Trudeau reflects
October 7, 2024 3:22 PM Subscribe
We need something like ACAB for folks that are basically part of the modern monarchy / political class pipeline.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 4:30 PM on October 7 [11 favorites]
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 4:30 PM on October 7 [11 favorites]
TLDR: "Shitguzzler guzzles shit."
posted by Pedantzilla at 4:32 PM on October 7 [2 favorites]
posted by Pedantzilla at 4:32 PM on October 7 [2 favorites]
I know Everyone Hates Trudeau, and there's plenty about him I'm not fond of, but at the end of the day I think he's a fairly competent person who believes that the government ultimately exists to run things and help people, and wants to do a good job running a government that runs things and helps people.
Do I think a lot of his ideas about what "helping people" entails are wrong? Yes. Do I think that his flavour of "running things" is autocratic at times and could be a lot better? Yes.
But I think 90% of the hate right now is ginned up by the right wing -- and now proven to be fuelled at least partially by foreign dollars boosting social media noise machines -- and I'm now more inclined to think he's gotten the shaft by a screaming noise machine, a near-monopoly on the media by right winters (hang tight, CBC), and a lot of people who don't pay a lot of attention just hearing the shrieking, shrugging, and saying "if there's that much screaming, there's probably something to it."
Maybe I'm a sucker, but I think he's not the worst PM we've ever had, and is getting a raw deal. I'd take him over Chretien or Martin, and stacked against Harper or Ford or any of the other blithering fascists running provinces, or God forbid Poilievre, he feels like a godsend.
Would I rather Jack Layton rise triumphant from the grave and lead us to a better leftist future? Sure. But I'm more disappointed with all the people being swept along on a tide of "Fuck Trudeau" bumper stickers -- and the perpetual meandering and dithering of the NDP -- than I am with Trudeau at this point.
posted by Shepherd at 4:53 PM on October 7 [87 favorites]
Do I think a lot of his ideas about what "helping people" entails are wrong? Yes. Do I think that his flavour of "running things" is autocratic at times and could be a lot better? Yes.
But I think 90% of the hate right now is ginned up by the right wing -- and now proven to be fuelled at least partially by foreign dollars boosting social media noise machines -- and I'm now more inclined to think he's gotten the shaft by a screaming noise machine, a near-monopoly on the media by right winters (hang tight, CBC), and a lot of people who don't pay a lot of attention just hearing the shrieking, shrugging, and saying "if there's that much screaming, there's probably something to it."
Maybe I'm a sucker, but I think he's not the worst PM we've ever had, and is getting a raw deal. I'd take him over Chretien or Martin, and stacked against Harper or Ford or any of the other blithering fascists running provinces, or God forbid Poilievre, he feels like a godsend.
Would I rather Jack Layton rise triumphant from the grave and lead us to a better leftist future? Sure. But I'm more disappointed with all the people being swept along on a tide of "Fuck Trudeau" bumper stickers -- and the perpetual meandering and dithering of the NDP -- than I am with Trudeau at this point.
posted by Shepherd at 4:53 PM on October 7 [87 favorites]
Shepherd I agree with you 100 metric percent and regret that I can only offer you one like.
posted by hearthpig at 5:01 PM on October 7 [8 favorites]
posted by hearthpig at 5:01 PM on October 7 [8 favorites]
Reneging on proportional representation was the end of Trudeau for me, girded by his fellating of organised crime by protecting SNC Lavalin.
Even if the balance of his political efforts were indifferent-to-mildly-beneficial to most Canadians, it set a horrible example that certainly will be followed (and bested) by his right-wing successors.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 5:21 PM on October 7 [7 favorites]
Even if the balance of his political efforts were indifferent-to-mildly-beneficial to most Canadians, it set a horrible example that certainly will be followed (and bested) by his right-wing successors.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 5:21 PM on October 7 [7 favorites]
SNC Lavalin was corrupt before Trudeau, and will be corrupt after Trudeau. His presence in or absence from the conversation was immaterial.
posted by Snowflake at 5:28 PM on October 7
posted by Snowflake at 5:28 PM on October 7
His presence in or absence from the conversation was immaterial.
The pigs are gonna shit whether you go in the barn or not, but you don't have to roll yourself around in it.
posted by clawsoon at 5:37 PM on October 7 [4 favorites]
The pigs are gonna shit whether you go in the barn or not, but you don't have to roll yourself around in it.
posted by clawsoon at 5:37 PM on October 7 [4 favorites]
SNC Lavalin doesn't 'exist' you fucking hippies concerned with 'justice' and 'the rule of law'.
it's a brand new day.
background
posted by lalochezia at 5:50 PM on October 7 [2 favorites]
it's a brand new day.
background
posted by lalochezia at 5:50 PM on October 7 [2 favorites]
- In Canada, PM's get 2 terms and then the clock runs out. Of course, if a politician fights for the top job, then they don't want to give up again without another fight.
- I'm annoyed that Singh didn't push for electoral reform when he had the chance to do it. I also think that Singh doesn't have the broad appeal to make decent numbers in an election.
- "Flood the zone with shit" is a Bannon quote which exactly describes PP and his moronic followers (and foreign influences), which the conservative-dominated medias & pollsters are pushing hard for now.
(SNC Lavalin scandal was about some generic Libya graft that happened back in the Harper era. Justin should have done the Chretien shrug and just said "hey shit happens" and then ducked and gotten away with it. Instead he tried to intimidate Jody into taking the fall for him, which was a bad idea.)
posted by ovvl at 6:03 PM on October 7 [6 favorites]
- I'm annoyed that Singh didn't push for electoral reform when he had the chance to do it. I also think that Singh doesn't have the broad appeal to make decent numbers in an election.
- "Flood the zone with shit" is a Bannon quote which exactly describes PP and his moronic followers (and foreign influences), which the conservative-dominated medias & pollsters are pushing hard for now.
(SNC Lavalin scandal was about some generic Libya graft that happened back in the Harper era. Justin should have done the Chretien shrug and just said "hey shit happens" and then ducked and gotten away with it. Instead he tried to intimidate Jody into taking the fall for him, which was a bad idea.)
posted by ovvl at 6:03 PM on October 7 [6 favorites]
After almost a decade people are sick of hearing bad things about Trudeau and the Liberals so their time is up. Doesn't matter who's saying these bad things or if they're true, people just need someone to blame at this point so they can get rid of them and start with a clean slate with the next guy. Trudeau does have to go because he is just so fucking mediocre and Canadians do deserve better but somehow the Conservatives managed to pick someone even worse so we aren't even going to get that.
The average Canadian is horribly uninformed about what is going on in their city/province/country and which level of government is responsible for whatever thing they're praising or complaining about today. I drove with a friend to the CNE grounds in Toronto on the weekend and on the way back we drove by the site of Ontario Place which is all boarded up.
Friend: What's happening here?
Me: Oh, they cut down all the trees to clear land for construction. They're going to build a spa.
Friend: A spa? What are you talking about? Are you trolling me?
Me: No, this is real. Some foreign company is going to build a spa here and taxpayers going to pay a couple of hundred million dollars for underground parking for it.
Friend: WTF? Why is the city doing this?
Me: This has nothing to do with the city. The land is owned by the Province. This is 100% on the Conservatives and Doug Ford.
Friend: I thought the Science Centre was going to come here.
Me: Yup, that'll come here too.
Friend: How does the Science Centre and a spa even make sense together?
Me: It's a pretty bad combination, I agree.
Now the whole Ontario Place spa thing is actually pretty big news here, but he isn't watching the news or reading a paper, and I'd imagine he's a lot closer to the average Canadian than I am.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 6:29 PM on October 7 [4 favorites]
The average Canadian is horribly uninformed about what is going on in their city/province/country and which level of government is responsible for whatever thing they're praising or complaining about today. I drove with a friend to the CNE grounds in Toronto on the weekend and on the way back we drove by the site of Ontario Place which is all boarded up.
Friend: What's happening here?
Me: Oh, they cut down all the trees to clear land for construction. They're going to build a spa.
Friend: A spa? What are you talking about? Are you trolling me?
Me: No, this is real. Some foreign company is going to build a spa here and taxpayers going to pay a couple of hundred million dollars for underground parking for it.
Friend: WTF? Why is the city doing this?
Me: This has nothing to do with the city. The land is owned by the Province. This is 100% on the Conservatives and Doug Ford.
Friend: I thought the Science Centre was going to come here.
Me: Yup, that'll come here too.
Friend: How does the Science Centre and a spa even make sense together?
Me: It's a pretty bad combination, I agree.
Now the whole Ontario Place spa thing is actually pretty big news here, but he isn't watching the news or reading a paper, and I'd imagine he's a lot closer to the average Canadian than I am.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 6:29 PM on October 7 [4 favorites]
Trudeau didn't renege on proportional representation, just electoral reform. Although if my memory serves me, he made it a non-priority by giving the portfolio to a junior minister and provided no political cover and promptly gave up as soon as he got opposition to the option he wanted (ranked choice).
Reading their concerns, it kind of makes sense in that no one wants to pull a Mulroney, but then why did they even bother making electoral reform a part of their platform in the first place? It just seems like he was never serious about it to start with.
posted by The arrows are too fast at 6:46 PM on October 7 [1 favorite]
Reading their concerns, it kind of makes sense in that no one wants to pull a Mulroney, but then why did they even bother making electoral reform a part of their platform in the first place? It just seems like he was never serious about it to start with.
posted by The arrows are too fast at 6:46 PM on October 7 [1 favorite]
I thought Trudeau's subdidized childcare need tweaks in the program, but that it was fundamentally necessary as a program to relieve pressures on young people. I've been worried that neoliberal economies have been too reliant on immigrants to make up for population shortfalls, without wondering what happens when immigrant home countries also enter into below-replacement fertility rates. Since parenting has opportunity costs and only the government can break the tragedy of commons from the free market disincentives to parenting.
But I think the Trudeau Liberals were too deep into the belief that immigration was a Canadian virtue, without questioning what our immigration levels were doing to the housing market. Maxime Bernier's PPC were the first to make the criticism, but Pierre Pollievre's Conservatives also successfully latched on to it. The Liberals and NDP refused to make the immigration-housing crisis link, which left frustrated young Canadians moving to the CPC.
Michael Studerak was on CBC on Sunday, September 15 and he said that labour shortages allow for the economy to allocate productivity efficiently. Young students would love to be in an economy with labor shortages, because the jobs are plentiful and easy to obtain. Immigration suppressed those labor shortages to keep the economy inefficient.
posted by DetriusXii at 6:54 PM on October 7 [9 favorites]
But I think the Trudeau Liberals were too deep into the belief that immigration was a Canadian virtue, without questioning what our immigration levels were doing to the housing market. Maxime Bernier's PPC were the first to make the criticism, but Pierre Pollievre's Conservatives also successfully latched on to it. The Liberals and NDP refused to make the immigration-housing crisis link, which left frustrated young Canadians moving to the CPC.
Michael Studerak was on CBC on Sunday, September 15 and he said that labour shortages allow for the economy to allocate productivity efficiently. Young students would love to be in an economy with labor shortages, because the jobs are plentiful and easy to obtain. Immigration suppressed those labor shortages to keep the economy inefficient.
posted by DetriusXii at 6:54 PM on October 7 [9 favorites]
I think that Trudeau is fundamentally well-meaning, and has been a pretty good Prime Minister. I will also never forgive him for abandoning electoral reform as soon as he could, because it has led to us facing another Conservative government, and I'm not sure Canada will be recognizeable after that.
The fascists in Canada haven't overtly taken over the party, but they certainly support it wholeheartedly, and have seen from the US that just brazenly going for what you want works for at least a while.
posted by PennD at 7:08 PM on October 7 [7 favorites]
The fascists in Canada haven't overtly taken over the party, but they certainly support it wholeheartedly, and have seen from the US that just brazenly going for what you want works for at least a while.
posted by PennD at 7:08 PM on October 7 [7 favorites]
Here in Aotearoa/NZ we switched to proportional representation (MMP) in the mid 90s. It's certainly better than FPP but probably needs some minor tweaks.
The really big unexpected advantage was that it essentially threw all the political cards in the air - politicians who had come into the system on one side of the political fence and who's world view had changed over time were able to find a place where they felt more comfortable (and voters could more easily see what they really stood for). Honestly I wish there was a way to do this every 30 years or so
posted by mbo at 9:17 PM on October 7 [5 favorites]
The really big unexpected advantage was that it essentially threw all the political cards in the air - politicians who had come into the system on one side of the political fence and who's world view had changed over time were able to find a place where they felt more comfortable (and voters could more easily see what they really stood for). Honestly I wish there was a way to do this every 30 years or so
posted by mbo at 9:17 PM on October 7 [5 favorites]
Canada doesn't vote governments in, they vote governments out.
posted by fairmettle at 10:19 PM on October 7 [12 favorites]
posted by fairmettle at 10:19 PM on October 7 [12 favorites]
I don't blame PP's ascension on Trudeau. I blame it on the US. Trump's own ascension and "legitimacy" towards full scale populism and outward racism. It somehow became a thing that Conservative Canadian voters went, "oooh we want that too!! We don't have to hide how awful we are if we couch it in deep deep concern for the dissolution of Canadian identity!"
Trudeau has been a mediocre PM at best, but I would rather mediocre than a populist. Jack Layton ain't coming back no matter how much I want him to, Jagmeet Singh is disappointing me left and right as an NDP supporter, and I don't even know who could replace Trudeau as the head of the Liberal party. We're in a real shit place for options but it really doesn't help when you have a psychotic neighbour to the south of you lending strength to awful thinking.
posted by Kitteh at 6:16 AM on October 8 [6 favorites]
Trudeau has been a mediocre PM at best, but I would rather mediocre than a populist. Jack Layton ain't coming back no matter how much I want him to, Jagmeet Singh is disappointing me left and right as an NDP supporter, and I don't even know who could replace Trudeau as the head of the Liberal party. We're in a real shit place for options but it really doesn't help when you have a psychotic neighbour to the south of you lending strength to awful thinking.
posted by Kitteh at 6:16 AM on October 8 [6 favorites]
Shepherd, I agree with your take. But there is serious Justin fatigue out there. He came in on such a gilded cloud - political royalty, "sunny ways", lots of ideas, and delivered on a few, and then founders on some. He is disarmingly open and candid, but then it seems like he's high on his own supply while problems like the linked issues of immigration and housing distort the economy. He doesn't seem to have quite the political cunning that his dad or Chretien had.
As already mentioned, Canadians vote governments out. It's just sad that PP, the likely beneficiary of this fact, is such a poor option.
posted by Artful Codger at 6:27 AM on October 8 [1 favorite]
As already mentioned, Canadians vote governments out. It's just sad that PP, the likely beneficiary of this fact, is such a poor option.
posted by Artful Codger at 6:27 AM on October 8 [1 favorite]
I think that expensive housing in Canada has cascading deleterious effects -- nearly everything here would be made better (and, granted, a couple of things worse, but the worse things are mostly related to very rich people getting slightly less rich, so...) by a massive, sustained housing crash. It's absolutely maddening to me to see the amount of effort the government puts into keeping the housing market as high as possible. It's especially maddening to me, as an immigrant myself, to see the housing crisis painted mostly as an immigration problem. Is immigration a factor? Undoubtedly yes. Is it the main factor, or even a huge factor? Extremely debatable. But it's the easiest, lowest-hanging fruit that an opposition party *or* a government can reach for, so they're going to reach for it. We basically are utilizing two levers to disincentivize housing demand -- interests rates (rapidly becoming a non-issue, unfortunately) and immigration -- and at the same time pushing a billion other levers to incentivize it.
I am not a young person, I am a 51 year old man with a reasonably well paying, union job, and I cannot afford a house in a city that is considered "affordable". I have been renting the same apartment for well over a decade and have fought off eviction attempts. This is a problem. Fortunately I'm not credulous enough to fall for the CPC's bullshit about housing affordability -- their head is himself a landlord!! -- but I can fully see why some people might, including and especially young people. I'm... tacitly an NDP supporter, but wow has Jagmeet been mostly a disappointment or what.
posted by the dief at 7:20 AM on October 8 [12 favorites]
I am not a young person, I am a 51 year old man with a reasonably well paying, union job, and I cannot afford a house in a city that is considered "affordable". I have been renting the same apartment for well over a decade and have fought off eviction attempts. This is a problem. Fortunately I'm not credulous enough to fall for the CPC's bullshit about housing affordability -- their head is himself a landlord!! -- but I can fully see why some people might, including and especially young people. I'm... tacitly an NDP supporter, but wow has Jagmeet been mostly a disappointment or what.
posted by the dief at 7:20 AM on October 8 [12 favorites]
the dief, I'm an immigrant myself and I feel like the majority of Canadians who do own a home really really rely on that as an asset. I'm not saying I've never encountered it in the US but it feels like a lot of public and private conversations here centre around keeping one's housing value high. Folks don't want the housing market to crash because that is the one thing of value they have. But that's on them.
posted by Kitteh at 7:36 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 7:36 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
Kitteh, yeah, undoubtedly. And the sooner they are separated from that particular conception the better for everyone, homeowners included. And it will happen, it's just a matter of when. Liberals are intent -- and have been largely successful -- on kicking that can down the road, but eventually you run out of road.
posted by the dief at 7:40 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
posted by the dief at 7:40 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
In 2015, when I met so many young people all excited about Trudeau, I felt like such a cynical old b-face warning them that this is what Liberals do all the time, they campaign on the left, govern on the right, you can't trust them. I did not really enjoy being proven right.
posted by Kurichina at 8:21 AM on October 8 [3 favorites]
posted by Kurichina at 8:21 AM on October 8 [3 favorites]
I think he did the right thing after the commission in push the stop button. I think he did the politically opportune thing in 2015 opening the issue. It's the Mulroney syndrome: open the door do change and get bitten in the ass by the consequences when things fall in the water.
The thing I most strongly disagree with in any PR system is that it puts too much in the hands of the elected representatives who are then only mildly impeded by electoral responsibilities. IOW, it enables more bad politiciking with fewer consequences. The worst of this shows up in the coalition building that is a feature of every proportional vote system out there. It's all done in secret, it's never made public. If they had to do it in a public forum on Hansard, I'd be much more OK with it. The fact that it has been covered by NDAs (in the recent confidence and supply agreement in BC a few year back) is profoundly anti-democratic in my view. If they choose to do that shit, we should go back to the voters and have a referendum on it to certify it.
PR also has major limitations for application to Canada specifically when it comes to the quasi-constitutional practices of regional and national representation. I think this was the source of many of Trudeau's objections. Multi-member districts could allow for majority suppression of minority candidates, for example.
posted by bonehead at 8:57 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
The thing I most strongly disagree with in any PR system is that it puts too much in the hands of the elected representatives who are then only mildly impeded by electoral responsibilities. IOW, it enables more bad politiciking with fewer consequences. The worst of this shows up in the coalition building that is a feature of every proportional vote system out there. It's all done in secret, it's never made public. If they had to do it in a public forum on Hansard, I'd be much more OK with it. The fact that it has been covered by NDAs (in the recent confidence and supply agreement in BC a few year back) is profoundly anti-democratic in my view. If they choose to do that shit, we should go back to the voters and have a referendum on it to certify it.
PR also has major limitations for application to Canada specifically when it comes to the quasi-constitutional practices of regional and national representation. I think this was the source of many of Trudeau's objections. Multi-member districts could allow for majority suppression of minority candidates, for example.
posted by bonehead at 8:57 AM on October 8 [2 favorites]
> Do I think that his flavour of "running things" is autocratic at times
it seems to me that autocracy is built into the Canadian system. I've been alive since Trudeau I and every PM who had more than a token run was basically a king and the PMO was his court.
posted by Sauce Trough at 9:47 AM on October 8 [3 favorites]
it seems to me that autocracy is built into the Canadian system. I've been alive since Trudeau I and every PM who had more than a token run was basically a king and the PMO was his court.
posted by Sauce Trough at 9:47 AM on October 8 [3 favorites]
I'm not going to risk an irreversible change just to fulfil a promise I made… that's kind of what promises are for, though.
posted by scruss at 10:50 AM on October 8 [3 favorites]
But I think the Trudeau Liberals were too deep into the belief that immigration was a Canadian virtue, without questioning what our immigration levels were doing to the housing market.
Is immigration actually the issue, or is it that the government have not made it easier to build more housing? I ask because immigrants are being scapegoated here in the US for housing issues, when it's actually immigrants who do most of the hard work of building the houses; and when governments at various levels have been resistant to making it easier to build more housing in the first place.
All the fascists in the US are very excited about tying immigration to housing woes, as it makes their plans to deport people en masse, and tying that to cheaper rent/housing prices (lol) for Real Americans, resonate with lots of shallow thinkers.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:01 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
Is immigration actually the issue, or is it that the government have not made it easier to build more housing? I ask because immigrants are being scapegoated here in the US for housing issues, when it's actually immigrants who do most of the hard work of building the houses; and when governments at various levels have been resistant to making it easier to build more housing in the first place.
All the fascists in the US are very excited about tying immigration to housing woes, as it makes their plans to deport people en masse, and tying that to cheaper rent/housing prices (lol) for Real Americans, resonate with lots of shallow thinkers.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:01 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
Folks don't want the housing market to crash because that is the one thing of value they have.
Speaking personally - this was how the middle class was raised 35+ years ago in North America: you buy a house as soon as you can reasonably afford it, and you make paying it off your main goal, ahead of retirement saving, and your house is a key part of your retirement plan, releasing some value when you downsize.
Of course the last two decades have messed with the formerly steady but unspectacular appreciation of housing. We're sitting in a now absurdly-high priced Toronto home that we paid off a decade ago. How would we react to a housing price crash? We'd survive, as long as the whole market drops, so that if we choose to sell, we will still release some value by buying smaller, or if we could afford to rent for the rest of our lives. But if there's no reasonable exit strategy... we're staying put. So this is part of the housing puzzle.
posted by Artful Codger at 12:21 PM on October 8 [1 favorite]
Speaking personally - this was how the middle class was raised 35+ years ago in North America: you buy a house as soon as you can reasonably afford it, and you make paying it off your main goal, ahead of retirement saving, and your house is a key part of your retirement plan, releasing some value when you downsize.
Of course the last two decades have messed with the formerly steady but unspectacular appreciation of housing. We're sitting in a now absurdly-high priced Toronto home that we paid off a decade ago. How would we react to a housing price crash? We'd survive, as long as the whole market drops, so that if we choose to sell, we will still release some value by buying smaller, or if we could afford to rent for the rest of our lives. But if there's no reasonable exit strategy... we're staying put. So this is part of the housing puzzle.
posted by Artful Codger at 12:21 PM on October 8 [1 favorite]
Is immigration actually the issue, or is it that the government have not made it easier to build more housing? I ask because immigrants are being scapegoated here in the US for housing issues, when it's actually immigrants who do most of the hard work of building the houses; and when governments at various levels have been resistant to making it easier to build more housing in the first place.
There are three sources of population growth: Cloning, domestic fertility rates, and immigration. We don't allow human cloning and domestic fertility rates are persistently dropping. Five years ago, it was 1.6 births per woman and now it's approaching 1.3 births per woman. 2.1 births per woman is where the domestic population is at equilibrium. As that domestic fertility rate decreases, immigrants have to occupy more of the ratio to make up for even constant population growth. The domestic citizenry keeps wanting to shrink itself. Chart 3A from the Bank of Canada also shows a strong correlation between population growth and home prices. But the domestic fertility rates are below replacement, so the domestic citizenry (children of immigrants born in Canada are also domestic, so please don't attach the word domestic to racism) was constantly shrinking. The only driver of population growth in Canada (and the United States) is immigration.
Trudeau's Liberals are the federal government. The federal government does not control housing policy easily as that's up to the provinces and then delegated to municipalities. The supply side could be increased by the municipalities by removing restrictive zoning, but then we're facing that battle everywhere. Retired home owners show up to city halls persistently to complain about the character of their neighborhoods being destroyed whenever there's mention of zoning changes. The older home owners have a lot more influence over their city councilors than young people do, so the changes aren't happening sufficiently fast enough.
Edmonton was the first city to remove restrictive zoning in Canada, but the other municipalities are struggling to allow for unrestrictive zoning. We need single family homes to be replaced by condo high rise towers, just like is found in Seoul, but it's not happening and development isn't happening fast enough.
The federal government has an easy time with controlling immigration and that's a power that they control with no need for justification to the individual provinces. They could approve immigration to only cities that were able to remove restrictive zoning (Edmonton and Calgary) and deny immigration permits to any other city.
Immigration is actually the issue. Housing has two sides, but immigration does absolutely form one side of the housing demand curve and to constantly eliminate it from discussion drove young people into the arms of the CPC, when they've traditionally been more likely to lean left and vote for Liberals or the NDP.
In order for immigrants to contribute to housing, they would have had to be hired and accepted into the construction industry. But they're ending up in the retail and hospitality sector, that's unrelated to housing. And all the ones in the retail and hospitality sector still need a house too.
posted by DetriusXii at 1:46 PM on October 8 [3 favorites]
There are three sources of population growth: Cloning, domestic fertility rates, and immigration. We don't allow human cloning and domestic fertility rates are persistently dropping. Five years ago, it was 1.6 births per woman and now it's approaching 1.3 births per woman. 2.1 births per woman is where the domestic population is at equilibrium. As that domestic fertility rate decreases, immigrants have to occupy more of the ratio to make up for even constant population growth. The domestic citizenry keeps wanting to shrink itself. Chart 3A from the Bank of Canada also shows a strong correlation between population growth and home prices. But the domestic fertility rates are below replacement, so the domestic citizenry (children of immigrants born in Canada are also domestic, so please don't attach the word domestic to racism) was constantly shrinking. The only driver of population growth in Canada (and the United States) is immigration.
Trudeau's Liberals are the federal government. The federal government does not control housing policy easily as that's up to the provinces and then delegated to municipalities. The supply side could be increased by the municipalities by removing restrictive zoning, but then we're facing that battle everywhere. Retired home owners show up to city halls persistently to complain about the character of their neighborhoods being destroyed whenever there's mention of zoning changes. The older home owners have a lot more influence over their city councilors than young people do, so the changes aren't happening sufficiently fast enough.
Edmonton was the first city to remove restrictive zoning in Canada, but the other municipalities are struggling to allow for unrestrictive zoning. We need single family homes to be replaced by condo high rise towers, just like is found in Seoul, but it's not happening and development isn't happening fast enough.
The federal government has an easy time with controlling immigration and that's a power that they control with no need for justification to the individual provinces. They could approve immigration to only cities that were able to remove restrictive zoning (Edmonton and Calgary) and deny immigration permits to any other city.
Immigration is actually the issue. Housing has two sides, but immigration does absolutely form one side of the housing demand curve and to constantly eliminate it from discussion drove young people into the arms of the CPC, when they've traditionally been more likely to lean left and vote for Liberals or the NDP.
In order for immigrants to contribute to housing, they would have had to be hired and accepted into the construction industry. But they're ending up in the retail and hospitality sector, that's unrelated to housing. And all the ones in the retail and hospitality sector still need a house too.
posted by DetriusXii at 1:46 PM on October 8 [3 favorites]
Australia's population has grown faster than Canada's this century, largely (more than in the case of Canada) from immigration. But it has not had a housing crisis.
posted by senor biggles at 3:08 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
posted by senor biggles at 3:08 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
The federal government has an easy time with controlling immigration and that's a power that they control with no need for justification to the individual provinces. They could approve immigration to only cities that were able to remove restrictive zoning (Edmonton and Calgary) and deny immigration permits to any other city.
IANAL but I believe that mobility rights in the Charter make it impossible for the federal government to force anyone, immigrants or otherwise, to live in specific locations.
posted by senor biggles at 3:13 PM on October 8 [1 favorite]
IANAL but I believe that mobility rights in the Charter make it impossible for the federal government to force anyone, immigrants or otherwise, to live in specific locations.
posted by senor biggles at 3:13 PM on October 8 [1 favorite]
I suppose my jaded take on the Canadian Liberal politicians has largely been based on actually talking to some. They didn't seem to care about issues outside of how it would affect their image. In this, they are no different than the lizard-brained Conservatives who wish to replace them.
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 3:26 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
posted by Jessica Savitch's Coke Spoon at 3:26 PM on October 8 [2 favorites]
The effect of immigration on housing is a side effect of the government getting out of the non market housing business decades ago. Which has allowed market forces to make the line go up at the expense of everyone.
And that is something the federal government could act on. Just straight up building non market housing in quantity [1] to kneecap the bubble and cause a retraction in values. And while wildly necessary causing housing values to drop by 25-50% would make the post GST/NAFTA collapse of the PCs seem minor by comparison. No party wants to be holding that bag so here we are. This bubble is going to end some day and it is going to end in the messiest way possible (hyperinflation? massive depression? some new virus culling the population in European bubonic plague / smallpox in colonialism North America fashion? a big ass war? Whatever happens it ain't going to be pretty).
Ugh. We are going to end up with that racist transphobic, homophobic, quasi religious nut job Pollviere and its going to be horrible for anyone who isn't a wealthy cis white male.
[1]The federal government can build billions of dollars of pipeline, they could build housing the same way.
posted by Mitheral at 11:02 PM on October 8 [4 favorites]
And that is something the federal government could act on. Just straight up building non market housing in quantity [1] to kneecap the bubble and cause a retraction in values. And while wildly necessary causing housing values to drop by 25-50% would make the post GST/NAFTA collapse of the PCs seem minor by comparison. No party wants to be holding that bag so here we are. This bubble is going to end some day and it is going to end in the messiest way possible (hyperinflation? massive depression? some new virus culling the population in European bubonic plague / smallpox in colonialism North America fashion? a big ass war? Whatever happens it ain't going to be pretty).
Ugh. We are going to end up with that racist transphobic, homophobic, quasi religious nut job Pollviere and its going to be horrible for anyone who isn't a wealthy cis white male.
[1]The federal government can build billions of dollars of pipeline, they could build housing the same way.
posted by Mitheral at 11:02 PM on October 8 [4 favorites]
I do find it frustrating when people blame domestic problems like housing on immigration, the one group of people guaranteed to have not been involved in the decision-making process.
Most Western countries, with varying settings for immigration, are having a housing crisis. In Australia, we like to blame our housing crisis on a tax policy called "negative gearing", which nowhere else does, and people don't seem to make the connection between "most of our peers are also having a housing crisis" and "only Australia allows negative gearing on taxation". Likewise, it is probably not immigration that has led to Canada not building enough housing for its existing citizens, because it has been profitable to not.
Japan does not have a housing crisis, and part of their secret is that housing depreciates over time rather than being an investment, in part because constant updates to the building codes make old houses more of a liability, and because Japan never recovered from the crash 30 years ago. Governments in Western countries generally don't build enough housing, which leaves construction up to the market, and the market has no problem withholding supply to drive the price up.
posted by Merus at 12:00 AM on October 9 [4 favorites]
Most Western countries, with varying settings for immigration, are having a housing crisis. In Australia, we like to blame our housing crisis on a tax policy called "negative gearing", which nowhere else does, and people don't seem to make the connection between "most of our peers are also having a housing crisis" and "only Australia allows negative gearing on taxation". Likewise, it is probably not immigration that has led to Canada not building enough housing for its existing citizens, because it has been profitable to not.
Japan does not have a housing crisis, and part of their secret is that housing depreciates over time rather than being an investment, in part because constant updates to the building codes make old houses more of a liability, and because Japan never recovered from the crash 30 years ago. Governments in Western countries generally don't build enough housing, which leaves construction up to the market, and the market has no problem withholding supply to drive the price up.
posted by Merus at 12:00 AM on October 9 [4 favorites]
it seems to me that autocracy is built into the Canadian system.
Canada, and the Westminster system in general, is essentially a dictatorship with elections every 3-5 years. Regular elections seem to be enough feedback to work and keep politicians somewhat honest, but in majority governments, effectively all that matters is the Executive, or Cabinet. Under majorities the legislatures are not very important.
The Legislative part matters in a minority situation, possibly more than the executive. Governing at the pleasure of the House is often slower and more expensive, as that involves a lot more dealmaking. Coalition partners need to be able to show they won something so things like dental programs, or the current OAS top-up fight are typical of minority governments in Canada.
One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PR is that it would mean majorities would be less common and coalitions more common. And I worry that that would lead to something like the US entitlement system where side deals---or speaking plainly political bribes---are constantly added to bills to ensure support.
posted by bonehead at 8:31 AM on October 9
Canada, and the Westminster system in general, is essentially a dictatorship with elections every 3-5 years. Regular elections seem to be enough feedback to work and keep politicians somewhat honest, but in majority governments, effectively all that matters is the Executive, or Cabinet. Under majorities the legislatures are not very important.
The Legislative part matters in a minority situation, possibly more than the executive. Governing at the pleasure of the House is often slower and more expensive, as that involves a lot more dealmaking. Coalition partners need to be able to show they won something so things like dental programs, or the current OAS top-up fight are typical of minority governments in Canada.
One of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of PR is that it would mean majorities would be less common and coalitions more common. And I worry that that would lead to something like the US entitlement system where side deals---or speaking plainly political bribes---are constantly added to bills to ensure support.
posted by bonehead at 8:31 AM on October 9
« Older Progress on open source E-ink tablet, the PineNote... | Joy Newer »
posted by adrienneleigh at 4:07 PM on October 7 [25 favorites]