Is Stephen Harper one of the most powerful men in the world

[PIK]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

[nicky10013]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

Ahahahahahahahaahahahahahahaah

[dre]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance?

You guessed it!!!

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_K5ADcrHFv74/SwuoioQdXUI/AAAAAAAADbE/Ng-RKj7G6gQ/s320/frank+stallone.jpg

Frank Stallone!

Edited July 30, 2010 by dre

[ToadBrother]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

I don't know if Harper so much derailed the bank tax as much as he was the most willing to say what a number of finance ministers in the G20 couldn't. Canada, because of our well-regulated and well-managed banking system, never had the sort of anti-bank sentiment that places like the US, the UK, France and Germany did. Publicly the politicians had to sound very stern and threatening about their banks, but privately I suspect few of the G20 governments out there thought the bank tax idea was a good one. Harper comes along and says "Canada ain't doing it", and that was enough for everyone to sort of go "Well, we tried, but you know, we couldn't get agreement."

[fellowtraveller]

'Powerful' is too strong, the Canadian economy is too small now and will always be too small for the PM to be a major global player.

But it is undeniable that the Canadian economy has weathered the storm better than most, and that Harper is pretty influential internationally as a result. It is debatable whether all the credit should go to him, but he is looking good externally.

That in itself is funny, as a major criticism when he became leader, then PM, was his lack of international presence and knowledge. That has changed.

[nicky10013]

'Powerful' is too strong, the Canadian economy is too small now and will always be too small for the PM to be a major global player.

But it is undeniable that the Canadian economy has weathered the storm better than most, and that Harper is pretty influential internationally as a result. It is debatable whether all the credit should go to him, but he is looking good externally.

That in itself is funny, as a major criticism when he became leader, then PM, was his lack of international presence and knowledge. That has changed.

No it hasn't. The man is a joke internationally.

[August1991]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

I'll give Harper credit for the bank tax. He reminded the other G8 leaders that he and other key G20 leaders were against it. Harper made it respectable to oppose it.

I don't know if Harper's role was critical but it was certainly instrumental.

[On second thought, I doubt this current G8 crew has the fortitude, talent or experience to impose an international bank tax. It was DOA without Harper.]

As for government fiscal policies, this is a domestic issue. The G8 or G20 can say what they want at a summit but each government will decide on its own how to tax and spend. At the moment, for better or worse, perceptions of budget deficits pose political electoral problems in most countries.

[Smallc]

No it hasn't. The man is a joke internationally.

Based on what evidence? International relations seem to be Harper's strong point.

[fellowtraveller]

[On second thought, I doubt this current G8 crew has the fortitude, talent or experience to impose an international bank tax. It was DOA without Harper.]

Actually, the environment for nailing banks with a fat tax was ideal, they are the perfect bogeyman in several places and particularly US and UK. The tax could easily be sold as a punitive measure, given that the actions of banks in those countries are seen to be partially to blame for the economic problems. The optics are and were good. But the reality is that any tax would simply end up being passed on to consumers, and that stark reality would negate any spin the G8 could generate initially.

No it hasn't. The man is a joke internationally.

Just this once, don't let your partisan hatred interfere with your analytical prowess. Canadian financial systems and Harper have both gotten plenty of backslapping in the international press in the last year. You're just going to have to face the facts this time.

Don't be a h8er, be a sk8er

[nicky10013]

Based on what evidence? International relations seem to be Harper's strong point.

With who? What has he done internationally other than obfuscate like he has at home? Relations with Mexico and the European Union are right now fairly bad due to the implementation of visas for Mexican and Czech citizens. China because rather than organize deals for business we decided to entirely chide them on human rights. Copenhagen, where most deals went to negotiate honestly, Canada was rightly named as one of the biggest obstacles to a real deal there, and, in most of the western world, the environment is a big deal. Back in 2006, Canada also came out firmly for Israel during the war in Lebanon, completely undermining our position as one of the last few honest brokers in the region to the dismay of many. As for things like the bank tax and stimulus, do you think that guys like Obama are grateful that those were torpedoed? Give me a break.

Furthermore, we don't even have a foreign policy. What are our goals, what are we doing to accomplish them? Not even people in the DFAIT can answer that. I have an acquaintance in DFAIT through some university friends who has said that our standing in the world is at pretty much the lowest it's been in a long time simply because we're aimless and partisan.

It sums up nicely with an anecdote from the G8 or G20 in Italy. During a press conference with international reporters, Harper was answering questions. A reporter asked him about the economy and Harper launched into a partisan diatribe against Michael Ignatieff on something Ignatieff never even said. The international press corps were dumbfounded because most of them didn't even know who Ignatieff was.

If this is successful foreign policy, I'd like to know what bad foreign policy is.

[nicky10013]

Just this once, don't let your partisan hatred interfere with your analytical prowess. Canadian financial systems and Harper have both gotten plenty of backslapping in the international press in the last year. You're just going to have to face the facts this time.

Don't be a h8er, be a sk8er

Yeah, the press has been rightly patting Paul Martin on the back, bud. Edit: You want your analysis, there it is. Right above.

Edited July 30, 2010 by nicky10013

[wyly]

After all the crap about a burning police car in TO is over ,what I remember is european leaders and the most powerful man in world,obama himself came here with the notion of a bank tax and more spending,untill our own PM said no and changed the minds of most of these people.So who is the man the euros are looking to for guidance, I will give you one hint, it is not obama.

[Smallc]

With who? What has he done internationally other than obfuscate like he has at home? Relations with Mexico and the European Union are right now fairly bad due to the implementation of visas for Mexican and Czech citizens.

I see no evidence of that either. I think he's done everything necessary to fix that problem, and by next year, it won't be a problem anymore at all.

China because rather than organize deals for business we decided to entirely chide them on human rights.

That was an early mistake that he seems to have fixed, given the talk of the President of China during his visit.

Copenhagen, where most deals went to negotiate honestly, Canada was rightly named as one of the biggest obstacles to a real deal there, and, in most of the western world, the environment is a big deal.

There was never going to be a deal there. Never a chance.

Back in 2006, Canada also came out firmly for Israel during the war in Lebanon, completely undermining our position as one of the last few honest brokers in the region to the dismay of many.

But was it the right position? That's debatable, not an automatic no.

As for things like the bank tax and stimulus, do you think that guys like Obama are grateful that those were torpedoed? Give me a break.

What about China, South Korea, and Australia?

Furthermore, we don't even have a foreign policy. What are our goals, what are we doing to accomplish them? Not even people in the DFAIT can answer that. I have an acquaintance in DFAIT through some university friends who has said that our standing in the world is at pretty much the lowest it's been in a long time simply because we're aimless and partisan.

I would say the exact opposite is true. Canada's voice in the world is probably at one of the highest points ever. We are taking part in Afghanistan, and we are committed to rebuilding there. We responded quickly to the Haiti crisis and we're committed to rebuilding there. We've started a new focus on building bridges with Africa. We've begun asserting our sovereignty in the north to a degree that we never have before. We've spoken out against international barriers to trade, and are currently in negotiations with many countries and groups (including the EU) to bring down barriers.

Having many priorities that we're working hard at doesn't make us aimless.

It sums up nicely with an anecdote from the G8 or G20 in Italy. During a press conference with international reporters, Harper was answering questions. A reporter asked him about the economy and Harper launched into a partisan diatribe against Michael Ignatieff on something Ignatieff never even said. The international press corps were dumbfounded because most of them didn't even know who Ignatieff was.

Everyone makes mistakes. Harper's rabid partisanship is probably his biggest flaw.

[nicky10013]

I see no evidence of that either. I think he's done everything necessary to fix that problem, and by next year, it won't be a problem anymore at all.

As long as there is a visa requirement, there's going to be a problem

That was an early mistake that he seems to have fixed, given the talk of the President of China during his visit.

Yet the state run media took him out behind the shed and beat him the entire trip.

There was never going to be a deal there. Never a chance.

So that excuses Canada's performance there? It doesn't diminish our reputation abroad?

But was it the right position? That's debatable, not an automatic no.

The right position is one that gets both sides back to the table. Our position clearly wasn't going to do it.

What about China, South Korea, and Australia?

What about them? We're already in China's dog house. South Korea and Australia are big boys and can handle themselves. They say, thanks for the help on this one and go about their way. In international relations its not about what you've done but how you're helping me now.

I would say the exact opposite is true. Canada's voice in the world is probably at one of the highest points ever. We are taking part in Afghanistan, and we are committed to rebuilding there. We responded quickly to the Haiti crisis and we're committed to rebuilding there. We've started a new focus on building bridges with Africa. We've begun asserting our sovereignty in the north to a degree that we never have before. We've spoken out against international barriers to trade, and are currently in negotiations with many countries and groups (including the EU) to bring down barriers.

As for the first two scenarios, we've been in Haiti for a while and so has everyone else. As for Afghanistan, we're pulling out and everyone else knows it, so we'll see how that goes over. As for Africa, Harper is finally building bridges after destroying them. He's cut development and AIDS money to Africa big time. As for international trade barriers, that's the one thing I'll give him credit for. That being said, the EU free trade deal has been in the works since Trudeau, so he doesn't deserve all the credit.

Having many priorities that we're working hard at doesn't make us aimless.

We don't. It's been Afghanistan and that's it. Everything else has been dealt with as it has happened, often with no thought of international ramifications like the Czech Visas or the supporting of Israel.

Everyone makes mistakes. Harper's rabid partisanship is probably his biggest flaw.

You don't say.

[Topaz]

Harper's relationship with the rest of the world may have been good when he first appeared on the scene, but now cutting money to organizations that help people around the world isn't going to get you a badge of respect or loyality. Telling other countries to get their debt in check, while rising yours at home, is not very wise. I can't wait for an election, I think the outcome will be different!

[Smallc]

As long as there is a visa requirement, there's going to be a problem

The visa requirements will be gone once we fix our problem.

Yet the state run media took him out behind the shed and beat him the entire trip.

I'm talking about the visit of the President of Chine to Canada in the lead up to the G8 and G20.

So that excuses Canada's performance there? It doesn't diminish our reputation abroad?

It means that we weren't the only ones keeping an unrealistic and imaginary deal from being done.

The right position is one that gets both sides back to the table. Our position clearly wasn't going to do it.

Sometimes, getting people to the table is useless.

What about them? We're already in China's dog house. South Korea and Australia are big boys and can handle themselves. They say, thanks for the help on this one and go about their way. In international relations its not about what you've done but how you're helping me now.

They were on our side, and we aren't in China's doghouse. If you had watched the visit of the President of China to Canada, you would know that.

As for the first two scenarios, we've been in Haiti for a while and so has everyone else.

No to the level that we are.

As for Afghanistan, we're pulling out and everyone else knows it, so we'll see how that goes over.

Yes, we're pulling out militarily. We'll still be there in many capacities, and up until now, we've done more than most.

As for international trade barriers, that's the one thing I'll give him credit for. That being said, the EU free trade deal has been in the works since Trudeau, so he doesn't deserve all the credit.

It has never been this far along.

We don't. It's been Afghanistan and that's it. Everything else has been dealt with as it has happened, often with no thought of international ramifications like the Czech Visas or the supporting of Israel.

Weren't we just talking about the trade barrier issue? Didn't I mention northern sovereignty?

[Smallc]

Harper's relationship with the rest of the world may have been good when he first appeared on the scene, but now cutting money to organizations that help people around the world isn't going to get you a badge of respect or loyality.

When did he do that? CIDA has a $5B budget now, the biggest ever.

[nicky10013]

The visa requirements will be gone once we fix our problem.

And what exactly have we done to fix that?

I'm talking about the visit of the President of Chine to Canada in the lead up to the G8 and G20.

State visits don't signal that everything is hunky dory. The Chinese have long memories. We'll be paying for his repeated slights for a while.

It means that we weren't the only ones keeping an unrealistic and imaginary deal from being done.

I again ask how that helps our reputation?

Sometimes, getting people to the table is useless.

So we should never try. At anything. Good lesson.

They were on our side, and we aren't in China's doghouse. If you had watched the visit of the President of China to Canada, you would know that.

Yeah, like I said, international relations is a game of what are you doing for me now.

No to the level that we are.

Yes, we're pulling out militarily. We'll still be there in many capacities, and up until now, we've done more than most.

And that matters to who besides the Americans?

It has never been this far along.

It was also close to death and is still on life support due to the visa dispute. They were saying by the end of this year. Now it's the end of next. Almost like they're waiting to negotiate with someone else.

Weren't we just talking about the trade barrier issue? Didn't I mention northern sovereignty?

I don't know. Furthermore, why would you bring up a land dispute in the arctic that has been straining our relations with Denmark, Russia and the US?

[nicky10013]

When did he do that? CIDA has a $5B budget now, the biggest ever.

He's cut funding to international groups operating in Canada due to their outrage over the fact that he wouldn't fund abortion. That's another thing, his maternal health plan was the laughing stock of the G8. The day they put it out, statements from pretty much every member denounced it saying it wasn't enough.

[Smallc]

And what exactly have we done to fix that?

The new immigration system that will come on line next year.

State visits don't signal that everything is hunky dory. The Chinese have long memories. We'll be paying for his repeated slights for a while.

I'm telling you the things that he said (about our important relationship...talking us up) signal that we aren't in the doghouse.

I again ask how that helps our reputation?

To other countries, it doesn't really hurt it much. We were being realistic. It's as simple as that.

So we should never try. At anything. Good lesson.

Right, because that's what I said.

Yeah, like I said, international relations is a game of what are you doing for me now.

And were doing things.

And that matters to who besides the Americans?

I didn't realize international conflict and development were only important to Americans.

It was also close to death and is still on life support due to the visa dispute. They were saying by the end of this year. Now it's the end of next. Almost like they're waiting to negotiate with someone else.

It's still closer than ever.

I don't know. Furthermore, why would you bring up a land dispute in the arctic that has been straining our relations with Denmark, Russia and the US?

Because that is part (a big part) of our foreign policy. One of the disputes with the US is close ( a couple of years) to being solved. The other will come later.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Smallc

[Smallc]

He's cut funding to international groups operating in Canada due to their outrage over the fact that he wouldn't fund abortion. That's another thing, his maternal health plan was the laughing stock of the G8. The day they put it out, statements from pretty much every member denounced it saying it wasn't enough.

And yet every member ended up supporting it. I know you love to spin things against Harper (and I don't support excluding abortion) but his plan seems to have been a success.

[nicky10013]

And yet every member ended up supporting it. I know you love to spin things against Harper (and I don't support excluding abortion) but his plan seems to have been a success.

Spin? Since when have I been spinning things? Listen, these countries didn't vote for a plan. They all pledged money from their own budgets. The fact that they had to pick up our slack for ideological funding should be more cause for embarrassment rather than success. They took our initiative and made it respectable. As if we couldn't handle this ourselves.

[g_bambino]

State visits don't signal that everything is hunky dory. The Chinese have long memories. We'll be paying for his repeated slights for a while.

And yet...

At the request of the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, and at the invitation of the government of the People’s Republic of China, Their Excellencies the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean, Governor General of Canada, and Mr. Jean-Daniel Lafond, along with their daughter Marie-Éden, will conduct a visit to China, from June 30 to July 5, 2010.

Itinerary for Visit to China

[wyly]

Because that is part (a big part) of our foreign policy. One of the disputes with the US is close ( a couple of years) to being solved. The other will come later.

the disputes over the sea bed/continental shelf/mineral rights have a dispute mechanism which will run it's course....

what will not be solved is the USA's claim that our artic waterways the NWP is not ours to control...

Edited July 30, 2010 by wyly

[nicky10013]

The new immigration system that will come on line next year.

And that will fix things? I doubt it.

I'm telling you the things that he said (about our important relationship...talking us up) signal that we aren't in the doghouse.

Fair enough, but think about it this way. How much further along would be along with China if it wasn't for that?

To other countries, it doesn't really hurt it much. We were being realistic. It's as simple as that.

In the international community things aren't seen that way.

Right, because that's what I said.

Not word for word. How is the sentiment any different, though?

And were doing things.

Okie dokie.

I didn't realize international conflict and development were only important to Americans.

In Afghanistan where everyone is getting out as fast as they can, it's a question that needs to be asked and of course, it's going to matter most to the Americans.

It's still closer than ever.

And if it actually dies the response will still be, "it doesn't matter if it died on our account, he was still closer than ever." I'm the one that's spinning? Sheesh.

Because that is part (a big part) of our foreign policy. One of the disputes with the US is close ( a couple of years) to being solved. The other will come later.

It's close to being solved? No it isn't. The US hasn't and will not recognize Canada's arctic sovereignty. The US position is that the islands that make up our north aren't islands but ice because...here's the kicker...we can't see under the ice so we don't know what's there. They keep their position so they can run submarines through the NWP and the arctic ice cap. That position won't change. So, unless we're going to cede the territory to the Americans or cede that they aren't isalnds, I doubt how this is going to be solved. Though, considering the fact that (another example of bad foreign policy) that despite every single WTO and NAFTA hearing on tariffs on soft wood, Harper pulled a deal where we were fucked with our pants on, him giving up control of our north to the Americans could be in the cards.