Yea bring home the bring homes. Axe the tax. No security clearance bro, can't touch this

Bro, I didn't get clearance so they couldn't stop me from speaking the truth, trust me bro.

I don’t see anywhere that says it’s the full tax?

Even the quote you sent only says half?

It's not, the Liberal policy is that they will cut the development charges in half but offset the full amount via infrastructure investments. So if the charge is $100 and they cut it to $50, the Liberals will put in $50 of corresponding investments. It's a 1:1 policy.

The Conservative policy is that they will pay for up to half of the amount that is cut. So if the charge is $100 and the city cuts it to $50 the Cons will give the city $25. It's a 2:1 policy. (Edit: It's up to a maximum of $50k per house)

More specifics about the housing policy for each party: https://storeys.com/canada-2025-elec...ted-platforms/

For the Cons: "They have also pledged to reduce development charges by reimbursing local governments 50% of every dollar in development charges that they cut" (Edit: It's up to a maximum of $50k per house)

For the Libs: "The Liberals have pledged to cut these charges in half for multi-unit buildings, which developers estimate make up anywhere from 20% to 30% of the cost of a new home. For local governments, the federal government would then offset the amount with direct funding for infrastructure. This is expected to cost $1.5 billion a year."

I didn't outright say so in my previous post but the Liberal policy is the one I much prefer though I think there should be some stick to the policy - specifically, cities need to increase their property taxes by some amount in return for the extra money (say 25% of the funding comes from property tax increases and the feds pay 75% of the cost). Cities have been offloading infrastructure costs to new development in order to keep property taxes low and that needs to stop. Landowners need to pay their fair share.

Haha well I mean I expect nothing else... but Carney came out swinging at Con numbers saying they're complete fabrications and backed it up with examples. Said they're counting completely on projected tax revenues which is disingenuous.

The liberal plan is 67 pages long and has one pic of Mark Carney. The cons plan is 30 pages long and has 17 pics of pp including 4 full page pics of pp.

That's actually quite funny.

All fluff, no substance.

Typical modern day conservative politics.

Hey Honda, he's even pledging actual numbers on an item important to you as well. PeePee has stated no actual numbers thus far.

Carney pledges to cap non-permanent resident population at below 5%
https://www.ipolitics.ca/2025/04/19/...on-at-below-5/

This is great.

Having actual plans and actual numbers is irrelevant to much of the voter base. Tell them they'll get cheap eggs and plastic straws, and they'll vote for you. They have the lowest of the low level of thinking, and make up a huge base of voters.

Just tell they voters to vote for him or you're gay :joy:

Doesn’t seem like it would apply to me and seems to be a relatively sane commitment?!

Not sure if you’re trying to say if I moved away that would include me, as I would still be a citizen of Canada with a primary Canadian passport.

Crazy what people will vote for when you’ve skyrocketed child poverty :shrug:

Aren't you like me and against all the unfettered immigration after COVID? You've mentioned it numerous times here.

Figured it would apply to you, and all of us, most certainly.

I think most of us here are on the same page on that topic, I'm just noticing that Carney is actually putting numbers forward here, as opposed to PeePee's vibes and slogans.

Oh never mind I thought you were saying that was PP’s commitment at first and I read the article as such, my mistake

I'm not lumping you in with those plastic straw voters. I think you care very much, and put a lot of thought into your takes. I just think you easily get worked by names and faces, both in who you support and who you're against.

I think it’s a bit disingenuous to lump all conservative supporters into people who only care about plastic straws and carbon tax.

They’ve watched their quality of life largely deteriorate over the last decade, they’ve seen homelessness and poverty take over city centres. If voters knew nothing else than what they see in their communities, I don’t think they have to be overly informed to make a decision based on what they’ve watched happen.

The VAST majority of voters on both sides likely know nothing compared to what we discuss here.

Well, everyone calls me a libtard or a woketard if I vote Liberal... but like most people here I'm centrist.

I don't like ANY extremes. I just want a normal day and as fair treatment as possible for people and people to be treated equally. I don't know why that's so had nowadays lol... the current CON party has grown too extreme in my opinion on too many subjects for my liking.

The departed Liberal leadership was too extreme on some things I didn't think matter too much either and caused a lot of strife and seemed kinda weak on economic direction... seems like Carney is more serious about business and $ but still cares about all people in a very pragmatic way.. when I see him talk in interviews it genuinely feels like he's listening carefully to the person talking and being thoughtful with his answers not just waiting his turn to mouthpiece. That seems ideal to me.

Plastic straw voters are not just conservatives, that's why it's so effective.

Shockingly, a lot of other people I know who aren't normally into politics are voting Con. I'm willing to bet that the Cons will have a minority gov in this, with how polarizing and divided our politics is currently. The misinformation campaign is turning a lot of regular voters into Con voters, which I think may win popular vote but not the election. Hopefully anyway.

You stupid libtard !!! Hurry up and vote con so I can get plastic straws back for my bubble tea!!’

What’s a platform ?!? He had me at plastic straws…. I can’t even pronounce his name. Prime minister pee pee it is

The young people in Canada, like myself, have lost faith in the Liberal government. Likewise, immigrants in Canada that have traditionally voted liberal are switching sides and voting conservative after seeing how broken Canada's economy has become and how unaffordable everything is.

Young voters are frustrated and want to see change. About 39% of Canadians aged 18 to 34 support the Conservatives, versus 36% for the Liberals, according to Nanos Research. The liberals have done such a poor job that they flipped the script and now young voters prefer conservatives over liberals and old people like yourself prefer liberal over conservative.

Poilievre’s platform is centered around affordability and that appeals to the younger generation while Carney appeals to Gen X and older. That is why Carney's messaging resonates with older Canadians.

I still believe this election is a coin toss due to the state of the economy.

https://nanos.co/wp-content/uploads/...ield-Ended.pdf

So I haven't gone line by line on the housing policies of the Liberals and Conservatives BUT, as someone who knows a TONNE about housing I call bullshit right off the top on the Conservative policy...

From their costed platform: A new Conservative government will build 2.3 million homes over the next five years.

Over the past 5 years there have been about 1.25m housing starts (not the same as completions which is trailing data) so the Cons are proposing that they can increase new builds by 80% over their term which means they'd need to DOUBLE the number of new builds by the 3rd year of their term to meet this goal. Anyone who knows anything about housing knows this isn't vaguely achievable even with perfect conditions - we lack the trades, we lack the materials, we lack the zoning, and we lack the financing to do it. It's a total joke to make this kind of claim.

And this is before we evaluate each of the proposed policies to achieve this goal - I'll dig into detail for them and the Libs later but the top line is that the proposed plan from Cons won't work, it'd be lucky to generate slightly more housing (like maybe 100,000 more units over 5 years).

Data: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1...pid=3410012601

I’d bet my life neither party will meet their housing goals.

Well there's a big difference between lying and setting a challenging goal. The Liberals' housing goal is to increase new builds to 500k/yr within a decade - that's within the realm of possibility especially as they're also rolling out grants for people to get training in the trades, are going to get into the house building business, and are committing to take advantage of decreased US demand for goods like lumber.

Can the Liberals double housing starts over a 10 year period? It'd be tough but it's totally possible. If anything it's a low goal - housing goals should be a bit more "We need to put a man in space" kinda thing IMO.

Can the Cons double the total number of houses built in the next 5 years? Absolutely not. This is putting a man on Jupiter. It's a flat out lie to make this claim.

How old do you think I am? lol... I'm nowhere near the oldest guy on here

I'm like 1 year removed from a millennial