Dearche

It's half an issue about messaging. The problem is that the Liberal messaging keeps sounding like things designed for older generations and not things that'll help younger Canadians, while Cons messaging sounds like they re for younger Canadians rather than older ones.

Yes, Liberal plans on expanding housing while preserving healthcare are definitely things that are good for younger Canadians, but they both sound like things that are only for older generations. Like building more houses are only for rich Canadians to buy cottages and healthcare are for old people who can't get out of bed because of their bad knees, not that housing means that first-time buyers finally have houses within their price ranges, or that getting sick and taking time off work doesn't equate to being 20 years in debt because hospitals gouge you for everything you have because people are willing to mortgage the rest of their lives to get life-saving treatments.

On the other hand, the Cons keep saying they'll create resource jobs and reduce taxes, making it sound like they're opening up so everybody can become gold diggers and stop the government from taking their hard-earned pay, when it's actually not even close to being true. That the jobs the Cons promise are only minimum wage jobs at best, in terrible conditions and far away from all convenience, or that the taxes reduced will save the rich millions while the poor still can't afford to buy the houses and services that the taxes get saved on, making it so that they are actually subsidizing the rich even more than before. Not to mention that every $100 cut in taxes means that the average Canadian will pay thousands more for the services that they've been getting all their lives.

But no, the Cons are better at wording their platform to appeal to the worst off in Canada, yet those are the ones cheering for them the most. The Cons are really the world's best conmen, and too many Canadians are too desperate to notice.

This is extremely narrow and one-sided. This problem went both ways.

For example, when western diplomats went to China to negotiate trade, they were often thrown out for not bringing convoys of gold and silver as tribute just to talk to the Emperor, since in those days China was such a local superpower that the very concept that a foreign nation wouldn't kowtow and beg for scraps at the Emperor's feet didn't exist. They thought that diplomats daring to stand without groveling in front of the Emperor was a direct insult and verging on a declaration of war.

This is why so many western diplomats simply went around the Imperial court, which is also a significant reason why the opium wars happened (though not exclusively. The west is heavily to blame for escalating and taking advantage).

Both sides refused to back down, so it both underhanded means as well as military force was utilized. Neither side accepted to consider the other as an equal, so when a clash of needs and desires came about, physical domination was the only possible result. Nowadays, China is still using the same principals that the Emperors of eld held, but is trying to use the west's old methods back against them.

I wont say that the west isn't at fault at any point along the way, but China's means and motivations are equally as bad and there is no justification aside from greed, pride, and envy for what they are doing. People complain about all the stuff the CIA's been doing, but you have to ask yourselves, how do you justify China sending thousands of fishing boats just outside of Argentina's EEZ? You know, in Atlantic waters, not even Pacific ones.

And this isn't even starting on how China keeps making artificial islands in the south China seas to extend their claims on territorial waters, boxing in the Philippines, Indonesia, and the other local powers that are still so poor that the Halifax-class is more like a battleship compared to what their navies have.

It's as if by making it easier for people to drive instead of having viable alternatives, people would chose to drive more, causing even more cars to fill up the 401.

Induced demand is a terrifying demon that will make driving more miserable by taking away resources from solutions that actually work: trains and other alternative measures. A single train can move as many people as the entire 134km of new roads, and you can put more than one train on a single new rail track. You can run dozens of such trains a day, and instead of being a money sink hole, it can even operate at a profit that goes directly towards maintaining the remaining roads as long as it's government owned rather than have private middlemen pocket the surplus cash.

Toronto and many other major cities already have wonderful and expansive rail infrastrucutre. We just need to upgrade the rail systems in between cities so that passenger and freight doesn't have to compete for the same lines causing massive delays every single day.

I'm pretty skeptical about this result, but if you think about a perfect 100 points not as a marker of true ideal freedom and prosparity, but rather a degree of freedom from blatant easily quantifiable oppression (in other words reverse the numbers and mark it as the oppression index), then the result does sound more reasonable.

Canada has made great strides and is ahead in many ways, but that's because so many major countries have such high degree of public oppression. We're one of the best in a quite dystopic world, which really isn't saying much when you are looking at ideas, and which also means we still have a massive amount to go.

Every time I see one of these, I get a bit more depressed. It's just incredible how people can vote for a party that openly declared to make depriving Canadians of some of their fundamental rights as part of their platform. How if you take even ten seconds to think about their policies, they're basically to purely empower the rich and powerful, while screwing over 98% of Canadians.

They basically stand on the same platforms as the Nazi party did almost a hundred years ago, and it's not like they're the only right-wing party. Just the most extreme right-wing one that has more than 1% of the expected votes.

It's because DOGE is basically cutting government everything, something the ultra-wealthy love, because it makes it easy to use money and power however they want because of the lack of government power to do anything about it. Doesn't matter if what they do is blatantly illegal if there is no department to even investigate such illegal activities. It's better than tailoring laws to suit them since they don't have to plan years ahead and instead just do so.

Imagine a mafia successfully eliminating the entire local police force. They could murder people out in the open, but without any cops to do the arrest, they effectively got away with it even if hundreds of people recorded the crime happening and posted it online. Nobody to do an investigation, nobody to do an arrest, and nobody to take them to court. DOGE is doing the same thing, but on a national level for the richest and most powerful.

Too bad the only non-right parties got single digit seats or less in the last election.

Very, very encouraging. I hope this isn't a one-time thing and we'll see at least double this on the actual vote day, and continue seeing such results on subsequent elections.

The more people vote, the more our leaders need to pay attention to our wants and needs, leaving little space for corporate corruption. This is especially for those of us unsatisfied with how our only leaders are all center right to far right and want leaders that actually lean in any direction but right.

No, it will affect us. Not massively, but it will, since now the producers will have to divide their shipments to route around the US. This will add to extra shipping since they benefit less from bulk.

In addition, while we'll cut out the US middlemen, there'll likely be a Canadian middleman taking their place to do distribution on a more local level, negating any cost savings from removing a step from the process.

Still a minor logistics issue, but one that'll likely take several months at least to resolve that'll land us with a few points higher in cost.

If I remember right, that was basically what they did to make commie blocks.

If the building isn't too tall, maybe 5 stories or less, that is proven to work, though I don't know about the quality, at least it's durable. But I strongly doubt that it would work for skyscrapers. I don't think there's any way to get beyond single large support struts to go throughout the entire building, and concrete walls feel too heavy to be used. Maybe prefab concrete floors could work, but I don't work construction.

Could be. Some places make election day a mandatory holiday to encourage turnout. Frankly, I think we should do that here for elections on all levels for the same reason.

It seems the courts have struck down 28 laws related to mandatory minimum sentencing that Harper put together.