4 ms·

While deeply unlikely to change anything it really is important as much noise is made about this as possible. On top of this will be C-34 which is just full no

While deeply unlikely to change anything it really is important as much noise is made about this as possible. On top of this will be C-34 which is just full no privacy anymore territory https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/everything-all-at-once-bill-c-34-combines-platform-duties-a-kids-social-media-ban-ai-chatbot-regulation-and-a-powerful-digital-safety-commission-into-a-risky-trust-us-bet/ https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/everything-all-at-once-b... The gov do all this and then will act surprised as Canada's tech sector finds it even harder to create any consumer facing businesses leaving all the value being captured by the Americans. Surprised pikachus all round.

alephnerd 4mo ago
> then will act surprised as Canada's tech sector finds it even harder to create any consumer facing businesses... That's not why an indigenous Canadian tech industry is non-existent. Heck, China, Israel, India, South Korea, and Taiwan all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements (and in Israel and Taiwan's case are much smaller than Canada population wise). Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities.
- giantg2 4mo ago
  A lot of the Indian tech industry is really just the tech industry from other countries being outsourced to there.
  - alephnerd 4mo ago
    Sure foreign players do play a role, yet it still has the 4th largest VC dealflow [0] in the world ($9.3B) at 2x the size of Canada's entire market which highlights a significantly larger market. And unlike Canadian startups, most Indian startups IPO domestically [1] thus building a self-sustaining capital market [0] - https://dealroom.co/guides/global https://dealroom.co/guides/global [1] - https://internationalbanker.com/finance/india-is-undergoing-an-unprecedented-ipo-boom/ https://internationalbanker.com/finance/india-is-undergoing-...
    - giantg2 4mo ago
      I didn't realize the VC market was that strong there. A lot of the stuff I read on here had previously pointed to it being a tough startup market.
      - Computer0 4mo ago
        Tough as in a lot of competition. A lot of market segments dominated by Chinese manufactures have a relentless stream of Indian Startups nipping at their heels, is what I understand.
        alephnerd 4mo ago
        Chinese players don't compete with Indian companies as both China and India have blocked access to either's market. For example, Chinese digital exports remained banned in India and even Chinese players in India like SAIC and Xiaomi have been de facto Indianized via forced ownership changes, similar to what China used to do when it was in India's shoes in the 2000s when competing against the US. When people on HN talk about the difficulty in the Indian startup scene, it about whether to raise in India or raise in the US and then operate in India.
        anukin 4mo ago
        The issues in Indian startup scene are myriad and not just raising. For one the lack of govt support and extreme corruption at anything govt related hinders the startups penetrating market. There other reality is a two tier system of founders where people belonging to certain premier institutes are assumed to be better at startup than others. This stems from the fact that most Indian VCs are mass holders and investment bankers with nil to little exposure to operating a tech company. Capital is probably a secondary order factor if you consider these issues.
  - dyauspitr 4mo ago
    Not everything though. There are huge unicorns that serve the Indian market in India.
  - Tiktaalik 4mo ago
    Describes Canada too!
- cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
  > Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities. Off-topic but I suspect it's also that oil and gas and real estate are the "easy" money in Canada and that's where investment goes. Canadian investors are risk adverse because they can be. That and there's a colonial-descended cultural bias towards credentials and established players. But yeah, I'm furiously writing code for a product living off my savings, and would love to get investment to build a startup off of it, but every time I sniff around the Canadian "investor" scene it becomes clear to me that they'd have no time for somebody like me.
  - alephnerd 4mo ago
    > it's also that oil and gas and real estate are the "easy" money in Canada and that's where investment goes Partially. The money made in ONG and Construction is then re-invested in American equities. And even provincial pension like Ontario Teachers and La Caisse funds prefer investing in American equities instead because their only incentive is pension solvency. The issue is Canada is simply a tiny country with an extremely loose confederation in a world that is returning to a "winner takes all" mindset dependent on hard unification. More tactically, using a Yozma-style approach to subsidize Canadian VC would help sow the seeds for a truly self sustaining ecosystem. > it becomes clear to me that they'd have no time for somebody like me Because they don't and never will. Anyone who has potential gets frustrated and leaves (ofc I've poached a couple as well).
  - glitchc 4mo ago
    Canada definitely has a "first buyer problem" which makes it hard to get liftoff. A great many Canadian startups end up going to the US to get funding to get around this issue.
  - rangestransform 4mo ago
    I have a (admittedly unevidenced) hypothesis that the US took off from other economies after ‘08 because real estate became a spectacularly shit investment overnight and investors had to invest in productive things for returns. Investors in Canada kept passing the same pieces of land between each other for no benefit to society. My pipe dream is that Canada grows the balls to annhilate property values
- fidotron 4mo ago
  > Heck, China, Israel, and India all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements. It's almost like all three of those involve absolutely enormous captive markets, including for their defence/espionage purposes.
- singpolyma3 4mo ago
  The premise seems wrong here. As someone who worked my whole career in Canadian tech I assure you it exists.
  - AlexandrB 4mo ago
    The two big Canadian names in tech are Shopify and MindGeek (AKA Pornhub's parent company).
- EmbarrassedHelp 4mo ago
  > Heck, China, Israel, India, South Korea, and Taiwan all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements (and in Israel and Taiwan's case are much smaller than Canada population wise). That's actually not true for most of those countries. None of those countries other than maybe China have laws requiring encryption backdoors. Suspicionless bulk metadata retention is also illegal in the EU, and no such law existing in many of those other democracies you listed.
  - ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
    China and Israel have pretty strict requirements. Korea was recently on the news for something some might say is an "internet speech requirement" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48406198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48406198)
- tw85 4mo ago
  And why, pray tell, is that the case? Because the Liberal government has created a terrible environment for Canadian businesses over the last 11 years, ballooning the size of the public service and the amount of regulations and bureaucratic oversight, as well as trying to pick winners by handing out subsidies to all the wrong companies in service of their ideological agenda. They would rather companies fail than succeed without their "help". That, and they've done everything in their power to keep the housing bubble juiced instead of allowing an RE correction. But hey, running the country into the ground while trying to blame everything on the orange man gets you elected, so I don't expect any course correction.
  - cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
    Dude, these problems predate the Liberal government(s) we've had by decades. It's a problem endemic to Canada's colonial background and existence as a resource extraction zone, and both mainstream political parties have made it happen, and both have sets of friends which benefit from their different flavours of patronage. Frankly the conservatives were worse when in power on doubling down on turning Canada into a pure petro-state above all. I've never seen a healthy tech sector in Canada and I've been working in it for 30 years through the regimes of both flavours of asshole politician.
    - alephnerd 4mo ago
      This. It's the exact same problem Australia faces as well, except Australia is basically a bizarro version of Canada where Harper won.
- tamimio 4mo ago
  Because US has far better opportunities and more money. My personal experience in doing business in Canada: each industry is monopolized by two or three companies, you need to get their “blessing” before you can do anything in that sector. Government contracts aren’t much, but even with that, it’s nepotism based, you will get a contract knowing someone who will indirectly get benefits from you, for example you will hire people they know, so kinda laundering the money. Lengthy regulations, you might wait months to get an SFOC for example (in drones, where you might need a special flight operation certificate) to do a simple operation, only to repeat that for another test. Securing clients, a combination of low on money and usually clients prefer US based companies, your best bet is securing a big client that will be your backbone, so back to point one where you need a blessing from a big company. And Im talking here about a business where there’s an opportunity to scale up, so food truck business and the local plumbing work aren’t part of that.
  - cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
    Yep, ever the same since the Hudsons Bay Company and the Northwest Company ran the whole place. Now it's just the Westons and Rogers and Bell instead. Some years ago when I first moved to my farm out here in the Hamilton area there was a meeting about zoning bylaws, as the city was finally -- after 20 years -- harmonizing the rural zoning laws after the municipal amalgamation that Mike Harris had forced on them back in the late 90s. We're on an A1 zoned farm lot, and I have a small hobby vineyard here, and although I don't have enough acreage myself to run a winery business, I was curious to see what the zoning around that was. But then I noticed that they had language in the zoning laws that explicitly restricted all winery / commercial vineyard operations to be only in the east of the city (Winona, east of Stoney Creek). I was baffled why they would restrict like that, actually have laws preventing you from running a business up here. So I went to the zoning presentations / meetings and tried to talk to the city staff there about it. She looked at me completely incredulously like I was from Mars. "That's because that's where the wineries are. Maybe we'd allow cider operations up there, but not wine." Why on earth would you go out of your way to do that? If someone wants to try it, why stop them? She just took it for granted that their job was to enshrine the existing state of things in a formal law. It's for some reason just the default Canadian mindset to create an environment to often favour the already entrenched, and to explicitly put gates in front of any upstarts. It's not a partisan thing. It's not liberal vs conservative vs whatever. It's just some weird mindset that wants to see credentials for everything, and the best credential you can have is your proximity to already existing power privilege or wealth. Best explanation I have is this is an outcropping of the colonial mindset.
- mikestorrent 4mo ago
  Oh cool, we should set up stricter free speech restrictions in order to encourage our nascent tech sector. Sure thing champ. Canadian tech is nonexistent because we continue to see ourselves as a colony instead of a country, a resource-extraction post-national economic state instead of a people.
- 8note 4mo ago
  the biggest reason is that canadians speak English we could much more easily get a Quebecois tech industry than canadian
  - alephnerd 4mo ago
    Smh what's with these dumb takes. Literally the only thing blocking a self-sustaining Canadian tech scene is the lack of capital. Has anyone who comments these hot takes ever talked with Canadian founders or tried to raise capital in Canada?!? Do y'all even know what a term sheet is? It doesn't matter if you live in Quebec, Alberta, or Nunavut - why the hell would I as a fund manager at Ontario Teachers, ScotiaBank, or a family office allocate $100M in Canadian equities over American or Asian equities? You could potentially make a case for commodities like ONG and metals, but much of the trading for that is cleared in Chicago and London and the past decade of major capital projects in the space were all blocked - be it pipeline projects by BC and Quebec or renewables projects by Alberta and Saskatchewan. But even with commodities that basically leaves Canada turning into a North American version of Australia or Russia. This can only be solved with significant government support and intervention, which is how Israel, China, India, South Korea, and the UAE developed sustained domestic VC markets. The Carney admin has started to make the right moves.
    - voidnap 4mo ago
      > The Carney admin has started to make the right moves. What moves in particular?
      - alephnerd 4mo ago
        The creation of the Strong Fund, the Tech Fund, and sector specific SWFs like the Food Security Fund which can all participate in the VC Action Plan, along with increased coordination between provincial funds and the federal government and increasingly serious conversations about providing a tax shelter for venture and early stage capital in Canada.
- myth_drannon 4mo ago
  Canadian tech was thriving 10-20 years ago, there is a reason it was called Silicon Valley North. RIM, Nortel, Celestica, QNX... I can't explain what exactly happened. A simple explanation would be Liberals prioritized real estate growth, unlimited immigration to artificially boost GDP but I suspect the problem is more complex.
  - alephnerd 4mo ago
    > Canadian tech was thriving 10-20 years ago... Moreso 20 years ago, but more to that in a bit. > I suspect the problem is more complex Yes. The answer is the absolute growth of the US economy over the last 20 years compared to Canada. In 2006, the market cap of the TSX and NYSE+NASDAQ was roughly US$1T versus US$26T respectively. In 2025, the market cap of the TSX and NYSE+NASDAQ was around US$4.8T versus US$87T. Additionally, from 2006 to 2026 the Canada's GDP grew from around $1.3T to $2.42T whereas America's GDP grew from around $13T to $31T. Basically, there was always a US-Canada gap, but the gap turned into a chasm over the last 20 years, especially as Canada's GDP growth wasn't able to keep up to the US [0] and was tied to energy markets. The brutal reality is Canada's economy is significantly less complex that the ambitions on Canadian HNers. Canada's export bundle is roughly as economically complex [0] as Bulgaria [1] and Serbia [2]. Real estate and immigration is the easy boogeyman, but it's never been a serious consideration for institutional investors in Canada. Institutional investors with a Canada thesis primarily wish to invest in ONG, Energy, and Construction associated to those industries, yet bipartisan bickering such as BC+Quebec blocking pipelines and Alberta blocking renewables projects wiped out tens of billions of dollars worth of projects and dealflow, and played a role in US$1T in capital leaving Canada [3] over the past decade. Additionally, Canada's major differentiator against the US in the 2000s was it's ONG sector, but by the 2010s the US was able to take advantage of shale fracking and NatGas in order to completely upend Canada's leverage on the American energy market. Heck, fracking was subsidized by a Democrat (Obama) and green energy was subsidized by Republicans (eg. TX wind/solar and Perry or Solar Panel manufacturing in Georgia and Arizona). Meanwhile, in Canada liberal leaning parties would undermine fossil fuel dealflow and conservative parties would undermine renewable dealflow. With such a diverge, Canadian capital basically left for the US and even Canadian companies like RIM and OpenText shifted much of their leadership and core IP to their US divisions. [0] - https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=CA-US&start=2000 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locat... [1] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/124/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/124/export-complexit... [2] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/100/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/100/export-complexit... [3] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/688/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/688/export-complexit... [4] - https://www.rbc.com/en/thought-leadership/the-growth-project/capital-gains-how-canada-can-unlock-the-1-8-trillion-it-needs-for-growth/ https://www.rbc.com/en/thought-leadership/the-growth-project...
- koe123 4mo ago
  One thing I have been thinking about is digital tariffs. The US is perfectly willing to slam billions into ventures that lose money for years. EU for example doesn’t work that way. Consequence: US can develop faster, unconstrained by profitability, and capture the entire market before EU. This seems as US being more “innovative”, but realistically they are just running a perhaps similar engine way hotter at the cost of American QoL being way worse for the less fortunate. Similar thing can be said with Chinas subsidies on electric vehicles potentially flooding the EU with cheaper alternatives. America is our ally, so we let this happen. For the most part this has served in this case EU and perhaps Canada well, albeit at the mercy of the US tech sector. Perhaps we shouldn’t anymore though, and consider tariffing American services to protect and incentivize local, sustainable alternatives. Meta, microsoft, etc. are clearly starting to rent seek now that they have us by the balls, I say fuck em? I’m no expert in economics so I bet there are great arguments against this, lets see.
  - jibe 4mo ago
    First issue is you are conflating investment and subsidies.
    - koe123 4mo ago
      Quote the part where I state they are the same
  - 0xDEAFBEAD 4mo ago
    >at the cost of American QoL being way worse for the less fortunate That's a common claim, not sure it's true https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/poverty-share-on-less-than-30-per-day https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/poverty-share-on-less-tha... https://xcancel.com/CPopeHC/status/2065144840002670921 https://xcancel.com/CPopeHC/status/2065144840002670921
- j16sdiz 4mo ago
  > Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities. I was told that we should never invest pension fund on local, because you salary is basically based on local industry. One need diversified investment. Not sure how true this is, but that's what I have been listening for years. (disclaimer: not canandian, not american

alephnerd 4mo ago

> then will act surprised as Canada's tech sector finds it even harder to create any consumer facing businesses... That's not why an indigenous Canadian tech industry is non-existent. Heck, China, Israel, India, South Korea, and Taiwan all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements (and in Israel and Taiwan's case are much smaller than Canada population wise). Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities.

giantg2 4mo ago
A lot of the Indian tech industry is really just the tech industry from other countries being outsourced to there.
- alephnerd 4mo ago
  Sure foreign players do play a role, yet it still has the 4th largest VC dealflow [0] in the world ($9.3B) at 2x the size of Canada's entire market which highlights a significantly larger market. And unlike Canadian startups, most Indian startups IPO domestically [1] thus building a self-sustaining capital market [0] - https://dealroom.co/guides/global https://dealroom.co/guides/global [1] - https://internationalbanker.com/finance/india-is-undergoing-an-unprecedented-ipo-boom/ https://internationalbanker.com/finance/india-is-undergoing-...
  - giantg2 4mo ago
    I didn't realize the VC market was that strong there. A lot of the stuff I read on here had previously pointed to it being a tough startup market.
    - Computer0 4mo ago
      Tough as in a lot of competition. A lot of market segments dominated by Chinese manufactures have a relentless stream of Indian Startups nipping at their heels, is what I understand.
      - alephnerd 4mo ago
        Chinese players don't compete with Indian companies as both China and India have blocked access to either's market. For example, Chinese digital exports remained banned in India and even Chinese players in India like SAIC and Xiaomi have been de facto Indianized via forced ownership changes, similar to what China used to do when it was in India's shoes in the 2000s when competing against the US. When people on HN talk about the difficulty in the Indian startup scene, it about whether to raise in India or raise in the US and then operate in India.
        anukin 4mo ago
        The issues in Indian startup scene are myriad and not just raising. For one the lack of govt support and extreme corruption at anything govt related hinders the startups penetrating market. There other reality is a two tier system of founders where people belonging to certain premier institutes are assumed to be better at startup than others. This stems from the fact that most Indian VCs are mass holders and investment bankers with nil to little exposure to operating a tech company. Capital is probably a secondary order factor if you consider these issues.
- dyauspitr 4mo ago
  Not everything though. There are huge unicorns that serve the Indian market in India.
- Tiktaalik 4mo ago
  Describes Canada too!
cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
> Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities. Off-topic but I suspect it's also that oil and gas and real estate are the "easy" money in Canada and that's where investment goes. Canadian investors are risk adverse because they can be. That and there's a colonial-descended cultural bias towards credentials and established players. But yeah, I'm furiously writing code for a product living off my savings, and would love to get investment to build a startup off of it, but every time I sniff around the Canadian "investor" scene it becomes clear to me that they'd have no time for somebody like me.
- alephnerd 4mo ago
  > it's also that oil and gas and real estate are the "easy" money in Canada and that's where investment goes Partially. The money made in ONG and Construction is then re-invested in American equities. And even provincial pension like Ontario Teachers and La Caisse funds prefer investing in American equities instead because their only incentive is pension solvency. The issue is Canada is simply a tiny country with an extremely loose confederation in a world that is returning to a "winner takes all" mindset dependent on hard unification. More tactically, using a Yozma-style approach to subsidize Canadian VC would help sow the seeds for a truly self sustaining ecosystem. > it becomes clear to me that they'd have no time for somebody like me Because they don't and never will. Anyone who has potential gets frustrated and leaves (ofc I've poached a couple as well).
- glitchc 4mo ago
  Canada definitely has a "first buyer problem" which makes it hard to get liftoff. A great many Canadian startups end up going to the US to get funding to get around this issue.
- rangestransform 4mo ago
  I have a (admittedly unevidenced) hypothesis that the US took off from other economies after ‘08 because real estate became a spectacularly shit investment overnight and investors had to invest in productive things for returns. Investors in Canada kept passing the same pieces of land between each other for no benefit to society. My pipe dream is that Canada grows the balls to annhilate property values
fidotron 4mo ago
> Heck, China, Israel, and India all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements. It's almost like all three of those involve absolutely enormous captive markets, including for their defence/espionage purposes.
singpolyma3 4mo ago
The premise seems wrong here. As someone who worked my whole career in Canadian tech I assure you it exists.
- AlexandrB 4mo ago
  The two big Canadian names in tech are Shopify and MindGeek (AKA Pornhub's parent company).
EmbarrassedHelp 4mo ago
> Heck, China, Israel, India, South Korea, and Taiwan all have larger tech industries than Canada and have much stricter internet speech requirements (and in Israel and Taiwan's case are much smaller than Canada population wise). That's actually not true for most of those countries. None of those countries other than maybe China have laws requiring encryption backdoors. Suspicionless bulk metadata retention is also illegal in the EU, and no such law existing in many of those other democracies you listed.
- ShinyLeftPad 4mo ago
  China and Israel have pretty strict requirements. Korea was recently on the news for something some might say is an "internet speech requirement" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48406198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48406198)
tw85 4mo ago
And why, pray tell, is that the case? Because the Liberal government has created a terrible environment for Canadian businesses over the last 11 years, ballooning the size of the public service and the amount of regulations and bureaucratic oversight, as well as trying to pick winners by handing out subsidies to all the wrong companies in service of their ideological agenda. They would rather companies fail than succeed without their "help". That, and they've done everything in their power to keep the housing bubble juiced instead of allowing an RE correction. But hey, running the country into the ground while trying to blame everything on the orange man gets you elected, so I don't expect any course correction.
- cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
  Dude, these problems predate the Liberal government(s) we've had by decades. It's a problem endemic to Canada's colonial background and existence as a resource extraction zone, and both mainstream political parties have made it happen, and both have sets of friends which benefit from their different flavours of patronage. Frankly the conservatives were worse when in power on doubling down on turning Canada into a pure petro-state above all. I've never seen a healthy tech sector in Canada and I've been working in it for 30 years through the regimes of both flavours of asshole politician.
  - alephnerd 4mo ago
    This. It's the exact same problem Australia faces as well, except Australia is basically a bizarro version of Canada where Harper won.
tamimio 4mo ago
Because US has far better opportunities and more money. My personal experience in doing business in Canada: each industry is monopolized by two or three companies, you need to get their “blessing” before you can do anything in that sector. Government contracts aren’t much, but even with that, it’s nepotism based, you will get a contract knowing someone who will indirectly get benefits from you, for example you will hire people they know, so kinda laundering the money. Lengthy regulations, you might wait months to get an SFOC for example (in drones, where you might need a special flight operation certificate) to do a simple operation, only to repeat that for another test. Securing clients, a combination of low on money and usually clients prefer US based companies, your best bet is securing a big client that will be your backbone, so back to point one where you need a blessing from a big company. And Im talking here about a business where there’s an opportunity to scale up, so food truck business and the local plumbing work aren’t part of that.
- cmrdporcupine 4mo ago
  Yep, ever the same since the Hudsons Bay Company and the Northwest Company ran the whole place. Now it's just the Westons and Rogers and Bell instead. Some years ago when I first moved to my farm out here in the Hamilton area there was a meeting about zoning bylaws, as the city was finally -- after 20 years -- harmonizing the rural zoning laws after the municipal amalgamation that Mike Harris had forced on them back in the late 90s. We're on an A1 zoned farm lot, and I have a small hobby vineyard here, and although I don't have enough acreage myself to run a winery business, I was curious to see what the zoning around that was. But then I noticed that they had language in the zoning laws that explicitly restricted all winery / commercial vineyard operations to be only in the east of the city (Winona, east of Stoney Creek). I was baffled why they would restrict like that, actually have laws preventing you from running a business up here. So I went to the zoning presentations / meetings and tried to talk to the city staff there about it. She looked at me completely incredulously like I was from Mars. "That's because that's where the wineries are. Maybe we'd allow cider operations up there, but not wine." Why on earth would you go out of your way to do that? If someone wants to try it, why stop them? She just took it for granted that their job was to enshrine the existing state of things in a formal law. It's for some reason just the default Canadian mindset to create an environment to often favour the already entrenched, and to explicitly put gates in front of any upstarts. It's not a partisan thing. It's not liberal vs conservative vs whatever. It's just some weird mindset that wants to see credentials for everything, and the best credential you can have is your proximity to already existing power privilege or wealth. Best explanation I have is this is an outcropping of the colonial mindset.
mikestorrent 4mo ago
Oh cool, we should set up stricter free speech restrictions in order to encourage our nascent tech sector. Sure thing champ. Canadian tech is nonexistent because we continue to see ourselves as a colony instead of a country, a resource-extraction post-national economic state instead of a people.
8note 4mo ago
the biggest reason is that canadians speak English we could much more easily get a Quebecois tech industry than canadian
- alephnerd 4mo ago
  Smh what's with these dumb takes. Literally the only thing blocking a self-sustaining Canadian tech scene is the lack of capital. Has anyone who comments these hot takes ever talked with Canadian founders or tried to raise capital in Canada?!? Do y'all even know what a term sheet is? It doesn't matter if you live in Quebec, Alberta, or Nunavut - why the hell would I as a fund manager at Ontario Teachers, ScotiaBank, or a family office allocate $100M in Canadian equities over American or Asian equities? You could potentially make a case for commodities like ONG and metals, but much of the trading for that is cleared in Chicago and London and the past decade of major capital projects in the space were all blocked - be it pipeline projects by BC and Quebec or renewables projects by Alberta and Saskatchewan. But even with commodities that basically leaves Canada turning into a North American version of Australia or Russia. This can only be solved with significant government support and intervention, which is how Israel, China, India, South Korea, and the UAE developed sustained domestic VC markets. The Carney admin has started to make the right moves.
  - voidnap 4mo ago
    > The Carney admin has started to make the right moves. What moves in particular?
    - alephnerd 4mo ago
      The creation of the Strong Fund, the Tech Fund, and sector specific SWFs like the Food Security Fund which can all participate in the VC Action Plan, along with increased coordination between provincial funds and the federal government and increasingly serious conversations about providing a tax shelter for venture and early stage capital in Canada.
myth_drannon 4mo ago
Canadian tech was thriving 10-20 years ago, there is a reason it was called Silicon Valley North. RIM, Nortel, Celestica, QNX... I can't explain what exactly happened. A simple explanation would be Liberals prioritized real estate growth, unlimited immigration to artificially boost GDP but I suspect the problem is more complex.
- alephnerd 4mo ago
  > Canadian tech was thriving 10-20 years ago... Moreso 20 years ago, but more to that in a bit. > I suspect the problem is more complex Yes. The answer is the absolute growth of the US economy over the last 20 years compared to Canada. In 2006, the market cap of the TSX and NYSE+NASDAQ was roughly US$1T versus US$26T respectively. In 2025, the market cap of the TSX and NYSE+NASDAQ was around US$4.8T versus US$87T. Additionally, from 2006 to 2026 the Canada's GDP grew from around $1.3T to $2.42T whereas America's GDP grew from around $13T to $31T. Basically, there was always a US-Canada gap, but the gap turned into a chasm over the last 20 years, especially as Canada's GDP growth wasn't able to keep up to the US [0] and was tied to energy markets. The brutal reality is Canada's economy is significantly less complex that the ambitions on Canadian HNers. Canada's export bundle is roughly as economically complex [0] as Bulgaria [1] and Serbia [2]. Real estate and immigration is the easy boogeyman, but it's never been a serious consideration for institutional investors in Canada. Institutional investors with a Canada thesis primarily wish to invest in ONG, Energy, and Construction associated to those industries, yet bipartisan bickering such as BC+Quebec blocking pipelines and Alberta blocking renewables projects wiped out tens of billions of dollars worth of projects and dealflow, and played a role in US$1T in capital leaving Canada [3] over the past decade. Additionally, Canada's major differentiator against the US in the 2000s was it's ONG sector, but by the 2010s the US was able to take advantage of shale fracking and NatGas in order to completely upend Canada's leverage on the American energy market. Heck, fracking was subsidized by a Democrat (Obama) and green energy was subsidized by Republicans (eg. TX wind/solar and Perry or Solar Panel manufacturing in Georgia and Arizona). Meanwhile, in Canada liberal leaning parties would undermine fossil fuel dealflow and conservative parties would undermine renewable dealflow. With such a diverge, Canadian capital basically left for the US and even Canadian companies like RIM and OpenText shifted much of their leadership and core IP to their US divisions. [0] - https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=CA-US&start=2000 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locat... [1] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/124/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/124/export-complexit... [2] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/100/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/100/export-complexit... [3] - https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/688/export-complexity https://atlas.hks.harvard.edu/countries/688/export-complexit... [4] - https://www.rbc.com/en/thought-leadership/the-growth-project/capital-gains-how-canada-can-unlock-the-1-8-trillion-it-needs-for-growth/ https://www.rbc.com/en/thought-leadership/the-growth-project...
koe123 4mo ago
One thing I have been thinking about is digital tariffs. The US is perfectly willing to slam billions into ventures that lose money for years. EU for example doesn’t work that way. Consequence: US can develop faster, unconstrained by profitability, and capture the entire market before EU. This seems as US being more “innovative”, but realistically they are just running a perhaps similar engine way hotter at the cost of American QoL being way worse for the less fortunate. Similar thing can be said with Chinas subsidies on electric vehicles potentially flooding the EU with cheaper alternatives. America is our ally, so we let this happen. For the most part this has served in this case EU and perhaps Canada well, albeit at the mercy of the US tech sector. Perhaps we shouldn’t anymore though, and consider tariffing American services to protect and incentivize local, sustainable alternatives. Meta, microsoft, etc. are clearly starting to rent seek now that they have us by the balls, I say fuck em? I’m no expert in economics so I bet there are great arguments against this, lets see.
- jibe 4mo ago
  First issue is you are conflating investment and subsidies.
  - koe123 4mo ago
    Quote the part where I state they are the same
- 0xDEAFBEAD 4mo ago
  >at the cost of American QoL being way worse for the less fortunate That's a common claim, not sure it's true https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/poverty-share-on-less-than-30-per-day https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/poverty-share-on-less-tha... https://xcancel.com/CPopeHC/status/2065144840002670921 https://xcancel.com/CPopeHC/status/2065144840002670921
j16sdiz 4mo ago
> Canadian tech is nonexistent because every Canadian pension fund, family office, and bank prefers to invest in American equities over Canadian equities. I was told that we should never invest pension fund on local, because you salary is basically based on local industry. One need diversified investment. Not sure how true this is, but that's what I have been listening for years. (disclaimer: not canandian, not american