this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2026
87 points (98.9% liked)

Canada

12113 readers
430 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

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


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. 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.

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


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah, can't we save the planet on the cheap? I mean how clean do your water and air need to be??

[–] glibg@lemmy.ca 30 points 2 days ago

Wait til you find out how much climate change is going to cost to live through!

[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Let's check back in 50-100 years and see what's more expensive.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Let’s say the next few months and every summer from now on, we got forest fires season now!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Can someone remind me again what we avoided by electing Carney instead of Poilievre?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 days ago

"I shouldn't have to make personal decisions! Corporations should be forced to change so I don't have to."

"NOT LIKE THAT!"

[–] MyBrainHurts@piefed.ca 11 points 2 days ago (4 children)

People seem to be misunderstanding Carney's point here, which is that the plan gave someone like Polievre ammo and a damned good chance of burning down Canada.

It really is worth watching the video, or reading the transcript (I couldn't find one as of yet.) But he talks about the original plan which was entirely appropriate for the comparatively rosy pre trump era in which it was devised. These are different and bad times.

The Right, the radically anti climate right, is ascendent kind of across the globe. Had trump not been such a spectacular asshole, there's a good chance Poilievre would be running things. Canada in contrast is one where you could see the Liberals walk this tightrope between the Left and Right. So while the Trudeau era plan is the one I'd prefer personally, I see a Carney plan as actually happening, in the long term (which is what matters) rather than being undone shortly by Poilievre or whomever.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I see a Carney plan as actually happening, in the long term

I agree, but...

The only problem with that is governments change on a shorter time scale, and new governments frequently hobble or completely eliminate the previous government's long term projects for ideological reasons while claiming that they haven't shown results and therefore are useless.

It happens all the time, and it is a large part of "this is why we can't have nice things".

[–] Mavvik@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Funny how the government can do tlvery unpopular things it didn't campaign on like the surveillance bill C22, but when it comes to caring about the climate (which it did campaign on), it just isn't "viable". Just more neolib bullshit.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] wraekscadu@vargar.org 12 points 2 days ago (3 children)

In a market system, a carbon tax is the best way to punish carbon emission. Buuuut it was politically unpopular :(

I think we have a decent industrial carbon tax, right? Which kinda has a similar-ish effect as the consumer carbon tax, though slightly less efficient.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago

yes, dividing his patrons' profits.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›