Newspaper Endorsements

[jdobbin]

The claim was to illustrate that the vast majority of workers are employed by companies. You don't agree? Well, then, who do they work for?

No, you said 90%. This isn't about me. It is about what your claim is.

[Jobu]

I should also add, that many public sector jobs would not exist but for the private sector, i.e., corporations. From regulation to taxation to a whole host of support sectors.

[Jobu]

No, you said 90%. This isn't about me. It is about what your claim is.

So... do you have a point to make here or not?

[jdobbin]

Yep, you're really calling me out. Glad to see you agree with me on my fundamental point, though. Move along now to another thread, teflon dobbin.

Where is your stats? You can't produce them, can you?

[jdobbin]

So... do you have a point to make here or not?

My point is that you can't back up your 90% claim and don't even attempt to do so.

[Jobu]

Where is your stats? You can't produce them, can you?

Of course not. Private sector employment is about 65-70% of all employment (check the latest labour survey). A significant number of public sector jobs are directly related to the private sector. For example, many people employed by the government in taxation, regulation, policymaking, enforcement etc. would not exist if corporations were to disappear. I am sure that this statistic isn't even out there, but anyone with any sensibility (i.e., not you) would understand that corporations are the primary source of employment in this country.

The fundamental point that I have made doesn't depend on whether it's 90.01627% or some other figure.

Since you're focusing on this so much, it's clear you agree. Heck, how can you not?

Try again.

[Jobu]

My point is that you can't back up your 90% claim and don't even attempt to do so.

As I suspected, no poin here. Run along.

[jdobbin]

As I suspected, no poin here. Run along.

I have the stats, by the way. Just wondering how long it will take you to admit that you are wrong.

[Jobu]

I have the stats, by the way. Just wondering how long it will take you to admit that you are wrong.

Wrong about what?

[jdobbin]

Wrong about what?

Wrong about 90%. It was something you couldn't back and I doubt any Conservative would back you up on the 90% either. It was basically blowing a lot of hot air.

[independent]

Corporations should pay zero taxes. People should pay taxes. Of course, no one wants that, right?

Is your solution to drive all corporations out of the country?

That will do wonders for employment and our economy.

You know a lot of corporations are foreign owned.

You know not everything they make goes back into the Canadian economy.

You know that income from employees mostly goes back into the Canadian economy

You know it costs us millions in infrastructure so the Corporations can stay in business.

Corporate welfare is not very popular in Canada.(You will never sell that idea).

There is not a direct correlation between taxes and employment.

If Taxes are so high that in cuts into their minimum profit threshold then they will find it not worth staying in business.

If Taxes are so low that they are costing more in infrastructure than we are getting back in taxes from the employed people then we are better off not having the business.

The company that I work for is already making all kinds of after tax profit. If taxes were dropped there would not be one extra person hired because they run on the policy of employing the minimum amount of employees required. Since most of the shareholders are foreign based most of the money saved would be leaving the country.

Edited October 12, 2008 by independent

[Jobu]

Wrong about 90%. It was something you couldn't back and I doubt any Conservative would back you up on the 90% either. It was basically blowing a lot of hot air.

OK. Because I just pointed you to a recent labour survey that effectively confirms the numbers, if not exactly then certainly to the same degree. Of course, that was never the point.

And on that note, what about the point I was making, that doesn't depend on what the figure is or might be, whether it's 50% or 100%? Surely you would agree that if we eliminated all corporations in Canada we would have a bit of a problem on our hands?

You can focus on 90%, I will focus on the fact that we are the #1 economy in the G7 for a reason, despite the best efforts of the left to turn this nation into a disastrous cesspool of recession and unemployment.

[jdobbin]

Of course not. Private sector employment is about 65-70% of all employment (check the latest labour survey). A significant number of public sector jobs are directly related to the private sector. For example, many people employed by the government in taxation, regulation, policymaking, enforcement etc. would not exist if corporations were to disappear. I am sure that this statistic isn't even out there, but anyone with any sensibility (i.e., not you) would understand that corporations are the primary source of employment in this country.

You didn't say private sector. You said corporations and you said 90%.

The fundamental point that I have made doesn't depend on whether it's 90.01627% or some other figure.

Since you're focusing on this so much, it's clear you agree. Heck, how can you not?

Try again.

I am saying you made a claim, didn't back it up with a link, any citation and expected everyone to swallow it. Then you responded by attacking the the person asking for a citation.

[Jobu]

You know a lot of corporations are foreign owned.

So? Does Molson not employ Canadians? Do you have a citation for this fact?

You know not everything they make goes back into the Canadian economy.

So? Much of it does. Do you have a cite for the claim that not everything goes back into the Canadian economy?

You know that income from employees mostly goes back into the Canadian economy

I would assume so. Do you have a cite?

You know it costs us millions in infrastructure so the Corporations can stay in business.

And that we get billions back in return, yes. Do you have a cite that it costs us millions so that corporations can stay in business?

Corporate welfare is not very popular in Canada.(You will never sell that idea).

Cite? There are lots of things that are and are not popular. It doesn't mean it's right. A long time ago it was popular to segregate Japanense people.

There is not a direct correlation between taxes and employment.

Cite? Are you trying to tell me that there would be the same corporate situation in Canada no matter the level of taxes? In that case, why not tax them 95%?

If Taxes are so high that in cuts into their minimum profit threshold then they will find it not worth staying in business.

I would assume so, but do you hve a cite?

If Taxes are so low that they are costing more in infrastructure than we are getting back in taxes from the employed people then we are better off not having the business.

Cite?

The company that I work for is already making all kinds of after tax profit. If taxes were dropped there would not be one extra person hired because they run on the policy of employing the minimum amount of employees required. Since most of the shareholders are foreign based most of the money saved would be leaving the country.

Cite?

[Jobu]

You didn't say private sector. You said corporations and you said 90%.

I am saying you made a claim, didn't back it up with a link, any citation and expected everyone to swallow it. Then you responded by attacking the the person asking for a citation.

At least we've established that you agree with my fundamental point. Thanks again.

[jdobbin]

OK. Because I just pointed you to a recent labour survey that effectively confirms the numbers, if not exactly then certainly to the same degree. Of course, that was never the point.

It doesn't effectively confirms the numbers. It shows you were blowing hot air on 90% and now you are modifying your statement to say you really meant private sector and that your point on 90% was not really a point.

And on that note, what about the point I was making, that doesn't depend on what the figure is or might be, whether it's 50% or 100%? Surely you would agree that if we eliminated all corporations in Canada we would have a bit of a problem on our hands?

Oh, but the numbers here all important. You keep trying to slide away from your claim but you made it and it was easily refuted that I couldn't believe you said it.

I certainly never made any claim on the private sector or any other the problems you mention. I simply asked you to back up what you said with a citation. Your deflection of the word "sad" showed me you realized that you had nothing to back up the claim.

Yeesh. You give Dion a hard time but when asked a simple question, you could not respond with a simple answer.

You can focus on 90%, I will focus on the fact that we are the #1 economy in the G7 for a reason, despite the best efforts of the left to turn this nation into a disastrous cesspool of recession and unemployment.

Yes, I am sure you want to focus on anything other than your incorrect claim that 90% of Canadians work for corporations.

[jdobbin]

At least we've established that you agree with my fundamental point. Thanks again.

I agree that you can't back up anything with a cite to say 90%. It was a lie.

Edited October 12, 2008 by jdobbin

[Jobu]

It doesn't effectively confirms the numbers. It shows you were blowing hot air on 90% and now you are modifying your statement to say you really meant private sector and that your point on 90% was not really a point.

Oh, but the numbers here all important. You keep trying to slide away from your claim but you made it and it was easily refuted that I couldn't believe you said it.

I certainly never made any claim on the private sector or any other the problems you mention. I simply asked you to back up what you said with a citation. Your deflection of the word "sad" showed me you realized that you had nothing to back up the claim.

Yeesh. You give Dion a hard time but when asked a simple question, you could not respond with a simple answer.

Yes, I am sure you want to focus on anything other than your incorrect claim that 90% of Canadians work for corporations.

Thanks for coming out.

[Jobu]

I agree that you can't back up anything with a cite to say 90%. It was a lie.

And you can't back up that it isn't accurate.

[jdobbin]

And you can't back up that it isn't accurate.

I can't believe you are still going down that route. 1 in 5 Canadians work for the government. That works out to 18% of the workforce.

http://www.reedconstructiondata.com/alex-c...-public-sector/

In 2007, there were 3.2 million people employed (on average) in the public sector in Canada, according to a report recently released by Statistics Canada. This was an increase of 1.9% versus the year before. (By the way, a 2.0% annual increase in jobs is a benchmark figure that indicates good, but not excessive, growth.)

The proportion of public sector employees among the total labour force in Canada has been about 18% since 2000. In other words, nearly one in five workers is employed by government or one of its agencies. Expressed a little differently, there is one government employee for every four private sector jobs.

Corporations do not count for 90% of the workforce. Stop making the outrageous claim. And stop downplaying that the 90% figure really wasn't the point.

Corporations account for a portion of the private sector but you've left out so many other aspects that it would never equal the 90% you quoted. You didn't mention cooperatives, credit unions, sole proprietorships, partnerships or any other aspects of private sector functions.

[jdobbin]

Thanks for coming out.

Can't back up the 90% and never could. It was a lie to begin with and not a very good one.

And you criticize Dion. Yeesh.

[kengs333]

We need all the corporations we can get in Canada. They are a very big reason why our economy is the best in the G7. Higher taxes and other uncompetitive policies will drive this economy into great depths.

Flaherty was 100% correct on this point.

If we have no corporations, we have no jobs. Though I guess communism is sort of what you want.

Funnily enough, as we speak our economy is taking a nose dive and it has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with corporate greed...

Our economy is a little stronger at the moment because of oil, but if you haven't noticed the price of oil is declining rapidly and with the imploding American economy, where about 75% of our exports go, is resulting in decreased consumer demand already and corporations closing up shop in Canada.

[capricorn]

The fact that they don't pay their fair share of taxes,

How do you know that?

that they underpay workers, that they constantly unemploy people and move to Mexico or China, etc. etc. etc.

Contrast that to the situation faced by GM and Chrysler. They are forced to look at a merger or go bust. Historically, greedy American and Canadian unions have cared more about building their own empire than properly protecting the jobs of their members. When unions win large pay increases for their members they raise their union dues and proceed to bloat their own establishments. Obscenely high wages eat into the companies' bottom line and bring them to the brink of bankruptcy. It's no wonder these companies look outside Canada for its workforce. It's the only way they can remain competitive. When the auto industry in Ontario finally shuts down completely, much of the blame can be placed squarely at the feet of greedy auto unions.

Similar fates have happened in the manufacturing industries in Canada for similar reasons as in the auto industry and it will only get worse.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081011/bs_nm/...tos_chrysler_gm

Complaining about underpayed workers and companies moving their operations to other countries shows how uninformed you are and is total crap.

[Who's Doing What?]

UPDATED

These are the endorsements I have found. Any others?

Conservatives

Brantford Expositor: http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDi....aspx?e=1243512

Calgary Herald: http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/t...32fc1ac&p=1

Calgary Sun: http://calsun.canoe.ca/Comment/POV/2008/10...058606-sun.html

Economist: http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayst...ory_id=12381439

Edmonton Journal: http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news...43-4c8d37aa6f38

Edmonton Sun: http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/Comment...060476-sun.html

Globe & Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...NStory/politics

Kitchener-Waterloo Record: http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/426593

Montreal Gazette: http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...61-513309031805

National Post: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=866505

Ottawa Citizen: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/views/...4f-2b00eba5d867

Ottawa Sun: http://www.ottawasun.com/Comment/Editorial...057061-sun.html

Toronto Sun: http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editoria...059606-sun.html

Vancouver Province: http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/edi...49-58706fa0d773

Vancouver Sun: http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...9c-d0fb9184f638

Windsor Star http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/news/edi...3a-6f41c8673851

Winnipeg Free Press: http://winnipegfreepress.com/editorial/sto...p-4880617c.html

Winnipeg Sun: http://www.winnipegsun.com/Comment/Editori...057401-sun.html

Liberals

Toronto Star: http://www.thestar.com/FederalElection/article/515895

No Endorsement

La Presse

Victoria Times Colonist: http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...af-7c63a3127ffa

Ahhhhh, The LIBERAL BIASED MEDIA in action.

[fellowtraveller]

an't get the hang of this Google thing, but surely the CBC is foursquare behind Mr Haprper?