Vancouver King

I am suggesting the record speaks for itself: $12 billion dollar inherited surplus squandered $3 billion dollar contingency fund eliminated asset disposals at depressed prices contemplated This would make the most prolifigate NDP regime blush.

wow thats quite the zinger - running on empty, sweety?

Of course not, you are a Harper conservative, you are an expert at squandering money.

Thank you for confirming our Canadian bank relief is Wikipedia's exact definition of a bailout.

Lower than Geoffrey's 1.75% mortgage rate? What is the much lower rate you refer to? Do you have a link for this claim? I thought not.....

You can't be serious, why even waste the breath asking the question? Quebec nationalism is currently in thankful slumber. There will be less tranquil times in the future to revisit this issue.

Geoffrey made a career in this forum savaging all who questioned the banks unalterable right to function without regulation and oversight. He cheered on American policy that removed the last vestige of oversight in investment banking resulting in the poisoned derivatives that now choke global institutions. Money changers, speculators and con artists of his ilk are directly responsible for the financial wreckage that now lies around the globe. His scorn and arrogance are disquieting reminders of just how far we've sunk.

To think we could have been the envy of the world in the midst of this financial storm if only Harper and Co. and not taken the decisions to squander a $12 billion surplus, eliminate a $3 billion contingency fund and drain the treasury with questionable GST reductions. So now we are reduced to fire sale asset disposals - truly an amazing performance yet somehow a fitting commentary on this govt's finance record.

...if, if, if.....if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle.

You might consider joining Dancer in her night economics class.

There is noticeably less Harper-type drivel over the sanctity of the unfettered market; get the govt out of the face of business, cut red tape and regulation, etc. etc, now that the world's largest businesses line up for corporate welfare. Socialist state intervention, suddenly, is all the rage. You can wager, though, if profitable times return, conservatives will pickup where they left off: govt has no place in the 'free market'. A good rule of thumb is this: Only the profits are privatized - the losses are now to be borne by taxpayers.

If only Tories could shut down Wikipedia....

Wikipedia definition of bailout: "Often a bailout is in response to a short-term cash flow crunch, where an entity with illiquid, but sufficient assets, is given funds to "tide it over" until short term problems are resolved." Change 'given funds' to 'sell outstanding loans to govt' and you have a term that seems to describe the current situation: a bailout.

Moving forward has never been a priority for conservatives - that's why they are called conservatives. Neo-cons like Harper have agendas wrapped up with putting more money in the pockets of the rich and, to help accomplish this aim, by putting more money in corporate coffers. $40 billion in tax breaks for banks, oil companies etc. are in addition to just announced $75 billion relief to the same chartered banks. In all of these mind boggling numbers how many dollars are ear marked for struggling, hard working taxpayers? Zero, nada, nothing. That's right, not a dime. What else can be expected from a govt that raised income taxes on the poorest working Canadians in 2006?

Tories better be seated at the table stateside when Obama's team finalize details of the auto sector bailout. Someone needs to defend Canada's stake in the industry particularly in light of the new president's campaign rhetoric on defending American jobs. Canadians can only hope Obama has forgotten - or forgiven - Harper's PMO NAFTA intervention in the US primary process designed to embarrass the new president. If terms of the American auto relief involve gutting their Canadian operations, we will have Stephen Harper to thank for the job losses.

Only an idiot would make such a statement. Honda and Toyota both have V-8 pickups available and to you that seems to neutralize their deserved reputation for filling their showrooms with fuel efficient vehicles. Why don't you try a night course in economics?

...and your witty explanation for why our banks need additional bailouts while the global banking system recovers, is? No oversight required on these mammoth bailouts? I know reality has a built in liberal bias, but try your best to address the above.

So taxpayer's money should simply be handed over without accountability or veto power over how funds should be used? How could any govt input into on going operations be worse than the Big 3's own record? You could be right on the equity stake. Deutsch Bank says GM shares are worthless even with treasury relief. This bailout can only be justified on the cost to govt, including social costs, versus the 'free market' judgment of allowing them to fail. Apparently the math dictates state intervention.

All this expensive process and time frame only to confirm the obvious: Michael Ignatieff will lead the Grits into the next election battle.

And yet the Libor rate, the interest rate charged by banks to one another for loans, has steadily declined to near precrash levels, a sure indication that liquidity is improving not declining. What special problems does our 'best financial system in the world' have that the public is unaware of? This latest bailout, and the auto, etc. relief to come, demands that parliamentary oversight be intense on the terms and performance of this colossal relief. Frankly, I don't trust Harper's govt to act in the public interest when the current financial chaos gives them extraordinary opportunity to service their highest priority: transferring vast amounts of wealth to big business and the rich at the expense of working Canadians.

I seem to recall an ad campaign in the late '70's from Ford promoting their vehicles "road hugging weight". Now, two generations later, the company is on it's knees unable to sell more over sized gas eaters. Should taxpayers be asked to subsidize this performance without management input, strict limits on management compensation or an equity stake?

I have dibs on that '54 Merc convertible that appears in Castro's latest turista ad.

Of course light trucks are necessary. What is not necessary is 300HP under the hood to haul anything - including the owners butt to the office every morning.

Something is just not right when the same TV news program that hints at imminent 'Big 3' bailout relief then runs a commercial extolling the virtues of hemi V-8 powered half tons. Who will save these corporations from themselves?

Then why are they not selling?