madmax Posted December 23, 2008 Author Report Posted December 23, 2008 The Banana Republic of Newfoundland.Hugo Chavez ain't got nothin' on Newfoundland and Labrador premier, Danny Williams. Chavez hasn't got anything on Harper. Harper has suspended Parliment. That is true Banana Republic activity. Ol' Hugh at least pays compensation for expropriating private assets owned by corporations, unlike Williams, who is just taking the assets of forestry company AbitibiBowater. Hugho is acting like a Socialist trying to hold off the communist activists while at the same time as fight off powerful elite unions of the oil industry and the oil industry and its US backers. Hugo has the resources to pay, Danny Williams not nearly as much. Scratch Newfoundland off the list of places to invest. Its a great place to invest. The Free Ride is over and Newfoundland is a HAVE Province under Danny Williams. Quote
August1991 Posted December 28, 2008 Report Posted December 28, 2008 (edited) He's not merely cancelling a lease. He is confiscating company assets, including three small electric plants. But it's all hot air meant to make him look like the grand defender of the public. The courts are not going to accept expropriation of private property without compensation no matter how much "Blowhard Danny" whines.Unfortunately for Newfoundlanders, Williams has the right to write legislation.It's a question of "reputation". Alberta's Conservative's similarity to the Shah is probably more comparable to the way the Shah opened Iran's legs to just about any old super-power who'd line up to rape her.I guess we'll see just what kind of balls Alberta has when the US tells it to go peddle its filthy oil somewhere else. might even get the US to jump on board again. Eyeball, your analogy is entirely wrong except in one sense.Danny Williams can pull this stunt once. Then, no one will want to have anything to do with him, or Newfoundland. Eyeball, you misunderstand who has the power to choose. Edited December 28, 2008 by August1991 Quote
eyeball Posted December 28, 2008 Report Posted December 28, 2008 Eyeball, your analogy is entirely wrong except in one sense.Danny Williams can pull this stunt once. Then, no one will want to have anything to do with him, or Newfoundland. Eyeball, you misunderstand who has the power to choose. Perhaps you misunderstand who has the right. You're from Alberta? Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
August1991 Posted December 28, 2008 Report Posted December 28, 2008 Perhaps you misunderstand who has the right. You're from Alberta?Oh, Danny Williams has the right to do this. No question there.Scratch Newfoundland off the list of places to invest.Precisely.----- Danny Williams' ego is now officially too big for the Newfoundland time zone. Quote
Radsickle Posted December 29, 2008 Report Posted December 29, 2008 (edited) Danny's done the right thing. I hope the NAFTA challenge decides in his favour but I doubt it. Go Danny Go! screw the scare tactics of oooh, we better not invest there.... Malarkey. Edited December 29, 2008 by Radsickle Quote
eyeball Posted December 29, 2008 Report Posted December 29, 2008 Danny's done the right thing. I hope the NAFTA challenge decides in his favour but I doubt it.Go Danny Go! screw the scare tactics of oooh, we better not invest there.... Malarkey. I could see this being a concern in a world of plenty, where resources were easy to come by. In a world of increasing scarcity though these sorts of tactics will likely become more popular, with populism being the operative word. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Radsickle Posted December 31, 2008 Report Posted December 31, 2008 I could see this being a concern in a world of plenty, where resources were easy to come by. In a world of increasing scarcity though these sorts of tactics will likely become more popular, with populism being the operative word. If only the NAFTA panel were a jury of normal people, Danny would win, hands down. Take away the jobs, give up the right to the resources. Period. Quote
madmax Posted December 31, 2008 Author Report Posted December 31, 2008 Danny's done the right thing. I hope the NAFTA challenge decides in his favour but I doubt it. Nafta has no teeth as the US proved with the softwood lumber dispute. They just shit all over and ignored the Nafta rulings. Quote
Toro Posted January 2, 2009 Report Posted January 2, 2009 (edited) Its a great place to invest. The Free Ride is over and Newfoundland is a HAVE Province under Danny Williams. Yet he still thinks Canada should still be forking over equalization payments even though NFLD is a have province. Hmmm.... And I invest for a living. If I were investing in NFLD, I'd want an iron-clad contract with disputes adjudicated outside of the province. Edited January 2, 2009 by Toro Quote "Canada is a country, not a sector. Remember that." - Howard Simons of Simons Research, giving advice to investors.
Riverwind Posted January 2, 2009 Report Posted January 2, 2009 (edited) -- Edited January 2, 2009 by Riverwind Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
Riverwind Posted January 2, 2009 Report Posted January 2, 2009 (edited) Nafta has no teeth as the US proved with the softwood lumber dispute. They just shit all over and ignored the Nafta rulings.Softwood was specifically excluded from NAFTA just like the cultural and dairy industries. The NAFTA dispute panel was set up to prevent the kind of legislative abuse that Danny is engaging in and he will likely lose (In fact, it is likely that even the Canadian panalist would rule against NFLD). The only question here is whether the original agreements for the timber leases stipulated that a plant must be run in NFLD. If this is true then the confiscation of the timber licenses may be justified, however, I don't see how the expropriation of the interested in the power generation facility can be justified. Edited January 2, 2009 by Riverwind Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
madmax Posted January 3, 2009 Author Report Posted January 3, 2009 Softwood was specifically excluded from NAFTA Softwood lumber is not excluded from NAFTA. Quote
Radsickle Posted January 18, 2009 Report Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) Softwood lumber is not excluded from NAFTA. Are you sure? Why didn't Canada file a case against their US counterparts for imposing protectionist tariffs then? Were we simply too polite for such action? Were the Americans so belligerent about it because we didn't have a NAFTA recourse or are you not sure? Maybe we just needed a Danny Williams to stick up for our interests. Edited January 18, 2009 by Radsickle Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.