@TruthSeek01011 When vacationing in Mexico we met a retired teacher from Texas. Told her we had Alberta friends looking to buy property in Texas. She said, tell them to stay the hell away from Austin. Itโs a crap hole for the woke ๐
And this was from a teacher that you would assume be left.
So civic planners, especially those in cities, say we have to limit sprawl and build upward and not outward. Meanwhile they develop data centres that are larger than most midsized towns, and solar fields that render acres of farmable land useless. Make it make sense.
@vesperdigital Hidden in plain sight -Carney, world banks, WEF, IMF, WHO, the UN -all spell out explicitly their aims, yet the majority shrug in complacency.
Good thing breathing is an automatic physiological function, otherwise most would be waiting around for the govt. to tell them to do it.
๐จ๐๐๐ก๐๐๐๐ฌ ๐๐ข๐จ๐ก๐ ๐๐ง... ๐ฎ ๐ ๐ข๐ก๐ง๐๐ฆ!!!๐จ
Carney admits on tape: When voters blocked his ESG plans, "We" Central Bankers acted like "Regulators" going around the voters through the BACK DOOR!
Manipulating fossil fuel prices by withholding lending.
Now he's PM!๐
Ayn Randโs warning was not about some distant dystopia. It was about the moment a country starts punishing production and rewarding political access.
Look at Liberal Canada.
If you want to build, drill, mine, farm, hire, invest, or expand, you need permission from people who produce nothing but paperwork. If you play the subsidy game, hire the right lobbyist, repeat the right slogans, and flatter the right ministers, money magically appears.
Work gets taxed. Risk gets regulated. Failure gets funded. Competence gets buried under process. Graft gets renamed โpartnership.โ Waste gets called โinvestment.โ Favours get dressed up as policy.
This is how countries decline. Not all at once. Slowly, stupidly, and with press releases.
Canada does not need more managers of decline. It needs a government that respects the people who actually produce the wealth in the first place.
Canada just launched a $2 billion+ AI strategy.
They're calling it "AI for All."
But who is it actually for? ๐จ๐ฆ
Let me break this down.
The government wants to be the investor, the promoter, the buyer, AND the referee of AI in Canada.
All at the same time.
That's not a strategy. That's a conflict of interest. ๐จ
Here's what's actually happening:
Budget 2024 committed $2 billion over 5 years for "sovereign compute."
$700 million for AI data centres.
$1 billion for supercomputing.
$300 million for compute access.
Then came "AI for All" in June 2026.
The targets?
$200 billion in economic growth.
250,000 new AI jobs.
AI adoption jumping from 12% to 60% by 2034.
Sounds great on paper. ๐
But here's where it gets interesting.
The government gave Cohere $240 million in public funds.
@cohere is valued at $7 billion USD.
Their investors include AMD, NVIDIA, Salesforce, and BDC.
They don't need our tax dollars to survive. ๐ฐ
Then the government signed an MOU with Cohere to deploy AI across federal services.
So the same government that funded them is now buying from them.
And the same department (ISED) that promotes AI companies is also supposed to regulate them.
How do you regulate the company you just invested in? ๐ค
It gets worse.
The "sovereign" data centre in Cambridge, Ontario?
It's operated by CoreWeave.
A U.S. company.
That's not sovereignty. That's branding. ๐ท๏ธ
45 civil society organizations asked the government to separate AI regulation from ISED.
They said the department's mandate to grow the AI industry directly conflicts with protecting the public.
The government's response?
The Artificial Intelligence and Data Act (AIDA) died on the order paper in 2025.
Canada still has no binding AI law. โ๏ธ
Meanwhile, AI is being deployed in public services that handle:
Your health data.
Your immigration file.
Your tax information.
Your justice system interactions.
No comprehensive audit framework.
No statutory liability.
No citizen appeal rights.
Remember ArriveCAN? ๐ฑ
The Auditor General found "glaring disregard for basic management and contracting practices."
That was a simple app.
Now imagine that same procurement culture deploying AI across every federal department.
The strategy explicitly says it will use government procurement as a "strategic anchor customer."
That means your tax dollars become a guaranteed revenue stream for preferred vendors.
Small Canadian startups? Open-source alternatives?
They get crowded out. ๐ช
This is how you build a new telecom oligopoly.
Bell, Rogers, and Telus already dominate connectivity.
The Competition Bureau has flagged their market concentration.
Now we're layering AI infrastructure on top of the same pattern.
The U.S. spent $285.9 billion on private AI investment in 2025.
23 times more than China.
Canada can't compete on capital alone.
But the answer isn't to hand billions to venture-backed companies and call it sovereignty. ๐ฆ
Here's what should happen instead:
1. Separate regulation from promotion. Give oversight to an independent body, not ISED.
2. Regulate before you promote. Pass a binding AI law before deploying AI in public services.
3. Full transparency. Make the AI Register mandatory and link it to procurement records.
4. Public interest test. Every subsidy and contract must prove verifiable public benefit.
The sequencing matters.
Protect citizens first.
Regulate first.
Audit first.
Then adopt. โ
Sovereignty isn't a data centre with a Canadian flag on it.
Sovereignty is operational control, independent oversight, and the ability to enforce the public will.
Until Canada separates its promotional ambitions from its regulatory duties, this strategy benefits a select few while exposing all of us to the risk.
Read the full report with all 19 citations and sources in the article below. ๐
#CanadaAI #CdnPoli #TechPolicy #ArtificialIntelligence #SovereignCompute #AIRegulation #PublicPolicy #Innovation #Cohere #CanadianPolitics
@FringeViews@RealCandaceO Much like Tim Horton's - laxative in a cup. If people didn't order it with double sugar and double cream the stuff couldn't be tolerable.