this post was submitted on 01 May 2026
27 points (96.6% liked)

Canada

11926 readers
437 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

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


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ 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
 

I have quite a few creative ideas, but am too tired to write them down rn. I'll go the easy, lazy way (and write about more legislation ideas tomorrow):

Proportional representation like Germany. In every election, the voter votes for an individual and a party. The individual is chosen to represent the riding through STAR voting (my version). After all MPs are elected, to ensure proportional representation according to the party votes (the second vote that voters cast), individuals from party lists are put into parliament.

This way, we get riding representation and party representation.

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Karmanopoly@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

Canada is one of, if not thee richest resource filled countries on Earth

Oil and gas. Forestry, mining, fisheries. Agriculture, tourism... Canada literally has all of this in abundance

Each and every Canadian should own these resources and we should literally be the wealthiest population on the planet.

The fact we are not should anger you and legislation should be created to ensure that we become that

I think the new sovereign wealth fund might do this but if not its heading the right way:

When the government funds a company like a startup or bails out an existing company it should get shares in those companies.

This would allow us to increase the amount of money in our public market which will increase the amount of companies being started in Canada. And the conservatives will be less able to bitch about it because its an investment and running the government like a business. Not that any of them know how to do that.

[–] grey_maniac@lemmy.ca 2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Eliminate limited liability for holders of voting shares in corporations. Charges and lawsuits can go after any and all assets of every holder of voting shares in a corporation.

[–] DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago)

In most corporations, the only thing that shareholders really do is vote in relation to who the directors are. The directors and officers are generally the ones who actually do things.

The directors are often also in charge of share sales and transfers. In corporations not in the stock market, you often can't sell, redeem, gift, or otherwise get rid of you shares whenever you feel like it.

Officers are also appointed by directors, not by shareholders, so that could be another step removed from having agency over what's happening.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 35 points 1 day ago

End first past the post.

Every other goal becomes significantly achievable if we do that.

Next immediate goal after that is UBI.

Proportional representation without question

Nationalize all natural resources in Canada. Oil, minerals, water, electricity, you name it.

[–] DarkSirrush@piefed.ca 6 points 1 day ago

There's too many that would benefit Canada immensely.

Since most of my first thoughts were already said, maybe criminalising corporate involvement in politics? Or price fixing. Hell, even nationalising necessities would be good (food, housing, utilities - including phone/internet).

Another thought would be requiring a total compensation disparity of no more than 7x - as in, if any employee is being paid $17.85 (current BC minimum), the total compensation for the highest can be, at most $124.95, including stocks and other benefits that can be considered compensation. Its still a fucking insane difference, but much more sane than not having a cap at all.

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

National priorities: 1. PR, 2+3. UBI paid by wealth tax, 4. healthcare, 5. nationalization of resource and infrastructure assets. If you can fit all of that in one bill then that counts.

My priority: A new railway bill. Mandate passenger trains having right-of-way over freight, and create a new infrastructure manager tasked to buy/seize, develop and improve railways for passenger or passenger-freight dual use (or +military for triple use) and create a usable national network.

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Collectivization of all industry. Or if that's too pie in the sky, strengthen and actually enforce local ownership requirements over Canadian news orgs.

[–] timbyte@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Worker cooperatives.

Also, housing cooperatives and other types of cooperatives everywhere.

[–] Reannlegge@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Sounds like communism, I like it!

[–] timbyte@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

A good start would be for the federal government to stop funding news orgs that have more than 0% foreign ownership or funding.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

The "tithe" law. Profit capped at 10% to keep costs and chicanery down. People and corps taxed at 10% across the board. GST/PST 10% total. Capitalism, but non-aggressive, loaded with social programs. I guess I might as well throw in flying pigs. Yes, pigs should fly, and it oughta be a law.

[–] Quilotoa@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago

Ban online gambling.

[–] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)
  1. The banning of all future fossil fuel expansion.
  2. Criminal charges for any Canadian fighting in the IDF or involved in sending arms to Israel.
  3. Require that all vehicles in excess of 2 tonnes require a commercial license to operate. The idea would be that this limit would gradually be reduced to a sensible number over time.
  4. Vehicle speed limiters, ideally tied to the region you're in (city/highway).

I know, you asked for one, but there's a lot of stuff to be done.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

Ban age verification laws.

[–] SneakyWeasel@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Ive been thinking of these laws myself for the longest time as well. Glad im not the only one

[–] Sdes01@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

To allow booking MAID in the future based on developing conditions such as dementia. I definitely want to do this.

[–] DiarrheaSommelier@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago

Immediately end all subsidies and preferential tax treatment of the fossil fuel sector.

[–] Gmak2442@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

The price of food cannot increase.

[–] BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ban algorithmic timelines for all social media, news, and entertainment.

Ban real-time algorithmic pricing.

Enforce a higher standard of driving, tailgating, extreme speed, distracted driving is insane.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

All timelines are algorithmic except for AI generated timelines, which are heuristic. You're gonna force them to put AI in the timeline

[–] BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Obviously I’m referring to ranked predictive timelines vs chronological. A basic heuristic chronological feed (eg. most recent) has little in common with modern machine learning powered social media timelines designed to be β€œmost relevant”.

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 0 points 11 hours ago

You're right, we should ban heuristic timelines and force them all to be algorithmic.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I was about to write this. Universal basic income.

But how are we going to fund this exclusively from taxpayer money? I think it's important we secure a solid revenue to fund this first. Through nationalized resources, or a tax on the wealthy, etc.

[–] RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

About the funding:

Many years ago there was a Conservative politician named Hugh Segal who lead a study about UBI. The calculations showed that if the 60 over-lapping government handouts were elimated, Canada would save millions (or billions idk it's been a while since I read it) of dollars every year.

Sounds too good to be true until you realize that just for UI each city across Canada has a least one office with multiple employees. These office all pay rent, insurance, power, etc. Most cities likely have 10 or more UI offices.

Multiple that by all the other programs and it adds up to quite a bit on money.

Edit: I found this from CBC https://www.cbc.ca/radio/sunday/the-sunday-edition-for-march-29-2020-1.5509908/amidst-a-global-pandemic-hugh-segal-s-call-for-a-guaranteed-annual-income-is-even-more-timely-1.5509938

From the article:

"The Parliamentary Budget Officer said it would probably cost about $60 billion without counting those federal and provincial programs. It would replace those and produce substantial savings for the taxpayer. That would bring the number down to about $25 billion nationally. That's less than 10 per cent of Canada's total economic cost in terms of running the store. That would be a very efficient investment, not only in reducing poverty, but also in reducing all the negative pathologies of poverty, like bad healthcare, health status, education outcomes and family difficulties, difficulty with the law β€” all of which cost taxpayers a tremendous amount of money."

[–] timbyte@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A UBI is intended to be inexpensive to administer, this is why everyone gets it unconditionally, but income taxes need to be increased so that the wealthy end up paying back what they got and more, such that it balances the cost of giving it to everyone.

Well that's the thing ain't it? Taxing the rich? Unless we have strong legislation on that with higher tax rates and get rid of loopholes, we could achieve it.

IF we do those things.

[–] No_Maines_Land@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago

Labd value tax

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)
  1. The progressive gov defunding of all Canadian media. There is nothing as destructive to a functional democracy as a media that is beholding to the government.
[–] el_muerte@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 hour ago

Being funded by government doesn't equate to being beholden to government.

I'd argue that the ownership of media by foreign billionaires, many of whom actually do dictate their direction, is far more harmful to our democracy.

[–] Damionsipher@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

You think a state funded media outlet, that has organizational control separations from direct government influence, is worse than corporate media? History and every level of academic inquiry very much disagrees .