this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
197 points (96.7% liked)

Canada

7215 readers
421 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Universities


πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

The monarchy does not affect my life in any way.

[–] JesseoftheNorth@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Then you should have no problem if it was abolished.

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't care either way. Literally don't care.

I'm smart enough, though, to know that it's being used as a dog whistle to whip up populist nationalism which is never a good thing for a country.

[–] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That goes both ways though. Wouldn't the effort and cost to remove them be wasted if they don't actually do anything. Lots of people struggling right now and I'd be pretty pissed if the government went around spending time and money on this

[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 2 points 1 year ago

Don't look up how much the gold throne king charles III sits on is worth

[–] baconisaveg@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It doesn't affect us day-to-day no, but honestly I like being part of a 'Commonwealth'. I like feeling like I have something in common with Australia, or New Zealand, or the UK, even if I've only ever been to the UK for a few hours.

Your family name (for most people, unless you're George Hitler) has no impact on your day-to-day, this to me seems like saying "We should just get rid of family names!"

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The people who are being manipulated with this nationalist dog whistle see no value in being a member of the Commonwealth. Canada First and MCGA and all.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is a mistake to assume that those of us who oppose monarchy are Canadian nationalists.

Some people simply hate outdated hereditary titles. They have no place in a democracy.

[–] TheZoltan@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You don't need to keep the Royal Family to stay in the Commonwealth. Take a look at the current members of the commonwealth.

[–] APassenger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What happens when or if a monarch refuses to rubber stamp?

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They won't. We live in a constitutional monarchy. Their role is ceremonial.

[–] anachronist@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

That's what Australia thought until they elected a socialist and suddenly the Queen's representative was running the country.

[–] Frederic@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It costs a lot of money, this money comes from your taxes, it affects your life

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

$1.55 per Canadian per year? Seriously?

[–] grte@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Sixty million a year could build multiple public housing projects, every year. And on the other side of the balance scale is Charles.

[–] Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We would still need an executive position. There would be no savings.

[–] Splitdipless@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In fact, if Canada goes with a "President," it would cost more. Just on the election alone, but then they will also need an enlarged staff for their political works. Also, electing a President has really been working out well elsewhere, like the USA, hasn't it?

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We could have a President that is ceremonial like the Governor General now. Which means this hole thing would be pointless just to change the name of some position.

[–] nueonetwo@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

That's maybe enough for one 100 unit building a year, depending on where it's built, which is something but so far from anything substantial.

Building is fucking expensive right now even if the province uses paramountcy to bypass municipal zoning. Plus, the province sucks ass at building compared to private because its gov't. That's not too say I don't support massive amounts of public housing being built because I do 100%, but gov't is gov't.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How is it costing us 60 million a year? Majority is Governor General. Well we still need that position it well just be named President of something. So don't see how it well save any money.

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

You know it wouldn't be, though.