Good job. You want life in Canada to get better and you’re not going to overlook or disregard a good, but not perfect, policy for the sake of ideology. Bravo!
I would however caution you that in politics there are no “golden means”. One extreme always pushes the puck towards the wrong net—there’s no icing in a bureaucracy.
Agreed, there is no end game for people looking to just live their lives. "We" spent 10-15 years fighting the authoritarian over reach of the left. Now we're faced with a similar threat from the right.
You fix a housing shortage the way you fix any shortage—by freeing up the market so it can attract more sellers to build new housing. I know you know this—the law of supply and demand. When the supply of any product is limited it becomes scarce, but when you remove price controls (housing and building regulations effectively work as a control or limit on new housing because it causes too many delays) prices increase and new capital will be attracted to higher profits and the demand will be satisfied. Easy peasy.
Everything you say is true, and I have argued against rent controls and bureaucratic red tape. However, supply and demand issues are also impacted by too much demand. Adding 100s of thousands of new citizens every year does not help matters.
In emergency situations you take emergency measures. Scaling back immigration until the crisis is under control is not an unreasonable suggestion.
In 1920-21 Coolidge did nothing when faced with a great recession following WWI. America recovered without any 3-letter agencies.
Individuals left to face an emergency will always fair better than granting emergency-powers to the state. When has the state ever willingly given back what it has taken from its citizens?
You’re conflating an actual war (WWII) with an emergency?
Once America discovered that Germany was racing to build an atomic weapon, destroying Germany’s military infrastructure was an appropriate defense response.
The Cold War was a propaganda campaign for the most part. No response was needed. The cry for building up our military was a power grab by government officials.
Since its birth in 1776, the United States has experienced remarkable population growth, evolving from a fledgling nation of 2.5 million inhabitants to a sprawling country of over 330 million people today. This expansion is a testament to the interplay of birth rates, death rates, and waves of immigration that have shaped the nation's demographic landscape over centuries.
Housing was never a problem until our government started regulating it.
They also had no safety net, free land so long as they planted a flag on it, and a people who don't vacation back in their home country every year. People built their own homes because they had to. It's disingenuous to think that parallels the current situation, at all.
unless you're suggesting we remove all regulation and start giving away land parcels and remove the social safety net for migrants... then you'd be onto something
We don’t have to give anything away, but we do need to deregulate housing and allow the free market to work. There is only one reason for scarcity of any resource, government controls over prices or rules and regulations that limit supply.
As for your mischaracterization of homesteading please take note of the following:
Challenges and realities of homesteading
Harsh Environment: Homesteaders faced significant challenges, including difficult terrain, unforgiving weather conditions (droughts, blizzards, tornadoes), and the presence of crop-destroying insects like locusts.
Lack of Resources: Many homesteaders lacked experience in farming, and the availability of essential resources like building materials (timber was scarce, leading to sod houses), fuel, and water was limited.
Economic Struggles: High transportation costs (especially with railroads) made it difficult to sell crops and acquire supplies, and farmers often faced debt due to high interest rates and fluctuating market prices for their produce.
Isolation and Difficulties for Women: Isolation and loneliness were common struggles, particularly for women who also faced the added burdens of childbirth in remote areas with limited access to medical care.
Impact and significance
Western Settlement: Despite the hardships, the Homestead Act played a pivotal role in the settlement of the West, leading to the establishment of communities and driving agricultural development.
Transformation of the Frontier: The Act and subsequent settlement transformed the American frontier, paving the way for railroads, infrastructure development, and economic growth.
Impact on Agriculture: The availability of land encouraged farming, and combined with technological advancements (like improved plows and farming machinery), it contributed to a significant expansion of American agricultural production.
Dispossession of Native Americans: It is crucial to acknowledge that the expansion of homesteading and settlements often occurred on land already inhabited by Indigenous peoples, leading to displacement, conflict, and the disruption of Native American land practices.
In conclusion, homesteading in early America, fueled by the Homestead Act, represented a powerful force in westward expansion, offering the promise of land and a new life to many. However, the pursuit of this dream was often fraught with immense challenges, demanding resilience and perseverance from those who sought to establish themselves on the frontier.
I'm not chasing you on your chatGPT rabbit hole. respond like a human or you're getting a slur...
I literally don't care about the hardships. If Canada is so good, and people want to flood in, then it's worth it. I have no obligation to fund the lifestyle choices of 3rd world diaspora. They've degraded the Canadian national identity in every way that matters and have contributed nothing in return.
No increase in GDP
No increase in production (we are 12 years into our lost decade)
No cultural improvements
Insane crime increases, organized and random
A strain on social services that are already crumbling.
I refuse to speed run Venezuela because you decided to chatGPT a bullshit answer about homesteading.
I just imagine Canada as a more civilized country. Seems as though you dealt with the Quebec issue well, need to cut back on non European migration unless you the people want to“ fundamentally change “Canada. A slightly different health insurance system- de facto rationing. Canada was wrecked ( IMO) by Trudeau’s fascist policies.
I pretty much agree with everything you said. Here is my concern; what if Carney is doing all of this stuff just to secure a majority? He is saying the right things, but it all runs counter to what he said (repeatedly) in the past. I truly believe that there are senior Liberal party members that have been comprimised by the PRC/CPC and we still haven't seen any details on the Green Slush Fund debacle. Are all of these centrist moves just a ploy to bring enough voters on side to secure a majority? When they are comfortable, they can collapse the current minority, trigger the election and voila!, we are back to where we were a year ago. Carney has no trouble speaking out of both sides of his mouth. It seems to come naturally to him. If the curtain ever gets pulled back, a lot of important people might have a rude awakening.
You're not wrong, and I am jaded. I understand why the GOC tends to be so.flippant with public trust, I don't see how they ever lose it, no matter how many times they betray it
Phil,
Good job. You want life in Canada to get better and you’re not going to overlook or disregard a good, but not perfect, policy for the sake of ideology. Bravo!
I would however caution you that in politics there are no “golden means”. One extreme always pushes the puck towards the wrong net—there’s no icing in a bureaucracy.
PS—I hope you like my hockey reference.
Yes, well done on the reference.
Agreed, there is no end game for people looking to just live their lives. "We" spent 10-15 years fighting the authoritarian over reach of the left. Now we're faced with a similar threat from the right.
It never ends.
You fix a housing shortage the way you fix any shortage—by freeing up the market so it can attract more sellers to build new housing. I know you know this—the law of supply and demand. When the supply of any product is limited it becomes scarce, but when you remove price controls (housing and building regulations effectively work as a control or limit on new housing because it causes too many delays) prices increase and new capital will be attracted to higher profits and the demand will be satisfied. Easy peasy.
Everything you say is true, and I have argued against rent controls and bureaucratic red tape. However, supply and demand issues are also impacted by too much demand. Adding 100s of thousands of new citizens every year does not help matters.
In emergency situations you take emergency measures. Scaling back immigration until the crisis is under control is not an unreasonable suggestion.
Emergencies give birth to tyranny.
"can"
Doing nothing gives birth to anarchy.
Fear of tyranny is not an excuse to do nothing.
In 1920-21 Coolidge did nothing when faced with a great recession following WWI. America recovered without any 3-letter agencies.
Individuals left to face an emergency will always fair better than granting emergency-powers to the state. When has the state ever willingly given back what it has taken from its citizens?
How would that approach have worked during WWII? Or the Cold War?
You’re conflating an actual war (WWII) with an emergency?
Once America discovered that Germany was racing to build an atomic weapon, destroying Germany’s military infrastructure was an appropriate defense response.
The Cold War was a propaganda campaign for the most part. No response was needed. The cry for building up our military was a power grab by government officials.
10 million diaspora in the last decade. thats 1:4 people living in Canada, right now. You cannot outbuild that.
All evidence to the contrary.
Since its birth in 1776, the United States has experienced remarkable population growth, evolving from a fledgling nation of 2.5 million inhabitants to a sprawling country of over 330 million people today. This expansion is a testament to the interplay of birth rates, death rates, and waves of immigration that have shaped the nation's demographic landscape over centuries.
Housing was never a problem until our government started regulating it.
I recommend that you pick up a copy of Bryan Caplan’s book,https://www.amazon.com/Build-Baby-Science-Housing-Regulation-ebook/dp/B0CW1PT7KK
They also had no safety net, free land so long as they planted a flag on it, and a people who don't vacation back in their home country every year. People built their own homes because they had to. It's disingenuous to think that parallels the current situation, at all.
unless you're suggesting we remove all regulation and start giving away land parcels and remove the social safety net for migrants... then you'd be onto something
We don’t have to give anything away, but we do need to deregulate housing and allow the free market to work. There is only one reason for scarcity of any resource, government controls over prices or rules and regulations that limit supply.
As for your mischaracterization of homesteading please take note of the following:
Challenges and realities of homesteading
Harsh Environment: Homesteaders faced significant challenges, including difficult terrain, unforgiving weather conditions (droughts, blizzards, tornadoes), and the presence of crop-destroying insects like locusts.
Lack of Resources: Many homesteaders lacked experience in farming, and the availability of essential resources like building materials (timber was scarce, leading to sod houses), fuel, and water was limited.
Economic Struggles: High transportation costs (especially with railroads) made it difficult to sell crops and acquire supplies, and farmers often faced debt due to high interest rates and fluctuating market prices for their produce.
Isolation and Difficulties for Women: Isolation and loneliness were common struggles, particularly for women who also faced the added burdens of childbirth in remote areas with limited access to medical care.
Impact and significance
Western Settlement: Despite the hardships, the Homestead Act played a pivotal role in the settlement of the West, leading to the establishment of communities and driving agricultural development.
Transformation of the Frontier: The Act and subsequent settlement transformed the American frontier, paving the way for railroads, infrastructure development, and economic growth.
Impact on Agriculture: The availability of land encouraged farming, and combined with technological advancements (like improved plows and farming machinery), it contributed to a significant expansion of American agricultural production.
Dispossession of Native Americans: It is crucial to acknowledge that the expansion of homesteading and settlements often occurred on land already inhabited by Indigenous peoples, leading to displacement, conflict, and the disruption of Native American land practices.
In conclusion, homesteading in early America, fueled by the Homestead Act, represented a powerful force in westward expansion, offering the promise of land and a new life to many. However, the pursuit of this dream was often fraught with immense challenges, demanding resilience and perseverance from those who sought to establish themselves on the frontier.
The bottom line: There are no free lunches.
I'm not chasing you on your chatGPT rabbit hole. respond like a human or you're getting a slur...
I literally don't care about the hardships. If Canada is so good, and people want to flood in, then it's worth it. I have no obligation to fund the lifestyle choices of 3rd world diaspora. They've degraded the Canadian national identity in every way that matters and have contributed nothing in return.
No increase in GDP
No increase in production (we are 12 years into our lost decade)
No cultural improvements
Insane crime increases, organized and random
A strain on social services that are already crumbling.
I refuse to speed run Venezuela because you decided to chatGPT a bullshit answer about homesteading.
I just imagine Canada as a more civilized country. Seems as though you dealt with the Quebec issue well, need to cut back on non European migration unless you the people want to“ fundamentally change “Canada. A slightly different health insurance system- de facto rationing. Canada was wrecked ( IMO) by Trudeau’s fascist policies.
We wish you prosperity and safety.
I pretty much agree with everything you said. Here is my concern; what if Carney is doing all of this stuff just to secure a majority? He is saying the right things, but it all runs counter to what he said (repeatedly) in the past. I truly believe that there are senior Liberal party members that have been comprimised by the PRC/CPC and we still haven't seen any details on the Green Slush Fund debacle. Are all of these centrist moves just a ploy to bring enough voters on side to secure a majority? When they are comfortable, they can collapse the current minority, trigger the election and voila!, we are back to where we were a year ago. Carney has no trouble speaking out of both sides of his mouth. It seems to come naturally to him. If the curtain ever gets pulled back, a lot of important people might have a rude awakening.
LPC earned 0 goodwill, and they've been coasting on intentions for the last decade.
Until I see things finished, they get 0 from me
Everyone judges as they see fit.
You're not wrong, and I am jaded. I understand why the GOC tends to be so.flippant with public trust, I don't see how they ever lose it, no matter how many times they betray it