blueblood

What are you talking about, how are rich people taking away from the middle class? The "capital class" is making money not because they are screwing the middle class, but because their customer base is rapidly expanding in emerging markets. Labour screwed themselves because of their small mindedness. The middle class screwed themselves with their greed and entitlement just as much as bankers with a central bank with a gun to their heads. We already paid for massive govt spending in the 70s and all we have to show for it is a debt that still isn't paid. Rich people contribute enough to society, why can't the rest of the country step up?

The prisons we have are not designed to accomodate the large numbers we have in them today. Why do we have overcrowding yet crime is reported going down? Simple, compare the population of canada in the 70's to today. There's just a bigger pool to draw from and the prison system hasn't adjusted to that. The criminal code is quite specific on what's criminal and hasn't had too much change since inception. If the code were followed to the letter, a large portion of the country would be behind bars. As for unreported crime, there is the question of "what do you want done with the person who did this to you?" I had it asked when the police caught a kid who tried stealing. How many people do you think say want nothing done? How about officer's discretion when they don't have enough to go on for an investigation. So there's that aspect, its not as much but its some.

The pipeline will not influence the world price of oil. There are too many players and canada sells its oil at a world price. There's no discount for china, just more dollars into the govts, companies, and employees kitty. Just remember those corporations pay tax and shareholders and employees (ceo down) pay tax, and remember that alberta lost out to saskatchewan when SK lured the oil companies there with better royalty rates, which benefitted the average SK person with higher pay due to competition for workers, property values rising, and more employment opportunity. Sounds like the avg person benefits. The market right now is saying it wants oil. My big worry is if oil prices get too out of control then the switch to natural gas takes place and the usa and china promptly kicks us to the curb with their massive nat. Gas access, and we're left milking a dry cow. Its a big enough rush to develop a resource and create jobs. What's wrong with a person working at timmys up there making 20 bucks an hour. Have you looked at what has happened with north dakota when fracking technology took off. One of the very few places in the usa where there's employment opportunity. Seems like all of north dakota is benefitting when those big companies are investing money in extracting oil whether its investing in workers, technology, or equipment. I don't understand it, a pipeline is the most efficient way to transport a liquid. However if I was a big player at the enbridge shareholder meeting I wouldn't be happy with enbridge's record with pipelines especially when they're looking to expand. I'd be looking to put my chips in with another pipeline company. Its far better than plugging the railway and highway with oil coming out of the oilsands. Make no mistake, people want oil and the benefits that come with it, and they will get their oil.

You do know thay were dealing with a small percent of the population who commit crimes and a percentage of that who are write offs. Some can be helped, some are best kept out of society. Its like AA, the first step is admitting they have a problem, but how does treatment work when a percentage of offenders don't think they truly have a problem? The problem that conservatives have is with repeat offenders who are write offs that think they don't have a problem and will never admit to it.

How is cutting public sector jobs a bad thing. One of the biggest complaints of the public sector is waste. Nothing wrong with trimming the fat. Not only that public sector jobs are not as beneficial to the economy as private sector jobs due to the fact that public sector jobs don't create wealth, they redistribute it. How is cutting taxes doling out money? It isn't. They aren't taking as much and allowing businesses namely small businesses (which just make it into the high income tax bracket and hire the most people) to buy,save, and invest in things that are usefull rather than have the govt sink it in a black hole. There is always going to be an elite small portion of the population in any society. At least in ours, the business class is at the mercy of the consumer, just ask the execs at RIM. Would you rather have an elite political class like in heavy left leaning countries where the elite is far fewer in number?

Ask the shareholders of bp when management cut corners and we had old faithful in the gulf of mexico. Not only did heads roll, british pensioners took a bath. Nothing says clean up the mess faster than pissed off shareholders. Had it not been a corporate entity, would the spill have been cleaned up faster??? As for punishing everyone, its common military practice to punish the entire unit if one guy screws up continuously so that he isn't playing the martyr card. Guess what its effective.

And if you want to send a better lesson, punish everyone. He brass covered it up, and look what happened. This is punishing those who did this by the fact that Penn states football program going down e crapper is all their doing. I wouldn't want to be In those guys shoes. This isn't about screwing over students it's about sending a message, this type of behavior will not be tolerated.

Voluntary cooperation

That person has a job whereas before he didn't. This is a good read My link So we have the developing worlds income rise, and not only that goods in those countries are priced at what the sweet spot in the population can afford. So yes the free market did extend to the person making the iPad. Here's another My link

And the free market system allows cooperation to take place. You get to buy an iPad and al the benefits and enjoyment from owning it and apple and the Internet provider get money. They provide you with a product which improves your lot, and you provide apple and the Internet provider money which improves their lot.

And I suggest you read meltdown: a free market look at why the stock market collapsed. The economic theory used in the book has won a Nobel prize in economics. Maybe you'll learn something as to why he government can't inflate it's way out of recessions. As for Germany in the 20s, my point stands. They were in a bind and chose to try and inflate the money supply to get out of it. A fat lot of good that did them. They impoverished eir people and screwed themselves by inflating their way out of a mess. As for FDR prolonging the great depression, I'll go with buddy who wrote the article in the wall street journal. Inflating prices didn't work.

Here's an article b LZ granderson on the CNN website. I think he hits the nail on the head here. And *gasp* he's a Christian. My link

That's why I'm happy e school gets to take a bath for the next decade at minimum, just like those kids had to go through that pain and nothing would get done about it. The institution enabled that to go on, the institution can pay.

Nothing nothing, growth growth. Most prosperous times in USA history

Oh really... My link How did Germany's money printing scheme in the 20s go, have to fight that liquidity trap!

When prices fall to levels that people are willing to pay for starters. Do you know what demand destruction is. Trying to prop up prices by Debt spending was the height of foolishness and all that happened was a decade of hi unemployment and massive debt. But when the market reallocated those resources, FDR took the credit even though his policies prolonged the depression instead of ending it.

If you call winning the Hawaii bowl in 2009, losing a bowl game in 2010, and winning the bbva compass bowl in 2011 not recovering... Not quite the rose or orange bowl, but getting there. But your right 25 yrs between bowl victories.

Some sports writers have suggested it's worse than the death penalty because of the zero bowl games and big ten playoffs for four years in addition to the clause that allows the Penn state players to jump ship. Not only that, the scholarships being taken away. This team is crippled for I'm guessing the next decade at least. It's going to be very hard to recruit players to go to this school.

Spending 150% of GDP did nothing except put the country in debt. The thing that got the country out of depression was the market allocating resources which took a longer time to do because the government was printing money to spin it's tires and prop up prices. Look at 1920-21 for a similar scenario with a different method of combatting it.

And you have to realize that the free market is always working to equilibrium. If goods are mass produced at a price range which workers can afford, are they in fact poor? We have millions of people all over the world with smart phones with Internet access. I'm pretty sure the phone companies want to see each and every one of those customers with money in their pocket in order to buy those phones. However at the same time the company that hired them wants to pay them as little as possible so that they are able to stay working and are still productive. As more and more companies employ workers, the labor pool goes down and firms have to pay more to secure employment. It's through that mechanism that a country becomes rich.

What do you mean "our money"? The money they made and earned that isn't taxed at the rates you guys want it at. I love it you guys complain when corporations improve the lives of the developing world and are efficient at it by paying salaries to individuals and building infrastructure, yet play the pity card when we see starving children in south Asia and demand the government fork over tax dollars to tin pot governments to "help" them. That's beyond hypocrisy. Global poverty is dropping, and your complaining about it. Corporations are putting money in people's hands, people all over the world who didn't have money to begin with to buy products designed by us, and to use our natural resources. You can't punish companies harshly like that because they'll say screw this place, I'll set up headquarters in Australia and focus 100% on the Asian market and those greedy north Americans can milk a dry cow. So I take it you want the impoverished world to stay poor so you guys can keep spinning your tires. Unfortunately for you guys CEOs that run the corporations are smart enough to realize that by providing more people with income, there is more people to buy their products. Why in the name of all that is holy would a corporation want to see poverty? A corporation wants it's customers to have as much money as possible to buy their products, and you guys think the only way developing countries should have an income is through UNICEF, charity, or foreign govt aid. Wow!

It's still a market because for smaller companies without those financial resources, it allows them to train CEOs for the big boys. It's a market some would deem unfair, however it still a market and a competitive one at that. People trying to get to the inside, a fierce competition to keep those on the inside.

It is similar to what HP did in canning it's CEO for running around on it's wife and it going public. The NCAA doesn't want it's brand to be associated with child sex acts. They washed their hands with Penn state. Revenues won't be hurt, you have positive media relations by slamming the Penn state institution for harboring a pedophile, and most importantly there is a bidding war for the new playoff format. The NCAA is laughing.

And it has nothing to do with companies competing hand over fist with compensation to find and retain said CEO? There is competition in both the CEO labour market and with the firms hiring them. The big dogs get the best CEOs.

If I'm making decisions that can make or lose a company billions of dollars and my ass can be fired at the drop of a hat, 10 million might not be enough when another company down the road is willing to pay me more. I asked the question who would work for 10 cents on the dollar, punked moved the goal posts and stated he would work for 10 cents on the dollar if he were to get 10 million. Obviously, he is using extremes and is not taking into account competition from low tax jurisdictions. How about this, since punked likes to offer choices, here's some more food for thought, society a offers a 30 cents on the dollar tax for a CEO to go work in that country and society b offers a 90 cents on the dollar tax. Society a and b are both western countries with all the amenities and comforts of western civilization. At the end of the day, society b would allow the CEO to keep 10 million dollars, and society a would allow the CEO to keep 70 million dollars. Where would you want to be? If your saying you would rather take the 10 million dollars over the 70 million, I call BS. What you guys fail to realize is that when somebody makes that kind of money they aren't burying it in the ground. They are saving it in banks for others to borrow, investing it in companies helping them grow and provide jobs, buying others goods and services, and making the decisions to provide jobs and goods and services to others. Isn't that contributing enough, yet you want more.