[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 6 2004, 03:14 PM
I can see your points on Alberta. If another party had been in power during this time, the province probably wouldn't be debt free at this point in time. On the other hand, who's to say that if another party (for arguments sake) the Liberals where in power, that we would be worse or better off?
Government does have to set up some checks and balances in order to keep money flowing for it to spend. But once that has been established, as long as the market doesn't change, they don't really have to do anything.

If Klien decided to give 100 million dollars to Calgary, and allowed Bronconier (sp?) to spend it any way he chose. What effect would that have on my life? Bronconier probably would spend it on roads, schools and infrastructure. That in turn, could make Calgary a more "attractive" city for companies to move to, creating jobs, etc. Same with roads, more construction jobs available. Does that mean the minimum wage is going to increase? Maybe, maybe not. House prices I know will increase, becuase of increased demand. Gas prices may go up, with more people in the city, supply may go down a bit.

I think it is more cause and effect than a direct correlation. Government can set things up for success, but it is up us a citizens to take advantage of the situation presented to us.

As for the states, say for instance, the US government passed a tax admendment that said "If you own a business, you don't have to taxes on your income or assests". Say you are the owner of the company, you no longer have to pay taxes. What do you do with all your extra money? Do you re-invest it into the company, to help build and grow it? Or do you take that fat check, and just go off and buy toys, vacations etc. Unemployment could still be high, as business ownders take their money and run.

The government can only do so much. The rest is up to the people. At least that is the case in a market economy. Communisim is a whole other thing.

Man, I don't know how you can say with a straight face that the government doesn't have that big of an effect on the economy, especially when you've given the example of the government spending money on roads and that creating more jobs. That's not even a direct economic policy and it appears to have a pretty large effect on the economy.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but it seems that the whole basis for you point is sure, they can do that, but I don't think it's that big.