this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025

-36 points (7.1% liked)

Canada

9521 readers

1001 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Toronto Blue Jays

Basketball

Toronto Raptors

Soccer

Main: /c/CanadaSoccer
Toronto FC

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

General:
- Canada Politics
- FairVote Canada
Federal Parties (alphabetical):
- Animal Protection Party of Canada
- NDP
By Province (alphabetical):
- BC Greens

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.
Election Interference / Misinformation

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

otter

mp3

otters_raft

-36

Liberal government's high immigration policy created housing crisis: report (torontosun.com)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/canada

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (21 children)

I'm fairly pro immigration, but it shouldn't be used mainly as a source of cheap labour to drive down corporate costs and extract money from Canada. Immigrants need time to acclimate to Canadian society, and having too high an immigration rate risks losing our values of tolerance, and equality.

And while I do kinda agree with the headline, the timing is certainly rather suspicious coming from Conservative owned media. Also, I don't think Conservative policy on the matter would be that substantially different, as they're equally pro-corporate.

[+] [email protected] -12 points 3 days ago (19 children)

You're welcome to vote PPC, who is the only party outside of the conservatives promising to dramatically cut immigration.

It was done as you say to lower wages and to entrench asset values, which according to BoC publications wages naturally rise after QE to restore the inequality created. In the 70s we blamed unions, now we just do mass immigration.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago (18 children)

I'll most likely be voting for a party who promises to implement PR. FPTP is a one way ticket to the American political landscape, and it has to be ended above most other issues.

[+] Arkouda -8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Ask Germany with 20% AFD in their parliament how PR works. How many more elections until they form Government do you think?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but in the US, the AFD equivalent is literally running the county. I'll take deadlock over that noise any day.

[+] Arkouda -8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Perhaps you haven't noticed but AFD came in second overall in the last election. Again, I ask you, how many more elections until they form Government in your opinion?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

They're sitting at 20%, so never. Best they can hope for is a coalition government with the other right wing party, and at least they won't be running the show. And even if that happens, I don't see how that's any worse than a merger of right wing and far right parties, which if anything is more insidious.

[–] Subscript5676 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Using Germany as an example to argue against PR is disingenuous on many levels. It shows a lack of understanding of how things work, what things are meant for, and also a blatant disregard of Germany’s history.

You’re essentially asking for an electoral system to keep extremists at bay, when no such system exists because it is simply impossible for any system to do that. Trying to use an electoral system for such a purpose is operating at the wrong level if you want to keep extreme views in check.
Germany has a unique history with far-left ideologies, how it got dismantled, and how the East and West reunified. If you look at the current state of old East Germany, you’ll see that the prosperity of the West did not flow into the East; their living conditions are bad, amenities lacklustre, there’s not enough jobs around and they don’t pay well, and the Western population can easily buy up their lands and properties just due to how much disparity there is in terms of wealth. And if you look at the electoral map and results of the last election, you’ll see that both far-left and far-right parties have a strong hold on old East Germany. This is the failure of the German government at truly unifying both sides of the old Germany. And if anything, I’d even argue that it’s a successful example of PR at work, as far as being a system goes.
Keeping or adopting any kind of Winner-Takes-All system will simply further divide us and keep voters feeling disenfranchised, believing that voting brings no effective change, all for no good reason.

An electoral system is not political. It’s the framework of which you exercise democracy.

Trying to make frameworks, which are meant to surface all voices, suppress certain ones is, frankly, barking up the wrong tree.

[–] Sturgist 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The person you're replying to has reeeeaaally bad takes, and have shown little understanding or willingness to learn. They're a troll. If they weren't pissing off basically everyone they interact with I'd say they were possibly a foreign (or domestic far-right) actor. I think the reality is that they're ignorant and proud of it.

[–] Subscript5676 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I initially thought I’d give them the benefit of the doubt cause I’ve seen them around, and they sometimes say things that look like they can think and hold some kind of conversation. But from the reply they’ve given me, it looks like it was not needed. I was basically Ben-Shapiro-ed there.

[–] Sturgist 2 points 1 day ago

Yeah, samesies. Which is why I mentioned it. Try and give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but that only goes so far.

[–] Arkouda -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

You’re essentially asking for an electoral system to keep extremists at bay, when no such system exists because it is simply impossible for any system to do that. Trying to use an electoral system for such a purpose is operating at the wrong level if you want to keep extreme views in check.

Not what I am asking for, it is what is being argued. "PR will prevent us from US politics" was the original argument. Feel free to look at other countries with PR and use them as examples. Far right is on the rise regardless of the political system being used and Germany is a perfect example since they have gone from Nazi to never again to back again in less than 100 years and PR did shit all about it.

Germany has a unique history with far-left ideologies, how it got dismantled, and how the East and West reunified. If you look at the current state of old East Germany, you’ll see that the prosperity of the West did not flow into the East; their living conditions are bad, amenities lacklustre, there’s not enough jobs around and they don’t pay well, and the Western population can easily buy up their lands and properties just due to how much disparity there is in terms of wealth. And if you look at the electoral map and results of the last election, you’ll see that both far-left and far-right parties have a strong hold on old East Germany. This is the failure of the German government at truly unifying both sides of the old Germany. And if anything, I’d even argue that it’s a successful example of PR at work, as far as being a system goes.

All countries have unique histories, and Germany isn't special.

PR is argued as the golden bullet to avoid "American style politics". It isn't. That is my point.

Keeping or adopting any kind of Winner-Takes-All system will simply further divide us and keep voters feeling disenfranchised, believing that voting brings no effective change, all for no good reason.

I am not arguing for winner take all systems. I am arguing against PR being this amazing thing that solves the problem. It doesn't and I gave an example. Feel free to look at every other country that uses PR and examine the results of recent elections. The right is seeing a Global rise and PR as a voting system isn't stopping it.

An electoral system is not political. It’s the framework of which you exercise democracy.

Trying to make frameworks, which are meant to surface all voices, suppress certain ones is, frankly, barking up the wrong tree.

I don't need all of this fluff, but since I responded to everything you said without you once answering the question I posed to someone else:

How many more elections until they form Government do you think? (The AFD in Germany)

load more comments (15 replies)

load more comments (16 replies)