Jump to content

Danny Williams has got big balls


Recommended Posts

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by August1991
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Toro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
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 by Radsickle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,755
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Joe
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Matthew earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Fluffypants went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Joe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Explorer
    • exPS earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...