The "LOLCANADA" thread...again

LMAO, can you be more pathetic? You obviously played the lolololol people with intellectual disabilities are too stupid to be offended by the r word card. That's on you. Don't try to quibble around the edges.

This is a shifty level stupid debate. Go ahead and say the r word if you think it makes you feel cool and edgy to push back back at people trying to be a bit respectful.

I said their not the main demographic of people being offended. think were proving the point

A lot of people with intellectual disabilities can write better sentences than you can, so I don't know that I would triple down on the idea they aren't the ones offended by the r word.

Rofl.

All those times Professor Uke bragged about Canada out performing G7 countries now were in a recession and the worst amount G7 countries on growth

who do you blame?

1) Carney and the libs

or

2) PP and the Conservatives for having 3 tries to beat the saddest Lib party ever, and failing all 3 times?

I am centrist, but given the choice between PP and a Con gov, and Carney and a Lib gov, I'll take the latter.

Would have preferred Carney on the Conservative ticket, but that didn't happen.

PS. I am stuck with PP as my MP....ffs

You guys do realize GDP or even GDP per capital is only one small part of the equation right?

I blame Trudeau and the Liberals and voters that supported him all those elections . It was clear after the first election he was a fraud

lmao no, I have always explained to you guys that any metric is just one metric. For instance, when you have two quarters of population decline gdp is going to drop - but population decline is precisely what you all want! It isn’t necessarily bad! Of course Canada is uniquely impacted by the tariff wars and facing that brunt stronger today than our generally relatively decent gap growth in prior years. Context matters.

No it isn't. Not at all actually.

After you form an opinion you actually have to reflect on the consequences of those opinions. Advocating for massively restricted immigration has the consequence of population decline, much as the slightly restricted immigration of today has resulted in slight population decline for two quarters.

You were the guy who wants to mansplain to women about how important babies are and think that is going to magically result in more babies - right?

You have my sympathies in this. Had that for almost a decade myself.

PP is a chihuahua with short man syndrome and a dick to most people who can't do anything *for* him and should never run a country. Ever.

Carney, while stiff and maybe a bit snobby, has the chops to do what needs doing, and stay towards the center.

Slow and steady will win the race, and not bowing down to a soon to be octogenerian in late stage dementia is the right strategy. Wait them out.

Can't wait for some of the geniuses to realize that North American birth rates have been declining for decades. And then turn around and try to explain to women that their sole purpose in life, according to them, is adding to the population. And least they'd probably get kicked in the nuts so hard it'd mean they won't be the ones fathering the children. So it might work out after all.

population should be a neutral thing. I don't want it and I don't not want it. It should have little impact on quality of life and how you build a country. The only ones who cares are government who want to be bigger to have more taxes to waste and capitalists who want a bigger labor force (cheaper). but you have been conditioned that if line does no go up civilization is over. Things like labor shortages are a good thing imo workers rights etc etc make them train rather then import and baby boomers need indians to pay their pensions is just noise that does not need to be fixed. If we don't have the population to pay for full pensions they don't get full pensions. It sucks but you know gotta weather the storm without becoming india.

Uke making it sound like population decline is bad. I just don't understand why population decline has to be all bad. We should have periods of growth and decline. Shouldn't you be the one who likes population decline. Its the top way to fight climate change ! If you are actually serious about fighting climate change population decline has to be mandatory to stop any curves

Yes pregnancies amount women have fallen but on the bright side we seem to have a rise on men getting pregnant .

More like the geniuses here want the government to do more to make having babies for Canadians more attractive. Not solve every problem this country faces with mass-immigration.

We've done it the professors way and look where we are now.

To be clear, I don’t necessarily think population decline is bad a priori. My point is mostly people should be honest that their immigration critiques would naturally lead to population decline which would naturally lead to GDP decline, again not necessarily bad a priori. But these guys have these fantasies about magically changing domestic birth rates to compensate for their immigration views and ya it just isn’t happening.

And specifically to the news item that GDP dropped -0.1% last quarter and the right using this to attack Carney, it’s fair to point out that population declined and gdp per capita rose in that quarter, which is what you’d expect if your curtail immigration like Carney did and they want.

Lmao, never going to happen. Loll I’m a big supporter in the government doing more to support families and cheered on Trudeau’s CCB and daycare programs as important progress. We should do more. But just lol no way more big government spending is ever going to meaningfully up the domestic sub-replacement birth rate. This is true for pretty much every first world country.

Israel has done this, basically by telling the people they are in a population arms race with the Arabs (which they are), creating a sense of urgency to have more children. Even if you discount the ultra religious, the secular population has birth rates around 2.0. And with the ultra religious, birth rates are much higher.

Basically, what seems to work is telling "natives" that if they dont reproduce, they will be replaced and their culture destroyed. So basically what might work is getting white people to believe Canada will be overthrown by "browns" if they dont start having much more children.

(I am not saying this is true or not, I am just commenting if you got people to believe this it would actually create a level of urgency to get them to reproduce more).

I never said this? I'm a fiscal conservative, I don't believe that the government is very good at spending our tax dollars but that doesn't take away from the fact that it's the governments responsibility to make having children more attractive.

We have ****ed our youth out of jobs and have priced them out of homes and we're wondering why Canadians aren't making kids?

But sure, lets keep importing the third world and solve exactly nothing. Again, we've done it your way and are we better off for it?

It's certainly not untrue. Immigrant women in Canada have more children on average than Canadian-born women, this much is true.

Stfu with your gaslighting. Nobody advocated for "massively restricted immigration".

The Canadian government has already funded programs to teach people about population control. What's the difference?

You said this:

I think that was self-referential in context. Don't get me wrong, I'm under zero illusion that right wingers would want the government to spend a ****ing dime to support people with kids. But I always do find it amusing that you put the burden directly on the government to "do more" but when faced with real programs like expanding CCB or expanding daycare of course conservatives vote against it every single time and complaining about spending tax dollars. So your demand to do more is just utterly vacuous.

The simple fact is that if you substantially reduce immigration in the long run you will have population decline and GDP decline. There is just no way domestic births are going to reverse the trendlines we see. That isn't even necessarily a bad thing - maybe all your dreams come true and we have skyrocketing real GDP per capita growth - but we don't have to deny reality.

Pablito's policy position is that immigration should be slashed by over 80%, at least from his target: Indians. I don't know about other nationalities. That sounds like massively restricted to me. Maybe that isn't your position so let me ask: Do you think we should substantially lower immigration beneath, say, prepandemic levels?

Is this your weird way of talking about basic sex ed like condoms and the birth control pill in schools?

If so, weird.

Why do you guys just have to be so ****ing weird with everything?

You think wrong. Not every problem is fixed with throwing a ****ton of money at it.

Just to confirm, I'm considered a right winger here who complained about expanding CCB or expanding daycare(I haven't)?

I'm doing the opposite, a point you continue to ignore. We have done it your way, opened the immigration floodgates and where are we now? We've done nothing but keep housing prices up and bringing in a ridiculous number of immigrants to artificially boost our GDP.

Good job Canada!