by Ricky Daytona
West Kelowna
June 22, 2023
Housing is a key campaign issue for Pierre Poilivoire (hereafter referred to as PP), falling within his finance/debt/inflation attack banner.
PP is an immigration fan. He supports it in all forms, and hasn’t crystallized it down into “good” and “bad” immigration. Most conservatives would hold a position that “good“ immigration includes “good cultural fit’ people coming from culturally appropriate nations, and people with skills such as professionals in need and/or with equity such as investors. Preferably both, since capital helps with establishing themselves and brings value to the country. It means we are not importing poverty, and more people will have a better chance at staying the course. If you ever wondered how Immigration and Citizenship processes these applications, it makes one wonder. We seem to import an endless conveyor belt of broke ESL people who have some skills from their home country, but their chances of successful migration and establishment are slim.
We are basically watering the Canadian legacy identity down to become New Delhi or Islamabad with snowblowers and nylon toques. Yet PP is ok with that and does not challenge the status quo. Basically, he offers the same as the Liberals.
Another component of the messaging that may switch off conservatives is PP’s war on the housing issue. Many conservatives are capitalists, and as such they believe in self-determination for success and getting ahead in life.
During the covhoax and since, we have seen increasing numbers of people who are happy to lounge about. Jobs go unfilled, and people will not take service jobs. They are happy to be careerless. The human flotsam and jetsam of idleness and laziness. Whatever this cultural or psychological block is, it has helped put a stop to economic development.
Conservatives believe that in the west we operate in a conventional free market capitalist society. Clearly this is now incorrect. In the conservative world people work hard to get ahead or they flounder.
Conservatives are capitalists and as such they want high home value. They want to build wealth and equity, and they will take on serviceable levels of debt in order to get ahead and grow financially.
For clarity, I am talking about the smart set. Not those who have become overleveraged with unserviceable debt. They are just the uneducated financially illiterate horde of any party allegiance.
Conservatives don’t want to risk losing their hard-earned wealth. The Liberals offer nothing but a race to the bottom of home value destruction and wealth erosion. They do not like the fact that the middle class has got wealthy without needing them. They bristle at the very thought of a wealthy, independent, right-leaning middle class.
The left brings out mobs of troglodytes driven by jealousy and resentment. They motivate these people using jealousy triggers. For the mod, the idea of free housing and affordable housing is tagged to wealth destruction, taking from the rich, and in more extreme cases, the “repurposing” of private property, squatter rights, and other extreme anarchic methods.
The right side do not particularly oppose the provision of affordable and public housing, but they have a few concerns that PP should address. Firstly, who pays. Because in general in all nations with a public sector housing project they are a burden or disaster. Taxpayers are generally bled dry in high tax nations, while incompetent inefficient government stooges run a sloppy ship. Some nations do have policies stated that housing is a right, yet the execution of this often falls woefully short. See the Soviet Union, referencing housing quality and public satisfaction. Yet, people were not homeless and even in post-Soviet Russia homelessness is minimal. In many developing and third world nations, housing is not a right and unless one is prepared to hustle and/or work there will be no “home”. In real terms, these nations are examples of true free market capitalism. Of course, they could be improved and refined, for example by diverting corruption waste into public housing support and initiatives. NGO’s pretend to try, but they simply funnel money and then claim more is needed because it fails to deliver. Many of these initiatives are disasters:
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/61800648.pdf
Some of PP’s points are valid, but the immigration issue rankles here. Migrants are either too broke to afford, therefore contributing further, or wealthier than the average Canadian and can out-purchase them in the current real estate market, therefore contributing further. Much of the immigration process is designed to add to the nation’s problems. And the immigrants themselves do not help. Who moves to a country without first researching, to then find out they cannot afford a home and have a high chance of having an unhappy desperate life. They have a high chance of owning nothing and being unhappy.
PP has a perfect dichotomy to address. As we can see from the affordability chart, the covhoax has absolutely been used to inflate prices beyond peoples reach. This affects the lower income, marginalized, and young much more. If the covhoax/not-so-great reset was intended to destroy all hope of home ownership, if not a complete success then it has gone far in this regard. If their goal was to send a strong message with real life reinforcing experience that “you will own nothing and be unhappy” it has worked. The young have little hope of home ownership. Once hope has gone, it leaves a deep scar. The lack of hope and futility around the human experience creates a void and an emptiness. Communism would and will always fail because it erodes the human spirit and turns people into husks. It erodes the very soul of the purpose of being human.
The young, marginalized and low-income earners need to express their rage and frustration somehow. Who is to blame? They can hardly blame PP and co. The finger of blame must be pointed fully at the Trudeau regime. And yet many of this demographic refuse to do so. Some remain stubbornly leftist and idealistic in nature. They are torn asunder when considering fault and blame. They are conflicted and told PP is bad. Perhaps they believe that more socialism will bring wonderful free housing with granite countertops and Italian travertine floors. Perhaps more communism will give them eastern European maid service and a Thai chef on 24/7 demand.
We now live in extremely strange times, confusion reigns, and government disinformation and propaganda are extremely powerful. Clarity seems impossible, and those most in need of direction and help sometimes seem to be the least receptive.
PP’s messaging fails to resonate with many conservatives. Of course, his ratings are improving, it would be almost impossible not to gain popularity given the state of the nation. Yet he has a core of voters who are still not being won over fully.
There may be a hope that he can win over some of the housing-excluded class.
PP is clearly not fully “conservative” and we are unlikely to see such a thing ever again. Voters may also find that if he wins, we may end up with PP-lite and disappointment will be the end point. It feels like that is where this is all heading. It feels manipulated. As a “system” we seem to have run out of inertia and the covhoax put the brakes fully on a lot of our economic development.
One great hope is that those who own nothing and are unhappy finally figure out who is responsible, including to an extent, themselves.
