Secret RCMP report warns Canadians may revolt once they realize how broke they are - 8 years of intentionally ruining everything for everybody, you'll be shocked by the results!

Secret RCMP report warns Canadians may revolt once they realize how broke they are​

Right from the get-go, the report authors warn that whatever Canada’s current situation, it 'will probably deteriorate further in the next five years'
---
A secret RCMP report is warning the federal government that Canada may descend into civil unrest once citizens realize the hopelessness of their economic situation.

“The coming period of recession will … accelerate the decline in living standards that the younger generations have already witnessed compared to earlier generations,” reads the report, entitled Whole-of-Government Five-Year Trends for Canada.

“For example, many Canadians under 35 are unlikely ever to be able to buy a place to live,” it adds.

The report, labelled secret, is intended as a piece of “special operational information” to be distributed only within the RCMP and among “decision-makers” in the federal government.

A heavily redacted version was made public as a result of an access to information request filed by Matt Malone, an assistant professor of law at British Columbia’s Thompson Rivers University, and an expert in government secrecy.

Describing itself in an introduction as a “scanning exercise,” the report is intended to highlight trends in both Canada and abroad “that could have a significant effect on the Canadian government and the RCMP.”

Right from the get-go, the report authors warn that whatever Canada’s current situation, it “will probably deteriorate further in the next five years.”

In addition to worsening living standards, the RCMP also warns of a future increasingly defined by unpredictable weather and seasonal catastrophes, such as wildfires and flooding. Most notably, report authors warn of Canada facing “increasing pressure to cede Arctic territory.”

Another major theme of the report is that Canadians are set to become increasingly disillusioned with their government, which authors mostly chalk up to “misinformation,” “conspiracy theories” and “paranoia.”

“Law enforcement should expect continuing social and political polarization fueled by misinformation campaigns and an increasing mistrust for all democratic institutions,” reads one of the report’s “overarching considerations.”

Ironically, among the report’s more heavily redacted sections is one carrying the subtitle “erosion of trust.” “The past seven years have seen marked social and political polarization in the Western world” reads a partial first sentence, with the entire rest of the section deleted by government censors.

The censor’s pen also deleted most of a section warning about “paranoid populism.” “Capitalizing on the rise of political polarization and conspiracy theories have been populists willing to tailor their messages to appeal to extremist movements,” reads the section’s one non-redacted sentence.

In terms of declining living standards and inaccessible home ownership, the RCMP’s warnings are indeed in line with available statistics.

Canadian productivity — measured in terms of GDP per capita — has been trending downwards since at least the 1980s. But this has accelerated dramatically in recent years — even as per-worker productivity rises in many of our peer countries.

An analysis last year by University of Calgary economist Trevor Tombe found that if Canada had merely kept pace with U.S. productivity growth for the last five years, Canadian per-capita earnings would be $5,500 higher than they are now.

Meanwhile, housing affordability has reached “worst-ever” levels in most of Canada’s major markets, according to a December analysis by RBC. On average, even condos are now so unaffordable that only 44.5 per cent of Canadian households had sufficient income to buy one at current prices. As for single-family homes, only the richest 25 per cent of Canadian households had any hope of obtaining one.

“Economic forecasts for the next five years and beyond are bleak,” reads the RCMP’s assessment of the rest of the decade, even adding a quote from French President Emmanuel Macron that “the end of abundance” is nigh.

Article / Archive
 
Doubt the USA would let that happen.
Probably not. I just know it's been a point of contention between Russia and Canada for a while. It might be something else they're talking about though, Russia's just the only country I know of that's tried to make claim to Canadian Arctic territory.
 
Another major theme of the report is that Canadians are set to become increasingly disillusioned with their government, which authors mostly chalk up to “misinformation,” “conspiracy theories” and “paranoia.”
Every other part of this document lists poor governance and leadership failure.
In most of these countries here's how laws get passed
"Woke leftist politician who recently took office: "We need to let government execute people"
Everyone else: "Why?"
Woke leftist politician who recently took office: "here's a study that says we should do it"
Everyone else: "Well I don't want to be seen as anti science so okay"

if the example becomes muddied like

Everyone else: "Wait didn't Canada try this and it was a fucking disaster?"

Then that becomes harder to pass. You start seeing significantly more pushback especially from voters and politicians back off from it. The entire reason MAID for example was passed in Canada was because there weren't enough cases of it to suggest it might cause a slippery slope. A judge notably threw out the idea that MAID would get extended to include things like depression because it hadn't happened before. Now it has, and Canada is now the example.

Another really good example of this is actually immigration. The entire justification from politicians as to why they need to import immigrants from third world countries is because "there's not enough babies being born" but if importing immigrants actually reduces the economy instead of increases it as is occurring in Canada it becomes much harder to justify doing it. The only remaining justification is "liberals like it" and fewer people still would say "yeah totally" if because of it they can't afford to buy a house.

As @Hokuriku has pointed out it's already happening in the UK. They're using Canada as an example of what not to do.
Before Canada implemented the federal carbon tax, there were many countries, including the US, kicking the idea around.

Note: none of these countries are considering it any more.

Once the economic carnage in Canada is completely understood, no one will admit they ever thought it was permissible.
 
H
Before Canada implemented the federal carbon tax, there were many countries, including the US, kicking the idea around.

Note: none of these countries are considering it any more.
Here in Oz, our first female Prime Minister Gillard, introduced it after saying she wasn't going to. She the. Proceeded to lose the next election because the Liberals ran on the platform of removing it. It hasn't come back yet but Labor and the Greens keep going "but muh carbon".
 
“The past seven years have seen marked social and political polarization in the Western world” reads a partial first sentence, with the entire rest of the section deleted by government censors.
Because everything was just hunky-dory in the West until the bad Orange Man was elected.
 
H

Here in Oz, our first female Prime Minister Gillard, introduced it after saying she wasn't going to. She the. Proceeded to lose the next election because the Liberals ran on the platform of removing it. It hasn't come back yet but Labor and the Greens keep going "but muh carbon".
Our first and only female Prime Minister (Kim Campbell) only lasted 2 months and then she decimated the Progressive-Conservative party (her party) in her first election.
 
H

Here in Oz, our first female Prime Minister Gillard, introduced it after saying she wasn't going to. She the. Proceeded to lose the next election because the Liberals ran on the platform of removing it. It hasn't come back yet but Labor and the Greens keep going "but muh carbon".
It’s so dumb because the pain is so direct. And for something nebulous like “muh climate” which is purely a luxury belief, the first to go when shit gets bad.

Easy to repeal, easy to see economic gains immediately after.
 
Same. I’m pretty sure the US would Annex Canada if only to use it as a nuclear dumping ground and border between them and Russia. They would never let the enemy sit so close.
The funny part is that Ottawa and Toronto would want to fight it tooth and nail, and the rest of the country really wouldn't give a shit. Toronto becomes globally economically irrelevant as soon as its not "North America, but cheaper" for socialites who are too broke to hack the New England region. The whole Ontario/Quebec economic power is pretty much dependent on extractive policies to the west that they'd lose entirely under a new statehood arrangement, and favorable NAFTA terms that they'd lose under a new statehood arrangement. Ottawa becomes useless as all it really did was be a discount DC, and there's no need for two of those.

Meanwhile, the Canadian East Coast would probably mildly benefit as a few US Naval bases set up as convenient staging for north atlantic and Arctic sea patrol, and otherwise wouldn't give a shit. The Central Canadian regions of Manitoba through to Alberta would probably happily accept incorporation - Alberta has a strong resource base and already exports and imports heavily with the US, and politically aligns with much of the Constitution. The rest of the provinces are so sparsely populated they really wouldn't care - Literally the entire province of saskatchewan, a strong agricultural goods and supplies exporter, has a population half that of Houston - The liberal government has done fucking nothing for them.

Vancouver is the only real tossup, but they're so far out of place to do anything meaningful about it that they'd just slap "More Seattle" over the city signs and call it a day, don't want to disrupt the operation of the legal crackhouses by mobilizing or anything.
 
The only party that even remotely has a policy like that is PPC, which nobody votes for because "muh strategic voting". All three major parties in Canada are the exact same shit.
The Christian Heritage Party is more niche, but their policies are even better than the PPC, because they openly oppose trans garbage, versus the PPC which is led by a guy who thinks queers are just fine thank you.
 
Don't understand the part about Canada being pressured to cede Arctic territory. To whom? Why?

I've never heard political or public concern about losing Arctic territory.

What has been alluded to for decades is the idea that Canada loses control of its ability to enforce its borders and entry into territorial waters in the Arctic Archipelago once the Northwest Passage warms enough to be a feasible shipping route.

Canada has always maintained that the Northwest Passage is sovereign territory and hence should be regulated and enforced by Canadian law.

The US has always had the official position of "Lol, No". That the Northwest Passage will be an International Strait that will be traversed at will.

Canada only owns the archipelago because of lines on a map. They have no heavy icebreakers, no nuclear subs, no deepwater ports and no useful military installations in the area.

Their decades old plan for Arctic sovereignty continues to involve providing Eskimos with WW2 rifles and orange, red and green camouflage hoodies while holding a photo-op military exercise for politicians there occasionally during the summer when enough ice melts so Canada’s janky ships can actually sail that far north.
 
The Christian Heritage Party is more niche, but their policies are even better than the PPC, because they openly oppose trans garbage, versus the PPC which is led by a guy who thinks queers are just fine thank you.
I didn't see them on my ticket, but I did see PPC, which I've voted for the last two elections. If I see them I will vote for them, though.
 
Canada only owns the archipelago because of lines on a map. They have no heavy icebreakers, no nuclear subs, no deepwater ports and no useful military installations in the area.
Wait, Canada has no icebreakers? Seriously? Could they not figure out how to buy them from the Russians between 1902 and 2022?
 
Wait, Canada has no icebreakers? Seriously? Could they not figure out how to buy them from the Russians between 1902 and 2022?
Call me naive, but my first thought would be to give some job opportunities by opening a dry dock specifically for making ice breakers.
 
Back