Moonbox

There were a number of sell-offs of Crown Corporations. I don't know a ton about it but the worst was the 407 highway. Sold it for like $2 billion and less than 10 years later it's independently valued at something like $11B. It was a fire sale price. I liked a lot of what Flaherty did while he was in Ontario but I will always be disgusted in how much money he threw away on us with the 407.

I think naive is the word we're looking for here people. I mean...the government spending hundreds of billions on roads and infrasture, defence etc clearly didn't benefit ANY of the taxpayers.

Are you asking a question or sarcastically implying the answer? I can't tell sorry.

Well said.

That's just simple psychology. A recession-weary population, historically speaking, inevitably blames it on the ruling government. Causes and effects aren't rationalized. This blaming naturally leads the people to see the government in a negative light and as an extension everything they do. If Harper was in China right now savings Panda bears from poachers and negotiating lasting peace in Palestine, he'd still go down in flames in the polls probably. That's why I was saying back in December he should have just let the Coalition happen. Instead he fought to maintain control over a sinking ship and subsequently he'll get blamed for it.

I am angry at Flaherty still for the 407 sale, but at least he made cuts to useless services that needed fixing. He inherited a mess from Bob Rae.

That's a very level headed suggestion....

I don't think the tapes have anything to do with Harper's worsening poll numbers. It more has to do with (as I predicted in December) how governments tend to fair HORRIBLE in the midst and aftermath of recessions. There are few exceptions to this.

I don't have a problem with this decision providing we get a good deal on the business and it's not another 407esque fire sale where we are out billions as a result. If this is a Flaherty trick to make the budget look better in a given year then I'm definetly not impressed.

If the recession lasts more than 5 years we'll have more problems than just the deficit. You're criticizing Harper for stimulus spending when the opposition is saying he's not doing 'enough'. It's an example of 'spending is totally okay' as long as it's not done by Harper.

There are French and there are English speaking Canadians. You can be one or the other and be Canadian but being bilingual is not the 'essence' of being Canadian. It helps, primarly with government jobs, but the vast majority of Canada doesn't speak a lick of french nor does it need to or care to. They can fuss and cry all they want, but the reality of things is that Quebec is slowly disappearing as a French 'nation' and cities like Montreal are less and less french every year.

Bilingual means you can speak both languages. We have two official languages, and I suppose that's part of what makes Canada what it is. I think Ignatieff is trying to just identify himself with Quebec voters and there's nothing wrong with that. To be honest I'm confused why a thread was started about this.

I speak both English and French. I don't feel any more Canadian than someone who doesn't.

India already has the capability to blow up Pakistan and itself with nuclear weapons. I don't see any problems providing energy solutions to long standing allies and trade partners.

I'm of the firm opinion that the Greeks had it right. The people do not know best. The 'people' by and large, do not bother to keep themselves informed or educated enough to make fiscal policy decisions. Leave it to people who at least understand the principles and we can have our pageants elections and judge what politicians say they're going to do and what they actually end up doing. Kind of like now...but we could use a little more accountability.

I just don't read them and throw them out. They're pathetic jokes considering how much truth they hold.

They don't know what they're talking about then. 2006-2008 is the CPC's record, not the LPC's. The CPC didn't shine in this time, you're right. What you really have to ask yourself, however, is why the Liberals promised spending increases in the 2008 election if they were so in favor of fiscal restraint? If you were unhappy with the spending, one would assume spending decreases would be on the agenda and not new spending announcements. Keep in mind this was before stimulus spending was even part of the picture. Since then, the Liberals have been demanding even more spending. Again, if you're going to criticize the spending don't make spending promises on top of it. It sends a pretty confusing message, one only brainwashed Liberals seem able to reconcile. I mean, saying, "The CPC has been spending too much, but WE'LL spend an extra $80B over the next few years." somehow to you means that spending will get reduced. Chretien and Martin reduced spending 14 years ago...so it MUST be true. As far as UFO museums, seriously get off that. It's ludicrous, but it's peanuts and you bring it up all the time. Mulroney cut spending significantly from Trudeau's levels. $30B in debt service payments each year from Trudeau's accumulated debt turned operating surpluses into DEEP deficits. I can show you these numbers AGAIN if you like. For Mulroney to have balanced the budget with 14% prime interest rates and the biggest debt levels ever, he'd have had to slash spending far beyond what Chretien and Martin did. If you want to talk about former cronies and who's in government right now, Pierre Trudeau's spending record was the worst of all BY FAR and there are lots of current Liberals who worked with him.

You should see what some of the academic economists are saying. Ignore the government and business economists, take out the vested interest in the predictions, and you'll find some REALLY gloomy predictions.

Nobody argues that. All we argue is that given the excessive spending, the Liberal solution was to propose increased spending. They promised this in 2008, they are promising it now. They are promising EI spending increases, they are saying Harper's not doing enough to help the economy but at the same time they're criticizing his spending. Somehow you're able to determine that promised spending increases in the wake of Tory increases means the Liberals would show fiscal restraint, but the shoe don't fit. The facts speak otherwise. Only you, in your weird little way, are somehow able to reconcile this VERY fundamental problem with the Liberal position on the economy. That is, of course, if you ignore Paul Martin's tenure, Pierre Trudeau's record, and ONLY use the mid 90's as your reference point. I'm really sorry to have to tell you this, but what the Liberals did in 1995 was to prevent the government of Canada from going bankrupt. They had no choice. They did what was necessary. Unfortunately for you, we're now looking at a completely different set of people, 14 years later, who are promising and proposing nothing BUT increased spending.

What 'most' Canadians, do unfortunately, is not indicative of the rate of default on loans and credit cards. It's not uncommon to find people with $40,000 annual incomes but $30,000 in credit card debt. Most people aren't that dumb/desperate, but that doesn't matter. Just watch the Banks quarterly reports as they come out over the next little while. Loan loss provisions will be skyrocketing and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better simply because people are able to live off their credit cards while unemployed for months and months before it finally hits the fan. Thankfully we'll not be in as bad a situation as the Americans because of CMHC guidelines on mortgages and stricter capitalization requirements, but believe me it's not a great time to be working for a bank right now.

The only thing you have to do to judge Pierre Trudeau's record as PM is to look at the deficits he ran and the debt level he accumulated. To THIS DAY the majority of our debt can be laid directly at his feet and we are STILL paying off his ludicrous spending 27 years since he left. I can back that up with numbers if you like, but Turdeau sold us out to finance his dubious legend. He failed at national unity, because he alienated the West. He failed as a fiscal manager, because we are still paying his debt. He failed us as a statesman, because he never did anything but piss off our neighbours and the only thing good you can say about him is he at LEAST got Canada in the news. It was really great to have the PM's wife make news for screwing around with coked out rock stars.

Yeah I'm still waiting on the platform. I've no idea what the Liberals are about. I'm 100% against their EI changes (and yes I do understand them) but other than that I have no idea what they want to do.

As mentioned before, there are various ways the provinces can change their Constitutions and there are various ways the provinces can arrange to have the constitution changed and failing that there are ways the provinces can force federal fiscal adjustments in their favor. The fact that the West has been a Liberal wasteland for the last 20 years is a pretty good indication of where equalization policy has gone. Ontario and the West thought they had found a solution with Harper but unfortunately he ultimately turned out to govern exactly like the Liberals had previously with spending and pandering to Quebec. A golden opportunity was blown in my opinion, one which will likely cost Harper and the CPC the vital support of Ontario that it needs. I'll probably not vote for him again.

Sorry. I wasn't clear in my last post. The vast majority of the cost for the OIL companies in bringing a litre to the pumps is from crude. What they don't tell you is that the oil companies own the entire process from drilling to refining to distribution, and they make profit on every step. Petro Canada likes to tell us that only 3% of the retail price at the station is profit, but that's total horseshi* and even if it were true the whole process is so vertically integrated that the parent company is making giant margins on every preceding step. There's massive profiteering going on right now. I hate the oil companies but I've invested my money with them. If you can't beat 'em...join em.... :S

I would love it too if it the federal government paid $2000 worth of taxes each year for me. Like I said, it's easy to love Canada when it's paying your bills.