Jump to content

GrizzlyBear

Member
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About GrizzlyBear

  • Birthday 02/24/1975

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto

GrizzlyBear's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. The ability to prorogue Parliament needs to be written right out of the Constitution. The federal government has a mandate to govern at all times...through thick and thin...in sickness and in health. It is an absolute disgrace what this country has become, and even worse that not one MP has the balls to get out there - with full, blustering force in the media - to denounce this tyrannical act. All we get are dithering, gray hairs in Ottawa who worry more about their short game than doing what it is they're actually paid by all of us to do. This continent is going to hell in a hand-basket...and not one savior looms on the horizon. We're just a country full of weak-kneed windbags. Canada = a bad joke (albeit a pampered one)
  2. Currently, there is no free market in the sale of alcoholic beverages in this province, thus I would be all for the McGuinty government selling the LCBO to a private company...and while they're at it they should get their paws off the Beer Store as well. The Beer Store, contrary to what I've read in this thread, is not owned by a Belgian or American company...and yes, the government does have a hand in its operations. The Beer Store is a consortium run by Molson, Labatt, and Sleeman...is legislated by the Liquor Control Act, and can only sell products already approved for sale at the LCBO. Therefore, the Beer Store is not a completely private-run company free of government strings. One need only visit the Beer Store's website to verify this info. It is high time the Ontario government got with the program and recognized the money that could be saved by selling to the private sector, off-loading fiscal responsibilities to municipalities, and greatly shrank the size and scope of government.
  3. Fascism is borne out of government-corporate collusion. It is correct to draw a parallel to the Conservative Party of Canada in that regard...however, the only reason this is so, is because the Conservative Party are conservatives in name only. If the party actually lived up to its namesake, it'd be a complete joke to suggest they bear any resemblance to fascists. Matter of fact, among the Libs, Cons, NDP or Bloc...none of them can claim to be unrelated (however distant the relation may be) to fascist ideals. All of those parties are in favour of blended economies where the lines between governments and corporations blur.
  4. The article correctly recalls what Martin did right (firing useless public servants, cutting spending, and off-loading fiscal responsibilities to the provinces), but glazes over the banking regulation mentioned, as well as assume that other first world nations were allowing their banks to be "unfettered". There hasn't been a truly unfettered banking system in any country in recent memory, and any country that has dipped a toe in that pool undermined their attempts by ratcheting up government involvement in other areas. So, it is a misnomer to say that Canadian banks were more successful because of more regulation...that's bunk. If Canadian banks have been more successful it would be because, as Finance Minister, Martin happened to place regulation where it was needed or it made sense to place it, as opposed to say...the United States...who have had anything but "unfettered" banks, but rather plenty of regulation applied in all the wrong places. And I take umbrage with Martin's assessment of the role of government. He says the government must invest in education, and in-so-doing contradicts the work he did as Finance Minister when he cut government spending in so many areas. You either believe in limited government or you don't. He says letting laissez-faire rule over education is wrong, so clearly he sees a line in the sand somewhere. To me, he displays a stunning level of ignorance to infer that the private sector would not provide higher quality education for less money than the government could ever hope to provide. And if that isn't what he is inferring, than one is to assume by his idea of the federal government "investing" in education, that he is in favour of taking money from the pockets of Canadians, and throwing it down a rat hole.
  5. Austerity is just what this country, and unsustainable economic system, needs. Here's hoping the first round of cuts are just the beginning. I hope Flaherty realizes that in the long run, if he hopes to be part of a real solution, he'll have to table a budget that makes deep cuts in pensions, and EI.
  6. The absolute last thing our government should be doing is buying companies; leave that to the private sector. When government gets involved money is squandered, resources become poorly allocated.
×
×
  • Create New...