That's fine, but judging from Layton's comments in the call, that money will go right to the unions in Ontario and Quebec.
Naturally.
This is a situation where we are going to pay for having a wishy-washy premier in Stelmach. At a time like this, we really needed a Lougheed-type leader who would stand up for Alberta.
The USSR sure as hell will not care for Alberta in any way, except to see how much of our money they can steal to fund Quebec.
did you seriously not see this coming yesterday before the DOW had a chance to do anything?
Weirdly this article seems to suggest that the TSX is dropping due to bad economic news from the U.S. Must be an oversight. Clearly it's because the markets are afraid of the NDP.... http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/1...ts-monday.html
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Iowa_Flames_Fan For This Useful Post:
Real life isn't the "facist hick bible-thumping gun toters" VS the "inept socialist money-######ed commies," despite what posters on internet message boards (or the Calgary Sun) might say. Before you accuse me of being the latter, I'm not. It's just nice to read a political discussion that doesn't involve gratuitous name-calling, and unfortunately, you can't even find one of those on Calgarypuck.
Real life isn't the "facist hick bible-thumping gun toters" VS the "inept socialist money-######ed commies," despite what posters on internet message boards (or the Calgary Sun) might say. Before you accuse me of being the latter, I'm not. It's just nice to read a political discussion that doesn't involve gratuitous name-calling, and unfortunately, you can't even find one of those on Calgarypuck.
Further to that last point, here is Paul Krugman's take on fiscal policy and the economy. He's talking about the U.S., but our economic fortunes are tied to theirs, like it or not: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/01/op...gman.html?_r=1
Krugman is a pretty well-respected economist. He won one of those Nobel Prize thingies. My inclination is to think he knows what he's talking about. Note in particular the historical argument:
Well no s**t cutting spending and raising taxes would be a bad idea. Where was anyone suggesting this? I think both sides of the floor can agree that this would be stupid.
Raising taxes/cutting spending is not the opposite of raising taxes/raising spending (which most Conservatives are scared the NDP/Liberals would do).
Maybe I just misunderstood the point you were trying to get across...
How is he being a hypocrite? I read his post as saying "let's stop calling each other names and start talking about these issues like adults."
It's high time for that in my view. I don't see where he was calling anyone anything. Both sides need to take a deep breath and realize that the other side isn't some nefarious cabal of evildoers trying to undo everything that's good and sacred. The political discussion will improve if we all recognize that politicians (for all the ugliness of politics) generally do what they do because they believe it's the best thing for the country. That includes Harper.
Well no s**t cutting spending and raising taxes would be a bad idea. Where was anyone suggesting this? I think both sides of the floor can agree that this would be stupid.
Raising taxes/cutting spending is not the opposite of raising taxes/raising spending (which most Conservatives are scared the NDP/Liberals would do).
Maybe I just misunderstood the point you were trying to get across...
Krugman is essentially saying that recessions are not the time to be a deficit hawk--period. The government needs to create a stimulus for the economy, and deficit spending is sometimes the only way to create one that's big enough. There are long term costs, but they're far outweighed by both short and long-term gains. That's how I read Krugman's point.
I think the worst thing that will result from all this is the final and complete alienation of Western Canada. Canada has always had a tenuous political stability with the various regions holding strongly opposing political and social views, but the the thread of federalism has always managed to hold us together. But the Eastern regional parties basically banding together to stick a collective finger in the eye of Western Canadians and including a party whose stated purpose is the breakup of Confederation will ultimately sever any unity within this country. I never thought I would see the day that Liberals and NDP would sell their (federalist) souls for political power.
__________________ There are excesses in science and there are excesses in religion. A reasonable man wouldn't be stamped by either one - Carl Sagan
Money can't buy happiness, but it can buy assassins!
The last I just heard about the coalitiion is the majority of the economic stimulus package will go to bail out the motor and forestry industries. I cant see bailiing out the motor industry will do any good if we do so before the USA announces their intentions.
And they said they won't rescind the tax cuts to corporations, apparently the Liberals would not go along with that.
And the latest numbers on Canada's economy show we are just a bit ahead of track, as Flaherty had announced previously. But I expect that with the current shenanigans, that will change drastically in the next quarter.
Krugman is essentially saying that recessions are not the time to be a deficit hawk--period. The government needs to create a stimulus for the economy, and deficit spending is sometimes the only way to create one that's big enough. There are long term costs, but they're far outweighed by both short and long-term gains. That's how I read Krugman's point.
Is there another way to read that point?
Are you insinuating that Harper is being a defecit hawk? He's said "We won't run a defecit unless we unveil a stimulus package" and "the next budget will contain stimulus actions based on advice from the G20 and leading economists".
It just blows my mind that we could have a Layton/Ignatieff steer us through this mess instead of someone with an economics degree.
I think the worst thing that will result from all this is the final and complete alienation of Western Canada. Canada has always had a tenuous political stability with the various regions holding strongly opposing political and social views, but the the thread of federalism has always managed to hold us together. But the Eastern regional parties basically banding together to stick a collective finger in the eye of Western Canadians and including a party whose stated purpose is the breakup of Confederation will ultimately sever any unity within this country. I never thought I would see the day that Liberals and NDP would sell their (federalist) souls for political power.
Agreed. I never thought I'd see the day that the Liberals would partner up with the NDP. Didn't Trudeau once even engineer his own downfall to avoid giving the NDP the balance of power? These two party historically DO NOT get along.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Agreed. I never thought I'd see the day that the Liberals would partner up with the NDP. Didn't Trudeau once even engineer his own downfall to avoid giving the NDP the balance of power? These two party historically DO NOT get along.
This is like the Flames and Canucks teaming up to beat the Oilers in the 80s... while promising to give the Stanley Cup to the Canadiens, even though they "won't be involved."
And they said they won't rescind the tax cuts to corporations, apparently the Liberals would not go along with that.
So if the revenue for the spending isn't coming from the corporate tax cuts, then where's it coming from? Individual taxes? Carbon taxation? Go into a 30 billion dollar deficit?
And why would Layton come on board the coalition train without sticking it to the big greedy corporations that he loves so much?
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
So if the revenue for the spending isn't coming from the corporate tax cuts, then where's it coming from? Individual taxes? Carbon taxation? Go into a 30 billion dollar deficit?
Probably deficit spending. Keep in mind that the Conservatives have suggested that they would likely have to go this way if they were to offer a stimulus package as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
And why would Layton come on board the coalition train without sticking it to the big greedy corporations that he loves so much?
It's called compromise. Something the Conservatives had initially refused to do until the threat of the coalition was looming over their heads. They have already rescinded the public funding for the parties and the strike ban proposed for public employees. Let's see how much further they go to remain in power.
