jacee

Ya the wealth that got stashed offshore and never was taxed as income would be a good start.

Ya the Bush_Cheney thing is just a bit past its best before date.

"Total warfare" against whom? You've lost me ...

Not the bankers, though they toady to them. I'm talking about the wealthiest 1percent of the population who own 40percent of the wealth and all of the power. The wealth is stashed offshore and the power is having politicians in their pockets. They run the country, and our money increasingly flows into their pockets.

Oh they do but it's a multiparty system like ours with a 40-60 split.

If Hudak doesn't know any better than to refer to Canadian citizens as "foreigners" then the PC party has sure scraped the slime from the bottom of the barrel to find him as a 'leader'.Does the corporate/business sector really find such ignorance attractive? GO HUDAK! You're doing a great job! BTW ... did I mention that Hudak's wife bald-faced lied to the Judge at the Ipperwash Inquiry? Such a nice couple.

I'd like to search it out again too, but time doesn' allow for it today. Maybe the SUV and hummer drivers should be paying a premium for their gas, not getting a break. Food for thought: The 13-year bill for corporate welfare is equivalent to about 40 per cent of our $500-billion federal debt. Regrettably, both corporate welfare and public debt look set to spike in the years ahead. It’s not a coincidence. Much of the latter is caused by the former. http://mobi.fcpp.org/publication.php/3067 .

Corporate managers are not the top 1percent of wealth holders. They are the lackeys to the real holders of an obscene and increasing portion of the wealth and most of the political power.http://www.vanityfair.com/society/features/2011/05/top-one-percent-201105?mobify=0 " In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent. Their lot in life has improved considerably. Twenty- five years ago, the corresponding figure (was) ... 33 percent. One response might be to celebrate the ingenuity and drive that brought good fortune to these people, and to contend that a rising tide lifts all boats. That response would be misguided. While the top 1 percent have seen their incomes rise 18 percent over the past decade, those in the middle have actually seen their incomes fall. For men with only high-school degrees the decline has been precipitous—12 percent in the last quarter-century alone. All the growth in recent decades—and more—has gone to those at the top. In terms of income equality, America lags behind any country in the world ... Among our closest counterparts are Russia with its oligarchs and Iran. While many of the old centers of inequality in Latin America, such as Brazil, have been striving in recent years, rather successfully, to improve the plight of the poor and reduce gaps in income, America has allowed inequality to grow." And the situation is virtually the same in Canada. In this situation, corporate tax cuts are just another conduit for funnelling wealth to the wealthiest. I read that US corporations that stash their profits overseas are waiting for another tax holiday like 2004 to 'repatriate' the money at a 5percent tax rate: Low income earners pay 10percent. Corporate tax cuts are just another scam perpetrated by the wealthiest against all of the rest of us, by virtue of their well greased access to our governments.

Ya? Who was that ... Bob? Seriously, tell the pathetic idiots to quit being a burden on the public purse and get a friggen job! It's just the white supremists who are beating a path to the CHRT to whine and moan about their fate for political purposes. Their attitude is what prevents them from getting jobs: They don't have what it takes to work in Canada today. Do YOU want to hire them? Does ANYBODY want to hire those pathetic twits? A young neighbour of mine didn't like the supervisor's way of organizing the workplace, and started railing on the "camel jockey" about how things are done "in Canada". He got his walking papers and thinks he was discriminated against for being white. Duh!

No it isn't nonsense. Look up the subsidies, and compare them to company statements. An oil sands company got $250m in subsidy and posted $250m in profits for the same year, their first year of operation.Thank you for acknowledging that subsidies to the oil companies should be eliminated. You must be some kind of lefty radical! BTW ... did the US taxpayers get their $5b back or did it too go into shareholders' pockets? $5b could pay for health care and nutritious food for a LOT of children, Millions. Do you know that poor nutrition (and low income people can seldom afford good nutrition) is the primary cause of learning problems in children? It destroys them early and they never acquire the skills to hold down a job. Re GDP/GPI: I guess I wasn't clear but I was suggesting that use of the less-than-valid GDP in doing economic forecasting is resulting in invalid forecasting. As we've seen in the past few days., economic forecasts are crashing globally. Use of a GPI would improve the quality of forecasts as it accounts for the REAL costs of industry born by taxpayers.

Oh excuse me! I didn't realize you were talking only about jobs for the "lower class" (!) But ... not even the "lower class" can live on that pay. The only reason I mentioned "middle class" is because the superrich have already decimated lower income people, are in the final assault on the middle class, and next will be their lackeys in the upper income brackets who are not among the top 1percent of wealth holders. They want your money too. Sociopaths who prey on society are never content until they have it all.

I do agree that all hate crimes should be treated as criminal offences. What about discrimination in employment, housing and other services? Personally, I'd like to see perpetrators of these offences against society be treated as criminals as well.

It's obscene to crow about paying investors the money that companies "save" by paying people less than what they need for basic necessities of life. NO ONE in Canada can live on $8.50 an hour. That might cover rent and utilities but not food and transportation.The business/industrial complex is busily decimating the middle class and pouring more and more money into the offshore accounts of the superrich. When are you people going to figure out that they don't care about you either? It's a sociopathic scam. You're next.

http://www.jewsforajustpeace.com/ ""Independent Jewish Voices has voted to join the international boycott campaign because we stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people and support their right to self-determination," says Diana Ralph, Co-Chair of IJV. "We are calling on the Canadian government and all Members of Parliament to push for immediate sanctions on Israel. ""The time has come for people around the world to rise to the challenge in Israel/Palestine, as we did for South Africa," says Fabienne Presentey, Steering Committee member of IJV. "All voices that can be raised against this injustice must be." ... "Independent Jewish Voices is a member-led organization with chapters in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto Hamilton, Ottawa, Montreal, and Halifax. http://www.jewsforajustpeace.com/ And see ... http://jfjfp.com/ http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DgmS7rD_4mPA&v=gmS7rD_4mPA&gl=CA My understanding is that the majority of people in Israel itself support Palestinian independence. The hardline right wing government is the perpetrator of violence and obstacles against achieving peace, apparently preferring blood and guts revenge and wallowing in angst over civilized behaviour, defense expenditures over housing, bombing children over educating them, etc. Perhaps support of Jews abroad will give Israelis the courage to throw the perps out of power.

"White folks"? When did Caledonia become entirely comprised of "white folks"? Of course the fact that the nearest town was attempting to build on disputed land without consultation and accommodation of Aboriginal rights had nothing to do with it? Afterall, 'white rights' must remain supreme, in your privileged perspective? The unfortunate thing for the people of Caledonia is that those like you Bill, promoting the 'white rights' perspective at their expense , don't even live in Caledonia! I suggest you promote your 'white rights' agenda in your own neighbourhood instead.

If we stand in opposition to discrimination by race, religion, etc in employment, housing, etc., does it it not follow that we must have mechanisms in place to investigate and rule on such issues? Rather than just whining about the mechanism in place, can anyone suggest better processes?

Setting aside for the moment the social costs, it appears to me that the environmental costs of industries have to be addressed to provide valid evidence of economic health. The BP spill in the gulf cost the American government $220b in public money, a substantial amount out of the taxpayers pockets unplanned. If we can use past data on cleanup costs for unexpected events and for site restoration, again largely born by taxpayers, we can have a better idea of the actual benefit of industries ... in dollars. Economists should be climbing on board to add more costs into their mix, as obviously better predictors are needed if their forecasts are going to be of any use whatsoever. No one is suggesting we adopt someone else's GPI measures, but that we develop one that works for us, perhaps even different elements for different areas of the country (see GPI Atlantic, for example). I could live without the social cost element, but I do believe environmental costs are now having a substantial impact on the public budget and should be accounted for. If industries are going to deplete resources and render the surrounding environment uninhabitab le , there is a cost to that for the taxpayers. Should those costs not be part of the calculation of profits? If companies are going to declare bankruptcies and re-form as different entities while moving on to the next site, should those public costs not be entered into any calculation that attempts to provide an estimate of national economic health? The GDP is an estimate of profits going to shareholders via increased 'product' but it is not a good estimate of the economic health of a country as it does not address the costs of industry that are born by the public and are draining public budgets. "Although the US GDP has increased substantially over this period (ie the past two decades), the GPI has charted a 45 percent decline." Might explain the crashing economic forecasts, don't you think? And btw, why can an oil company post profits that consist entirely of corporate subsidy from taxpayers' pockets? Why can industries go bankrupt to avoid environmental remediation? Because we let them. We simply cannot afford these costs anymore and we need to use more accurate measures that provide REAL cost estimates.

Nor, apparently very useful.Better a valid measure with challenges than one easy to calculate that takes you in the wrong direction. If you need bread would you go to the hardware store because it's easier to park there? If you want valid economic forecasting, don't rely on the GDP anymore.. It doesn't adequately account for costs and thus overestimates status and progress. It also doesn't account for lousy products that drain resources through constant replacement.

What land is that, and how is it yours? It appears that they will be there. Now what? Bomb them some more? If Israel intends to remain a viable state, perhaps it should act like one.

Cite please? I don't recall that part of their performance. Was that in the song they sang perhaps?

cite?

Well said, and I agree. We expect student to collaborate efficiently in the classroom. Employers expect employees to collaborate efficiently in the workplace. And yet we accept government that blusters and bickers like nincompoops for hours and hours on tv, on our dime? That's not governance, that's just Jerry Springer without the hairpulling! Proportionate representation would help broaden the discussion and improve the quality of legislation IF all reps have to be accountable to a constituency and not just a party.

Geez, next she'll be hollering "We are the 99 percent!" and occupying Wall Street!

Oh crap! Now you just aren't being sensible. Take your place in the school of gbambino/smallc school of make believe! ¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨¨ Edited to add: Legally ... Indigenous Nations have recourse to the International Courts of Justice, who rule according to documents encompassed by the UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Pollitically ... 1) Harper refused to sign the UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 2) Harper wanted a seat on the UN Security Council, but didn't get it because of 1). 3) Harper signed. Economically ... If Harper makes Canada look like an ass on the international stage, say goodbye to your markets. Successive governments of Canada, on our behalf, have devolved the responsibility for accommodating Aboriginal rights to those directly infringing on those rights: If you want to build or drill or extract, you consult with and accommodate the Nation with Aboriginal title/rights to the land: They retain the right to sustain themselves from that land (and the products thereof), and their interests will include protecting the capacity of the land to sustain human life. Not sayin it's easy, but it's both reasonable and sensible I think.

"Aboriginal title is a common law doctrine that the land rights of indigenous peoples to customary tenure persist after the assumption of sovereignty under settler colonialism. ... Aboriginal title was first acknowledged in the early 19th century, in decisions in which indigenous peoples were not a party. Significant aboriginal title litigation resulting in victories for indigenous peoples did not arise until recent decades. The majority of court cases have been litigated in Australia, Canada, Malaysia, New Zealand, and the United States. Aboriginal title is an important area of comparative law, with many cases being cited as persuasive authority across jurisdictions." No they can't ... ... because extinguishment requires the consent of the First Nation, which will happen when pigs fly. Well you are talking somewhat more sensibly than gbambino and smallc, who just reiterated garbage about how parliament can just do anything it wants to get rid of Aboriginal rights. At this point the Supreme Court orders federal, provincial and municipal governments and third parties (developers, pipeline/oil/mining/forestry etc corporations to negotiate agreements with Indigenous communities but as you said has not assigned limits. However, where the process or compensation is wholly inadequate, the Supreme Court will address the inadequacy.