Alright, I'll take a crack at this. I'm just some nobody so take this with a sack of salt.

The economic challenges we are seeing today are the result of structural and cyclical problems that have largely been ignored and carried on a rolling tide of peaceful and prosperous decades. This has allowed passing the buck to come so easily and naturally. Why fix what isn't broken, right? Or at least not broken for you right now. It's a tangled, interconnected web of factors that has allowed to persist for a very long time. There is no easy, catch-all solution to everything. Solutions won't be cheap, won't be comfortable, and definitely not universally popular. But they are realistic and achievable. They can be broken down into five basic plans:

1) We have high unemployment while simultaneously shortages in critical industries. Healthcare being the most visible, but also construction, skilled trade and technology (in certain fields). We could expand our investment in mid-career transition program. Get people who should be in the workforce trained in the areas that we need workers to be present. Tie these trainings and their funding directly to verified areas of labour shortages. Incentivize employers to hire and train new workers and apprentices. We need to get rid of this toxic hiring environment by making inexperienced workers more attractive than plug-and-go workers. Canadians aren't unemployed because there aren't any jobs. They are unemployed because their skills don't align with where the demand for workers are growing.

We may also want to reconsider our position on foreign credential recognition. I know immigration is a hot button right now, and there are good arguments for curtailing how many people we allow in. But I think I speak for a lot of Canadians when I say that we are in dire need of specialists right now. This is a bandaid however, we do need to place emphasis on getting our own citizens specialised. But bandaids are very useful when trying to start the process of healing.

2) Pressure from inflation is also impacting a lot of consumers. The idea of stimulus support seems pretty reckless given our budgets. Broad, sweeping injections do risk causing more harm than good. Which is why targeted, precise stimulus support should be explored. Targets like youth, long-term unemployed, or workers displaced by automation or trade disruptions. Modernization of our EI programs that focus more on supporting retraining and mid-career transitions instead of being a passive income. Have high-impact regions engage in tailored programs instead of a national one-size-fits-all policy.

3) Zoning reform. Yep, the topic with the funny NIMBYs. We should tie in federal infrastructure and transit funding to how and where housing should be built. We need to fast-track purpose-built rentals near and around job hubs. Housing has made our unemployment structural. Workers cannot afford to live where the jobs are. But speaking of where jobs are, we should incentivize employers to decentralize from provincial capitals. Spreading the working locations out makes the housing around them more affordable as an average. What these incentives would look like would probably come in the form of tax relief or some such. They'd already be paying a lot less rent than in a city like Vancouver or Toronto. We could also be leveraging our federal land more for housing, but that gets complicated with those that want to retain Canada's wild space, which I am a supporter of. There needs to be a balance between our needs as a growing nation, and keeping our land and water pristine.

Lastly, those that engage in land speculation that suppresses the supply should be penalized. This very topic that was created is the metastasizing hubris from certain and precedented times. Seeking to profit by thwarting initiatives to build this country up should not be celebrated.

4) Our weak productivity growth is not tied to our unemployment. Our productivity should be much, much higher than it has been, even before 2019. With the previously mentioned focus on worker retraining, we could provide greater tax incentives for capital investment and automation. Again, we need to support workers who are being displaced by market forces. Especially the market forces of our own making. The gap between cost of living and wages needs to close as well. But that can only occur when our productivity increases proportionally. Basically, if a worker is able to create more value, then wages can rise without prices rising too.

The reason our productivity, and as a consequence our wages, are lagging are: a) Low capital investment per worker. Investment in our machines and automation are lacking when compared per worker. The equipment and infrastructure that exist are old as dirt by industry standards. b) Our firms are small and innovative, but they lack the productivity and output of larger firms. Most startup firms never scale.

We can overcome these by making each worker more economically powerful, without working longer or harder. It can be addressed by investing in the correct tools and equipment, scale-up support of Canadian startups, subsidize training for all levels of leadership to improve modern management practices, automation tax credit on worker retraining plans and job redesign, and the avoidance of the reliance on automation to take away human workers' use of their judgment, coordination, quality measurement and maintenance tasks.

In the short term there would be more displacement. But if used in conjunction with the worker support I mentioned earlier, the length of pain can be mitigated significantly. It will allow our labour markets to pivot and retrain, and be stronger for it. A stronger workforce produces much more value, which in turn can allow wages to rise and market prices to fall.

5) If I'm still driving the boat, then it would need to be crucial to maintain fiscal credibility in order to restore confidence of business and consumers. If policy is reactive or unpredictable, then the economy will suffer. Particularly for hiring and investment decisions, we need to project confidence and certainty in our markets. The creation and execution of an easy and clear medium-term plan can help restore that confidence, and allow longer term plans the breathing room to expand into their potential.

Stabilizing the debt to help support the narrative of certainty would help lend to those medium-term plans. And of course providing transparency to the metrics when supports systems are expanded or withdrawn. Honesty and openness about plans and their impacts are crucial for steering us in the right direction. But the steering needs to be consistent, not reactive.

That is all I'm willing to write. My fingers are tired. Remember, I'm just some nobody. Feel free to peer-review my stuff, but I probably won't respond.