August1991

Did you notice Chow was wearing green? I'll bet she wears green until 28 June.

If this is for real, then this is really, really dumb. First, the jokes are not funny. "Bootylicious"? (On the French site, it's "Pétard" which is just as inane.) Second, Layton just accused Martin of making bad decisions that lead to preventable deaths. Life matters. We should enjoy it and laugh. But not this way. Third, the Liberals just spent $250 million on flags that don't fly or don't even exist. The money was used for restaurant meals or kickbacks to pay for the classy Liberal ads we're all watching now. At the moment, IMHO, most Canadians are not looking to discover the lighter side of Paul Martin. (Is 'bootilicious' PM PM's lighter side?)

Check this out at the Liberal Party (federal) web site. I still haven't formed an opinion. It's too weird. Liberal Top Ten List The French sentence in the English version is filled with errors. The French version reads like a translation. And BTW, Infoman is a very well-known (in Quebec) Radio-Canada character. His web site is here.

MS, your seat prediction makes no sense here. AF, can you give us some numbers?

That makes sense.

BQ 55 Lib 20

I would put them: Duceppe Martin Layton Harper PM PM speaks French well. The few times I've heard him, Layton is much better than I expected. He has a distinct Quebecois accent. I suspect his vocabulary is poor. Harper can communicate in French but his accent and sentence structure are truly grating after a while. Of course it is one thing to speak a llanguage and another thing to say things in a delightful way. None of the four would likely come up with "Le Québec n'est pas à vendre. On ne fera pas le trottoir pour un bout de chiffon rouge." although Duceppe might.

Was unnamed source Kinsella? Doubt it.Quote at the end of National Post article It seems early to talk of changing managers. But if this campaign continues the same way for the Liberals, at some point, it will happen. Keith Davey was brought back in 1984. There was a famous incident where Nixon on camera shoved his press secretary back at the press. And in 1984, Turner on camera hesitated to talk to journalists on a boat. What event will make PM PM on camera go over the edge? (The pressure must be horrific, and everything is happening too fast.)

According to tradition since Edward Blake, federal Liberals have switched between English and French. Lapierre wanted it but he won't get it. The next federal Liberal leader will be Dion and he'll be PM of Canada. You read it here first. (This story is far from over.) If you're a federalist (I'm not really), Canada has some kind of weird protecting horoscope sign. Fate seems to have decided this place.

For better or worse, I'm going to post this. (J'hésite à ma manière.) Wow. I saw the picture with Ducasse on the wharf in Seven Islands. I thought "dumb photo op". This election is wide open. Hats off to Layton for getting out of the closet. Canada needs this. But like a deranged family argument, we can needlessly (and harshly) hurt one another. Can of worms. Please, all, be polite. Dans le fonds, notre vrai dons à l'existence, c'est la politesse.

Front Page? Check out what the Toronto Star did with this Layton "issue": Homeless People according to the Toronto Star

You're a Tory. You probably never listened. But ordinary people did listen to Chretien.According to a Quebec journalist travelling in BC with PM PM, ordinary people are not listening to PM PM anymore. I think the journalist has a point. I'm curious.

This post answers in this correctly named thread a post in a different thread (Conservatives and Bilingualism) that went off on a tangent. (IMV, thread names - and logos - matter.) Europe is two tier. If you have money, you get immediate service. Otherwise, you're in the State bureaucratic take-a-number-and-wait nonsense. This is true for both East-West Europe before-after the Berlin Wall. (Heh, this is Europe...)I told East Europeans that the wives of Canadian PMs (Mulroney and Trudeau) had children in the same hospital I would go to. They said Canada was a communist country! In effect, we're now no different from Europeans. Our second-tier is the US. That's where Bourassa went for cancer treatment. Martin's Medisys thingy is more recent. It's a private clinic ostensibly offering services to foreigners in Canada but also offering services to "select" Canadians - at Health Ministry rates. PM PM gave these guys a good plug but they don't need it. I'm waiting for a full-fledged private hospital to open in Canada, as in Bulgaria or Switzerland, offering abortions, plastic surgery and other medical services to rich third-worlders. For the dumb left, it would be a "job creation hi-tech export sector".

Vincent Marissal, the Lapresse journalist with Martin, wrote a piece this morning that has made me wonder. Maybe this election is already over. Marissal's point is that no one is listening to Martin anymore. He can say whatever the hell he likes, but no one will believe him or even listen. "$9 billion for health, $2 billion for cities, get G8 on board..." No one is paying attention. On a related point, there are almost no Liberal posters to this forum. NDP, Tory or just plain whacko, yes. But pro-PM PM? Liberal voters, I think, are people who pay little attention to politics and want the status quo. They don't want to "waste their vote". They want to be "mainstream". But what if Liberals are no longer perceived as winners or mainstream? Their support will collapse. Potential listeners are not listening anymore and many traditional Liberal voters will sit this one out. The polls assume people who answer the phone will also go to vote. There is something up here.

Thanks Argus, that's a good link. The fact that this data is hard to find is evidence of how the issue has changed. Now the public service is all about visible minorities and so on. The data of "your link" says, not surprisingly, the same as the data of "my link" - with the provisio that most allophones are probably counted as anglophones. Did you see the breakdown of "your link" for management (EX?). It was 78% anglo and 22% franco. Again though, I repeat, this is neither here nor there. When the guys sit down to talk and make decsions, they speak English. To get attention, they have to write clearly in English. What percentage of work appraisals/job assessments (or whatever they're called) are written in English? Argus, you say you work in all that. (And you're posting here? Huh?) Be objective and look at the players. They speak English. Now, something really curious is the fact that NOBODY in Ottawa talks about this openly. EVER. Occasionally, there are veiled references. So Soviet. Long live the Internet.

Somebody should really start a new thread on Health Care. I don't agree about your take on western Europe health. It's two tier and sucks.Worse, I'm confused by "private, for-profit health care in addition to their national health care". What's the idea? Where the State has a role is in the insurance side of health care. Like most insurance schemes, it works best when people can't pick and choose. The State makes the insurance scheme universal and obligatory. But anybody should be able to provide health services. Consider State car insurance. You pay the premium to the province but you get your car fixed wherever you want - even a private, for profit garage. The government by rights should barely involved in this at all. Certainly not the feds. But I agree, the delivery of health services in Canada is a business ripe for takeover. Health care is a luxury good. The percentage of GDP rises with per capita income. In percentage terms, we're still well below the US. At present, I think we are shovelling about $7 billion of new money each year into the sector. If it were a private business, the stocks would be hot. I agree with it all. I could add points and points. But the Dippers are a kind of "social conscience". And they certainly have the right to be stupid.

That's false as it relates to the federal public service as a whole. I haven't been able to find data on senior public servants (EX category). In 1998, there were some 179,831public servants of which 125,997 (70%) were anglophone and 53,174 (30%) were francophone. (Another 660 were 'unknown'). The report notes that this has proportion has remained stable since 1984. Treasury Board data - goto p. 71 [This data doesn't include Crown corporations.] The federal government is a complex organization spread across the country. Employees tend to use the language of the region. In Ottawa, the main language by far is English. As the joke has it "French to follow..." The bilingual imperative status for positions is just part of the bureaucratic game. But it is impossible to be a player without a good command of English including written English. BTW, there are numerous unlingual Anglophone ministers but no unilingual Francophone has ever been appointed to cabinet. These points are neither here nor there. We are light-years from Diefenbaker issuing bilingual cheques. Until Trudeau, the entire federal service - even in Quebec - functioned solely in English. That's changed. There are no longer arguments about cereal boxes. In 1976, there was an extremely serious national crisis about languages used by pilots. Such a crisis would not happen now in the same way as then. A large number of English Canadians now consider that Canada's two languages are part of what defines Canada. While many English Canadians can't speak French well, to an American, all Canadians are perfectly bilingual. What Harper said and his own spin: Newman Interview of Harper - Random web site I think Harper's wrong but I understand his point. Toronto Star quote today This later quote makes a lot more sense and shows an understanding of Quebec that is rare among English Canadians. Quebecers are extremely concious of the fact that they are a small island of several million francophones in a sea of millions and millions of anglophones. They will agree with anyone who proposes anything that offers some security. They are finely tuned to any comment that implies a threat. Assimilation is the great fear.

And Dickensian poverty disappeared a long time ago too. You can find such poverty abroad but not in Canada. BD, did you read the Toronto Star article quoted above? 25 is a good enough sample size for me. Only 10 accepted the government subsidized housing. How would Charles Dickens describe the other 15?And BD, read the article through. The couple will get about $1000 on welfare, leaving some $390 after rent is paid. But he smokes. And they have two dogs to feed. WTF? I will point out one additional detail. If either of these two finds a part-time job, they will be taxed at a higher rate than the wealthiest in Canada. Anyone on welfare loses benefits dollar for dollar. That's a 100% tax rate. The NDP should propose changing that aspect of the tax system before any other.

The following article shows that the solution to homeless is much more complicated than merely allocating money for shelters (or whatever Layton accused PM PM of not funding). I have a suspicion that some homeless are tired of NDP dogooder types bothering them with various application forms for government programmes. Toronto Star on Homeless

Paul Hellyer's old/new thingy. Paul Hellyer made money as a developer in Ontario (and so the story goes, he sold houses without basements). Then he went into politics as a Liberal. He ran for the leadership against Trudeau in 1968. He was a bad loser so he left the Liberals and set up his own party. This party is the remnants. I think it's fair to say that Hellyer was a bit of a flake. Rent this DVD and watch the included documentary on the 1968 Liberal leadership race. It captures all the drama of a turning point in Canadian history.

This is beyond rich; it's a scream. Needless to say, this got much more coverage in Quebec than the Tory bilingual flap. Lapresse made a point of stating that that was all PM PM would say.G&M Gagliano Suit The irony is that this crew took taxpayers once and now, they're coming back for more by claiming other crew members were incompetent! It's too bad Dalton Camp and John Diefenbaker didn't live long enough to see this. It may well take the Liberal Party of Canada 20 years to recover from this.

And don't forget, it takes 2 to have theft. One unreasonable side with a gun and one unreasonable side who refuses to hand over a wallet.What's your point, takenumber? [Geez...]

Good fun. This is 1979 all over again, sort of. Tory candidates in English Canada, by chance, embarrassed Clark. Clark bent over backwards to say he was open to Quebec. End result? Big headlines in English Canada, no headlines in Quebec. Clark won 2 seats of 75 in Quebec. Stephen Harper will be EXTREMELY lucky if the Tories get two seats in Quebec. But the future augurs differently. You figure. What have I heard about Harper in Quebec? Here goes: First, his accent in French is extremely irritating (true). Second, c'est un vrai bloke. Third, "C'est ton voisin straight que t'as envie de séduire". Conclusion? Go figure.

I thought of GAAP. Then I thought of 'value'. Then I thought of bond rating agencies. And finally I thought that you're right. In Canada, taxpayers should pay for a clear report about how much the federal and other (provincial, municipal) governments buy (salaries, stuff) and how they finance this through tax income, borrowing from the public and, in the case of the feds, borrowing from the Bank of Canada. Why not another (ugh) special committee - or let the A-G do this. Why not an independent, annual report stating income/payments and assets/liabilities. (The left will say that government is not a business...) IMV, they're right in one sense. Interest payments on debt should not be included in government payments. We need "independent auditors" (accountants, economists) to decide this, even if they are political appointees like the "Supreme Court". In fact, the auditors should have the same status as the Nine Judges. I know this is highly political. Well, government budgets now matter in every day life - just as court decisions mattered in the lives of the rich hundreds of years ago. We need to know the "situation". Next up? An independent environmental agency with taxation powers. (The Bank of Canada gets this independence - why not the environment?)

MH, I like reading your posts too. Balanced, and make me think. (I'm sorry to skip over AF and BG posts.) You're right. GST, PST, property add some 15-20%. So, we're closer to 50% (if that) rather than 60%. "Consumption taxes" like the GST are neutral at worst. Paul Desmarais's wife and Sven Robinson's partner give alot more money to the feds through GST than I do. In addition, despite the recent car GST refund scandal in Ontario, the GST is "easier" to collect. With GSt, Canada Revenue deals with fewer collection "points" than income tax. I think the 'tax rate' refers to the 'marginal tax rate' and not the 'average or percentage tax rate'.This is how I understand the difference. Someone on welfare receives $800 per month. The person gets a small part-time job at McDo for $40 per month. But each dollar earned means one dollar less of welfare. The 'marginal tax rate' is 100%! Now, if the person were foolish enough to accept the McDo job, the 'average tax rate' would be "only" 5% - ($40 tax on $800 income). In the 1980s, governments lowered the marginal tax rates for rich people but not for poor people. Not surprisingly, rich people now work more and people on welfare don't look for jobs. BTW, if you know math, "marginal" just means the derivative of a function, or dy/dx.