August1991

Klein: Would Lévesque have been more elegant (?), and brutal (?)

Willy, everything you say, applies in the US also. So, what is the best way to deal with these problems? The Canadian way seems good, no?

MapleSyrup, thank you for starting the Health thread. But IMV, the Link in this thread is pointless. Being PM, and getting seats in the Federal House of Commons, is a regional game. You have to do the numbers province by province. The BNA Act was designed, with reason, that way. That's, wonderfully, Canada. Ontario maybe deserves its own regional breakdown. North of Sudbury-North Bay. Ottawa South East. London South west. Toronto. For this election, by and large, you wind up with Liberal/Tory minority depending on how you decide Ontario.

These Tory TV clips are now out here: Tory Clips They are zipped so you have to save, extract and then watch with a player. Not user friendly - but that doesn't matter because they don't aim for Internet people. There are two English clips and one French clip. The first English one is really good (IMV) but the French one is amazing. When I first heard on CBC Radio a few days ago that the Tory slogan was "Demand Better", I thought "how dumb". Canadians never demand. We ask politely. Why not "Expect Better"? (And that's as dumb as "Demand Better".) The first clip puts the slogan in perspective. This is the Canadian in New York saying politely "I'm Canadian." The French clip? "En avez-vous assez?" and "C'est assez." Wow! They could have gone further and said "Ça suffit" or even better, "Minute papillon". Brilliant, with an English accent that just gets it. My old Liberal Newfie aunt is going to think Stephen Harper is the nephew she never had.

I like that one BD. Blame the Cons for the collapse of socialized medicine. But it is inherently unsustainable. And I agree that for now it's a question of funding. We spend about 8% of GDP on health whereas the Americans spend about 12%. Of course, they're richer so they can afford to spend more on luxuries like health. (BTW, the rich spend proportionally more of their income on health than the poor. Health services are like airline tickets.) A GP is in the private sector. What's wrong with privately provided services paid for publicly? Our military works that way. (Dare I say it? That's how the government buys flags for post offices.)There are more fundamental points in my view: The demand for health services is much larger than the supply for the simple reason that health services are free. This is unsustainable. The only reason our health system has been sustained is because we have a two-tier system - our second tier is the US. The wealthy in Canada go to the US and pay for medical services. They avoid all these waiting lines and so on. (This explains in part why health is a bigger portion of US GDP. The US exports health services to foreigners.) Do you believe that Canadian citizen hockey players use their health cards as you and I do? Do you think that Paul Desmarais even has a Quebec health card? Black Dog, do you really believe that PM PM and his family go through the same hassles as you and I do when going to a doctor? (PM PM is over 65 and I'm sure he sees a doctor often.) IMV, state funding of health services is critical to a civilized society; and state funding is the best way to organize them. But how? It's the insurance scheme that should be State organized. And that's it, that's all. IOW, I think the federal government should pay each Canadian's health insurance premium using money collected from all Canadians. The government should get out completely from health except to say to Canadians, "You're covered. We Canadians pay premiums the Canadian way. That's Canada. To be Canadian, it means that we share the risk." Last Point. While Canadians say health is an important electoral issue, I suspect that it's not. When Canadians say "health system", they mean many things ranging from "I'm not American" through "We need a good government" to "I'm afraid of dying". Eyes glaze over with the nitty-gritty.

The market for oranges.Everday, millions of people "vote" in an "election" about whether to have oranges or not, and others "vote" about whether to produce them or not. This model works very well. It's the best form of "democracy".

If I'm not mistaken, the Bermudan government relies entirely on sales tax for revenue and has no income tax. There's alot of merit to your idea. A sales tax has fewer collection points than the income tax. This means Revenue Canada would deal with fewer people for tax collection. In addition, we pay a sales tax when we buy something; we pay an income tax when we earn money. This distinction is important because the difference is in savings. The income tax discourages people saving. Unfortunately, bureaucrats delight in finding ways to spend money and politicians usually agree. There is little rhyme or reason to our tax system except the logic of what people will tolerate. Politicians shake us down any which way they can. Heck, they sell us Canada Savings Bonds to get the cash. You know the old line? "If it moves tax it, if it keeps moving regulate it and if it stops moving, subsidize it."

I admit this sounds truly weird. But I wonder if the Liberals are starting to think they made a "Kim Campbell/John Turner mistake" with PM PM and they're considering other solutions. Are they looking elsewhere? Are they hanging their guy out to dry? G&M House Kinsella Sponsorship Memo And how about 'Mr. Liberal' Ibbitson? G&M Ibbitson You can go to Kinsella's web site to get the lowdown on who leaked this memo: Kinsella Musings Wow! As much as I enjoyed the complexity of Watergate, Mitchell (bungling guilty) and Deep Throat (side show), American political scandals have always resembled Hollywood movies to me. Canadian political scandals, on the other hand, are like an ugly argument between neighbours on my street. (I wonder, worry, someone calls the police, and then it eventually turns into a funny anecdote alluded to over the fence...)

And nor should you be against "out-sourcing" or "free trade" or "globalization". They are just like finding a new technology, or "industrialization" as you call it. All true. My fear is that, as in 1914, some people might take all this for granted. Maybe. But some people enjoy working, which has been my personal philosophy. (Get paid to do something you would do for free.)

OMG! That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard. Everybody would have to log on everyday, read a bunch of boring memos, figure out alot of stats and then make a decision. Participation rates would fall to single digits, decimal points, and the obsessive whackos would decide everything. Another really, really dumb comparison. If you think the CEO is incompetent, you sell your shares. You're not stuck with the guy for four years.CanadaRocks, I admire your desire to fill the "democrat deficit". But you should think a little more. Here are two ideas to chew on: 1) "One person, one vote". What if you feel very strongly about something (stopping the slaughter of baby harp seals) and I think it's OK (those Maritimers need a break) but I can live without the hunt? Should we both have equal votes? When you order pizza with friends, don't you take into account the "strength" of people's like/dislike for mushrooms? 2) "Why bother?" Let's be harshly honest. Your single vote in the next federal election will change absolutely nothing. There's more chance that a meteorite the size of PEI will hit the earth than two candidates in your riding getting exactly the same tally, and your ballot deciding who wins. So, why bother voting? My advice: Skip the trouble, you're wasting your time.

A David Suzuki moment. Get out the camera. I've always considered myself left wing - in the sense that the State should steal from the rich and give to certain poor people under certain special conditions. From what I saw of Bob Rae, we would probably not agree on the conditions.

There is NO DIFFERENCE between outsourcing and new technology. If I have to pay 10 cents to Joe, but 5 cents to an Indian or 5 cents for the computer, either way, Joe loses his job. In both cases, the corporations are being greedy and in both cases Joe can be retrained and in both cases, we just found a better, easier, cheaper way to do what Joe was doing. That's a good thing too. If not, we'd still be using Smith-Coronas. Heck, we'd need electricity for that so I guess we'd have those old Underwoods, assuming we had paper to type on.

I imagine by "false dichotomy" you mean that it is not black and white; it can be in between. Absolutely. This is a question of degree - as anyone who has ever worked on a committee fixing a budget knows. But it is a zero sum game. There's only so much money on the table and at a certain point, the committee has to make priorities and choose. Emotionally loaded? PM PM has clearly let the CBC media and public opinion decide the priorities. They help the Iraqi kidnap guy. Not the hungry kid. And watch when the CBC media types get all surprised because there are suddenly more of these Iraqi kidnap types! Duh.

Unlike a century ago, your household does not produce them. You have "outsourced" these activities. Now, you do other things with your time and trade. You gain. How about when a firm outsources to... a computer? That is, when a company replaces a person by a robot or a computer? Is that bad too? (If you think it is bad, then you are against the introduction of new technology.)

True. False.You choose, BD, between an adult who decides to go off to Iraq (despite explicit warnings not to) and a hungry kid someplace. Keep in mind that your choice might encourage more people to line up for your largesse.

US real GDP per person went from $22,666 in 1980 to $28,434 in 1990 (measured in constant 2000 dollars).US GDP US private sector trade union membership reached a peak of 39% in 1958 and has declined since to 9% in 2000 (about what it was in 1900). US Trade Union membership No one has yet explained to me why "outsourcing" is bad? We let foreigners do certain jobs so that we can do something else. Then we trade with the foreigners. Indians, Chinese, Vietnamese do not send us goods or services for free. We have to send something to them in return. Do you make your own clothes? Do you bake your own bread? Do you have your own chickens for eggs? Why has almost everyone "outsourced" these tasks from their households?

One dollar more for the Ambassador's reception means one dollar less for development assistance - or left in a taxpayer's pocket to buy a candy bar for a son or daughter.

There was in effect one vote more for the No but there was no violence. Are you suggesting that federalists are more violent than separatists?Europeans are uncivilized and tend to slaughter each other wantonly. This is not ancient history. Such violence in Europe occurred as recently as 10 years ago. We North Americans (Canadians and Americans) are much more civilized. One has to go back to the US Civil War to find anything nearly as bloody as a European war. Quebec separatists have made it plain that this problem will be dealt with in a civilized manner.

Michael Hardner: So you mean Indians will now provide us a good or service that we used to produce ourselves.Has it occurred to you that the Indians will not provide this service to us for free? That we will have to provide something to them in return? People will be employed to produce something the Indians want. Trade, outsourcing and new technology all result in the same thing and have the same effect. They are good because it means we can produce widgets more easily. Bar code scanners are great inventions.

The government budget is a zero-sum game.A child has no choice; an adult travelling abroad does. This leads to another result. Children are unlikely to change their behaviour because of what the government does; adults do that all the time.

You read it first here: Harper was right; the Liberals want a nasty campaign: G & M on coming election

If unions were abolished, what makes you think everyone would earn minimum wage? Most of the new technology firms are not unionized, and their employees earn good salaries. Salaries are determined like anything else in a free market, by supply and demand. Employers want to hire people with certain abilities and some people are willing to offer them. The evidence is that ordinary people living in countries with free markets, including free labour markets, prosper most and have higher incomes. But what about job security? Here's an idea to consider. A coming major change (5 to 10 years) will be the disappearance of supermarket cashiers. (Many will become unemployed.) Already in some stores in Montreal and in Europe, customers scan products and then pay by credit card. In the future, this process will be entirely automated, like self-serve gas bars and bank ATMs. Now, what happens if supermarket cashiers are unionized?

Indeed. They're honking horns now. (I paid attention to the first period. Not bad hockey.)

PM PM is due to fly to DC on 29 April to meet congressmen and then on 30 April to meet Bush in the Oval Office. CBC Visit Details According to me, Bush did not go into the "bubble" to mince words. He seems to say freely what he thinks, even about other countries, if he thinks it's pertinent. Question 1: Will Bush do something to get rid of Martin? According to me, PM PM wants to appear 'Statesman/Presidential/Main Guy' in DC. Mend fences but make it plain that he's his opwn man. Question 2: Will PM PM get a vote bounce from this trip? According to me, Harper will be left out of this whole scenario. Question 3: How should Harper respond to this trip? Pollster Michael Adams' Take

There is change, and then there is change.Right or wrong, I think this place called Canada, you know, the big pink splotch on the map, is in for a big change in the coming few years. Here's a link: Paul Wells 19 April 2004 (Skip Down to: "Dept. of Credit Where It's Rumoured to be Due") In my mind, this Martin Debacle (and his recruitment of Lapierre), the Denial of the Referendum Result, the Lousy Polls of Charest, the Alberta/Steyn/Canadian Right Idea that it's all a bluff are elements of a single picture. If I am right, and the next few years mean dramatic changes, I think English Canada would do well to have a genuine representative. (I have suspicion that it will have one.) I have no idea the outcome except that it will be achieved peacefully. We Canadians are far more civilized than those violent Europeans.