Tucker Carlson/Ann Coulter

[Black Dog]

Wait a second, so you agree, both the major parties in England are pro-war and you still don't think the people are behind it? Sounds kinda fishy to me.

It's an unusual situation to have two political parties out of step with the people (especially when one party-Labour-is coming from a progressive tradition), but the facts are there. Public opinion polls before, during and after the war showed opposition

If there was truely "overwhelming opposition" don't you think that a major party would be willing to run on that issue to galvinize their supporters and get the WIN. Or, perhaps the anti-war crowd isn't as HUGE a % as you think

There was: the Lib Dems made big gains on a anti-war platform. And Tony Blair's majority was sharply curtailed, largely because of anti-war sentiment (which, if you've ever read an opinion poll, is high).But again: Iraq was not the only issue.

[Yaro]

Again, see what I 'm talking about when I say Canadians come off very arrogant at times.

2004 GDP

United States $10,980,000,000,000

Canada $957,700,000,000

Are we done talking about economic strength yet?

Am I to take this as an admission that you really don't know anything about economics?

[flashman]

LOL You sure got that right!

WE have a SURPLUS!

YOU have a DEFICIT!

Neener neener neener!

btw surplus means extra money in da bank -- deficit means no money in da bank.

Now, how many TRILLIONS of dollars is your country in debt?

LOL

And much of it is being financed by China.

"The United States, the world’s leading debtor nation, is now heavily dependent on Chinese capital to underwrite its fast-growing debt."

Source http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update45.htm

[moderateamericain]

SO many points to address so little time. First off shame on you guys for this thread, it is aggressive to the point of insulting on both sides of the issue. This forum is better than that.

I guess ill start with something Yaro said, You stated anyone who thinks that military power is important is an idiot, You are both right and you are wrong as well. The amount of tanks or airplanes or infantry you have does not define strength of a nation. What does define strength (again we are talking strictly from a military position) is the ability to project that power. A great example of the ability to project power is an aircraft carrier. On the flip side, and what i think you are really looking at, is take a country like china, the largest standing army in the world. The reason the Chinese army is useless to them is they have no ability to project that power. Sure they have Nuclear weapons, but do you think anyone but a madman would use a currenct incarnations of nuclear power. we could wipe out russia with 3 missles. But who would want to? Nuclear weapons are akin to saying "lets kill them, us, and everything in between." Personally im glad canada does not make weapons like that, its a great testment to say "Nobody wants to attack us." I wish we in the United States could say the same thing. But the fact of the matter is we have been attacked. Another point I would like to make, The United states was an isolationist country until the turn of the last century. And it was the need of EUROPE that drove us out of what we were.

The 2nd point id like to address is on what this topic was really about, this Candian version of ANN coultier. If i took what he said to be the thoughts of all canadians id stand at the border with Canada with a rifle and man a post. But since im smart enough to realize hes full of shit, I think ill do what I do with Ann Coultier, ignore her.

The 3rd think I would like to talk about, Is the economic performance of the United States, there are many variables that are taken into consideration, unemployment, GDP, standard of living. Which are more important? The fact is they are all important. To say the US economy is bankrupt is at best foolish. And heres why. Are Average GDP growth has been 3% over the last two years, that means consumer spending is up. Which in turns mean people have money to spare. Are unemployment rate is hovering around 5 percent, not sure what Canadas is at. Are public debt is at 8 trillion dollars (rounded off). GDP at this point is over 11.75 trillion. With all this information provided its easy to see that the US is indeed the strongest economy in the world at this date. Do i think we will be surpassed by China, hell yes we will. Time frame should be within the next 10-20 years.

On a personal note, Yaro you need to back up your statments with anything remotley like fact, Someone provides you with statics with the GDPS of the US and Canada and all you can say is "you dont know anything about economics." That says to me that your are either too lazy or are full of hot air as you cannot disprove statistics with attacking statments.

Most of my statistics can be found

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html

[newbie]

Here's a couple of sites to indicate employment rates that moderateamerican alluded to. I think you'll agree that since Bush took office, the unemployment in the States rose proportionately.

http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/71-2...0/chart-p83.htm

http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseconomy/j...s.cfm#recession

[Yaro]

I guess ill start with something Yaro said, You stated anyone who thinks that military power is important is an idiot, You are both right and you are wrong as well. The amount of tanks or airplanes or infantry you have does not define strength of a nation. What does define strength (again we are talking strictly from a military position) is the ability to project that power. A great example of the ability to project power is an aircraft carrier. On the flip side, and what i think you are really looking at, is take a country like china, the largest standing army in the world. The reason the Chinese army is useless to them is they have no ability to project that power. Sure they have Nuclear weapons, but do you think anyone but a madman would use a currenct incarnations of nuclear power. we could wipe out russia with 3 missles. But who would want to? Nuclear weapons are akin to saying "lets kill them, us, and everything in between." Personally im glad canada does not make weapons like that, its a great testment to say "Nobody wants to attack us." I wish we in the United States could say the same thing. But the fact of the matter is we have been attacked. Another point I would like to make, The United states was an isolationist country until the turn of the last century. And it was the need of EUROPE that drove us out of what we were.

What I said was talking about military power as it applies to modern nations was idiotic which is the point of not being able to project power. The fact of the matter is that right now the US has stated unequivocally that they have no respect for Canadian sovereignty. They have said they will use the northern passage regardless of our desires in the matter and that they will shoot down missiles over Canadian territory regardless of the effect. If a nuke lands and detonates in Canada because the US downed it over Canadian territory (as unlikely as that is) then yes I would consider that an attack on Canada from the US and I would wish to be prepared to defend ourselves. The US has not been attacked; they had a single significant terrorist event happen, 3000 people died. Not to sound cold but BFD, want to save 3000 lives a year? Take 1/100th of the money that the US is now spending on security and spend it on transportation infrastructure.

The 2nd point id like to address is on what this topic was really about, this Canadian version of ANN coultier. If i took what he said to be the thoughts of all canadians id stand at the border with Canada with a rifle and man a post. But since im smart enough to realize hes full of shit, I think ill do what I do with Ann Coultier, ignore her.

Which is what I do, and I agree I don't know why people get so emotional about things like this.

The 3rd think I would like to talk about, Is the economic performance of the United States, there are many variables that are taken into consideration, unemployment, GDP, standard of living. Which are more important? The fact is they are all important. To say the US economy is bankrupt is at best foolish. And heres why. Are Average GDP growth has been 3% over the last two years, that means consumer spending is up. Which in turns mean people have money to spare. Are unemployment rate is hovering around 5 percent, not sure what Canadas is at. Are public debt is at 8 trillion dollars (rounded off). GDP at this point is over 11.75 trillion. With all this information provided its easy to see that the US is indeed the strongest economy in the world at this date. Do i think we will be surpassed by China, hell yes we will. Time frame should be within the next 10-20 years.

GDP is meaningless, if you don't know that then your not educated enough on economics for me to bother debating you (GDP is used by right wing think tanks because it sounds good and the US system produces high GDP, if you understood the issues with it you would see why its not used in educated economics discussions) Also unemployment rates are irrelevant, not that the US's numbers are particularly good you see when calculated using the Canadian system they come closer to 8% and when calculated using the French system they come closer to 12%) if your BLS hadn't been ripped apart by a statistician put in place by the Regan administration you would see that American unemployment numbers are horrific. It should also be noted that the GDP of nations such as China and India are calculated without respect to black and grey markets, or there relatively giant PPP in the area of IP. At the end of the day, your being lied to, spun by your government (like Canadians are to a lesser extent) to such an extreme that you probably couldn't imagine the number of dirty tricks that are used to make you believe the economy is better then it is.

I’m sorry if that offends you and if you want to make a particular argument or ask me a question then I will answer it for you but if you think I am going to get into a debate with someone that won't even understand a small fraction of the terms I use then your simply asking me to waste my time. Nobody in the world who understands economics to any real extent and is at all knowledgeable about Canada and the US is going to say that the US economy is healthy or that the Canadian economy isn't.

And I will simply add that the US economy IS Bankrupt, the US has more real debt per capita right now then either New Zealand or Argentina did when they declared bankruptcy. Please don't embarrass yourself by arguing this point, if you want to go get an economics professor to try to formulate an argument I will be happy to respond.

On a personal note, Yaro you need to back up your statments with anything remotley like fact, Someone provides you with statics with the GDPS of the US and Canada and all you can say is "you dont know anything about economics." That says to me that your are either too lazy or are full of hot air as you cannot disprove statistics with attacking statments.

I don't need to back up my statement at all, when he comes to the table with an actual argument I will bother destroying it until then I’m not going to waste my time.

[GostHacked]

Whoa did we get off topic, but you know, cool stuff. Part of the appeal and reason I visit this place, as nutty whackjobs as you all are. I have grown fond of you Yes even you BHS. Now on to the straying.....

Drea ..........Surplus means - we have money left over from the budget.

Reality, we are still in debt and should apply this 'surplus' to the national debt. So when you have a surplus, really you just have extra money you should really slap on the loan, cause the interest is a bitch.

Look Canada cannot compare to the US's economey as it is now. Even if our dollar gets higher and more on par with the US greenback we will always be a small economy. We are a nation of about 35 million people. About 1/10th of the population south of the 49th. So in the end this is a retarded agrument. We simply cannot afford a large military, and as I have posted before, we really don't see the need for a large military.

Yaro

Am I to take this as an admission that you really don't know anything about economics?

I am guessing he is a Statistics kind of guy.

Newbie, Any idiot knows that economy in the US affects us in Canada as well. They take a hit, we take a hit as well. Jobs used to be moved to Canada for company's bottom dollar, now even those jobs are shipped overseas. So jobs and dollars that would stay in North America are now being thrown at India, China et al. It is simply to expensive to have an American do the job. The government seems to encourage it all under the banner of Capitolism. Increase profits, lower costs, kill all who stand in our way. But moving the jobs offshore will not help the average American in the end. Cheap goods are the appeal. Alot of the shit you all buy is NOT made on this side of the planet. Take a look at the stuff you own. Is Economics that simple now? Nope. It does seem like a vicious cycle.

OK all you posting have a PC. Take something like a motherboard. Mine is an ASUS, made in freakin CHINA. I bought the board for about $120 CND. If that board was made in the US, I can sure bet you it would cost double that (pure uneducated speculated guess here) As a consumer, you are part of the problem. You want to save money, so you will by the more inexpensive products, regardless of where it is made. Again this vicious cycle prevails.

It is now a world economy. There is a ripple affect, and it is felt more now that we are globaly more intertwined than ever before.

If I may add an addendum to that statement, GH, it would be so that the above reads: "Coulter , Tucker, both are media whores who sensationalize and rant about anything and who know nothing at all about the subjects they are paid to rant about." Not only would I not worry about what they have to say, I wouldn't piss on either one if they were on fire.

I swear , BD you are right inside my brain at some moments.

[newbie]

Newbie, Any idiot knows that economy in the US affects us in Canada as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

An idiot? What a comment on Chirstmas morning yet. No, I understand how things work. I was just pointing out that we apparently have the lowest unemployment in 30 years vs. the rising American unemployment rate. moderateamerican was on a rant and I felt I had to respond. And you're right; I don't think our countries compare well on a lot of topics, from the economy to the military. Anyway, Merry Christmas.

[PocketRocket]

SO many points to address so little time.  First off shame on you guys for this thread,  it is aggressive to the point of insulting on both sides of the issue.  This forum is better than that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed.

[Montgomery Burns]

A Liberal Party member going on Canada's state-run, taxpayer-funded, Soviet Style CBC, and stomping a George Bush doll with her boot--and then taking a pencil to the doll's eye and stabbing it like a deranged meth addict = Okay.

Liberal Party members referring to Americans as "bastards, morons, and the coalition of the idiots" = Okay.

An American pundit - Tucker Carlson - referring to Canadians as retarded cousins = Bad.

Even though I am Canadian, I am constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of some of my fellow Canadians.

[GostHacked]

A Liberal Party member going on Canada's state-run, taxpayer-funded, Soviet Style CBC, and stomping a George Bush doll with her boot--and then taking a pencil to the doll's eye and stabbing it like a deranged meth addict = Okay.

Liberal Party members referring to Americans as "bastards, morons, and the coalition of the idiots" = Okay.

An American pundit - Tucker Carlson - referring to Canadians as retarded cousins = Bad.

Even though I am Canadian, I am constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of some of my fellow Canadians.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is because there is such an overflow of hypocracy comming from the south, it just kind of trickled up here. Regans Trickle Down Effect applies here as well.

[newbie]

A Liberal Party member going on Canada's state-run, taxpayer-funded, Soviet Style CBC, and stomping a George Bush doll with her boot--and then taking a pencil to the doll's eye and stabbing it like a deranged meth addict = Okay.

Liberal Party members referring to Americans as "bastards, morons, and the coalition of the idiots" = Okay.

An American pundit - Tucker Carlson - referring to Canadians as retarded cousins = Bad.

Even though I am Canadian, I am constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of some of my fellow Canadians.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Carolyn Parrish was a loose cannon and was dealt with. And it was tame compared to what the US ambassadors had to say about Canada. Keep it in perspective.

[Guest American Woman]

Exactly, it would be like Canadians say you can beat the US in hockey. I couldn't argue b/c it's easily provable (put them on ice and you win 8 out of 10 times).

Note: I know canadians do other things well besides play hockey, it's just an example.

I'm not saying Canada is weak and a terrible country, it's just not in the same class in terms of "power" as the US at the momment. Not bragging, just the honest truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"Power" isn't necessarily desirable or something to brag about. I'm not proud of the power the U.S. imposes on the world. I don't think the power that a bully exudes is something to be proud of or envied. Not to mention that there's much more to making a country great than a strong military. Canada provides health care to all its citizens, doesn't incarcerate a high percentage of the people for infractions like pot possession, doesn't have the death penalty, gives a larger portion of its GNP to charitible causes, respects the rights of gays to marry, has a lower infant mortality rate, and a higher life expectancy than the United States.

As for Blair winning Britain's election, it's true that the majority of Brits were/are against the war in Iraq. I've talked with quite a few about both of our elections beforehand. The common response was that they didn't have a choice; Blair is their liberal and a conservative would only be more supportive of war. So they chose the lesser of two evils, but they haven't been giving him an easy time regarding his support of the war.

An interesting point is that there is actually more anti-American sentiment among the British than there is among Canadians.

[flashman]

"Power" isn't necessarily desirable or something to brag about. I'm not proud of the power the U.S. imposes on the world. I don't think the power that a bully exudes is something to be proud of or envied. Not to mention that there's much more to making a country great than a strong military. Canada provides health care to all its citizens, doesn't incarcerate a high percentage of the people for infractions like pot possession, doesn't have the death penalty, gives a larger portion of its GNP to charitible causes, respects the rights of gays to marry, has a lower infant mortality rate, and a higher life expectancy than the United States.

These values or philosophies are promoted by the neo cons and are not necessarily supported by all Americans. So its important to recognize that any criticism of America is really against the current administration and not all Americans.

[moderateamericain]

I guess ill start with something Yaro said, You stated anyone who thinks that military power is important is an idiot, You are both right and you are wrong as well. The amount of tanks or airplanes or infantry you have does not define strength of a nation. What does define strength (again we are talking strictly from a military position) is the ability to project that power. A great example of the ability to project power is an aircraft carrier. On the flip side, and what i think you are really looking at, is take a country like china, the largest standing army in the world. The reason the Chinese army is useless to them is they have no ability to project that power. Sure they have Nuclear weapons, but do you think anyone but a madman would use a currenct incarnations of nuclear power. we could wipe out russia with 3 missles. But who would want to? Nuclear weapons are akin to saying "lets kill them, us, and everything in between." Personally im glad canada does not make weapons like that, its a great testment to say "Nobody wants to attack us." I wish we in the United States could say the same thing. But the fact of the matter is we have been attacked. Another point I would like to make, The United states was an isolationist country until the turn of the last century. And it was the need of EUROPE that drove us out of what we were.

What I said was talking about military power as it applies to modern nations was idiotic which is the point of not being able to project power. The fact of the matter is that right now the US has stated unequivocally that they have no respect for Canadian sovereignty. They have said they will use the northern passage regardless of our desires in the matter and that they will shoot down missiles over Canadian territory regardless of the effect. If a nuke lands and detonates in Canada because the US downed it over Canadian territory (as unlikely as that is) then yes I would consider that an attack on Canada from the US and I would wish to be prepared to defend ourselves. The US has not been attacked; they had a single significant terrorist event happen, 3000 people died. Not to sound cold but BFD, want to save 3000 lives a year? Take 1/100th of the money that the US is now spending on security and spend it on transportation infrastructure.

The 2nd point id like to address is on what this topic was really about, this Canadian version of ANN coultier. If i took what he said to be the thoughts of all canadians id stand at the border with Canada with a rifle and man a post. But since im smart enough to realize hes full of shit, I think ill do what I do with Ann Coultier, ignore her.

Which is what I do, and I agree I don't know why people get so emotional about things like this.

The 3rd think I would like to talk about, Is the economic performance of the United States, there are many variables that are taken into consideration, unemployment, GDP, standard of living. Which are more important? The fact is they are all important. To say the US economy is bankrupt is at best foolish. And heres why. Are Average GDP growth has been 3% over the last two years, that means consumer spending is up. Which in turns mean people have money to spare. Are unemployment rate is hovering around 5 percent, not sure what Canadas is at. Are public debt is at 8 trillion dollars (rounded off). GDP at this point is over 11.75 trillion. With all this information provided its easy to see that the US is indeed the strongest economy in the world at this date. Do i think we will be surpassed by China, hell yes we will. Time frame should be within the next 10-20 years.

GDP is meaningless, if you don't know that then your not educated enough on economics for me to bother debating you (GDP is used by right wing think tanks because it sounds good and the US system produces high GDP, if you understood the issues with it you would see why its not used in educated economics discussions) Also unemployment rates are irrelevant, not that the US's numbers are particularly good you see when calculated using the Canadian system they come closer to 8% and when calculated using the French system they come closer to 12%) if your BLS hadn't been ripped apart by a statistician put in place by the Regan administration you would see that American unemployment numbers are horrific. It should also be noted that the GDP of nations such as China and India are calculated without respect to black and grey markets, or there relatively giant PPP in the area of IP. At the end of the day, your being lied to, spun by your government (like Canadians are to a lesser extent) to such an extreme that you probably couldn't imagine the number of dirty tricks that are used to make you believe the economy is better then it is.

I’m sorry if that offends you and if you want to make a particular argument or ask me a question then I will answer it for you but if you think I am going to get into a debate with someone that won't even understand a small fraction of the terms I use then your simply asking me to waste my time. Nobody in the world who understands economics to any real extent and is at all knowledgeable about Canada and the US is going to say that the US economy is healthy or that the Canadian economy isn't.

And I will simply add that the US economy IS Bankrupt, the US has more real debt per capita right now then either New Zealand or Argentina did when they declared bankruptcy. Please don't embarrass yourself by arguing this point, if you want to go get an economics professor to try to formulate an argument I will be happy to respond.

On a personal note, Yaro you need to back up your statments with anything remotley like fact, Someone provides you with statics with the GDPS of the US and Canada and all you can say is "you dont know anything about economics." That says to me that your are either too lazy or are full of hot air as you cannot disprove statistics with attacking statments.

I don't need to back up my statement at all, when he comes to the table with an actual argument I will bother destroying it until then I’m not going to waste my time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since every figure i gave us is meaningless, why dont you enlighten us to what is the barometer for economic performance. Once again you have not made anything close to an argument that is plausable. The only person you embaress here is yourself. Have you ever heard the phrase, "the burden of proof". If your going to argue with me without statisitcs, or anything even close to proof, then im afraid your agruments are going to fall of deaf ears.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDP for anyone who didnt know.

[Yaro]

Fine I will go so far as to tell you what statistics to look at.

Look for current employment numbers, you will find them on the BLS website. Look under the seasonal charts. You will find that the number of employed people in the US in virtually every industry has dropped. Combined with a rise in the working age population, a severe fall in the personal savings then look for the method of determining the unemployment numbers specifically the revisions since 1989.

After you have studied this in some detail you will understand how the unemployment numbers have been modified to produce results which make the economy appear more favorable.

For GDP look for the methodology of determining GDP, then look for the methodology for determining government contributions to GDP and the methodology for determining private sector contributions. Consider the nature of the contractor to government relationship and how it would be applied to GDP. Then consider the amount of private sector goods that are purchased as final goods and are then added to the outgoing cost of another set of final goods.

After you have studied this you will understand why GDP is about as poor a measure of social wealth as one can have. You will also understand how economic freedom artificially boosts GDP and if you were a particularly sharp individual you will understand how why under these circumstances GDP diverges from NEW (Net Economic Wealth) under these types of extreme free market systems(well some of the causes).

As I said before I will not waste my time on someone who’s sum of understanding as applied to economics is to quote GDP numbers. That individual does not have the education to have a conversation with me and I have no desire to be a free internet professor.

But if you or he wishes to discuss any of the following economic topics concerning the US:

The petrol-dollar and its relevance to Iraq, Iran, and the EU.

China’s monetary support of the US through debt servicing and the holding of a virtually stapled currency and its effects when combined with the Feds’ continuing attempt to drastically devalue the dollar.

The effects of the US money supply as a standalone issue with considerations to wealth distribution methodology.

Well I could go on, but suffice to say if you have any topic which could actually spark some interesting discussions which could lead to some interesting conclusions, well then I am all ears (and a fair bit of mouth).

[moderateamericain]

Fine I will go so far as to tell you what statistics to look at.

Look for current employment numbers, you will find them on the BLS website. Look under the seasonal charts. You will find that the number of employed people in the US in virtually every industry has dropped. Combined with a rise in the working age population, a severe fall in the personal savings then look for the method of determining the unemployment numbers specifically the revisions since 1989.

After you have studied this in some detail you will understand how the unemployment numbers have been modified to produce results which make the economy appear more favorable.

For GDP look for the methodology of determining GDP, then look for the methodology for determining government contributions to GDP and the methodology for determining private sector contributions. Consider the nature of the contractor to government relationship and how it would be applied to GDP. Then consider the amount of private sector goods that are purchased as final goods and are then added to the outgoing cost of another set of final goods.

After you have studied this you will understand why GDP is about as poor a measure of social wealth as one can have. You will also understand how economic freedom artificially boosts GDP and if you were a particularly sharp individual you will understand how why under these circumstances GDP diverges from NEW (Net Economic Wealth) under these types of extreme free market systems(well some of the causes).

As I said before I will not waste my time on someone who’s sum of understanding as applied to economics is to quote GDP numbers. That individual does not have the education to have a conversation with me and I have no desire to be a free internet professor.

But if you or he wishes to discuss any of the following economic topics concerning the US:

The petrol-dollar and its relevance to Iraq, Iran, and the EU.

China’s monetary support of the US through debt servicing and the holding of a virtually stapled currency and its effects when combined with the Feds’ continuing attempt to drastically devalue the dollar.

The effects of the US money supply as a standalone issue with considerations to wealth distribution methodology.

Well I could go on, but suffice to say if you have any topic which could actually spark some interesting discussions which could lead to some interesting conclusions, well then I am all ears (and a fair bit of mouth).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Before i post an educated response, and crunch some numbers, does anyone know a good website to find, Personal savings averages for the US?

Here is my response yaro, i found all this material in between business today at work.

I crunched the numbers provided from the bls.gov website provided. Assuming that there is 150 million people living in the United States at working age In November 2005 there was a net 97k change in job force, and a loss of 52k jobs; which results in a net change of 149k unemployed in the USA. Assuming that the NOV 05 rate of 5 percent unemployment is correct then that means that 7.5 million people are unemployed. Now if we take the number of NEW unemployed (149 thousand) that means the true number of unemployed is 5.09%. GASP! I guess I should go withdraw all my money out of the bank. Now if given a formula and/ or a table to track savings over the last 20+years I am sure I can tear that argument apart as well.

It’s really easy to use this sight to see tables and graphs since 1989-2005, unfortunately you cannot copy/paste them as links so you will have to go http://www.bls.gov/cps/home.htm , click the dinosaur Icon and you can play with the tables.

As far as personal savings, I cannot find anything going back to 1989 however if you go to this website ( http://www.marketvector.com/leading-indica...nal-savings.htm ) It will show you since 2003. The table shows a down slope with an increase in the last year.

As far as GDP being a bad indicator, the only thing that people have against it, even though its used by a shit ton of economist around the world is it does not take into account a countries black market. This of course can only really be estimated.

US transactions abroad: http://www.bea.gov/bea/newsrel/transnewsrelease.htm

At the bottom of the page it shows how much of the “pie” we owe china

http://w4.stern.nyu.edu/news/news.cfm?doc_id=4713

However according to this its not like the US is going to keel over and die, if we can make some minor adjustments to standard of living we can cut the deficit in half. So it appears Yaro is partially right, specifically on us owing the “Lions share” of are debt to China.

[Montgomery Burns]

Pocket Rocket:

A few of these included the attitude towards France.

(Why wasn't there the same hostility toward Germany when they too vetoed Iraq???

Good question. No answer.)

I feel sorry for the students in that political science professor's class.

From the NY Times-owned International Herald Tribune (so no one can whine about rightwing sources):

President George W. Bush undertook a furious round of telephone diplomacy Monday in an attempt to salvage support for a UN resolution to authorize force against Iraq, but France said it was prepared to do whatever was necessary to block it.

.

"No matter what the circumstances, we will vote 'no,"' President Jacques Chirac said in a television interview.

And the prof's claims that the right rants more than the left is laughable - although I admit that the right does like to rant about the bias of the MSM (but I don't, of course )

[Montgomery Burns]

Which is why I say we build 300 small cap nukes point them at the US, then we are all equal. Because at the end of the day the only requirement for the big boy table militarily is to be able to destroy your opponent. Economically we are already FAR more important going forward then the US.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yaro,

I realize that you are smoking cheap crack here but really...do you intend that this discussion continue in this most ridiculously childish fashion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What do you expect from Yaro? His "Economically we are already FAR more important going forward then the US" comment was good for a laugh, though.

Our GDP growth is good (in the 3s), but the USA's is better (in the 4s).

Our unemployment rate is good (6.5%). but when the US unemployment rate was that high in the US, some were calling for Bush's head. They are now at 5%.

[Montgomery Burns]

Black Dog never ceases to amaze me...

This is funny beause it shows how little you really know. The people of England were overwhelmingly against the Iraq war. In fact, the only country where there was not overwhelming opposition to the war was the U.S. itself, and even then, the population was sharply divided. So while the UK government may be Best Pals with the Bush regime, don't think for a second that it is a popular position.

You must be unaware that Tony Blair was re-elected to a 3rd term, that the Tory Party (also pro-enforcement of int'l law) came in 2nd, and the anti-enforcement of int'l law party (I forget its name) came in a distant 3rd.

You also must be unaware that John Howard was re-elected to a 4th term in Australia.

You also must be unaware that Italy's Silvio Berlusconi was re-elected in May 2005.

[Montgomery Burns]

America1:

I'm also aware that we are a much more powerful country in every possible way.

Sure, if you are talking about insignificant things like having the most powerful economy, military, and culture.

But you do not have gay marriage - the single most important thing to Canada's liberal left (except for the majority of the public and those 40 members of Martin's cabinet who oppose it) - and you did NOT sign Kyoto!

* Just ignore the fact that our greenhouse gas emissions have risen almost double that of the USA's since 1990...we are morally superior, damnit! *

[Montgomery Burns]

Gosthacked:

And I can even tolerate it from Coutler, cause I know she is an alien for a fact. Either that or she had a sex chage (check out her adams apple dude)

And the way things are being reported these days, (Bush lying about the reasons for war, secret prisons, ect. It really makes it easier to bash the US government. I do not believe the majority voted for him, rigged (but thats another story)

So put it into perspective.

Coulter , Tucker, both are media whores who sensationalize and rant about anything.

But that is just it, they are media whores and nothing else.

Perhaps you should take your jug of Kool-Aid and head over to the racist hatemongering Linda McQuaig forum...

When it's all said and done, The Dayly Show is a much better news source.

Speaking of media whores who rant and sensationalize...

Plus, he made a complete jackass of himself when he went on that tirade on CNN's Crossfire.

[Montgomery Burns]

Newbie:

I don't think we need to constantly remind ourselves that we love our country, unlike some of your citizens who fly flags on lawns or wear flags on lapels.

Oh really?

What about all the Canadians who sew Canadian flags all over their bags when they travel to another country?

I've been to Europe, Mexico, the US, and spent a week in NYC (where you see people from practically every country in the world) and I do not recall ever seeing anyone with their country's flag sewn all over their bags....except for nationalistic Canadians.

[Montgomery Burns]

newbie:

You guys may be powerful but most of the world dislikes you.

Yep. That's why much of the world (including Canada) imitates American pop culture.

That's why the US attracts more immigrants than any other country in the world.

And that's why the US is the 2nd most visited country in the world.

Because most of the world hates the US!

[Montgomery Burns]

LOL You sure got that right!

WE have a SURPLUS!

YOU have a DEFICIT!

Neener neener neener!

btw surplus means extra money in da bank -- deficit means no money in da bank.

Now, how many TRILLIONS of dollars is your country in debt?

I'm at work now but will find a link and post it for you when I have more time.

LOL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Again, see what I 'm talking about when I say Canadians come off very arrogant at times.

2004 GDP

United States $10,980,000,000,000

Canada $957,700,000,000

Are we done talking about economic strength yet?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not quite.

Govt of Canada website:

Canada's 2005 federal debt ($ millions) -- 499,863.0

But shhhh. Don't tell anyone.