theloniusfleabag

Dear Toro, While browsing for info on the subject, I found a website article by the U of Florida's Economics dept. head, and he seems to back up August1991's position that the US gov't cannot go bankrupt. ( I didn't save or remember the link, it was a couple of days ago) However, I think both the learned professor and August1991 make a presumption in their analyses, and that is that the gov't intends to pay off the deficit, or end it's being used as a 'free, capital generating device'.

Dear Yodeler, I'll bet you $20 that there is no such place as 'heaven'.

Dear kimmy, Please, please, please consider me for 'The Ministry Of Silly Walks'.

Dear eureka, from that link to bbc weather.from kimmy's link.. couple this notion with 'cranial malleability', and it becomes dangerous...It seems B.Max is posting more links that 'prove' global warming than disprove it, but yet he vehemently denies both this and reality.

Dear crazymf, I am from Humboldt, SK, so I really take offence to...wait a minute, you are right...

Dear Sparhawk, Well said. I seriously doubt IMR will get a reply, though.

Dear kimmy, Can you say, "Lonely, bitter crank from waaaayyyy out in right field"? I knew you could. Ummmm, you posted a bunch of proof...

Dear shoop, It's semantics. If I owe you $50, and I have $50 in my pocket, does that mean I am not in debt anymore?I suspect Canuck E Stan may be right, that was indeed an old link, but the point was Ralphie was using semantics the other way for PR purposes. At the time, AB was still carrying a debt. You are right, and this was mentioned at the time. I am just saying that the term 'Debt free' was not officially correct at the time.This just in... http://www.finance.gov.ab.ca/business/budg...t_in_brief.html I did a search on 2005-06, and 'debt servicing costs are at 1.1%', which would imply that there still exists a debt.

Dear B.Max, from your link, The glacier is melting, not growing, causing rapid movement. Glaciers traditionally move at rates of inches per year. Debunked, my foot. Didn't you read the article? Or did you just not understand it?

Dear Canuck E Stan, source... http://www.gov.ab.ca/home/index.cfm?Page=852The papers were full of Fat Ralphie with signs of 'Debt Free!", but most opinions were that it was PR. True, the money is in the bank to pay the debt, but you can't really have a 'mortgage burning party' when you actually haven't paid it off.

Dear August1991, Yes, they used the military for replacements. Unions are designed for a teacher's security. I am for the abolition of unions, but certainly not for the privatization of the school system.

Dear Canuck E Stan, This is a fallacy. The debt still exists, but the gov't claims to have the money in the bank to pay for it. The AB gov't didn't want to pay off the debt early so they wouldn't suffer penalties. Payments are still being made on the debt.

Dear fellowtraveller, You'll know when you're in trouble when you hear Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries". If only the brunt of the effects of global warming could be placed upon those that deny it, or those that say "Addressing the issue will hurt the economy", but it is going to affect everyone. There are other ways to do what we do, and eliminate our 'pollution', but humans insist on the cheapest and generally, most damaging way of doing things, because too many believe 'maximum profit is the highest good'.

Dear Canuck E Stan, Mos people operate on faith. Faith that the drug companies have done a lot of R&D so therefore the drugs must work. Faith that the doctor knows what he is doing. This is not an entirely misplaced faith, but occasionally it is. Certain drug companies offer 'kickbacks' to doctors and health region authorities if they push certain drugs. from... http://www.endgame.org/corpfines3.htmlAlso from the same site...

Dear Hugo ver 2.0, ...er, August1991, I clicked on a couple of links, and in my opinion, they are reasonably legitimate, as far as the status quo of gov't grants go. The gov't publishes a book every year outlining what grants and subsidies are available and what guidelines are to be followed for application consideration. Most of them are for services that serve 'society needs' that generally can't be expected to operate on profit motive. For example...Pastew Place is an AADAC detox facility, and assumably the grant was a capital expense outlay, for a building and/or renovations that would far exceed a non-profit's budget. Windreach Farm Ashburn Ont $104,130 ...this is a farm designed for people with disabilities to experience 'farming life' (and enrich their own lives), again an unprofitable venture, by private enterprise's standards. There are truly some ridiculous grants out there, to be sure, but if you are suggesting that the gov't abolish grants to non-profit organizations, (or perhaps you are suggesting the elimination of taxes because they go to non-profit organizations, which is what fomented the 'Hugo 2.0' joke) then I must stand against you.

Dear BHS, I concur with August1991, excellent post. Indeed, the need for unions went out around the same time that the baseball bat was outlawed as a negotiation tool. I think a perfect example of this is WestJet. They treat their employees well, make it a fun place to work, and are not unionized. A union would kill them.

Dear August1991, The main manifestation of the effects of 'global warming' is purported to be abberant weather patterns. There are several problems with 'proving', one way or the other, of the cause. Truly, nature is cyclical, but then huge swings in weather may or may not affect the averages. If it is plus 40 degrees on Christmas day and minus 40 on boxing day, the average is still zero. However, some people can still take both sides...(some will say "That isn't right", while other's could say "It's cyclical, probably happens every million years or so".)I read about 'the greenhouse effect' some two decades ago, yet some people still misunderstand, saying "CO2 isn't a pollutant", when that was never the argument. It is difficult to assess what impact the billions of tonnes of pollution has on the environment when mankind's activities are unprecedented in the earth's history. I asked Pateris, and then cybercoma, what they would consider 'valid empirical evidence' of man-influenced climactic changes or 'global warming'. Cybercoma replied with 'scientific concensus', but I expect that is akin to waiting for the world's religious groups to agree on 'which is the one true God'.

Dear Argus, I have to agree, the last time 'energy rebate cheques' came out in Alberta, it was right before election time. Renters often pay heating bills, at least home and 'suite' renters do. That depends on how you define 'poor'. In Calgary, some of what I consider 'poorer neighbourhoods' (and with the 'magically variable 'poverty line, they might be considered 'legally poor')actually have been shown to have the highest percentages of disposable income.August1991, Too bad he has such curly hair. He could make a great PM, if given the chance.

It strikes me as odd that the federal, and also provincial (Alberta) governments are offering 'subsidies', rebates and 'prosperity cheques' to offset the high, and rising, costs of energy. Why not subsidize all of our consumption, and the industries that come with it? Is not the rising cost the only thing (apart from total depletion) that will 'fuel' the development of alternative energy sources? I should think that 'the left' should embrace soaring fossil fuel costs, as it means that dependence on fossil fuel is that much closer to extinction. For the 'collusion' part of it, why does the gov't choose to 'subsidize the consumer' rather than letting the comsumer's ill will fall upon the energy companies? Further, why not put those 'energy rebates and prosperity cheques' into alternative energy R&D? It seems that the biggest gains are being made by the energy companies themselves. Huge, record-breaking profits, and the gov't throws the consumer a bone with a few cheques here and there, so the consumer doesn't look elsewhere for energy.

Dear August1991, I agree with you, and so would Toro, I imagine. Where we are in disagreement, it seems, is that you feel the accumulation of said debt without plans or action for repayment, or even curbing the rise of debt, isn't an issue. Here is a link to a 'debt' conspiracy theorist...but the facts are correct. http://mwhodges.home.att.net/debt.htm or, this one... http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Dear August1991, Not exactly, wait till the child finds out all my spending has been the Japanese kid's money too! What is the parent going to say when the bills are far higher than they could ever hope to pay back (that is, the principal plus interest are beyond their means to structure a payback within the next hundred years), and that the party isn't seeming to end? ( the kid must be an alcoholic by now, they figure)

Dear all, Certainly there is bias in the media. Usually, it is in favour of whatever party is in power at the time. There are those that claim 'liberal (or leftist) bias towards anything that is slightly to the left of 'rabidly-right', but Canada, by and large, is a bit 'left' anyway.

Dear August1991, Yes, me, the ignorant left, and Alan Greenspan just don't seem to get it. Are you suggesting that Alan Greenspan hasn't got a clue about economics, or has he just gone off his rocker?

Dear August1991, I have read the text, and don't disagree. However, while reading it, I recalled something I posted earlier...that is is now too late to consider future taxation as a possible solution to the problem. The idea of covering gov't expenditure by 'tax now or borrow and tax later' is being acted upon by the US by doing neither. The solution to that problem doesn't seem to be covered in the aforementioned text. You seem to argue that nothing need happen, and that as long as the gov't retains the 'right to tax', it is as good as money in the bank, no matter how big the debt. However, it is directly pertinent to the level of taxation required. As you say, only the date of execution hasn't been fixed. Pres. Bush, like his penultimate predecessor, Pres. Bush, can throw a big party, with lavish spending, knowing that they won't be around when it comes time to pay the bill. However, that bill needs to be paid, if they think they should ever like to have the credit to throw another one. It is a future gov't, and ultimately the American people, that are going to get hosed for a huge bill that they cannot pay. How do you suppose the American people will react when a wheelbarrow full of money won't buy a loaf of bread?

source... http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/...ent_3563997.htm (The whole article is worth a read, different grammatical structure than mine is funny) Evidently, 34 Taiwanese were injured by the blowing of 'Longwang'. Meanwhile, Taiwanese gov't officials were heard to say, "If the Chinese Gov't won't give us independence, let them have a taste of 'Longwang". Elsewhere, a homeless Taiwanese was asked what the typhoon meant to them..."I live in a box. It is not made to stand up to typhoons. This 'Longwang' is going to ruin my box". Other people had a different take on the typhoon, with one Chinese Baptist Minister being quoted as saying, "It's God's 'Longwang', coming to take revenge on the wicked. We must repent soon, or we may suffer the wrath of God's 'Angry Longwang'. Several Western tourists in the area were snickering and unavailable for comment.