Summary

Mark Carney has been elected as the new Liberal Party leader in Canada with a commanding 85.9% of votes, following Justin Trudeau’s resignation.

The former Bank of Canada and Bank of England governor will become Canada’s 24th prime minister within days.

In his victory speech, Carney took aim at both Donald Trump and Canadian Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, vowing to maintain Canada’s tariffs until Americans “show us respect.”

Carney, despite never holding elected office, enters leadership as Canada faces trade tensions with the U.S. and a potential early election. He must secure a parliamentary seat and finalize the transition with Trudeau.

  • turnip@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    26
    ·
    14 hours ago

    No, he pushed mass immigration, in order to derive what he calls economic growth as we trade homes back and forth for ever larger sums, as zoning and developer fees prevent new development.

    Housing and rents doubled in 10 years as we did 4% population growth and bought 50% of mortgage bonds, all as he was a Liberal advisor. He’s a champaign socialist like our NDP, and we have no real worker parties left.

    • CitricBase@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      If your rents doubled while your population increase was only 4%, it sounds like immigration wasn’t the issue, now was it?

      Blaming poor people for the housing bubble is like blaming a fish for the rain. Look up.

      • rabber@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Our population increased by 10 million during Trudeau. As a homeowner I’m not complaining lol

      • turnip@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        The problem is nimbyism, sprawled zoning, and large developer taxes used to lower property taxes; which is why matching immigration to housing completions is important, and an obvious thing to do if you care about the poor.

        But people downvote criticism of their faux progressives. People got a whole 400$ in dental work as their rents doubled, wholly unfunded and paid with future austerity of course.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          I’m pretty sure Carney is onboard with tying immigration to housing. It seems like it’s basically just consensus within Ottawa at this point.

        • vilmos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          Matching population to available housing… Seems a little cart-before-the-horse. In your opinion what is the motivation to build housing, since we are controlling the demand not the supply?

          • turnip@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            58 minutes ago

            Profits are why developers build housing, for consumers its an inelastic good obviously.

            We have simply made land costs too valuable via regressive zoning and greenbelt, alongside the slow bureaucracy, poor mass transit. Then you have high developer taxes as I mentioned, which directly erode profit.

            When supply is diminished and debt is cheap it becomes a liquidity sponge where supply doesnt increase to match capital, and people speculate on rising values like they do Bitcoin or gold, except with cheaply borrowed money that is insured and a liability to our own government as they buy half of all mortgage bonds.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 minutes ago

            There’s always some being built but not ready to go, so depending on the exact requirement in place it doesn’t exclude massive growth.

            Actually, if it was literally letting in an immigrant family for every empty house on the market, you’d still get prices skyrocketing. To achieve the policy goal of continuing growth without sparking a cost crisis and a backlash, you have to leave room for domestic growth in demand, and maybe the effect of the other various push and pull factors on immigration. How exactly you do that, I don’t know. It’s probably pretty complicated.

    • Jhex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      No, he pushed mass immigration

      When? as the head of the Bank of Canada under Harper?!

    • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Oh. I’m sorry. I guess then pay attention as to how trump’s story goes. I don’t know now how it’s going to go. I hope to be dead by then.

      • turnip@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        Id guess it knocks over Canada’s housing bubble they built, and we have a lost decade like Japan due to trillions in misallocated capital.

        Its mainly full recourse loans as well, its incredibly irresponsible to do mass immigration and stoke demand to distort the market. Its almost like they wilfully broke our country to push climate policy, I can’t see any other way to explain it.