Canada's economic performance craters due to Liberals 'green economy' regulations and spending.

[I am Groot]

The Liberals spent $23 billion of our money on green initiatives last year. Despite all the spending and all the regulations, the 'green economy' has only grown from 3.1% to 3.6% of Canada's economy in the last decade.

 

Canada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy | Fraser Institute

[Legato]

9 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The Liberals spent $23 billion of our money on green initiatives last year. Despite all the spending and all the regulations, the 'green economy' has only grown from 3.1% to 3.6% of Canada's economy in the last decade.

 

Canada’s economic performance cratered after Ottawa pivoted to the ‘green’ economy | Fraser Institute

Tilting at windmills.

[herbie]

Expected headline. Exagerate 'economic performance and blame it on the Liberal green economy (whatever that is) instead of reality.
You guys are useless whiners, just like Peepee LePew.

[BeaverFever]

Fraser Institute is a propaganda outlet and fake research mill shilling for big polluters, big pharma, big tobacco, all the bad guys.  They take money from these companies to push out “reports” in their client’s’ favour. After they got busted back in the day taking money from big tobacco to put out “research” showing smoking was harmless they started making their donor list secret but we still know the game  

 

 

 

 

[herbie]

While I have yet to label it 'fake', the wording and polling demographics have always pointed to their steering polls towards the results they wish to obtain in the first place.
Of which none, not a single one benefits anyone other than corporate interests. 

A right wing propaganda machine, a known fact since it's inception.

NOTE: economically right wing.

[blackbird]

10 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Fraser Institute is a propaganda outlet and fake research mill shilling for big polluters, big pharma, big tobacco, all the bad guys.  They take money from these companies to push out “reports” in their client’s’ favour. After they got busted back in the day taking money from big tobacco to put out “research” showing smoking was harmless they started making their donor list secret but we still know the game  

 

 

 

 

Did you even bother to read the article?

You didn't comment on the information in the article.  Rather you just spit out some useless comment that makes no sense and does not  address the main points in the article.  Obviously it is just too much for your mind to understand.

quote

There are ostensibly two approaches to economic growth from a government policy perspective. The first is to create the best environment possible for entrepreneurs, business owners and investors by ensuring effective government that only does what’s needed, maintains competitive taxes and reasonable regulations. It doesn’t try to pick winners and losers but rather introduces policies to create a positive environment for all businesses to succeed.

The alternative is for the government to take an active role in picking winners and losers through taxes, spending and regulations. The idea here is that a government can promote certain companies and industries (as part of a larger “industrial policy”) better than allowing the market—that is, individual entrepreneurs, businesses and investors—to make those decisions.

It’s never purely one or the other but governments tend to generally favour one approach. The Trudeau era represented a marked break from the consensus that existed for more than two decades prior. Trudeau’s Ottawa introduced a series of tax measures, spending initiatives and regulations to actively constrain the traditional energy sector while promoting what the government termed the “green” economy.

The scope and cost of the policies introduced to actively pick winners and losers is hard to imagine given its breadth. Direct spending on the “green” economy by the federal government increased from $600 million the year before Trudeau took office (2014/15) to $23.0 billion last year (2024/25).

Ottawa introduced regulations to make it harder to build traditional energy projects (Bill C-69), banned tankers carrying Canadian oil from the northwest coast of British Columbia (Bill C-48), proposed an emissions cap on the oil and gas sector, cancelled pipeline developments, mandated almost all new vehicles sold in Canada to be zero-emission by 2035, imposed new homebuilding regulations for energy efficiency, changed fuel standards, and the list goes on and on.

Despite the mountain of federal spending and regulations, which were augmented by additional spending and regulations by various provincial governments, the Canadian economy has not been transformed over the last decade, but we have suffered marked economic costs.   unquote

Under Chretien and Harper, the economy did far better and Harper left office basically with no massive debt.  Now look at the mess caused by ten years of Trudeau liberals.  Lower standard of living for millions of Canadians, out of sight real estate costs, rent costs out of sight, grocery bills that many cannot afford and must go to food banks and all kinds of people living on the streets and rampant crime to boot.  Will Carney follow in Trudeau's steps by picking winners and losers in the economy, continue massive government spending, and continue the decline of Canada's living standards?  We will find out on Tuesday with the budget which direction he is going.

Edited November 3, 2025 by blackbird

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, blackbird said:

Did you even bother to read the article?

You didn't comment on the information in the article.  Rather you just spit out some useless comment that makes no sense and does not  address the main points in the article.  Obviously it is just too much for your mind to understand.

I don’t need to read an article by a propaganda outlet well known for putting out fake research on behalf of polluters.  It’s not credible and anything they say can’t be trusted. 

[I am Groot]

16 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Fraser Institute is a propaganda outlet and fake research mill shilling for big polluters, big pharma, big tobacco, all the bad guys.  They take money from these companies to push out “reports” in their client’s’ favour. After they got busted back in the day taking money from big tobacco to put out “research” showing smoking was harmless they started making their donor list secret but we still know the game  

So you're saying the 'green economy' is actually much, much larger? Is that it?

It's just like.. invisible.

 

The Fraser Institute is a conservative organization, which is why your ilk automatically ignores what it says. You're waiting for the CBC or Toronto Star to come out and dismiss the spending as wasteful. Which, of course, will never happen.

Edited November 3, 2025 by I am Groot

[I am Groot]

16 hours ago, herbie said:

While I have yet to label it 'fake', the wording and polling demographics have always pointed to their steering polls towards the results they wish to obtain in the first place.
Of which none, not a single one benefits anyone other than corporate interests. 

A right wing propaganda machine, a known fact since it's inception.

NOTE: economically right wing.

This is not polling. This is simple economic measurement easily repudiated if it's wrong.

Anything conservative would be termed 'economically right wing' and ONLY a conservative organization would ever post information critical of the government's climate change spending. And it's as mucha  'propaganda machine' as the CBC and Toronto Star.

You people on the fringe left always instantly dismiss everything that comes from any even moderately conservative source without even attempting to repudiate the actual information itself.

[herbie]

The very title of this thread renders reading the Fraser Institute report moot.
Trying to blame Canada's economic problems on the minimal Climate efforts by the Liberals rather than the total disruption of World Trade by the demented scumbag in the White House is beyond deception, it's a blatant lie.

[CdnFox]

On 11/2/2025 at 1:40 PM, BeaverFever said:

Fraser Institute is a propaganda outlet and fake research mill shilling for big polluters, big pharma, big tobacco, all the bad guys.  They take money from these companies to push out “reports” in their client’s’ favour. After they got busted back in the day taking money from big tobacco to put out “research” showing smoking was harmless they started making their donor list secret but we still know the game  

 

 

 

 

Child, if you cannot refute the facts in the story then you don't get to claim the story is invalid because you don't like the source. Stop acting like such a buttwad. You know better.

As it stands they happen to be right.

And it gets worse

Canadian governments spent $158 billion on green economy but created only 68,000 jobs: report - The Hub

That's about 2.3 million for each job, and no guarantee those jobs will last any length of time. In fact as I understand it many have already evaporated, And with the difficult economic times ahead more are on the chopping block. That money included subsidies for EVS which have stopped and now the EV manufacturers are leaving.

If you actually care about the environment and you hope one day that the liberals will get back into power after they inevitably get kicked out this time then it would be wise to take an honest look at what happened and demand that future liberal governments that you would like to see elected and sure that any of their policies don't destroy the economy or take hundreds of billions of dollars out of the economy at a time when we desperately need money to pay for critical programs

We're running 70 to 100 billion dollar deficits right now. You think that $160 billion dollars would be nice to have in our pockets maybe?

[I am Groot]

16 hours ago, herbie said:

The very title of this thread renders reading the Fraser Institute report moot.
Trying to blame Canada's economic problems on the minimal Climate efforts by the Liberals rather than the total disruption of World Trade by the demented scumbag in the White House is beyond deception, it's a blatant lie.

Minimal? A hundred and fifty eigh billion dollars is minimal? The regulatory framework hindering industry, and in particular the resource industry, and driving jobs and investments out of Canada is 'minimal'?

Edited November 4, 2025 by I am Groot

[Nationalist]

On 11/3/2025 at 8:07 AM, BeaverFever said:

I don’t need to read an article by a propaganda outlet well known for putting out fake research on behalf of polluters.  It’s not credible and anything they say can’t be trusted. 

 

[Barquentine]

On 11/3/2025 at 4:03 AM, blackbird said:

Under Chretien and Harper, the economy did far better and Harper left office basically with no massive debt.

They didn't have to contend with a pandemic and an even worse plague called Trump.

[Legato]

25 minutes ago, Barquentine said:

They didn't have to contend with a pandemic and an even worse plague called Trump.

Yes Trump is a problem but our economy was bad before he arrived.

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Barquentine said:

They didn't have to contend with a pandemic and an even worse plague called Trump.

One of the big problems that really damaged Canada was the ten years of Trudeau's green economy.  That means the Trudeau Liberal government intervened in the economy with laws and regulations that favoured a green economy and hampered the energy industry and anything that might be blamed for climate change.  That resulted in carbon taxes, heavy regulations on the energy industry hampering resource development, no more pipeline laws, tanker ban on the BC north coast, squandered billions of dollars of taxpayer money on the EV battery plants, etc.   That is how Trudeau made Canada much worse.  That had nothing to do with Trump or the pandemic.

The government intervened to give favour to green industries and oppose non-green industries.  This cost Canada a fortune and really hurt Canada.  Read the Fraser Institute article on how this was done.  Whenever you have government intervening and controlling investment, you have negative impacts on the economy.  Private enterprise knows best how to invest and build industry, not government.

The whole thing was a waste of time and a scam.  Canada only emits 1.5% of global CO2 while China emits about 32% and the U.S. emits 12%.  All these taxes on Canadians and the regulations on the energy industry and other taxes did absolutely nothing for the environment or climate change.

Edited November 4, 2025 by blackbird

[herbie]

FFS you can't get over that China is over 30x more people than Canada and pretend shitting in the pool only a little bit is totally acceptable. Same damn argument year after year for decaqdes. Multiply those figures you just quoted by population density and Canada produces 1.5 X the CO2 per capita. Not so nothing in those terms is it?

So if we 'failed' then we obviously didn't try hard enough, did we? IOW giving up or reducing efforts is no solution at all. Except to those blockheads or industrialists that continue to deny reality.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

Canada only emits 1.5% of global CO2 while China emits about 32% and the U.S. emits 12%.

LMAO!

If you want to truly discuss this in the context of global emissions what about the carbon released during the final combustion of our oil by end-users you can't wait to sell as much oil as possible to? 

Canada currently emits some 694 megatonnes into Earth's atmosphere every year. This includes emissions from the extraction of oil. The potential amount of emissions however from Alberta's proven reserves would be: 116 gigatonnes...1 gigatonne = 1000 megatonnes.

But of course this sort of information just causes you to declare man cannot control the climate or that climate change is fake - a Marxist left wing plot to destroy the economy.

That's why it's hilarious listening to you people trot out this 1.5% figure as if you cared.

 

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, Barquentine said:

They didn't have to contend with a pandemic and an even worse plague called Trump.

Harper had the worst worldwide economic downturn since the great depression. And it lasted longer than the pandemic and was harder to come back from.

Sorry but a complete swing and a miss on your part.

 

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

LMAO!

If you want to truly discuss this in the context of global emissions what about the carbon released during the final combustion of our oil by end-users you can't wait to sell as much oil as possible to? 

 

That would be generated by the end users, not Canada. And they would be generating that pollution whether the oil came from Canada or Russia or Saudi Arabia

Nice attempted deflection though.

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

That would be generated by the end users, not Canada. And they would be generating that pollution whether the oil came from Canada or Russia or Saudi Arabia

Nice attempted deflection though.

Sure. You must have been so pissed off when Canada banned the export of asbestos.

In a key vote on an NDP opposition motion to ban the export of asbestos on November 1, 2011, a majority of Conservative Party MPs voted against the motion, defeating it by a vote of 123 to 152.

Still true to form as always aren't you?

You guys think the way fentanyl producers do, the problems it causes are the responsibility of the consumer.

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Sure. You must have been so pissed off when Canada banned the export of asbestos.

Why? 

You are so weird. Whenever you get caught out and someone shows that you're being a bit of a Twat you always come up with this bizarre nonsense at random.

[WestCanMan]

On 11/1/2025 at 7:14 PM, Legato said:

Tilting at windmills.

Not true. They're actually funnelling taxpayer money to LPOC and WEF cronies. It's very lucrative for friends of the libs.

Green Energy = Greenbacks for the "Friends of the LPOC Cocaine Fund"

Edited November 4, 2025 by WestCanMan

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Not true. They're actually funnelling taxpayer money to LPOC and WEF cronies. It's very lucrative for friends of the libs.

Green Energy = Greenbacks for the "Friends of the LPOC Cocaine Fund"

True, and then it gets paid back when they leave office in the form of board positions that pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year for doing nothing

[Legato]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Not true. They're actually funnelling taxpayer money to LPOC and WEF cronies. It's very lucrative for friends of the libs.

Green Energy = Greenbacks for the "Friends of the LPOC Cocaine Fund"

Windmills as in windfarms.

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Why? 

Because a majority of Conservative Party MPs voted against the motion.