TF
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: In absolute terms women’s wealth in 1970 was much less than that of men. By 2030 women will have as much wealth as men. The total change in women’s wealth is the largest economic change between two groups in history as a total dollar figure and share of economy.

Fact Check: In absolute terms women’s wealth in 1970 was much less than that of men. By 2030 women will have as much wealth as men. The total change in women’s wealth is the largest economic change between two groups in history as a total dollar figure and share of economy.

March 14, 2025•by TruthOrFake
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Claim Analysis: Women's Wealth Growth from 1970 to 2030 ## Introduction The claim under scrutiny suggests that women's wealth in 1970 was significa...

Claim Analysis: Women's Wealth Growth from 1970 to 2030

Introduction

The claim under scrutiny suggests that women's wealth in 1970 was significantly lower than men's, but by 2030, women will achieve parity in wealth with men. It further asserts that this shift represents the largest economic change between two groups in history, both in total dollar figures and as a share of the economy. This article will examine the available evidence regarding women's wealth over the decades, the projected changes, and the broader context of economic inequality.

What We Know

  1. Historical Wealth Disparity: In 1970, women's wealth was considerably less than men's, a fact supported by various studies highlighting gender disparities in income and asset ownership. For instance, data from the Australian Institute of Family Studies indicates that women's participation in the labor force and their income levels have increased over the decades, but they still lag behind men in terms of wealth accumulation 2.

  2. Projected Wealth Growth: A significant portion of the claim centers on the "Great Wealth Transfer," which is expected to see over $100 trillion change hands in the coming decades. Reports suggest that women in the U.S. could control approximately $34 trillion of this wealth by 2030, up from $7.3 trillion just a decade prior 610. This shift is attributed to factors such as inheritance, longer life expectancies, and rising career earnings.

  3. Current Economic Position: As of the latest data, women still hold less wealth than men. For example, the median superannuation balance for women aged 65 and older was $168,000 compared to $208,200 for men in 2020 1. This indicates that while there is growth, significant disparities remain.

  4. Global Context: A report from Oxfam highlights that globally, men own approximately $105 trillion more than women, illustrating the persistent gender wealth gap 7. This disparity raises questions about the feasibility of achieving wealth parity by 2030.

Analysis

The claim that women will achieve wealth parity with men by 2030 is supported by projections of significant wealth transfer and increasing female economic participation. However, the reliability of these projections varies:

  • Source Credibility: Reports from reputable organizations such as McKinsey & Co. and Oxfam provide substantial data on wealth distribution and projections. However, these organizations may have inherent biases or agendas—McKinsey, for instance, has a vested interest in promoting economic growth strategies that include gender equity 67.

  • Methodological Concerns: The projections regarding women's wealth growth are often based on trends in labor force participation and demographic shifts. While these trends are promising, they may not account for systemic barriers that continue to hinder women's economic advancement, such as unequal pay, caregiving responsibilities, and discrimination in the workplace 58.

  • Conflicting Evidence: While some sources predict a significant increase in women's wealth, others highlight that the existing gender wealth gap remains vast and may not close as quickly as projected. For example, the data from the Australian government indicates that while women's wealth is increasing, it is still significantly lower than men's, suggesting that achieving parity may be more complex than the claim suggests 12.

  • Additional Context Needed: Further information on the specific mechanisms driving the projected wealth transfer, as well as a breakdown of how this wealth will be distributed among different demographics of women, would provide a clearer picture of the potential for achieving wealth parity.

Conclusion

Verdict: Partially True

The claim that women will achieve wealth parity with men by 2030 is partially supported by evidence of significant projected wealth growth and increasing female economic participation. Key evidence includes the anticipated "Great Wealth Transfer," which could see women controlling a substantial portion of wealth in the coming years. However, while projections are optimistic, they must be tempered with the understanding that systemic barriers and existing disparities continue to pose challenges to achieving true wealth parity.

It is important to acknowledge the limitations in the available evidence. Projections are inherently uncertain and may not fully account for ongoing economic inequalities, such as unequal pay and discrimination. Additionally, the complexity of wealth distribution among different demographics of women adds further nuance to the claim.

Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information regarding economic trends and gender disparities, recognizing that while progress is being made, significant challenges remain in the pursuit of economic equality.

Sources

  1. Current state of women’s economic inequality – examining the data. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.pmc.gov.au/resources/10-year-plan/current-state
  2. Families Then & Now: Income and wealth. (n.d.). Australian Institute of Family Studies. Retrieved from https://aifs.gov.au/research/research-reports/families-then-now-income-and-wealth
  3. The Big Shift. (2024). Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2024/women-money-economy-finance-investing/
  4. Women will get most of the $124 trillion 'great wealth transfer.' (n.d.). NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/business/personal-finance/women-will-get-124-trillion-great-wealth-transfer-rcna196076
  5. Economic Inequality by Gender. (2019). Our World in Data. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/economic-inequality-by-gender
  6. Massive Wealth Transfer Will Give Women $34 Trillion By 2030. (n.d.). Financial Advisor Magazine. Retrieved from https://www.fa-mag.com/news/massive-wealth-transfer-will-give-women--34-trillion-by-2030-80609.html
  7. The $100-trillion gender wealth gap is an outrage: can Davos ... (2024). Oxfam. Retrieved from https://views-voices.oxfam.org.uk/2024/01/100-trillion-gender-wealth-gap-davos-economy-for-women/
  8. What's Next For Women And Wealth-Building? (2025). Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrarojas/2025/03/13/whats-next-for-women-and-wealth-building/
  9. Eight graphs show how Australians have changed over the last 20... (2025). ABC News. Retrieved from https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-06/hilda-report-graphs-australian-life-changed-20-years/105009846
  10. The $34 trillion shift: How women are reshaping wealth and legacy. (n.d.). Empower. Retrieved from https://www.empower.com/the-currency/money/34-trillion-shift-women-reshaping-wealth-legacy-news

Got your own claim to verify? It's 100% Free!

Join thousands who trust our AI-powered fact-checking. Completely free with no registration required. Your claim could be the next important truth we uncover.

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: The transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 is the largest transfer of wealth in human history.
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: The transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 is the largest transfer of wealth in human history.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The transfer of total capital wealth from men to women beginning in 1970 and estimating up to 2050 i...

Mar 14, 2025
Read more →
🔍
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Business leaders and ex bank heads throw support behind Poilievre A number of prominent business leaders formally threw their support behind Pierre Poilievre in the upcoming federal election on Saturday, arguing his Conservative Party will best handle Canada’s slowing economic growth. The group of more than 30 current and past executives includes Fairfax Financial CEO Prem Watsa, Canaccord Genuity CEO Dan Daviau, former RBC Capital Markets CEO Anthony Fell and former Scotiabank CEO Brian Porter. They published an open letter in several Canadian newspapers on Saturday saying Poilievre's plans are best to get the country's economy "back on track." "Productivity has stalled. Economic growth has slowed. Our GDP per capita is shrinking," the letter reads. "Nevertheless, this decline is not inevitable -- and it's not the Canada we know and love." To turn things around, the letter said Canada needs to eliminate barriers to productivity by streamlining permit processes and cutting outdated regulations that prevent investment and job creation. It also said the government needs to be more disciplined with its spending, impose lower taxes to make Canada more competitive and develop the country's natural resources by building pipelines, expanding mining and investing in energy. The letter, which was also signed by former RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust founder Edward Sonshine, Mattamy Homes CEO Peter Gilgan and past Toronto Blue Jays president Paul Godfrey, is one of the strongest shows of support Poilievre has seen from the business community yet. His competitor, Liberal Mark Carney, has spent much of the election campaign, which concludes on April 28 when Canadians go to the polls, touting his experience as leader of the central banks in both Canada and England. He argues that experience leaves him best equipped to address the country's economic woes and tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump. The Liberals did not immediately respond to request for comment on the letter. The Conservatives, however, took the missive as a sign that their platform is resonating with the business community. “Pierre Poilievre’s Canada First Economic Action Plan is being recognized as a strong plan to lower taxes and eliminate red tape to unleash our industries and bring home powerful paycheques for our people and a thriving economy," Conservative spokesman Sam Lilly said in a statement. Poilievre revealed earlier this week that his plan is designed to cut bureaucratic red tape by 25 per cent in two years through a "two-for-one" law. The law would see two regulations be repealed for every new one that's enacted and require that every dollar spent on new administrative costs trigger the cutting of two dollars in other areas. Meanwhile, Carney has said he will boost interprovincial trade by removing all exemptions under the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, develop a new fund to help link natural resource extraction sites with rail lines and roads and create new programs geared toward training workers. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said it was "no surprise" some business leaders are backing Poilievre and Carney because they're giving a tax break to the ultra-wealthy," rather than focusing on "what people actually need—health care, housing, and support when they lose a job." "Canadians are working hard but falling behind," Singh said in a statement. "Wages aren’t keeping up, housing is out of reach, and public services are stretched. The economy isn’t working for most people." This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 12, 2025. Tara Deschamps, The Canadian Press

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Business leaders and ex bank heads throw support behind Poilievre A number of prominent business le...

Apr 13, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Unverified

Fact Check: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ THANK YOU FOLKS ❤ LIKE THE MAGA, THE PP HAS A 100 DAY AGENDA : The first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. Over the past year, if you asked around Ottawa about the transition team that was planning Pierre Poilievre’s first days in government, you were likely to be met with shrugs. The members of the team were not named, and those in the know were not talking. Even The Hill Times, the Ottawa parliamentary affairs outlet that excels at digging up gossipy news, had come up empty-handed. At the outset of 2025, they approached a dozen Conservatives close to Poilievre, all of whom stayed tight-lipped. His campaign manager Jenni Byrne ran a very tight organization, and slip-ups might incur her wrath. Besides, any operative whose party is on the verge of power knows it’s best to maintain utmost organizational secrecy. Such discipline, however, sometimes falters under the influence of a few drinks. That’s what Bryan Evans, a political science professor at Toronto Metropolitan University, found out in late 2024. Around the winter holidays, he ducked into his neighbourhood bar and ran into an old acquaintance. The man wasn’t himself on the transition team, but it turned out he was deeply informed. They slid onto stools for a conversation. While they didn’t run in the same circles, and certainly didn’t share political opinions, his acquaintance knew that Evans had an understanding and appreciation for the machinery of government. For ten years he was employed by the Ontario government, including a stint in the Ministry of Labour after Progressive Conservative Mike Harris had come to power in the mid 1990s. Relying on insights from that experience, he wrote his doctoral dissertation on that government and its radical agenda. In December 2024, Poilievre was riding high in the polls, as he had been for nearly two years. So maybe it was the overconfidence talking. Over beers, Evans’s drinking companion laid out more about the transition planning than anything yet discovered by well-connected reporters in the establishment media. The group was preparing for a Poilievre government to hit the ground running. It was going to be a blitzkrieg. “You were there at the start of the Mike Harris government.” “Yeah,” Evans said. “That’s going to be the playbook.” It was an ominous sign. Mike Harris’s government had moved quickly to make dramatic reforms. They had a hundred-day agenda, and they got a lot done: laying off public sector employees, cutting funding to education, slashing social assistance rates, deregulating industries, repealing equity laws, selling off Crown corporations, and empowering the government to impose user fees on public services. “It’s going to come hard and fast from every direction again,” Evan’s acquaintance said. The groups and communities impacted, as well as the political opposition, both inside Parliament and outside, would have to fight on dozens of fronts at once. One of Harris’s key first steps was to balance the budget as a way of supercharging their plans, according to Guy Giorno, the premier’s top strategist. He described this as their “agenda within the agenda,” the “factor which meant that absolutely everybody rolled in the same direction.” It began the process of shrinking public spending, and was followed up by deregulation, rolling back labour protections, freezing the minimum wage, and encouraging the subcontracting of public services. Back in the 1990s, Harris had been convinced by Alberta Premier Ralph Klein’s advisors that he would have to move speedily to implement his agenda, lest he get tripped up by protests or a stubborn public service. Those advisors had once encouraged Klein to read the work of economist Milton Friedman (Pierre Poilievre’s own ideological guru). In the 1980’s, Friedman had written that “a new administration has some six to nine months in which to achieve major changes; if it does not seize the opportunity to act decisively during that period, it will not have another such opportunity.” It’s the lesson Friedman had drawn from his first laboratory, Chile. After the U.S. backed overthrow of democratic socialist Salvador Allende, the military dictator Augusto Pinochet had instituted a violent, rapid-fire makeover of the economy, following Friedman’s radical free market rulebook: privatization, deregulation, cutbacks to the public sector, and attacks on labour unions. Purging the public service As for the composition of Poilievre’s transition group, Bryan Evans’ acquaintance belatedly recalled his Fight Club rules. He wouldn’t divulge names, but offered some ideas. There were Poilievre’s policy advisors, as well as some former senior public servants, lawyers, and an ex-Cabinet minister. He admitted that some people who had been around for the Mike Harris days were in there too. Even before they were sworn in as the government in 1995, Harris’s team had laid groundwork within the public service to ensure they could take swift control of the levers of power. Members of his transition team had shown up to their first meeting with outgoing NDP government officials with a list of six high-ranking deputy ministers they wanted to meet quickly. Those civil servants were the A-list, empowered to advise and serve Harris’s agenda; several others, considered unfriendly, received their pink slips as part of a careful purge. As one NDP official remarked, his own party had “assumed office, but never took power. These guys are taking power even before they have assumed office.” Poilievre’s transition team also was thinking very strategically about how they would wield the machinery of the state. Who did they want to bring into the higher ranks of public service to help advance their plans? Who should be removed? And who might they want for the most important position of all, the top ranking civil servant, the Clerk of the Privy Council? These were some of the questions they were asking while plotting their first moves. When it came to policy plans, one crucial difference between the two eras was that Mike Harris’ Conservatives publicly had rolled out their agenda years in advance. Harris’s young ideologues put out detailed papers, organized policy conferences, eventually published a manifesto, the Common Sense Revolution, of which they printed 2.5 million copies. Everyone knew what was coming, even if it would still shock people when it arrived and extend far beyond what Harris had promised. Would Poilievre’s team, for instance, follow Mike Harris’s “playbook” on healthcare? Harris had lulled Ontario into complacency by assuaging voters’ fears about protecting health services. Their manifesto was crystal clear: “We will not cut healthcare spending.” But the result turned out to look very different: forty hospital closures, 25,000 staff laid off, and declining per capita real funding at a time of growing need. Poilievre’s team, by contrast, hadn’t laid out many policy details. And yet, over the years and in the run-up to the spring of 2025, Poilievre had telegraphed a lot in past election platforms, online videos, and podcast interviews with Jordan Peterson. It hinted at what his sweeping agenda would entail if he was able to secure a majority government—an assault on the country’s collective assets and already tattered social programs, a renewed attack on unions, activist and Indigenous defenders, and a bonanza of deregulation and privatization that would make his billionaire backers cheer. This is an excerpt from Martin Lukacs’s THE POILIEVRE PROJECT : A RADICAL BLUEPRINT FOR CORPORATE RULE published by Breach Books and available for order.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: THIS IS STRAIGHT OUT OF THE MAGA PROJECT 2025 : PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE AND SHARE FAR AND WIDE ❤ TH...

Apr 6, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Two men are competing in the WOMEN’S final for the Ultimate Pool pro tournament.
Misleading

Fact Check: Two men are competing in the WOMEN’S final for the Ultimate Pool pro tournament.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Two men are competing in the WOMEN’S final for the Ultimate Pool pro tournament.

Apr 7, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Mostly False

Fact Check: Carney has massive direct ties to Trump and Elon Musk. 1. Carney moved Brookfield asset management to NY only 6 days after Trump imposes tariffs. This makes Trump happy. 2. Carney will not get rid of bill C69 which is no new pipelines in Canada. So this means most of our oil and gas continues to go to Trump in the US. We need to be independent. Again siding with Trump, Trump is very happy. 3. Trumps son-in-law Jared Kushner was in financial trouble and Carney’s company Brookfield signed a 99 year lease on his property at 666 fifth ave for 1.1 billion with all funds up front (unheard of terms) this cements Trumps admiration for Carney and Carney is now considered family. 4. Carney had Brookfield asset management bail out Elon Musk (Twitter) when he had the big buyout. This is Trumps best buddy and considers Carney also a big business partner with him now. 5. Trump publicly stated that he prefers dealing with the liberals as they never say anything bad about him but Pierre stands up for Canada and says Canada will never be the 51st state and he doesn’t like that. Trump says he wants to deal with Carney. 6. Carney has used off shore banking to hide Brookfields income and owes 5.3 billion to the government over the last 15 years. The address for the account in Bermuda is a bike shop. Carney says it’s legal to hide money and not pay taxes. 7. Liberals had the government prorogued for 3 months while they played around with who could take over while Trump dumped tariffs on us. 8. Carney’s company Brookfield intends to build homes to rent to Canadians with our tax dollars and Brookfield being the owner. 9. Carney sells Canadian dirty coal to China and India then blames us with contributing 1.5% of the worlds carbon and carbon taxes us to death meanwhile China is at 32% of the world’s carbon that Carney helped them get to. What a hypocrite. 10. Carney kicks Chandra Arya to the curb who has won the last 3 elections in Nepean for the liberals. Carney took the easiest seat available to win to try to get an MP job. Another set up and another slimy move. 11. Carney’s company Brookfield has clear cut 9,000 hectares of rain forest in Brazil for pure profit. I thought his idea was net zero??!! 12. Mark Carney took an all expenses paid trip to the UK before he was even temporarily made PM. This is an unelected person getting a free $500,000 trip. This is unethical and he should have used his own money. 13. Carney has used his power to influence the UK to use more expensive jet fuel, then had his company Brookfield invest $1 billion to be able to profit from that. 14. Carney is proposing an altered much higher carbon tax on corporations that will dump down on citizens with no rebates. Carney says the carbon tax has been used sparingly and needs to be doubled. 15. Carney wants to institute carbon credits that will restrict travel in your vehicle and vacations but the ultra rich can buy your credits so they can still enjoy the world. Same as China. 16. Carney wants to bring in carbon tariffs, which is called a carbon border adjustment on any country that he feels doesn’t have a high enough carbon tax. This means the whole world. Carney thinks he’s in charge of the entire planet now. This will increase the price on all imported items we buy. You can only imagine what this will do to the cost of materials. 17. The former UK British Prime Minister Liz Truss has warned Canada to stay away from him and his disasterous Net Zero scams. As did the Mayor of Lima, Peru. 18. Former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss on Mark Carney: "I strongly recommend not backing Mark Carney for his policies on Net Zero. It was disastrous for Britain. It would be disastrous for Canada. She stated he printed too much money and put their economy off track. After he left his successors have struggled to clear up the mess. Inflation spiked to 11.1 % in the UK compared to 5.2% in France. 19. Mayor Lopez Aliaga of Lima Peru said Brookfield, chaired by Carney, was “making massive profits off a toxic contract” plagued by bribes. 20. The Municipality of Lima is currently suing Brookfield (Carney is part of Brookfield asset management) in a New York City court. It’s part of an ongoing legal battle that has been going on for years. Mark Carney and Brookfield instituted tolls on the poorest people that took 1/3 of their monthly income. 21. Carney lied when he said he would build LNG pipelines across Canada to the west in English, the told Quebec in French, never without their permission! 22. Carney lied straight to everyone's faces in the debate, when he said he had nothing to do with Brookfield leaving Canada for the USA. Actually he was still Chair and recommended the move 6 days after Trump announced the tariffs. So this was a move to please Trump and avoid Canadas taxes and Trumps tariffs. 23. Brookfield owns pipelines in other countries and Carney has fought tooth and nail not to have Canada’s resources hit the open market. This is loss of profit for his company. Conservatives have fought for this for years. Now Carney and the liberals are campaigning to do this. This will end up being another lie just to get votes. 24. Carney lied when he said he worked with Paul Martin on balancing the federal budget, when he was at Goldman Sachs at that time as a Wall Street banker. 25. Carney lied when he said he helped save Canada during the 2008 banking crisis. It was not him who steered Canada away from the disaster that the "Bankers" like him at Goldman Sachs caused, it was the late Jim Flaherty. 26. Carney is involved in the Century Initiative, which was created to increase Canada's population to 100 million by 2050 that’s over 2 million per year that tax payers have to foot the bill. No matter how devastating the costs, and an end to Canadian Identity as we know it. All for profit. They have a website where you can read all about it. Trudeau brought in 1 million per year over 3 years and crashed our housing and healthcare. 27. Carney refuses to declare his assets before becoming the Pm and put them in a blind trust. That’s why the election was called with minimal notice. 28. Carney’s competitors were illegally eliminated before the liberal mini election to purposely to give Carney the job even though they raised the $350K. Ruby Dhalla is one of them, and Chandra Arya is another. Now Carney took his riding. 29. Carney says he would implement the emergency act against tariffs if necessary again. 30. In Carney’s own book he states capitalism is evil and rigid controls on personal freedoms, industry and corporations are necessary. Poverty will definitely happen but for the good of world order. In other words personal freedom is not an option. 31. Carney and the others that fought for the PM job (in the liberal debate) were forbidden to discuss the fentanyl crisis, homelessness, immigration, border issues, bail reform, China foreign interference or mass debt issues. This is from Trudeau himself. If Carney will lie this much before the election then refuse to follow all the proper ethics and conflict investigations, then he is going to continue to lie well after he gets in office. This is just another Justin Trudeau! Liar Personified! This is who Trudeau wants in office as Prime Minister without him ever being elected. His partner in corruption, greed, and immorality. Except he is even better connected, and established with the funds behind him. And soon he will have access to all of Canadas fund and Information about all companies for when he returns to the private sector. Ask yourself, why is a guy making $20 million a year here to make $203,000 as an MP (which Carney is not one) plus $203,000 for prime minister. = $406,000

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Carney has massive direct ties to Trump and Elon Musk. 1. Carney moved Brookfield asset management t...

Apr 23, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks