blueblood

No its because krugman is an idiot with a nobel prize.

Rich people already pay their bills. When the top 1 percent pays close to 30 percent of total tax revenue is that not enough. How about the 46 percent who don't pay anything and take finally start paying up. But no people like you want rich people to build offices and pay people to hang out by the water cooler so that everyone has jobs. So america is worse off with bain? Take bain away and you tell me if there is more dollars or less dollars. Staples store provides a service, we are better off with a staples store system than without one. Yet that's not enough for you people. So you would rather have the chinese and indian people with no jobs and scratching a living off rocks. Do you think the chinese liked living through the fifties when they had nothing? There are crappy jobs that need to be done, if north americans are too pretentious to take them, that's their problem. Oh those ordinary people saving for retirement and their swiss bank accounts. You go after the companies, everyone gets screwed, ask chavez! Rich people do pay their way and contribute to society, this is more of a jealousy and scapegoat game than anything. Steve jobs ran a successful company, introduced many products and services that improved many peoples lives and provided jobs to many people, yet that's not enough, people in similar situations should have to pay an enormous tax bill on top of it. That's garbage. Would you work for 30 cents on the dollar yes or no?

How pray tell do white collar criminals kill hundreds of thousands of people and steal trillions of dollars? Tinfoil? Jealousy?

And what's wrong with a richer china and indonesia? That's more customers to buy products, more places to invest money and get a return on it which helps ordinary people investing/saving their money. Romney contributed to society through bain capital, an example of which is the staples office store. What's wrong with providing jobs and a vehicle to invest money? Did you make a contribution like that to society? Didn't think so. So what is that 10 trillion doing out of government hands? Is it in a hole in the ground or is it working funding projects/in a bank for others to borrow and pay interest on, etc.? Given the massive boom in countries like brazil, china, india, mexico, etc. I'd say those tax breaks are working extremely well and have reduced poverty worldwide and given american companies more customers for their products. But guys like you would rather see them poor and funnel tax money at them in foreign aid. Maybe north america should focus on specializing in what we can do instead of being luddites and trying to compete with countries who can manufacture things better than we can.

What is it with you people and thinking wealthy people stick their money in a hole in the ground? Sheesh!! These types of arguments are the slippery slope to a breaking point in which the wealthy people say screw you guys I'm going home. The wealthy people already do a lot to contribute to society. They make products, have investment companies that generate more wealth by helping finance startups and other projects, save in banks, and buy a lot of stuff. Hugo chavez is trying to wage a war with wealthy people, as a result they're saying screw you there are other places in the world I can live in. Last I checked the rest of the world is catching up to north america as far as living standards go, keep playing that game and richie rich takes his ball and goes and plays with the new kids in town. Where did that attitude get venezuela, they're floating on oil and all they've amounted to is a pile of monkey crap, that's embarassing. The reality is that the working class needs to take their ass hats off because its not 1950s anymore, there are other countries willing to work and they may not be able to afford things they feel entitled to. A better idea for reducing the deficit is closing the loopholes in the tax code, getting those 46 percent of americans who don't pay income tax to start paying, and gut the red tape that chokes off small business and only benefits the likes of General Electric and the like. The rich people already do their fair share of contributing to society, how about the middle class stops their credit card and 30 year mortgage debt spree.

That depends on how bad people want jobs then. In my town we have guys of all wages who aren't employed in the ag sector making the drive west for their hitch. Some guys in their 40s and 50s who had problems logging or farming. There is a lot of affordable housing in the small towns where a guy has to set up his base and drive out to work for his 4-5 weeks on. That's funny because I see ads for saskatchewan bragging about their employment situation and the "benefits" to raising a family there. Heck the premier of SK went to ontario in the middle of the recession saying come west. The farm machinery "factories" we have out here are starving for workers and their inventory is SOLD OUT, they can't make machinery fast enough. Nobody said it would be easy!

I could suggest those unemployed people dig holes one day and fill them up the next because that would be a more effecient use of money. There are lots of jobs out west, maybe easterners could fill them instead of us having to go shopping overseas for temp workers.

What are you talking about? There is next to zero packing capacity in canada it all goes south. Even then the packers got hosed because they had inventory like crazy. Why do u think the packers put the pressure on bush jnr to get the border open? All players in the beef industry took a bath, that's why I had a cattle firesale because cows didn't fit into my business model anymore.

Firstly So you want other parts of the world poor so they can't afford our products. Also those oil countries are very large importers of grain, something we export a lot of. Secondly The trade off from having a bit of oil imported as to specializing in oil export is well worth it. I would rather the pipeline go to a billion customers than 20 million, I think they have more money than eastern canada.

So you propose to jack up the corporate tax rate (end the subsidies) to pay some company that you guys screwed over by taxing them to move a product from the guys who just got screwed and some magical bitumen refinery is going to magically appear in eastern canada. Why not just keep doing what we are doing and make a killing selling the oil to china and further down the road the usa. What's next a bullet train all through canada? There's a reason a pipeline doesn't go from alberta to ontario, its too far over difficult terrain for 20 million people when there is already infrastructure in place to provide eastern canada and the usa's energy needs. 20 million people can't pay for the size of project you want. 300 million can.

And that's why we currently have pipelines going straight south, just not the big daddy pipeline yet.

It wouldn't work because there isn't enough demand in eastern canada to justify it. There is demand overseas. Eastern canada isn't getting discounted oil out of all this, just like western canada isn't getting cheap cars. If eastern canada thinks building a pipeline east is going to get them cheap gas, they're dreaming. That pipeline goes north before it goes east.

It looks like the games being played by bc might end up biting them in the rear. The premier of NWT says why not go north? I don't mind this because it would help establish credibility in the north

Then there is our frenemy inflation that has to be looked at. Those savings have to provide returns that keep up or do better than inflation. For business owners its a tricky balancing act to update machinery/expand while at the same time having savings. Its a huge problem in the ag community because lots of people are on the expand bandwagon.

That's probably what's going to end up happening. Enbridge will have to pony something up. However with the bp spill, they managed to get that sorted out in pretty short order, I think there were a lot of innovations that took place with that oil spill. Not only that, shell is starting to drill off alaska.

Don't worry, out west we learned that lesson long ago. Remember supply management doesn't really exist out here. Its the pro business operations that still exist.

Which is better than what most landowners get when they negotiate surface rights for oil companies.

I can think of 8 billion reasons why. Is 8 billion dollars better than zero dollars. That railway saw more grain head east than goods shipped west. Its a population thing, hence the prefered route going west than east. And does alberta and saskatchewan not take an environmental risk when it comes to resource development. As they always say no guts no glory. I always find it amusing that the biggest opponents to projects like this are elitists who already have their money, but when someone comes up with an idea to make money, they strike it down in the name of the environment, sad. As for oil going to china, its going there like it or not, if the pipeline gets stopped this affects more than oil producers, potash and ag exports are going to feel higher transportation costs which will infuriarate saskatchewan. Those rail lines to bc are going to be plugged and the railways safety record isn't anything to write home about either.

Pipeline 1 goes south and severs 300 million people Pipeline 2 goes west and serves 1-2 billion people Pipeline 3 goes east and serves 20 million people Guess who's at the bottom of the list. The railway facilitated export of our products to coastal ports. In the late 1800s canadas big industry was agriculture and all that grain wasn't going to stay in canada. Now its oils turn. Oil is what is holding our economy up in this downturn, why not facilitate production of what we're good at.

And who's fault is it that we don't refine oil in eastern canada? Maybe if they cut out the red tape and taxes, it might be feasible to refine oil there. China paying world price for oil is a good thing, they can pay through the nose. What's wrong with oil companies having profits, that means more tax revenue and more jobs. This is like those neanderthals that pissed and moaned about railways getting built. Was canada better off with a railway yes or no?

Yes, because why pay 3+ dollars a gallon for gasoline when it could be 2+ dollars. Then there is all the tax revenue, jobs, and expanded economic activity.

BP cut corners on a drilling rig and let loose oil into the gulf. The shareholders punished the company by selling their shares and company equiyty went up in smoke when the share price plummeted. The board of directors of hp canned their ceo for running around on his wife for fear of shareholders punishing the company. The NYSE is just a market, not a governing body like the ncaa. If the ceo of goldman sachs had for example child porn on his computer and was under police investigation and in the media, you can be certain that the shareholders would want said ceo's head on a platter.

Unfortunately a lot of people don't see it that way and go on shopping sprees with double digit interest credit cards. That's a big problem of itself.

Its not a chicken and egg problem, its an equilibrium problem. The issue is that the point of equilibrium is where its lower than it used to be because of emerging markets. China started off from being a country that went through famines because its economy was terrible to having the second largest gdp in the world, because they realized that some pay is better than no pay, eventually more and more beca$e employed and the wages rose as a result of a competition for workers. Another problem we have is endebtedness and entitlement. North american consumers feel entitled to goods and services no matter their income level and spend money they don't have, thus putting on the chains of debt and high prices.

And your missing the point that its a different world than the fifties. Businesses are spending less on wages because people are wanting to spend less on products and services to the point that they must be made in areas that will pay lower wages to get goods made. Nobody's hoarding anything in a hole in the ground. Maybe if the threat of jacking up taxes and throwing in random regulations wasn't hanging over business's heads, they might be able to forecast earnings and down the road hire people. Would you rather have china et al stay poor so they can cause problems for us down the road. More customers means more money. Maybe instead of getting a sociology degree, young people can get educated in things that are actually worth something so they can manage those firms operating overseas. China is growing from the middle because they produce things people want at a price people are willing to pay. Not only that they save their money better than we do. Not only that, goods are priced at what they can afford. Why is cell phone service more affordable there than it is here?