Toro

You do not understand American society if you believe that the government attempts to provide an equal opportunity to all. Rather, it is defined through the ability of the individaul to attain for himself. Americans do not define equal opportunity to all as in everyone starts at the same position. Rather, its defined as there is no class or caste system that stops you from getting to the top. There is no caste system in the US. "Brutal social Darwinism" does not exist in the United States. Its a mythology that Canadians and Europeans use to define themselves. The US spends a fair amount on social and health programs, just not as much as other industrialized countries. I would agree with you, though, that Canada is not like continental Europe. Canada is more in the Anglo-American camp, as the French would define it, and leaning more to the Anglo side of that equation. Canada is America with a stronger safety net.

No its not. Its 4.9%. Its extremely low. Here it is. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm Fast food places are beginning to use their billboards outside their restaurants to advertise for workers as opposed to specials again like they did in the 1990s.

You mean by growing the economy?

Look above you. I edited my post.

So why endorse a policy that has almost universally had a shrinking effect on the middle class? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Which is what exactly? At market exchange rates, the German economy has shrunk, on average, 1.0% per year for the past 8 years. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3710 That's a shrinking middle class. Everyone is shrinking together.

That is true, but Chretien was also perhaps the luckiest politician to have ever been PM. His 3 terms were due as much to the fact that the Conservatives imploded. Its fairly unlikely that Chretien would not have one 3 terms if there was a credible opposition in Canada.

This is a very bad idea. Taxing savings is terrible policy, under any guise. Its just another tax grab. I know a bit about finance and financial institutions, and I understand the logic behind it - banks around the world are getting bigger, Canadian banks are being left behind and are thus losing out on financing business because they do not have the capital to compete. I do not know, however, if I agree with it. Large bank mergers often do not work, and there is little evidence that these supermarket banking behemoths are better amalgamated than separate. In the US, banks that are acquisitive often have lower multiples and are thus valued lower than other banks. So I'm not convinced bank mergers are necessary. But I'm not against them either. Infrastructure for the sake of infrastructure is bad policy - it is the primary cause of the mess Japan is in today. Where government spending on infrastructure is positive is when the spending increases economic growth after its finished, not just as it is occurring, and when domestic demand is stagnant. Using both these criteria, its difficult to say that Canada needs more infrastructure spending as Canada really doesn't need more roads and demand is quite strong.

No, making as many people as possible richer is the key. No society is perfect. However, the Left in Canada likes to paint America as this society as one between the haves and the have nots. In reality, both societies are ones of the middle-class, with fewer wealthy but fewer poor in Canada. But American society is a bit more dynamic, and the middle-class lives a little better in America than Canada. But not if the policies to level the playing field actually lowers or stagnates the playing field. You can make the least fortunate better relatively by lowering the standards of everyone else. In Europe, societies have instituted polices that no longer allow the middle class to grow, or grow very slowly. Yet the middle class is not willing to sacrifice enough to create conditions to allow those on social assistance to find employment even though they are taxed heavily. Societies do not have to change, and Germany may not. But its better to have working poor, as in America, than to have unemployed poor, as in Europe.

Actually, I think mirror is responding to my comment about having to change the German economy. He makes an interesting point, its a valid point and it is a criticism you hear in Europe - change the model and you become more like the Americans. Its one I strongly disagree with because Germany is not creating jobs with unemployment over 12%, and it must alter its economy if anything is going to get better. One can go on all they want about how humane such a model is, but I think that a society that has so many unemployed in the name of humanity is not humane.

One of the reasons why this is being proposed is because Germany is losing jobs left and right to Eastern Europe, and a few Eastern European countries have adopted a flat tax, though my memory fails me at this moment as I cannot remember exactly which ones. There are over 4 million unemployed in Germany, and the unemployment rate is over 12%. The economy isn't growing and companies are increasingly moving investment out of Germany. Germany is sick, and the country must embrace market reforms if it wants to grow. If it doesn't want to grow and maintain the status quo, so be it. But ain't nothing going to improve until they make changes.

Whatever it is, its Bush's fault. I give Chretien a lot of credit for solving the deficit problem. I don't think we should underestimate that. And though it may have been Martin driving it, Chretien still had final say and deserves credit. However, if Chretien was CEO of a company and his company almost imploded on his watch, in part because of his inaction, he would have been fired. Canada was almost lost by about the capacity of the Forum. If 25,000 people had voted the other way, Canada may not exist today. And Chretien's incompetence and inaction is partly to blame. I was always amazed the Canadians were so forgiving of that. We should also recognize that Chretien was perhaps the luckiest PM ever. The opposition collapsed and disintegrated. That's why he won 3 majorities. Adscam is a disgrace. Chretien is an old time politician whose practices the public loathes. I did like him when he took that protestor out who got too close to him. That was great.

Germany needs a Margaret Thatcher or its continue to sink in its own morass a la Japan.

The WTO is a UN institution? Are you sure about that? I don't think that's the case. The WTO is an outgrowth of the GATT, which was signed a few years after WWII. http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis..._e/inbr02_e.htm

For those who like irony - Here in Florida, Bill Nelson, the Democratic incumbent, is up for re-election. Nelson is a former astronaut and has been around state politics a long time. He is considered vulnerable in Florida, and with the GOP taking the first of two Florida senate seats last year from the Dems, and winning virtually every other state wide election over the past 6 years, believe they can take it. The woman leading in the polls for the Republican primary is Katherine Harris - THE Katherine Harris who certified the election results for Bush after the 2000 election fiasco. Harris became a national hero to the GOP, spoke around the country at Republican fundraisers and won a seat in the House in Sarasota in 2002. You would think the White House would get behind her like they did with Mel Martinez in 2004 considering how pivotal Harris was to Bush and how popular she is in the Republican Party. You would think wrong, however. The White House is scrambling here in the state to find an alternative to Harris, but several prominent Republicans have declined. In what is seen as a very winnable seat for the GOP, the White House believes Nelson will beat Harris because she is a lightening rod who appeals only to the party faithful while the rest of the state has a negative opinion of her. Right. And you are engaging in partisan politics in the exact same way. To the Bush-haters, everything is Bush's fault.

That may be true, but Canada is helluva lot better than France or Germany. Canada is more like the UK, and is - as the French would say - more so resembles the "Anglo-American" rather than the European social model.

I love these "impeach Bush" things. Who controls the Senate? Who controls the House? Now tell me who is going to impeach Bush exactly. Bush retains strong numbers amongst the rank-and-file GOP. If you want to keep banging your head against the wall, be my guest.

Hillary's negatives are consistently in the 30-40% range. That is very high. I don't think she can win. If the Republicans are smart - and I don't know if they are - they'd select McCain. It would be McCain's to lose.

Eventually, yes. The NDP will not run the province forever and the Saskatchewan Liberals have to be the most incompetent political party in the country. 19 were busted under Devine and I think either 4 or 6 went to prison. The Saskatchewan Party is essentially the Tory party in Saskatchewan.

That is absolutely fabulous. Maybe he continue down Japan's much-needed road to reform. Now, we await a similar result for that Angie chick in Germany.

Okay, I'm going to block your posts mirror. (No offence!)

No, there is a difference. Canada's currency could be improving while the US is also improving, but its not. Canada is improving relative to itself while at best, the US is stable, or, more likely, deteriorating.

I think it is fair to say that the Canadian dollar is not really rising; it is the US dollar that is falling. Its both. The loonie has also outperformed the Euro.

If the dollar keeps going higher, it could risk the large manufacturing in Ontario, which is already in poor financial shape -- which in turn would weaken the economy. Which would give the Tories a loaded gun to fire This is an interesting point. The strengthening dollar is at least in part due to Martin and the balanced budget. However, its also because of external demand for Canadian raw materials, which has nothing to do with the Liberals. So, in Ontario, where Martin is most likely to benefit from his credentials as good for the economy, the strengthening dollar hurts manufacturing. Out west, it will not help as much since the strengthening loonie is seen as due to demand for oil.

What happens when you do that? Do you not see any of the member's posts?

The Republicans will lose seats during mid-term elections. They will not lose the senate. There is an outside shot they lose the House.