blueblood

Do you lack reading comprehension or are you just stupid? Title of thread is who is more convincing. The question was who's side of the argument is more convincing. Not hard. Other people got it, why can't you. Sounds like your an embarassment to the education system in Ontario.

I am now stupider for having read this thread.

But did he have an actual monopoly? Only gov't can legitimately pull that off. Had Rockefeller actually pulled it off, there are just too many reserves in the world, too many other players, and the price of energy would have rose to a point where alternatives would have been considered a long time ago. Bill Gates famously said "It's not the competition I fear, it's the guy in the garage coming up with the next thing that will make me obselete." Now we have Google nipping at Microsoft.

Are you on a coke binge? You go around and tell people you disagree with that you "pwned" them and call people's arguments futile. I think your a fucking liar when you make those claims, and I went out to prove it. I have polled the posters at MLW and they all think that your arguments suck and are not convincing at all. A whopping 83% think you don't "own" anybody in an argument. I don't need to articulate my personal position on climate change, because Riverwind does it so much better than I can. What I can do, however is everytime you call someone's argument futile or say you "owned" someone in an argument, I can bring up this poll time and time again to show other posters and other site viewers the liar that you are. You shout down other posters for disagreeing with you, now it's come to bite you in the ass. Deal with it.

Just like Chretien pitching sandbags in '97. People in glass houses...

The only thing futile is your arguments. The fact a poll says that your debating skill suck, while you go and tell Bush-Cheney that his arguments are futile with no evidence to support your claim is laughable.

In Canada's case the government, the CWB, the dairy industry, Sask power, MTS circa 1990, Autopac, SGI, Manitoba Crop insurance. Those monopolies. The CRA is an example of gov't regulation that caused the mortgage bubble which caused the financial collapse. No regulation would have meant poor people went packing to start with, and the problem would have never gotten so big. Ask the U.S. banks what they think of Obama's new bank tax.

When you let foreign companies invest in your country more oil can be taken out. Chavez could produce lots of oil, but he chooses to screw over investors and look at the mess his country is. Oil industry in Venezula since 1922, their fault. No shit sherlock, ask the Irish. There is no US rule, if you believe that you wear a tinfoil hat. Iraq has its own parliamentary system and has the US troops there for security, don't worry the 'merkins will be gone soon enough. However the Iraq gov't is incompetant and Iraq just got out of a revolutionary war, its as big a gong show as Venezuela. However, Venezuela has had peaceful transitions of gov't for some time, yet they can't manage to run an economy, even the great Chavez can't pull it off. Hell the Irish didn't even have that advantage. Chavez brags about socialism being the greatest thing since sliced bread, a system that is perfect, yet his people live in squalor. He is the definition of a failure. Everybody else cashed in on 147 dollar oil, why can't he? How could conditions not improve, Paris Hilton could make conditions improve there. The Irish didn't even have oil money, and in 10 years they magically transformed their country, why can't Chavez and his perfect system do so? And you don't understand hyperinflation. With the wave of his hand, the people of Venezuela's purchasing power has been cut in half. A fat lot of good that education did the Irish most of the 20th century. And I suppose you haven't heard of education inflation either. Ask a person with a philosophy degree what kind of a job they can get and for what salary. Well if Socialism is the be all and end all and capitalism is an evil failure according to Chavez, if Ireland can achieve prosperity in 10 yrs. without oil and using the capitalist system, why can't venezuela using the socialist system have a similar standard of living? maybe because socialism sucks. No, just a gong show just like Venezuela, however a free gong show. And that same small child can see that your grasping at straws to justify a tin pot dictator for impoverishing his own people. Just like you and your leftist think tanks think that chavez is the second coming of jesus that will save the venezuelans and that socialism is the only way for a society to become prosperous. Given the results of the USSR and the fact that leftist countries are broke losers, I'll side with the cato institute over your tin foil hatists. USSR = Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. They were socialists whether you believe it or not, and they went down in history as epic failures. The EU are all social democracies, how come they aren't undermined by the west? oh wait, maybe because they have accountable gov't that doesn't screw its people over. Those countries screwed themselves and use the west as a scapegoat, which puts you on par with the losers of their country for believing that nonsense. Of course when your a tin pot dictator who has the unwavering support of the armed forces, who bullies and silences dissenters, of course people are going to vote him in, they're scared otherwise. What the hell are you talking about. Oil costs money to extract, money the Venezuelans don't have. Yet in 1943 standard oil agreed to a 50-50 deal to the country. Alberta doesn't even get a royalty agreement like that, yet they are far richer than Venezuela. those foreign oil companies were paying royalties of 17% and Chavez comes along and robs them of another 13%. The Venezuelans had a far "favorable" royalty structure than Alberta, yet they're still broke, how come? Yes we would be stealing if we broke that deal. Apparently you need to work on your contract law skills. There was no one sided deal with Venezuela, to suggest otherwise is tin foil hattetness. Alberta has lower royalty rates and greater prosperity. Then there is the rock bottom corporate taxes in Ireland for the use of its land and people. If you think jacking up royalty rates and taxes are how you get an economy going it's time for an economics class for you. Chavez should have stopped the moment he thought about being a foreign leader. Chavez made the investment climate unstable and his people are paying the price. Chavez is a tin pot dictator, that money is being spent on armed forces and a life of luxury for Chavez and his loyalists. No, he's interested in enslaving the Latin American people to him, keeping them poor, and robbing oil companies to fill his bank account. GWB is minor leagues compared to this clown.

Free markets are a two way street. With the lack of regulations, it is much harder to hide behind laws to be able to corner the market. Monopolies only exist because of gov't regulations. If someone tried to corner the market on insulin causing prices to rise, that sends a signal to someone else to start making insulin, and it eventually works out to equilibrium. They also hide inefficiencies. Sure there might be less market crashes, but when they do happen, its getting to be a bigger and bigger problem. Regulation and bureaucracy try to take out the cyclical nature of markets, which doesn't work and only goes to make the peaks and valleys larger and larger. Eg. Bailout of Chrysler and GM. Cost taxpayers billions, the companies are still horrible. They should have went bankrupt and let other car makers divy up the assets. They are vulnerable because when its tax time or talk of tax increases guess who the whipping boy is. The rich are also vulnerable because at the bottom line come election day they are out voted by a large margin. It takes a lot of resources to persuade ordinary people not to elect a party that will soak them in order to better society.

Your half right, it's cool sh*t in 3D directed by James Cameron. I see this film as being marketed as both a "visual epic" and "a James Cameron film" I don't know if people would want to see "Capitalism a love story" in 3D, just because its not cool in this day and age. Which I think is too bad, but I am just one person. What I would pay to see is Michael Moore and Kevin O'Leary debate capitalism and socialism in a movie shot in 3D. That would be epic.

Ah but in the 90's when Reagan's policies were starting to bear fruit, the US saw its biggest growth ever. You forgot about the shareholders in that capitalist example benefitting by having the factory shut down and move to China. Society as a whole won by having that factory close. In countries such as Canada and the US with ocean freight being as cheap as it is, there is no way we can compete with other countries in doing that kind of grunt work. Just because a factory closes, that doesn't mean its the end of the world for those workers, it's a matter of finding work in the sectors that we can do that nobody else can. There is a trade off the other way if those workers kept their jobs, goods would be more expensive and the value of the company would decrease and that could affect thousands of people. There has also been one of the most significant revolutions in human history started by rapid increases in taxation as well. Revolutions are a two way street. It's not about paying less and less with investing, it's about the returns your going to get. Say I have 10 dollars. Me being an investor and a cheapskate, I want to make money. I have a choice of two investments, I invest a dollar and get 3 in the long run, I didn't spend much, but I didn't gain much. Next one has me spending 5 dollars, but in the long run getting 20, I spent a lot of my money, but in the long run made a lot of money compared to when I started previously.

Oh Trudeau what a prize he turned out to be. Created the massive deficits, during Mulroney's time he got eaten alive by the interest rates. Then there is the war measures act. I don't know of a tory PM who invoked that little daisy in peace time, but I can name one Liberal PM. For Martin discussing soldiers on the streets, he shouldn't by throwing rocks from a glass house. So sticking your head in the sand and bending over is your way to stop bad people? Glad you weren't leading the free world in 1939.

Those too. Wasteland is subjective

Slashing enviro programs and the CBC for starters, gov't services that can be done by the private sector. Cuts to the civil service. A little nip here a little nip there so to speak. The tax base increases because the less taxes on business, the more incentive there is for foreign investment/business start ups, not to mention job creation. It's better to gain sources of tax rather than upping the rates.

Just because this is Mr. Canada, I'll defend the Liberals. Do you have the polling results for Trudeau's majority gov'ts? As much as I despise Trudeau, the numbers don't lie and at that period in Canadian history, he was a very popular leader.

If market prices rise, then if your a wheat exporting country that's great. If prices rise, that's a signal for Africa to get into wheat production for themselves and for export, and very recently they just got into that. The other problem is tin pot dictatorships that squander whatever else they do, which has resulted in a mess. The problem is they don't have any money to buy grain or exploit their resources. That money to do so comes from foreign investment, and selling whatever they produce. Ag production is the ground floor of where to start an economy. I've been clear I heavily favor a low flat tax, and a cap on spending, which results in an increased tax base. Think of Walmart selling things at rock bottom prices, but due to its sheer size is able to generate massive profits - that's how I view our tax system should be. By capping spending, and continuously growing the tax base, you should be able to lower taxes in perpetuity, just not massive percentage points.

Ireland was a country that was kicked in the balls by the brits for centuries. On top of that, had a revolution and instability for the first 80 yrs. of the 20th century, hell there were even terrorists there. No excuse for venezuela. Chavez claims that capitalism is evil and that socialism is the best system in the world. By his claims of how great socialism is, shouldn't venezuela be the best country in the world? The foreign multinationals pay royalties to foreign governments, it's a percentage because of the cost to develop those resources and the cost of doing business. No sane business person is going to give 100% of their profits back to the same country. However those foreign multinationals spend money in a country, provide jobs to its citizens, pay taxes, and pay royalties. That's how it works. Ireland knows this and got rich, Kuwait knows this and got rich, Alberta knows this and got rich. Norway has a stable, government that doesn't steal money from foreign investors. However Norway is one of the most expensive countries in the world to live in. Alberta has had a right wing gov't for almost 40 years, and they are the first and only debt free province in Canada. On top of that, Albertans are far more free than Norweigans are. Venezuela doesn't come into the freedom mix because of the whole tin pot dictatorship there.

Unless you are a commodity exporting country, then you want those prices to rise. Including ag commodities. When 75% of grain is exported, you want those prices high. I'm hoping my taxes go down forever, as long as the tax base expands and gov't spending is capped. They are going to "share" their wealth with the general community by buying things, saving in banks, and investing.

They were poor then and are poor now. So much for socialism being the gift from heaven to save the venezuelans. 10 years and nothing but failure. He is stealing from the oil companies who have invested there in good faith and have signed agreements. They agree to invest in oil infrastructure for a piece of the pie. If the oil companies don't get their share of the pie, the gravy train stops. Some oil money was going to the companies and some was going to the gov't in terms of royalties, and some was going to pay venezuelan salaries. Sorry hun, oil costs money to take out of the ground. I am implying that the people in Venezuela live in crap conditions right now. Reality agrees with me. Refer to Norway, Kuwait, Ireland, Alberta (Canada). If socialism is so great, why can't Chavez make the lives of his people comparable to other oil producing nations? Yet it still sucks, that's their own fault they have a garbage economy not the Americans. In the real world, Ireland developed a capitalist mantra and got itself out of being a basketcase in a decade, why can't Chavez? Oh wait because he develops a garbage policy and cut himself off from the gravy train. Numbers don't lie. And you need to read up on how capitalism works and how the Western world has done well by embracing that system, because you are making leftists look really really bad. Tin foil hat monthly called and they want their columnist back.

These are not good things and distort the economy. The market does the best job of taking care of surpluses. With greater risks comes greater payout. Guaranteed prices send out wrong signals and lead to massive surpluses which causes chaos.

Venezuela discovered oil in 1922, Kuwait in 1931, both countries were in the same boat at that era, that's their own fault socialists don't know how to run an economy. The numbers don't lie. Hell in 1969 is when they found oil in Norway. There is no excuse for the lack of Venezuelan prosperity. Alberta, Kuwait, and Norway have a much higher standard of living and much higher incomes than venezuela. Numbers don't lie. Chavez is a failure. His people are broke, yet they float on oil. The countries in my example allow foreign investment, and are richer for it. Why after 10 year in power are his people still poor? Why after oil hit 147 dollars is his country a toilet? Any CEO with that poor of performance would be fired. Just like Mugabe did with his printing press. Brilliant economics, devalue the currency and screw over your populations purchasing power! And leftists wonder why Venezuela that floats on oil is as broke and pathetic as it is. The venezuelans went from throwing crap at each other to throwing crap at each other with socks on, wow what an improvement. They could only get better, those other leftists left that country a mess. Yet Venezuela is still a crap hole that has squandered its oil wealth. Alberta, Kuwait, and Norway, knew how to spend their oil revenues responsibly, why can't Chavez? His people suffer, while he grandstands to the Americans and threatens war with his neighbours. What a prize he is. And people thought George W. Bush was bad. Venezuela would be better off with Chavez in the crazy house where he belongs. The state of venezuela does not have enough dollars to develop its oil reserves, that's why they are poor broke trash. They need foreign money, but don't want it. Ireland turned its economy around in 10 years without oil, why can't Chavez? Oh that's right he's a tin pot insane dictator. It is that simplistic, Chavez is a failure. That's no excuse for Venezuela, with all that oil it sits on it could attract a lot of foreign investment making its population richer, which would bolster health care and education, they chose to piss it away. Kuwait was a pile of sand before oil, Venezuela had more going for it before oil. Yet Kuwait knows how to manage itself. I leave out Iraq plus Nigeria and Iran because they are poor and also have tin pot dictators such as Chavez, notice a trend anywhere? Wrong, the cato institute called the cash injection a hindrance. Ireland got to where it was by slashing taxes, there was no meticulous socialist central planning. It was slash taxes and watch the sharks feast. Ireland made a killing, and with zero oil exports on top of it. Venezuela has no excuse why it couldn't duplicate that. It had a large cheap work force, oil close to deep water port, and a shipping advantage to the US. The fact they had an imbecile like Chavez running the show is the icing on the cake. They're losers. Numbers don't lie. I question the malarkey that your posting. I question the crap that comes out of Chavez's mouth, I question the fact that why a country that floats on oil, is its population so poor? I get my information from established and trusted media sources, not the tin-foil hat monthly newsletter like you do. Anyone with any critical thinking skills realizes that's a management problem (Chavez) You take the purchasing power of a developing nation that floats on oil away and see how that works for you. Hyper inflation anyone? My examples are successes and have the numbers to back it up, where are the numbers on venezuela's success? Socialism is a failure, ask the Soviets.

Here's my reasons why I vote blue: Party that has Best ag policy party that has tax cuts as a pillar party that understands rural canada Party that has actually accomplished somthing in Ottawa Party policy that screws over Criminals Party that believes in not punishing success Don't sound like dumb reasons to me.

That is miniscule as to what a CEO or other executive would get in the private sector. So no Harper is not in it for the money. That's peanuts compared to private sector management/business owners.

But I am a cowboy...

Take a look at the people of venezuela, they're broke ass losers with all of that oil money. That reeks of inferior management. He gets this money by letting foreign companies invest in infrastructure, then he goes around and nationalizes them which is essentially theft. Those private companies were investing a lot of dollars in Venezuela until El Presidente came in and turned off the tap, and look at them they've amounted to a big pile of monkey crap. How do you screw up the economy of a country floating on oil with a coastline, within close proximity to US refineries? Chavez managed to pull that off. Okay lets look at Alberta, and Kuwait, and Norway. There is no poverty in those areas, and they have well established literacy rates. If Chavez is such a good leader, why isn't a country that is floating on oil at the same level as these jurisdictions. Hell, Ireland in the 1980's was in the same boat as Venezuela, but they managed to become the freest country in the world and one of the richest, plus with no oil to boot. Yet somehow Venezuela is still a broke mess. I'm a cowboy that knows a garbage system when I see one. Chavez is a braindead selfish ass and his people are poorer because of it. Paris Hilton could run the Venezuelan economy better than Chavez. I suggest you take a class in commerce and economics, because you need it. Those dern rednecks and that there economics done outfoxed them commie bastards again. Hyuk hyuk hyuk.