the rise in canada - Google Search

Even now it's higher than new york by leaps and bouds. 

 

So I said something very specific and you then dishonestly attempted to change the goal posts by providing data on something other than what I had said

If you're a criminal it's more dangerous in the states but the reality is for the average person random violence is more likely in Canadian major metros then in the states

So your entire premise is false

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

1. It would be being wrong if you were unaware of it. When you are aware of it but ignore it yet it stole the virtues of Canadian cities as if it doesn't exist and it's hypocrisy.

2. And don't tell me you're not aware how dishonest that is. I specifically said removed the gang in criminal rates, but you chose to include it.   Criminals killing criminals isn't really what we're talking about here. 

3. 

New York City (2024): As of early May 2024, there were 95 reported unprovoked attacks in New York City, according to NYPD data, with 50 of those victims being women.

Canadian stats are harder to come by because the cops don't like to track it that way (makes the public scared), but...

Vancouver Focus: In 2021-2022, Vancouver experienced a reported surge, with police highlighting over four stranger attacks per day.  (stranger attacks)

stranger attacks on the rise in canada - Google Search

Even now it's higher than new york by leaps and bouds. 

 

4. So I said something very specific and you then dishonestly attempted to change the goal posts by providing data on something other than what I had said

5. So your entire premise is false

1. 'Extole' I think you're saying.  No, I stand by my praise of Canadian cities here.
2. "but when it comes to random violent crime we rival most of the US cities" I didn't realize that you were excluding 'gang crime' in that stat.  That would mean you are talking about 'random violence' ?  Why would anyone exclude gang crime ?  Or mass shooting or some other kind of violence unless they were starting with the result they're trying to prove then working backwards ?
3. 'Stranger Attacks' - ok well I will look at this then.
4. No, I didn't deliberately attempt to mislead - i looked at the sentence I quoted in point 2 and worked with that.J
5. Perhaps.... I can stand being wrong.  I am interested in the 'stranger violence' concept.

You should give me the benefit of the doubt... it's not like my point about what you posted is unsupported, and I certainly don't try to parse through your posts to find a loophole to 'deceive people' or whatever...

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2025001/article/00011-eng.htm

I learned something today - 

This one made my jaw drop:

 

Quote

Homicides perpetrated by a stranger were the least common type of homicide in Canada and the United States, accounting for 19% of homicides in each country.

 

[Moonbox]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Bullahit.  You would have voted liberal no matter who the CPC leader was or what he was doing. 

Because you say so? 🫠

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

There's no 'maga' in the cpc, Carney has been more trump like that PP and has praised him far more as well, not to mention rolling over for him. 

and in support of this claim you have (as usual) nothing.  In the face of muppet's insistence, we have Trump support broken down by party in Canada:

No MAGA in the CPC, nope nope nope.  

16 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I was very critical of his "sloganeering" even before trudeau stepped down, his 'lets have a carbon tax election" nonsense was lazy and way too easy to deflect (which is precisely what happened). 

Oh yeah, we all remember that. 

Hey everyone!  You guys all remember how critical Confux was of PP's sloganeering leading up to the election, right?    

🤣🤣🤣

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. 'Extole' I think you're saying.  No, I stand by my praise of Canadian cities here.

Based on what? Your argument was specifically that our policies made our city safer for people like you and the evidence does not support that

 

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. "but when it comes to random violent crime we rival most of the US cities" I didn't realize that you were excluding 'gang crime' in that stat.

Oh please. Violence between gangs is not random violence obviously. You're playing it dishonest game

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

  That would mean you are talking about 'random violence' ?  Why would anyone exclude gang crime ? 

Because neither you or I are in a gang as far as I'm aware. Criminal games fighting each other rarely impact the safety of individual citizens.

 

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Or mass shooting or some other kind of violence unless they were starting with the result they're trying to prove then working backwards?

Mass shootings would be included in that. That is random violence.

But you made specific statements about people in policy and I have limited the violence to reflect that. If you're not in a gang then violence that only occurs between gangs isn't relevant. If you and your wife beat each other up or shoot each other in a domestic violence situation that has absolutely nothing to do with government policy and isn't the kind of violence we're talking about

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. 'Stranger Attacks' - ok well I will look at this then.

Right. I'm sure you'll get right on that.

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

4. No, I didn't deliberately attempt to mislead - i looked at the sentence I quoted in point 2 and worked with that.J

It's pretty obvious you did. You deliberately ignored something I said and tried to come back with something different. And not surprisingly when we take a look at what information I provided is suggests that I'm right and I'm sure that if you looked into it you were finding the same thing and simply didn't want to admit that

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

5. Perhaps.... I can stand being wrong.  I am interested in the 'stranger violence' concept.

There's nothing new about it. Two people having an argument that know each other and fighting is normal no matter what country you live in, it happens. Criminal organizations fighting amongst themselves are significant problem but not really what we're talking about here when you talk about being able to walk around the streets safely.

What you're talking about when you discussing the ability to walk about a city freely is the idea that someone random make him up and rob or stab or harm you. And the fact is candidate does not do a lot better than the states. You could cherry pick a couple of examples but overall it's just not the case

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

You should give me the benefit of the doubt... it's not like my point about what you posted is unsupported, and I certainly don't try to parse through your posts to find a loophole to 'deceive people' or whatever...

Your track record doesn't allow for that. Your mistakes always just happen magically to be in favor of the position you want to promote and there's always just enough to try to make your point 

And here again you just "Happened" to not see the part where i referred to relevant violence, you can't imagine why i'd exclude violence that isn't relevant to the situation you described, etc. 

And I presented you information but rather than comment on it as an honest man would you simply say I'll look into it later and get back to you which we both know you never will

If you want the benefit of the doubt then you need to behave in an honest and operate fashion. You once again dodged the simple facts I put forward and you can't refute them but rather than come back and say gosh I didn't realize that our streets were as dangerous as American streets maybe what I said was in error, you come back with this nonsense which is dodging and desperately trying to avoid discussing the issue or the facts presented

And then you go on about how you're the victim and I should be nicer

Dude if you argue from the point of view of honesty and address the issues raised in the conversation then it's quite possible to have an interesting disussion even when people disagree, but when you play the kind of games you play here (and always do) and run away from the facts and the issue then you make it impossible to have respect for you or your position. 

 

[LinkSoul60]

On 5/3/2026 at 12:55 PM, Goddess said:

If he doesn't understand how taking orders from China makes us lose our sovereignty, you're dealing with a whole new level of stoopid here.

In your little mind we lost our sovereignty because a Chinese envy said something.... sure, go with that.  

[LinkSoul60]

On 5/4/2026 at 7:00 AM, I am Groot said:

Since them 'doing their thing' invovles killing me, I'm afraid I'm not nearly so sanguine about it. Call me intolerent.

No, they are not. 

When will you people learn that the Liberals think SAYING something is better than DOING something? They get the same good publicity with no cost or effort. 500,000 permanent residents will be given out this year, same as last year. The numbers for next year will also be 500,000. 

Here's how they do it. They announce they've cut immigration from 485k to 385k. Then, what they do is the start handing out a lot more permanent resident permits to people already here as foreign workers or foreign students. But they don't count them as immigrants. They are also continuing to give permanent resident permits to almost everyone who shows up and claims refugee status.

The result is half a million or more mostly 3rd world 'Canadians' can be signed in every year, and they expect the majority to vote Liberal (most 3rd world people vote for the left wing parties that offer the most generous social programs and make it easiest for them to bring their families over). 

So what they say isn't what they really do. Where do you get this information from?  

[eyeball]

23 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't say it very often, but these are moral choices that force me to stay away from that kind of politics.  

I hear what you're saying, things could certainly be a lot worse. Give credit where credit is due...Canada's natural governing ideology...which stems from all Canadians.

[eyeball]

23 hours ago, CdnFox said:

The very first thing you need to learn is that if you truly don't like corruption you can't be supporting corrupt governments. You need to be punishing them. 

By voting for a party that came up with anti-corruption legislation that had a hole in it that was so big a drama teacher could drive a convoy thru it?

LMAO!

[eyeball]

21 hours ago, blackbird said:

According to your thinking, criminals can just carry on with their crime and nothing will change unless some miracle happens to make all these repeat offenders financially well off.  That is really a terrible, perverse way of thinking.

According to you they just need to get right with Jesus.

How's that working out?

[herbie]

Ignore actual corruption. Like the govt announces a cheque to help with your grocery prives and all the chains raise prices $1 on everything by the next morning.

How they announce they'll cut the gas tax in a week. and the price up three times before that daye/

How they bring back EV rebates and thr car dealer tells you that was included in the MSRP.

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

By voting for a party that came up with anti-corruption legislation that had a hole in it that was so big a drama teacher could drive a convoy thru it?

 

There was no hole. In fact Trudeau got caught up in some of harper's legislation not to mention the whole ethics commissioner who caught him and found him guilty during the Aga Khan incident and several others 

The same one who's blown the whistle on carney.

Or did you forget that that was a harper creation as well.

And once again you want to try and blame Trudeau's corruption and now Carney's corruption on harper.

You and your friends are the ones that keep a corrupt government in power in Canada. You have absolutely no interest in accountability and the only reason you whine about it is to cover the fact that you're thrilled as hell keep supporting the crap out of a corrupt scumbag who's stealing the next generation's money as fast as you'll let him

 

[Goddess]

The Ag industry's take on things:

 

Mr. Carney, which CUSMA strategy is it this week? | Canadian Grocer

Under Mark Carney, Canada’s posture toward the United States has shifted with surprising speed—less theatrical than Trump’s, but no less consequential. In April 2025, we were promised a renewed economic and security partnership. By the summer, we were told the existing deal was already the best possible outcome. Fast forward to April 2026, and suddenly our reliance on the U.S. is framed as a strategic weakness. All of this, notably, after months without meaningful engagement or negotiation.

 

For an agri-food sector that sends roughly 75% of its exports to the United States, policy ambiguity is not an academic concern—it is a business risk. Increasingly, companies are not waiting for clarity. They are hiring consultants, restructuring supply chains, and preparing for a post-CUSMA environment. Not because it is inevitable, but because it is conceivable.

That alone should raise alarms.

While Canada debates its posture, Mexico is moving decisively—and intelligently. Under socialist Claudia Sheinbaum, the Mexican government has demonstrated a level of strategic discipline that Canada would do well to study. Despite repeated provocations—from being labelled a “narco-president,” to symbolic disputes like the renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, to the ever-present rhetoric around border walls—Mexico has largely refused to take the bait.

Instead of reacting to the noise, it has stayed focused on the signal: trade, production, and integration.

That approach has paid off. Mexico did not escalate. It did not grandstand. It did not reframe the partnership as a liability. It simply continued to deepen its role within the North American economy. And in doing so, it has strengthened its position as the United States’ most reliable agricultural and manufacturing partner.

The result? Mexico is no longer just a participant in continental trade—it is becoming central to it. It is positioning itself as America’s fresh food basket, a year-round agricultural partner, and a seamless extension of the U.S. logistics and supply chain system.

 

The contrast is striking. The U.S.–Mexico relationship is not without friction, but it is fundamentally aligned. Disputes happen within the partnership—not about its existence. Supply chains are being integrated, not questioned. The direction of travel is clear.

Canada’s is not. And that is the real problem.

Trade relationships do not unravel overnight. They erode gradually—through hesitation, mixed messaging, and missed opportunities. What we are witnessing today is not a collapse, but a slow decoupling of strategic intent.

[Goddess]

@CdnFox

Maybe you are right, I hope you are right.  When you said Canadians will wake up when it affects them, when things get so bad it can't be denied.

All the polls in BC are flipping.

It seems when land acknowledgements were just performative theater, people loved the virtue signaling.

But now the reality of "land back" is hitting home.

BC Land Rights Divide

 

 

56 (+7)

31 (-11)

6 (+4)

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, Goddess said:

@CdnFox

Maybe you are right, I hope you are right.  When you said Canadians will wake up when it affects them, when things get so bad it can't be denied.

All the polls in BC are flipping.

It seems when land acknowledgements were just performative theater, people loved the virtue signaling.

But now the reality of "land back" is hitting home.

BC Land Rights Divide

 

 

56 (+7)

31 (-11)

6 (+4)

Yep, British Columbians are definitely saying that they've had enough of the whole reconciliation thing for the moment. I suspected we will elect a government that will completely repudiate dripa and i suspect that the federal gov't will want to avoid it as well. 

A bit of a bridge too far for the first nations i think. 

[eyeball]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

There was no hole. In fact Trudeau got caught up in some of harper's legislation not to mention the whole ethics commissioner who caught him and found him guilty during the Aga Khan incident and several others 

The same one who's blown the whistle on carney.

Or did you forget that that was a harper creation as well.

And once again you want to try and blame Trudeau's corruption and now Carney's corruption on harper.

Nope, I'm just mocking how lame Harper's Conflict of Interest Act was at doing anything about it.

Trudeau sailed thru like a neutrino thru tissue paper.

[CdnFox]

16 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Nope, I'm just mocking how lame Harper's Conflict of Interest Act was at doing anything about it.

Trudeau sailed thru like a neutrino thru tissue paper.

Everyone knows that's a lie. We've been through this a million times

You genuinely believe that trudeau can be excused because somehow harper's accountability act which exposed numerous examples of Justin's corruption didn't magically stop all corruption in Canada. It's truly pathetic

And you've argued strongly that voters should not hold corrupt governments to account when voting. The voting is a useless proposition to begin with

And look! You who swear that you don't support the liberals at all and haven't for decades are here yet again spending yet another day defending the liberals. 

 

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You genuinely believe that trudeau can be excused because somehow harper's accountability act which exposed numerous examples of Justin's corruption didn't magically stop all corruption in Canada. It's truly pathetic

Yup its pretty pathetic act alright. Trudeau is boinking starlets and Harper is advising Carney.

LMAO!

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Yup its pretty pathetic act alright. Trudeau is boinking starlets and Harper is advising Carney.

Oh nobody said that corruption isn't profitable    Some of the richest people in the world have been corrupt. And I suppose what you're saying is that's why you support corruption.

But it's still true that you were support corruption. And that you blame the corruption on harper

[Goddess]

CEO of Cenovus came out swinging today:

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Oh nobody said that corruption isn't profitable    Some of the richest people in the world have been corrupt. And I suppose what you're saying is that's why you support corruption.

Nope, I'm just laughing at Conservative efforts to do anything about it and especially your attempt to showcase them as cutting edge accountability measures.

🤣

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Nope, I'm just laughing at Conservative efforts to do anything about it and especially your attempt to showcase them as cutting edge accountability measures.

🤣

No you're not.  You're defending liberal corruption by claiming it's harper's fault, same as always. 

If you really cared you'd spend as much time condemning the liberal corruption but you're somehow always magically just fine with that  

Harper DID do something about it and justin DID run afoul of his changes (snc for example, aga khan for another) but  you and your kind fought long and hard to keep the libs in power even after they broke so many of the ethics rules. 

Harper's legislation did quite a bit but the one thing it couldn't do is prevent dieHard lefties like yourself from guaranteeing that the liberals were never held to account

[Goddess]

Remember when the Liberals said Poilievre would cancel Pharmacare, but THEY would keep it?

Canada healthcare: Some shocked feds won't sign pharma deals

 

Health advocates shocked as Carney Liberals back away from pharmacare program

Edited May 7 by Goddess

[Goddess]

Q-958 (45-1) - Written Questions - House of Commons of Canada

Since 2015, the asylum claimant backlog (i.e. people who are eligible for the IFHP) has surged from 9,999 to over 295,000. This backlog largely resulted from Liberal government policies that included lifting the visa requirement for Mexico, allowing non-citizens to illegally cross the border and claim asylum, and a flood of claims from foreign students whose permits had expired. This meant that the cost for running the IHFP rose from $66M in 2016 to a projected $1.5B in 2029-30, or, a 2194% increase.

 

This has placed an unacceptable level of strain on Canadian healthcare.

 

More than 100,000 Canadians have died waiting for care since 2018
6 million Canadians, 1 in 5, lack access to a family doctor
Wait times to see a specialist are over 28 weeks (7 months).

 

Each of these visits put on the system via the IHFP are an additional demand on the already overburdened Canadian healthcare system.

 

This is why earlier this year, Conservative brought forward a motion to restrict health care access for failed asylum claimants to emergency life-saving care only. The proposal maintained emergency, life-saving care and an equal standard for denied claimants, as well as non-discrimination based on country of origin.

 

The proposal was defeated by the Liberals.