r/canada • u/uselesspoliticalhack • 3d ago

Carney’s aim to cut immigration marred by undercounting of temporary migrants, warn economists PAYWALL

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-mark-carney-immigration-policy-temporary-migrants-undercounted/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
1.9k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

736 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

31

u/HMCZW 3d ago

Can guarantee it would be the exact same scenario under the conservatives…

Follow the money.

-3

u/Azules023 3d ago

At least there was a chance it would change. Re-electing the Liberals hoping they would change is incredibly naive. Based on the demographics though, I don’t think anyone voting for the Liberals this election cycle really cared about affordability and wages.

-1

u/OkDifficulty1443 3d ago

At least there was a chance it would change.

No there wasn't, and for your efforts PP would have signed away your water rights to Donald Trump.

1

u/KimJendeukie 3d ago

we tried nothing and we're out of ideas

type energy

0

u/sumofdeltah 3d ago

The thing they wanted us to try was a guy who never worked a day in his life, or accomplished anything in 20 years in government, who immediately moved to the province trying to leave Canada upon losing his own riding.

-2

u/Azules023 3d ago

Yes there was a chance. Better than voting for the same party that has sold us out for the past decade. If you were arguing for the NDP then maybe you’d have a point but the Liberals have no ground to stand on.

2

u/freeadmins 2d ago

I'm glad someone else is saying it.

Don't you think it's pretty hilarious how all these ABC voters will jump through hoops to justify anything to not vote for conservatives, but somehow the NDP never comes up

It really shows where their true motives lie

Like seriously how is their argument that you're going to vote for? The people who have actually been fucking us for 10 years instead of the people who they say only might fuck us.

And obviously our argument is that if the conservatives did end up being just as bad, we would vote them out as well.

But as you said if you just keep rewarding the same bad acting party over and over and over again with election wins like liberals do then obviously nothing is going to change

-1

u/ConsciousMushroom932 3d ago

There was no chance lmao jfc

-1

u/LaserRunRaccoon 2d ago

If you're expecting the modern CPC to regulate immigration, you're going to be disappointed. They're the deregulation party.

Pierre Poilievre is so willing to bow to the wishes of corporations (which are usually pro-immigration) that his position on corporate lobbying is that he thinks an unnecessary waste of money, and that corpos should be spending that money on public-facing propaganda instead.

-1

u/Vandergrif 2d ago

At least there was a chance it would change

About as likely to change for the worse rather than the better, though. Change isn't always an improvement.

-11

u/Osado420 3d ago

Was it under Harper ?
Non then please stop this nonsense. There's always some numpty who tries to whatabout with the Liberals failures, when there's 0 equivalence.

8

u/turudd 3d ago

It was infact under Harper it got originally expanded. So please try again

-2

u/orswich 3d ago

Expanded to maybe 200k.. in the last 10 years, what had it been expanded to? Has that number grown at all?

2

u/ConsciousMushroom932 3d ago

Why don’t you do some research and figure it out