Canada's debt

[ToadBrother]

We have recall legislation in BC, and after a few attempts at removing MLAs, it's been all but abandoned. Heck, we even have legislation that would allow for citizen initiatives to be put to a referendum, and that's never been used.

As much as recall sounds great, I wonder what the bar would be. Too high, and it's useless, too low and it can be abused. Beyond that, I'm not sure I want my representative in constant election mode, which is what I'm afraid easy recall and referendum reforms might do.

I simply don't think you can govern a nation of 30 million people through referendums and the like. It worked in Ancient Athens because the population of voters was very small, but it did produce horrifying decisions like poor old Socrates being democratically forced to drink poison.

[Molly]

Good! (I knew that, too, now that I think about it.)

It most certainly shouldn't be routine or common. It's only needed for cases of 'travesty of democracy', and thank heavens, those are truly rare... but they do happen.

[Smallc]

It's only needed for cases of 'travesty of democracy', and thank heavens, those are truly rare... but they do happen.

I don't think a legislature would let such a thing happen the vast majoirity of the time...and if they did, the Court certainly wouldn't.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

A system of government that lays claim to being a democracy and hides behind the legislative efforts that created a bureaucracy as insulation from the legitimate effect and consequences of flawed policy can hardly be described as being just. The wording travesty of democracy is an apt description for the entire system.

Edited May 28, 2009 by Jerry J. Fortin

[Smallc]

A system of government that lays claim to being a democracy

Not only does it lay claim to being one, but it is one. The people elect their representatives....and the majority of representatives decide what happens. I don't see any better way for it to work.

[Zachary Young]

The debt should be repudiated. There is no justification to steal more money from the Canadian public, simply because the government in the past has spent beyond it's means. There is virtually no downside to this plan.

[M.Dancer]

The debt should be repudiated. There is no justification to steal more money from the Canadian public, simply because the government in the past has spent beyond it's means. There is virtually no downside to this plan.

Well aside from never being able to raise money again, having zero capital for infrastructure investment, having our foreign assets siezed and the relegation of a G8 nation to 3rd world status there is absolutely zero downside.

[Moonbox]

The debt should be repudiated. There is no justification to steal more money from the Canadian public, simply because the government in the past has spent beyond it's means. There is virtually no downside to this plan.

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.

[Zachary Young]

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.

I think the word "strawman" is the one we're looking for folks. You're attacking a claim I didn't make. Of you benefit people when you spend hundreds of billions of dollars. How could you not? But what you are ignoring, my friend, is the cost - probably because you are a lazy bum who doesn't have to pay taxes.

"Well aside from never being able to raise money again, having zero capital for infrastructure investment, having our foreign assets siezed and the relegation of a G8 nation to 3rd world status there is absolutely zero downside."

I would love it if the government were not able to raise money (how do they raise money? they steal from us via taxation, they steal from our children by borrowing, or they steal from those with savings via inflation). As for the rest of your nonsense, it is simply that. Who's foreign assets are you talking about? The government's (who of course should not own land in other countries, how stupid of an idea is that, it's bad enough that they own land here)? Or the citizens? As for becoming a member of the 3rd world, according to the Wall Street Journal we are well on our way, because of the socialist welfare state policies enacted BY our government.

[Moonbox]

I think the word "strawman" is the one we're looking for folks. You're attacking a claim I didn't make. Of you benefit people when you spend hundreds of billions of dollars. How could you not? But what you are ignoring, my friend, is the cost - probably because you are a lazy bum who doesn't have to pay taxes.

I'm not ignoring anything, buddy. I'm well aware of the cost of previous generations irresponsibility and excesses. As far as not paying back their debt, well, maybe you should take a look at what happens to standard of living when a people's country defaults on their debt payments.

As for becoming a member of the 3rd world, according to the Wall Street Journal we are well on our way, because of the socialist welfare state policies enacted BY our government.

I think you made that up. If you're going to say stuff like that, back it up with a link. If you do have some nut job saying that there and can link it, make sure before you do that it's not a certain fat slob we all know from down south or someone from Fox News please. You're new here, so I'll give you a friendly warning.

BTW. Where is JDOBBIN?!?! I want to show him a REAL right-wing wacko.

[Bryan]

It's not ideal, but seriously people it's 3% of GDP. That's like me putting an HDTV on my Futureshop card. Trudeau's deficits were three times bigger.

[Visionseeker]

It's not ideal, but seriously people it's 3% of GDP. That's like me putting an HDTV on my Futureshop card. Trudeau's deficits were three times bigger.

Um, it's not the GDP ratio that should concern us. It's the unbelievable rise with no apparent justification (i.e. stemming unemployment, massive investment, and so on). This was a government that was promising not to go into deficit only 5 months ago. Now we have a HUGE deficit and what do they have to show for it? Yup, nothing.

Harper and co. are simply ideologically ill-equipped to properly see us through these times.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Visionseeker

[August1991]

It's not ideal, but seriously people it's 3% of GDP. That's like me putting an HDTV on my Futureshop card. Trudeau's deficits were three times bigger.

No, it's not like putting an HDTV on your Future Shop card.

Rather, the question is how much would you pay to firefighters to stop a fire in your rich neighbour's home? (If the fire could spread... )

This is the moral dilemma.

[KingIggy]

Hypocrite Harper is a typical Neo-Con : cut taxes, reduce revenue, ramp up the war on drugs and increase military spending.

That's the recipe for a Republican Society. Harper makes Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rove and Limbaugh very happy.

[MontyBurns]

cut taxes

You want to pay higher taxes?

[KingIggy]

You want to pay higher taxes?

You can't keep BLINDLY cutting taxes and expect to stay out of debt, or maintain adequate social services. Taxes = revenue.

Now if you want Canada to adopt the Republican insanity of Palin, Rove, Cheney, Bush, Coulter and Limbaugh, then you keep on advocating reducing gov't revenue.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

You can't keep BLINDLY cutting taxes and expect to stay out of debt, or maintain adequate social services. Taxes = revenue.

Now if you want Canada to adopt the Republican insanity of Palin, Rove, Cheney, Bush, Coulter and Limbaugh, then you keep on advocating reducing gov't revenue.

What of the democratic insanity of JFK or FDR or for that matter BC or BO. The system is the deal not the party. Look at this system at little more carefully. It is far superior in all democratic respects than ours. The people are the key to how a system actually works, they decide how to apply it.

Even the Magna Carta looks like crap when compared to the American "Declaration of Independence", their constitution pales in comparison in my view, but that is just me. The concept of a republic is not new, but how the Americans use it is. It took a lot of guts to stand up for themselves and form their own country. It took a lot of brains to design a system of government that eclipsed the British system they lived under. The worked hard and achieved something brilliant.

Edited May 29, 2009 by Jerry J. Fortin

[Smallc]

Yes, a system under which people can be bought and sold and where everything is a clash between polar opposites are so much better. Parliaments make up the majoirty of the world government systems. America is different, but I certainly wouuldn't say it's anything special.

I'm also far more fond of the way that we chose to form our own country, with barely a gunshot.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

To each their own I guess. Yet somehow I think the reason that most nations use the British system is because of the demise of the British empire and the rise of the colonies. We were simply to lazy to do for ourselves and we adopted their system when we left their control.

[Smallc]

I don't think that's it. I think it's something that makes us distinc from America. Also, when I said most places use parliaments, I didn't necessarily mean Westminster Parliaments. Even most places with Presidents have parliaments in order to keep power from being concentrated. Many on the American right look down on Parliaments, though I'm never sure why.

[Borg]

I'm also far more fond of the way that we chose to form our own country, with barely a gunshot.

Your lack of history knowledge is showing

Borg

[Smallc]

Your lack of history knowledge is showing

I said barely a gunshot.

[Argus]

Well aside from never being able to raise money again, having zero capital for infrastructure investment, having our foreign assets siezed and the relegation of a G8 nation to 3rd world status there is absolutely zero downside.

Not to mention that most of the debt is owed to Canadians in the form of bonds - or to Canaian financial institutions, which would all have to go bankrupt.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The concentration of power is far more pronounced here than it is in the US! The one thing that we have that I do like is "Question Period", because in theory at least the government can be held to account. Of course like many things in the country it doesn't really work that way. In my view our system has only the perception of being better, in application it fares less well.

[Smallc]

And I see it as the exact opposite. Our system get things done and it has the ability hold our head of government to account much easier. Our government must do the people's will (even though yoyu will argue that the concentration of party power doesn't make that so, I would disagree. If Canadians didn't like what the party was saying, they wouldn't vote for the MPs). It really is responsible government.

People always talk about the appointments that tahe PM can make. Wellm in reality, the President makes even more. Many have to go through the Senate, but there is still a great deal of power in a political office. Here, all power really rests with a non partisan non political figure who has only the best interests of the country and the constitution in mind.