CPCFTW

Can help move your region towards a New Economy future? That's hippy talk for make everyone poor so we can hug trees. Everyone knows the "new economy" values trees and economic stagnation over growth and hdtvs.

You are right! The definition of recession was "a period when the majority of citizens polled in a right-leaning news media outlet believe they are in a recession". Silly Sharkman didn't know you knew so much about recessions!

No thanks to playing. A country that forms its policy on the advice of arts academics would be doomed to fail. Pol.sci, public policy, and American studies graduates advising us how to create jobs? No thanks. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that arts grads lean very far left. The bias is self-evident.

Yes this study looks very unbiased. BY M A R K M U R O , J O N AT H A N R O T H W E L L , A N D D E VA S H R E E S A H http://www.brookings.edu/metro/Staff/sahad.aspx She holds a Ph.D. in public policy from the University of Texas at Austin and a master’s in political science from Purdue University. http://www.brookings.edu/metro/Staff/rothwellj.aspx He earned a master’s degree in economics from the New School () and a Ph.D. in policy from Princeton University. http://www.brookings.edu/experts/murom.aspx University of California, Berkeley, Master's of American Studies; Harvard College, Cambridge, MA, Bachelor of Arts, 1982 So a bunch of Arts academics and a guy with an "economics" degree from The New School. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_School Excuse me while I gag.

I already answered your question. It's not my problem you don't understand that taxing isn't a business and that multinational corporations "business" isn't limited to 500 Canadian workers and consumers. Run along now little Marx.

Great post, but you also forgot to mention the fact that just because a company as a whole is profitable, doesn't mean that the particular division facing a wage reduction generates profits. Profits are not uniformly distributed between divisions. The workers in an unprofitable division or subsidiary are not somehow entitled to a share of the parent company's profits generated by more profitable divisions.

His proof is an editorial posted earlier in this thread which he read and which now qualifies him as an expert on the subject. You better read that link or you're nothing more than a troll to be ignored!!

Yes read up on it like you have done by reading an editorial posted earlier in this thread. Thank you for reciting facts already mentioned in that article that everyone has read. You are clearly an expert on the subject now! Yes $35/hr, or around 70k/yr full-time for college graduates is a lot. Do you know any college graduates? It is the fallback for people who can't get into University (and university isn't hard to get into). Obviously these workers would not be locked out if it was not a lot. Use your head man and quit calling everyone who has a different opinion than you a troll. It is pathetic.

In what part of your fantasy world are businesses isolated to the Canadian economy?

Peter MacKay's a baller. Lee Richardson too (60+ and dated Krista Erickson). Money talks.

Taxes aren't a business... You don't pay more... Yes it's good business, these 500 workers made $35 per hour for many years... presumably they paid taxes and spent their money on products and services. It's a shame for them that workers in the US are willing to do their job for half as much.

$35/hr?!! No wonder they're packing up! If I was a CAT investor (and I am indirectly through US market ETFs), I'd be furious if they chose to pay Canadian workers $35/hr instead of paying an American $18/hr. Yes Nathan Smith, this does impact us all. We all have to pay taxes to buy these trains at inflated prices and many of us have an interest (through US market exposure in RRSPs and Pensions) in CAT continuing to strive for excellent investor returns. at his last comment... So clueless. You can bet dollars to donuts that Nathan Smith dumps his money into mutual funds and then wonders why his funds aren't performing well. Must be the execs pocketing his money!

I clearly meant relatively unprofitable (relative to closing up shop and going to the US). Furthermore, we're talking about this plant, and these 500 workers, not all of CAT. Do you think these 500 workers generated CAT's $4-5 Billion profit? (Hint: Caterpillar has over 120k employees. Maybe you should think before posting).

My point was that even with those perks, CAT management obviously believes it would be more profitable to relocate. Either better perks are being offered in the states, or the cost of union labour is simply that much higher here than stateside. I can assure you that the primary motivation is profits.

Big surprise.. The union makes it so unprofitable for CAT to stay in Canada that they are willing to shut down a plant, forego tax breaks, and open a new plant in the states. Better blame the government for not forcing corporations to accept lower pre-tax profits!!!

You should add that to your sign right underneath the part about how the government stole your hat. Have your empty timmies cup ready, I have a quarter with your name on it!

I'm sorry I'm not quite clear on what you're asking. Could you use more ellipses?

Gross. We would be even worse off. We are in a decent position only because we embraced only moderate socialism rather than full fledged socialism. We would be in Greece's position had we had NDP leaders. We will need a decade of Harper rule to right the ship... but that's a hell of a lot better than Greece will do.

Very true. My mother is an executive in another big fed government department and she has recounted countless horror stories about employees and how impossible it is to fire them. One of them involved a fat woman who always expensed 2 executive class seats for her travel until my mother banned her from going on the trips anymore. Basically in the government, if you are a useless employee, you will be offered a "secondment" to another department rather than being fired. There are countless employees who shuffle around in "secondments" for their careers doing almost nothing productive except collect a fat paycheque and pension.

I have no reason to "redeem" myself over your unnatural obsession with who I voted for in an anonymous poll on the mapleleafweb forums. I won't waste my time justifying a meaningless anonymous vote in response to your belittling remarks. Put the tinfoil hat back on and get back to cooking up conspiracy theories instead of worrying about who 20 people voted for on an anonymous mapleleafweb poll. I was just letting you know that it wasn't government brainwashed aliens from Andromeda.

I couldn't agree less. If you're a criminal, you're a criminal. It doesn't matter if you're mentally ill. Mark Lepine was arguably mentally ill, I wouldn't have supported him ever seeing the light of day if he hadn't blown off his head. Vince Weiguang Li was mentally ill. I don't care, lock him up. I don't want to worry about him forgetting to take his meds and... oops.. there goes someone else's head. Andrew Conley was mentally ill. He got locked up for life.. and the sick kid deserves to be there. Karla Homolka, Paul Bernardo, etc. I have no pity for these people, only their victims.

I clearly stated that my support for Harper is not only based on my trust in his future accomplishments, but also on Canada not having any great PMs as competition. Did you expect me to vote for Trudeau for plunging Canada into socialism?

Actually for the purposes of this poll, my opinion is much more important. I have 1 vote out of 50ish in this poll, those experts have none. We were discussing the legitimacy of the poll results. Please try to keep up or don't bother participating in the discussion.

People may have voted for him in this poll based on where they think this country will be by the end of his career. I voted for him based on my belief that he will have 7 more years to cement his legacy and save Canada from going the way of Europe. Harper certainly wouldn't be considered the greatest of all time if he fails to live up to my lofty expectations. I don't think Canada has had many great prime ministers though. We just happen to be living on a land blessed with an abundance of natural resources and with a friendly world superpower as our neighbor. Modern Canada is a success born from circumstances, not from leadership.

I was referring to the fact that Iggy himself was a history "expert".