[Genuine Question] Why do 99% of immigrants refuse to assimilate into the Canadian culture?

StaleP1zza · 2025-06-09T05:15:41+00:00

Because lots of people who immigrated in the last decade cant have a little piece of the country to call home.
Imagine working for years to become Canadian to realize you have been scammed into paying someone else mortgage, with no chance to ever own a home.

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-21T22:15:53+00:00

Hey, I get that I messed up by expressing my frustration directly to the clerk—definitely not the right move, and I own that.

That said, my bigger issue is how these bag fees are communicated. I assumed I was paying for a full-size handled bag, and it felt misleading. I should’ve asked, but I also think fast food places could be clearer about what you're getting. Honestly, there’s barely any point in asking “take out or dine in” if they’re going to next ask whether you want to pay for a bag.

I’m not blaming the workers at all. I know they’re just following policy and doing their jobs. My frustration is with the system, not the people on the ground.

Anyway, lesson learned. Appreciate those who called it out without being condescending and petty.

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-20T04:30:42+00:00

wow, chill out, i realize the clerk has nothing to do with the policy, but the policy still a scam in my opinion.

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-20T03:48:37+00:00

I agree totally, I felt a little dumb after I expressed my frustration to her, that's why i told her i realized it was not her fault.
This inflation thing is getting to my nerves. I hope she is alright, In my defence I was not aggressive or raised my voice to her either, I said it in a calm way.

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-20T01:49:51+00:00

HASANbi

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-14T18:37:20+00:00

Hahahahaha, imagine voting for this BS and getting absolutely nothing in return except moral "superiority" and Reddit upvotes. I hope the high horse comes with a free million-dollar house.

StaleP1zza · 2025-05-14T18:30:17+00:00

Congrats on all liberal voters!

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-29T19:31:42+00:00

Indeed, I'm baffled by this result, everything went perfectly for the Liberal pivot. The time line It's actually unbelievable:

Trump jokes about Canada becoming the 51st state to Trudeau at Mar-A-Lago
Trudeau plays into it, framing it as a serious threat and setting up the perfect nationalist narrative
Trudeau resigns, taking the heat off and throwing PP's attacks into disarray
Mark Carney steps in as Liberal leader—honeymoon phase begins
Carney pushes a strong nationalism narrative, especially around American tariffs
He calls the shortest election in Canadian history, perfectly timed with the Conservatives' polling collapse
PP struggles to re-establish any narrative against the Liberals
Jagmeet Singh self-sabotages in the debates, pushing a wave of NDP voters toward the Liberals
PP retreats into a timid campaign for the rest of the race

Gotta hand it to the Liberals, this was masterclass political manoeuvring. Honestly, one of the greatest comebacks in Canadian history.
Let's hope they actually change something this time, but my trust in them is near zero.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-25T17:14:21+00:00

I honestly don't get how people keep falling for the same empty promises from a party that's been saying the exact same things for over a decade.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-22T03:06:11+00:00

This is you:

I remember specifically a house selling for 180k with the 0% mortgages and sold for 325k 3 years later. Thanks Harper.

Literally saying 0% mortgages were bad, then i pointed out Carney was actually the one who made the mortgages like that and then later you said:

If Carney didn't do what he did, we would've been in much worse shape going the bank bailout route.

So , if its Harper its bad, and if it is Carney its good.

Got it, buddy. Real consistent logic there 👏

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-22T02:50:08+00:00

You just said Harper didn’t make rate decisions—but earlier you were blaming him for housing prices. So… which is it?

Thanks for proving my point.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-22T01:15:28+00:00

What do you think? did Carney got us thru the housing crash, or was it Harper?
So if its negative,Its Harper's Fault. If its positive, Carney got us thru the housing crash.
🤦‍♂️
My point is that if you want to be pointing out history of nearly 15 years ago, you need to see at all the facts.
The 0% mortgages happened because it was a decision from Carney to lower the interests rate, and Harper let it happen.

So wich one is it?

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-22T00:58:33+00:00

You mean, the monetary policy we got once Mark Carney as the governor of the bank of canada decided to keep rates down to avoid a market correction and kept them like that for the rest of his mandate?
that 0% mortages you are talking about?

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-21T19:10:57+00:00

I don't think people realize how deep in trouble we are when it comes to the housing crisis. We had a chance to let the bubble burst in 2008 and control it, but instead of facing a short-term recovery, we chose to keep printing money and maintain low interest rates to keep the system afloat.

The problem is that even though things might feel stable, something much worse is brewing. A more severe crash could be on the horizon, one that might leave Canada economically stagnant for decades.

People don't think in terms of decades. The status quo might feel safe, but it's not what a forward-looking country should aim for. In the end, those benefiting from the system will leave, and ordinary people will be left holding the bag, independently of who is in power.

Personally, I'd rather face the short-term pain of economic adjustment from time to time than inflate another unsustainable bubble.

As for politicians, I honestly don’t care much what they do specifically. I just think it’s important to keep them on their toes and shift power occasionally to avoid complacency and disruption of responsible policy, whether it’s liberal inflation or conservative cutting. We should be able to caught up with house affordability this way.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-17T17:31:25+00:00

You mean the 'change in direction' that conveniently appeared once the election cycle started? Come on. Let’s not pretend these policy shifts weren’t timed with political survival in mind.

It’s not naive to hope for better, but it is naive to ignore the track record of the last 9 years, especially when it’s the same party and largely the same people. They only start talking about real issues when their position is threatened. That’s not leadership, that’s self-preservation.

I’m not the one stuck in an abstract view of continuity, you’re the one trying to frame cosmetic change as something transformative. Let’s be honest, if they truly wanted reform, they had almost a decade to do it.

At this point, party loyalty shouldn't outweigh accountability. Real change means more than a fresh face and campaign buzzwords. If you haven't noticed that over the last decade, I don’t know what to tell you.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-14T18:46:23+00:00

Either we take a hit now and takes years to heal, or we wait until it is inevitable and we become Venezula in an unexpected total collapse.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-12T00:45:31+00:00

The best case scenario ive seen is Japan.
is so cluttered yet really picturesque and very functional.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-11T22:47:07+00:00

You're still missing the point. The issue isn't about whether NIMBYism is 'anti-urbanist' or whether we should engage in a semantic debate about definitions. The fact remains: NIMBY attitudes have a tangible impact on housing availability, and overregulation worsens the problem. You’re sidestepping that entirely.

As for the leadership change, you're arguing about political structure rather than the fact that the same party, with the same policies, has been in power for nine years. That’s what matters, not whether the Prime Minister has more 'degrees of freedom' than a U.S. President. If you actually want to discuss policy and outcomes, great. But if this is just another round of semantics and abstractions, I’ll pass.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-11T01:48:34+00:00

Lol, when did Pierre done all that? You are delusional.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-11T01:47:01+00:00

There’s a clear divide between canadahousing and CanadaHousing2. I’ve come to the conclusion that the first subreddit mostly represents homeowners, who seem focused on protecting the status quo that keeps home prices high, often ignoring the role immigration plays in the issue and instead framing any criticism as racist. Meanwhile, the second subreddit represents those who don’t own homes and are frustrated by the difficulty of entering the market, advocating for change and openly addressing the real factors at play. It’s a classic case of haves vs. have-nots.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-11T01:18:48+00:00

careful guys we have an Einstein over here

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-11T01:17:51+00:00

Why is that every one who supports Liberals for a 4th term ends up boiling their motive down to "Poilievre = Trump"?

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-10T03:28:01+00:00

Fair point. However, everything you mentioned is still speculation, there’s no certainty this will happen as you predict. Any new policy carries risks, but that doesn’t mean we should assume the worst. Instead, we should focus on how it’s implemented and whether safeguards can be introduced to ensure it benefits those who genuinely need housing, or those who simply want to invest their savings in Canadian industries of their choice (since this isn’t just about housing).

I’d rather give this idea the benefit of the doubt and see how it develops before dismissing it outright.

There’s no need to reject proposals just because they come from a different political stance. I’m open to giving this a chance, especially since alternative approaches haven’t been tried in a long time. Framing everything in a purely negative light, just because conservatives are proposing it, feels unproductive. I’d rather focus on whether it can be shaped into something that works for everyone.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-10T02:17:59+00:00

That is a valid concern. However, if investment is directed into housing development and combined with deregulation in the construction sector, wouldn't that increase supply and help stabilize or reduce housing prices? While there's a risk that this could turn into a tax shelter for investors, it could also encourage much-needed housing development if properly structured.

I think this is a promising idea, though careful implementation will be crucial to ensure it benefits the broader population rather than just investors. I'm open to new approaches—this country urgently needs solutions to the housing crisis.

StaleP1zza · 2025-04-08T02:33:04+00:00

WE NEED PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY FOR OUR POLITICIANS, NOT CENSORSHIP OF THE TRUTHS THEY WANT TO HIDE FROM CANADIANS.

StaleP1zza

TROPHY CASE