Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 Who cares about income gaps. Should people care if millionaires are billionaires if the average canadian is making 70k instead of 40k? Get that communist shit out of here. Quit passing off your jealousy as "compassion". Do you ever wonder why horrendous ideas like Marxism came to seem like a good idea??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 And like most bonehead conservatives, you don't believe that taxes should be used in efforts to avoid war or find cheaper and better longterm solutions than building prisons. What solution did liberals came up with? And the majority didn't elect Harper either! Did they elect Chretien? He only got 40% of the 60% of voters who cast ballots. If that's not an argument for voting reform I don't know what is. Didn't bother liberals while in power the least. Why now? Should we elect El Presidente Fidel for life? Or Kim Ill JJoke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjandrew Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 That would be fine, but that's not what is happening. The economic benefits of globalization are going to the top earners and are not being spread to the lower/middle classes in North America by most accounts. Precisely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 Uh oh.. You may have just said that global Neo-Liberalism is really just a wealth redistribution excercise... Sssshhh...They don't ant anyone to know about that... I also note CPCFTW threw out the old "Communist" reference.... It's ok, I was a commie when I was 18 too. Some of us grow out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 That would be fine, but that's not what is happening. The economic benefits of globalization are going to the top earners and are not being spread to the lower/middle classes in North America by most accounts. "By most accounts"? Sounds like a solid source to me. The economic benefits of globalization are going to other countries. You know, the countries that you want to lock out of trading with us to make into a slave class that depends on handouts from Western economies? And who said anything about globalization? I said reduce taxes to get more jobs in Canada and let people pay for their own shit instead of having 8% unemployed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 "By most accounts"? Sounds like a solid source to me. The economic benefits of globalization are going to other countries. You know, the countries that you want to lock out of trading with us to make into a slave class that depends on handouts from Western economies? And who said anything about globalization? I said reduce taxes to get more jobs in Canada and let people pay for their own shit instead of having 8% unemployed. You do know 5% unemployed under our system is virtual full employment right? The Canadian government actually aims to keep that number at 5%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 "By most accounts"? Sounds like a solid source to me. Hey - you didn't have a cite so why should I ? The economic benefits of globalization are going to other countries. You know, the countries that you want to lock out of trading with us to make into a slave class that depends on handouts from Western economies? I agree with the first statement. As for the second statement, you're 100% mistaken on my position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 The creation of more jobs does nothing to benefit those who can't perform one. Reliance on children and grandchildren for ones support presupposes fertility/a social connection to a family unit. 8% of the LABOUR FORCE is unemployed in Canada. Creating jobs creates a larger tax base and reduces the amount of those who depend on government handouts. Those who can't perform a job (ie. are outside of the labour force) are the ones who should be supported, not the 8% who can't find a job because companies have to pay extra taxes to install solar powered bidets in every home rather than paying wages, or because you believe in the right of bus drivers and garbagemen to hold us hostage for our tax dollars until they make 6 figures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 I agree with the first statement. As for the second statement, you're 100% mistaken on my position. The left's stance on globalization doesn't make any sense. Is it a bad thing because it exports jobs from our country to create wealth in much poorer countries, or is it a good thing because it redistributes wealth from wealthy countries to poor countries? Is income inequity only important within a country's borders? If you ask me, the left just likes to find boogeymen to blame all of the world's problems are. Until you all realize that the world isn't fair, you'll continue to have misguided opinions and ideals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) @ Molly. How do you define those who can't perform a job? Quite a while ago, my wife took in her asshole cousin who left home because his mother actually wanted him to go to school and study and stuff like that and when he wouldn't, she quit feeding him till he got a job and paid rent. So he left, whined to some sociologist grad who could only find work as a welfare councilor. And they gave him money up the stump. That is wrong. Yes, there are cases of real need. I have no problem with that. But the above, and so many more like this are just wrong. Edited May 16, 2011 by RNG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 8% of the LABOUR FORCE is unemployed in Canada. Creating jobs creates a larger tax base and reduces the amount of those who depend on government handouts. Those who can't perform a job (ie. are outside of the labour force) are the ones who should be supported, not the 8% who can't find a job because companies have to pay extra taxes to install solar powered bidets in every home rather than paying wages, or because you believe in the right of bus drivers and garbagemen to hold us hostage for our tax dollars until they make 6 figures. You really over simplify market forces to the point you show how ignorant or dumb you are. As the Labor force becomes more employed and the unemployment rate goes down WHICH IT IS AT 7.6 RIGHT NOW NOT 8%. Then it is harder to find those to employ thus wages go up. Tax cuts wont fix that problem. AGAIN 5% is considered in our system FULL employment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 You really over simplify market forces to the point you show how ignorant or dumb you are. As the Labor force becomes more employed and the unemployment rate goes down WHICH IT IS AT 7.6 RIGHT NOW NOT 8%. Then it is harder to find those to employ thus wages go up. Tax cuts wont fix that problem. AGAIN 5% is considered in our system FULL employment. How much of that "Full Employment" is in underpaying temp service jobs for low pay and no benefits? Just because the larger unemployment number goes down does'nt mean all employed are gainfully employed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 The left's stance on globalization doesn't make any sense. Is it a bad thing because it exports jobs from our country to create wealth in much poorer countries, or is it a good thing because it redistributes wealth from wealthy countries to poor countries? Is income inequity only important within a country's borders? If you ask me, the left just likes to find boogeymen to blame all of the world's problems are. Until you all realize that the world isn't fair, you'll continue to have misguided opinions and ideals. Vulture Capitalists as the new humanitarians... The worm has definately turned... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 How much of that "Full Employment" is in underpaying temp service jobs for low pay and no benefits? Just because the larger unemployment number goes down does'nt mean all employed are gainfully employed... Plenty of it but someone has to serve Tim Hortons that is my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 The left's stance on globalization doesn't make any sense. Is it a bad thing because it exports jobs from our country to create wealth in much poorer countries, or is it a good thing because it redistributes wealth from wealthy countries to poor countries? Is income inequity only important within a country's borders? If you ask me, the left just likes to find boogeymen to blame all of the world's problems are. Until you all realize that the world isn't fair, you'll continue to have misguided opinions and ideals. It's a good thing because it redistributes wealth from wealthy countries to poor countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 Plenty of it but someone has to serve Tim Hortons that is my point. I'm not talking about service sector jobs...Generally,they are low paying by nature... You live in Ontario...What about the former manufacturing and skilled trade jobs that have left through playing low wage and low tax jurisdictions off against one another...Only to be replaced by low paying,no benny temp service jobs in our "new economy"?? This is where the rubber meets the road in the downward spiral of our standard of living... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 I'm not talking about service sector jobs...Generally,they are low paying by nature... You live in Ontario...What about the former manufacturing and skilled trade jobs that have left through playing low wage and low tax jurisdictions off against one another...Only to be replaced by low paying,no benny temp service jobs in our "new economy"?? This is where the rubber meets the road in the downward spiral of our standard of living... I agree we are in a race to the bottom but cutting taxes on the Rich only makes that race to the bottom go faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 You really over simplify market forces to the point you show how ignorant or dumb you are. As the Labor force becomes more employed and the unemployment rate goes down WHICH IT IS AT 7.6 RIGHT NOW NOT 8%. Then it is harder to find those to employ thus wages go up. Tax cuts wont fix that problem. AGAIN 5% is considered in our system FULL employment. I oversimplify because I rounded the unemployment number to what it was a few months ago? I'm not writing a phd thesis here buddy. I know full well what natural unemployment is and full employement is at 5% due to social programs and minimum wage laws. Look it up in an economics paper rather than a liberal propaganda geocities site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 I agree we are in a race to the bottom but cutting taxes on the Rich only makes that race to the bottom go faster. That's the fallacy of the Neo-Liberal free market approach to economics... Yes,some will be brought out of grinding poverty in other areas...Most will simply be less wealthey and that wealth will be redistributed upwards into the hands of the few... This not a longterm proposition and ,in my opinion,will end up in a distatrous blow back situation...On a global scale!Unfortunately,the types that advocate for these things never learn from history... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 (edited) I oversimplify because I rounded the unemployment number to what it was a few months ago? I'm not writing a phd thesis here buddy. I know full well what natural unemployment is and full employement is at 5% due to social programs and minimum wage laws. Look it up in an economics paper rather than a liberal propaganda geocities site. No full employment has nothing to do with Social programs, it has to do with elasticity in the Labor market. The government actually AIMS to keep employment there and views it as a problem when employment dips below that number for a number of reason. Productivity, Wage inflation, and so fourth. The problem is when Employment goes below that number, many sectors feel the crunch in finding workers to fill a skilled job set, and are forced to PAY BIG to either find those workers, bring them here, or train them. Much more money then any tax cut could ever provide. Do you just repeat what is told to you by the right wing? Seriously 6-7% unemployment would be great for our country and its economic growth. We can get there with out a tax cut. BTW your ROUNDING of the unemployment number represents around 100,000 jobs so it is kind of a big deal. Edited May 17, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 16, 2011 Report Share Posted May 16, 2011 I oversimplify because I rounded the unemployment number to what it was a few months ago? I'm not writing a phd thesis here buddy. I know full well what natural unemployment is and full employement is at 5% due to social programs and minimum wage laws. Look it up in an economics paper rather than a liberal propaganda geocities site. Would that economics paper come from: 1.The Fraser Institute? 2.The University of Calgary Economics dept.(AKA Chicago School of Business...North Division) 3.The National Citizens Coalition ???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 17, 2011 Report Share Posted May 17, 2011 What about the former manufacturing and skilled trade jobs that have left through playing low wage and low tax jurisdictions off against one another...Only to be replaced by low paying,no benny temp service jobs in our "new economy"?? This is where the rubber meets the road in the downward spiral of our standard of living... I don't think it's spiraling but it isn't zooming up either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted May 17, 2011 Report Share Posted May 17, 2011 (edited) I don't think it's spiraling but it isn't zooming up either. I don't know how we replace good paying manufacturing and skilled trad jobes with 10 to 15 dollar and hour temp service jobs (in the hundreds of thousands) and NOT have it have a seriously negative effect on our standard of living??? And even if our standard of living is only stagnating,real inflation keeps rising and wages are definately not keeping up...And jobs keep getting shipped overseas.. Edited May 17, 2011 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted May 17, 2011 Report Share Posted May 17, 2011 Would that economics paper come from: Try financial instead political. It works every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted May 17, 2011 Report Share Posted May 17, 2011 Try financial instead political. It works every time. You really aren't speaking to the points raised. "Left dumb, Right smart" can only be used as an argument so many times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.