carepov

Yes. I will beleive it [eliminiation of the deficit] when I see it. That GST cut from 7-5% sure was economically stupid!

Yes you are right, I should be more careful with my words. Increased exports coincide with new free trade agreements. Increased exports are positively correlated to increased wages and other measures of standard of living. These correlations support the theory that free trade agreements increase standards of living. A great example of this relationship is Mexico that joined GATT in 1986 and NAFTA in 1994. Mexican Human Development Data[1] Human development index 1985: 0.755 2003: 0.814 Human development index 1995: 0.782 2003: 0.814 Life expectancy at birth (years) 1975: 62 2005: 75 Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1970: 73 2003: 23 Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births) 1970: 110 2003: 28 Population with sustainable access to improved sanitation (%) 1990: 66 2002: 77 Population with sustainable access to an improved water source (%) 1990: 80 2002: 91 Population undernourished (% total) 1991: 5 2001: 5 Public expenditure on education (as % of GDP) 1990: 3.6 2000: 5.3 Adult literacy rate (% ages 15 and above) 1990: 87 2003: 90 Children reaching grade 5 (%) 1990: 80 2001: 93 [1] http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/data/countries.cfm

I strongly disagree from my experience observing 0-6 year-olds. They love "hard work" and if you let them they would "work hard" almost the entire time that they wake up to the time they sleep.

No. I wish it were true but it's not. I forgot to include the word "born" into my question. Don't all todlers ask, what's this, what's that, why, why, why???? Don't all kids in Grades 1-3 love to read, listen to stories, even learn math and science? IMO a key to sucess in life is a love of learning / curiosity and something is happening to smother out this curiosity. When does this happen, why, and how can we prevent it from happening and instead encourage a love of learning?

Income splitting would be such a benefit to me that I would probably put aside all my qualms over Harper and stick a blue sign on my lawn.

Why the negative expectations? (by the way negative expectations are often self-fulfilling prophesies) Aren't all human beings naturally curious and instilled with the love of learning - learning for no other reason than for the sake of learning? At what age do a significant number of kids stop wanting to learn? Stop being curious and creative?

Yes, Canadians have greatly benefitted from free trade with the USA. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/wages http://www.tradingeconomics.com/canada/disposable-personal-income Yes, I agree.

IMO, there should be very few tariffs or restrictions on trade between countries. There should also be minimal amount of subsidies or "corporate welfare". My understanding is that there is a strong positive correlation between exports and real income per capita - and therefore standard of living. A trade deal is generally successful if exports increase. Greater exports=greater wealth (GDP)=potentially greater inequality. If excessive, inequality within a country can spoil the benefits of increased trade. IMO, inequality should be addressed by domestic policies (taxation, social programs, etc...).

2015 is a long way away. IMO, if the unemployment rate remains low, and especially lower than the US rate, I predict that the CPC, led by Harper, will win another majority. (Much to my chagrin.) 1. As seen in the latest federal and provincial election, in relatively god economic times, Canadians do not want change - they like the status quo. 2. Harper and his entourage have lied and deceived Canadians. "Big deal". This is standard operating procedures since at least 500 years as per Niccolò Machiavelli. 3. On this scandal, Harper and the PMO are guilty of crisis mismanagement. What about all the other crisis’ he managed so well and/or prevented? His "save percentage" is still probably over 90%.

1. Canadian consumers will therefore bennefit by lower prices for imported EU goods. 2. The major reason for the lower duties that Canada pays is that Canada has a trade deficit with the EU. This agreeement will allow Canada to expand exports. 3. Trade is not zero-sum, when done right it is win-win.

I am sceptical, if this were true: Why has the Canadian crime rate and specifically violent crime rate been in decline since 1992? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CanadaViolentCrime.gif http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11692-eng.htm#a1 Why is Toronto's violent crime index lower than the Canadian average? And how can you explain the dramatic decreases in violent crime severity from 2009-2012 in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Canada#cite_note-Police-reported_crime_severity_indexes.2C_by_census_metropolitan_area.2C_2011-6

OK, we all agree here, no one has claimed otherwise. I'm not so sure how you get this conclusion, but no it is not automatic. Indeed, you may be correct. Reducing stress does not act against a check against a heart attack in all circumstances. It is probably not as important as a proper diet, exercise, not smoking, heredity, etc... However, all else being equal, a person with less stress is less likely to have a heart attack than someone with high stress. This is true despite that one chain-smoking, fat, hedge-fund managing fat sloth outliving the his twin fit, heath-conscious yoga chi-master. All else being equal, a world with increased economic interdependency and increased trade will be less likely to experience a major war than a world where countries are more isolated. Again, this has nothing to do with Canada and the EU it is a response to Topaz's post on trade agreements around the world.

OK thanks for clarifying. I never did get all the discussion on this point, the word "faith" is used for good reason.

Topaz suggested that more trade deals will mean that we are more vulnerable. I suggested that we will be better off with more globally interdependent economies, a principle reason is that more trade means less war. As you often remind us, a major war is always a high risk. Of course it's not a high risk between Canada and the EU, and of course this trade deal does not reduce the risks of major war. But in general (as per Topaz's comment), more trade means less chance of war, do you disagree?

What are you talking about? My response was to:

No, history does not disprove the assertion that increased trade reduces the probability of war. Your examples disprove any claims like: war is impossible between strong trading partners. I made no such assertions.

Are you saying that non-religious people are consistent rational evidence-based critical thinkers?

Nice diagram but there is plenty of other irrational nonsense out there. Political bollocks, for example: the bollocks of "sound fiscal management of conservative/republicans". Sociological bollocks: the bollocks of crime and punishment There are conspiracy bullocks: 9/11 truthers, "masons control everything" Racist/sexist bollocks Racist and conspiracy bullocks: "the Jews control everything" Environmental bollocks: put ethanol in gas, nuclear energy is bad, PVC or even all chlorine is bad There are heath and nutritional bollocks: organic food is safer/more nutritious, all chemicals cause cancer, microwaves are bad for you, don't do or eat "x" when you're pregnant!, penis enlargement, anti-fat mendication/devices, anti-wrinkle creams Psychological and child developmental bollocks: "holding a crying baby will spoil it"

So I guess nothing has changed since 1948...

There is no guarantee that increased trade will prevent war, just as there is no guarentee that nuclear capabilities and MAD stop prevent war -even a nuclear war. Increased trade means increased travel, personal contacts, cultural exchanges, and increased interdependance for prosperity. This can only help reduce the chances of war.

Yeah, maybe as soon as we see the "paperless offce". It's right around the corner!

Bonam said "always".

Hudson this is a thorough demolishment of the earlier claim about "peaceful zionst intellectuals". However, Rue and Dog have make some good points about your selectivity. Do you agree that the Israelis are are no worse violators of human rights than other regional powers?

Counties will be more inter-dependant. I see this as a good thing as it should reduce the chances of a major war.

No, most trade is beneficial due to the advantages of specialization and economies of scale that typically far outweigh shipping costs. The only thing left for local economies will be bricks, haircuts and strawberries.