The Arrogant Economist?

[Curiouscanuck]

I've heard it from many, bashing economists for claiming to know everything, while not having any "real life" experience. I have been hearing this increasingly lately. This leads me to some questions...

I would like to know your view on economists. In your opinion;

Do you respect their views on policy? Are they just Idealists? Do they tend to ignore the poor? Are they too focused on money? Have they been a major reason for the increase in wealth and well-being over the past half century? Should we move quicker to take on economists ideas? Or proceed with more caution? If you do not agree with economists, what other academic in social science do you tend to mould your thoughts from? Who do you respect most?

You don't have to answer all questions any of the above you fancy is fine.

[Canuck E Stan]

This leads me to some questions...

I would like to know your view on economists. In your opinion;

“Did you ever think that making a speech on economics is a lot like pissing down your leg? It seems hot to you, but it never does to anyone else.”

Lyndon B. Johnson quotes (American 36th US President (1963-69). 1908-1973)

That about sums it up

[mikedavid00]

I've heard it from many, bashing economists for claiming to know everything, while not having any "real life" experience.

True. This is one of the reasons economists can't agree on anything and are wrong half the time. Even the talking heads in the investement world are wrong half the time. It's this very disagreeing that makes stock prices go up and dow. IF everyone agreed a stock would go down, everyone would sell and there woulnd't be a stock left. So the market is based on disagreement.

Economists are the same sort of thing. Either way, they are just book taught. They have no real experience half the time and try to say things that they feel are logical but the real economy is extrememly complex. Probably even more comlex than the average economist can hanlde.

Do you respect their views on policy?

No. Interest rates or something more simple and singular then somewhat, but not their views on any kind of real gov't policy or anything along those lines.

Are they just Idealists?

Yes. Definately.

Do they tend to ignore the poor?

Depends on the economist. Some believe the poor are a target market group (Rogers cable, calling cards), and others believe that the reason why they are poor is because they don't have a degree.

Working poor are needed in society and coulnd't function without them. People who just choose to have kids and not work (ya'll know what I'm going to say), do NOT help out our economy. They are just a burden.

Have they been a major reason for the increase in wealth and well-being over the past half century?

No. Economists are arm chair quarterbacks. Most who graduate from economics do not find work at all in their field and sit under/unemployed. I have a couple of friends that took social economics so they can get their foot in some sort of gov't job. Didin't happen. Now they have nothing.

Should we move quicker to take on economists ideas?

Not myself. Economists hold personal opinions. That's all.

For instance, I believe that income trusts are a positive for the oil sector only, and not for a company like Telus or Bell.

However, Economists say that income trusts shouldn't have been there and it was something that had to stop all together.

Then there's the odd 1 that came on the radio and said that it was find the way it was.

If you do not agree with economists, what other academic in social science do you tend to mould your thoughts from? Who do you respect most?

Unlike most on the forum, I base my opinions off numbers. Published numbers. Not opinion. If it is opinion, it has to be backed by numbers like somethign from a study.

Numbers show that Canada makes 2% of GHG's. Thus, my opinion is that this should not be a priority for Canada. Everything else is emotion and anyone like Suzuki who says that this is manditory and a top priority is promoting his own agenda of feel good things that are not based off numbers.

You don't have to answer all questions any of the above you fancy is fine.

[gc1765]

Do you respect their views on policy?

For the most part, yes.

Do they tend to ignore the poor?

An economists focus, by definition, is economics. Economists are not concerned with the poor, they are concerned with economics. Sometimes their policies do help the poor, other times not.

Are they too focused on money?

Again, that is their job. Is a scientist too focused on science? An artist too focused on art?

Should we move quicker to take on economists ideas? Or proceed with more caution?

I'd have to decide that on an issue by issue basis. I tend to agree with economists more often than not.

[Curiouscanuck]

True. This is one of the reasons economists can't agree on anything and are wrong half the time. Even the talking heads in the investement world are wrong half the time. It's this very disagreeing that makes stock prices go up and dow. IF everyone agreed a stock would go down, everyone would sell and there woulnd't be a stock left. So the market is based on disagreement.

Economists are the same sort of thing. Either way, they are just book taught. They have no real experience half the time and try to say things that they feel are logical but the real economy is extrememly complex. Probably even more comlex than the average economist can hanlde.

Sure, economists that are proposing new theories may be wrong quite often, but tried and tested theories that economics have let us learn about are agreed on by the majority of economists, and proven with empirical evidence. Such as lower taxes to stimulate growth, low inflation to prevent the distortion of money, and free market producing better quality at a lower cost than government the majority of the time. These ideas are almost common fact to even a simpleton in modern times.

Its not disagreement that a stock goes up and down, it is speculation. A stock would never be worth $0 if it was paying out a dividend or had any probability of losing all its profits, assests and all other wealth. If a company was producing nothing but had land somewhere that could be sold, the company still has value.

No. Interest rates or something more simple and singular then somewhat, but not their views on any kind of real gov't policy or anything along those lines.

I thought I read once you believed we should privatize health care. This is parallel with economists, and they have been suggesting this for a long time.

Yes. Definately.

Karl Marx and Adam Smith I agree. They had no good way of data collection and analysis. Nowadays data collection is turning economics into less idealism and more realism.

Depends on the economist. Some believe the poor are a target market group (Rogers cable, calling cards), and others believe that the reason why they are poor is because they don't have a degree.

Working poor are needed in society and coulnd't function without them. People who just choose to have kids and not work (ya'll know what I'm going to say), do NOT help out our economy. They are just a burden.

Economists generally believe in liberty. The general rule is you can do whatever you please as long as it hurts no one else. This tends to leave the poor fending for themselves. However, the way economists say to eliminate this is through private donations to the poor, not government programs.

No. Economists are arm chair quarterbacks. Most who graduate from economics do not find work at all in their field and sit under/unemployed. I have a couple of friends that took social economics so they can get their foot in some sort of gov't job. Didin't happen. Now they have nothing.

You lost me when you wrote economists with government jobs. Economists are much better tooled for the private sector. They get held back by politics in government jobs. In my experience I was taught from day 1 the problems with government, and I go to a very liberal school.

Not myself. Economists hold personal opinions. That's all.

For instance, I believe that income trusts are a positive for the oil sector only, and not for a company like Telus or Bell.

However, Economists say that income trusts shouldn't have been there and it was something that had to stop all together.

Then there's the odd 1 that came on the radio and said that it was find the way it was.

They hold a hypothesis just like scientists. Through experiments they are either stronger arguments or weaker ones. Sure new studies can wipe common knowledge in economics tomorrow, but it is the same case in science. As for income trusts I don't think any economist could doubt that it created an unlevel playing field. If it could of been dealt with better is more of the debate.

Unlike most on the forum, I base my opinions off numbers. Published numbers. Not opinion. If it is opinion, it has to be backed by numbers like somethign from a study.

Thats great to hear, we have all seen what problems ideology have created. USSR, African debt, and more recently Kyoto in Europe. In terms of Kyoto I hope Canadians can observe Europe and see if they are willing to sacrifice such a standard of living loss for no benefit in climate change whatsoever. The best thing for this country in my opinion is for a bone chilling remainder of the winter. Otherwise you'll see uncompetitive policy and our jobs will move outside our boarders, and many of our best and brightest as well.

[Curiouscanuck]

Are they too focused on money?

Again, that is their job. Is a scientist too focused on science? An artist too focused on art?

Actually economists are programed to maximize utility, not money. How correlated these two should be is the nature of the question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility

[gc1765]

Are they too focused on money?

Again, that is their job. Is a scientist too focused on science? An artist too focused on art?

Actually economists are programed to maximize utility, not money. How correlated these two should be is the nature of the question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility

I agree (actually I realized that right after I posted). An economist is focused on resources...it just so happens that those resources almost always are, or can be, exchanged for money. Thus, the reason why economists are focused on "money".

[Figleaf]

Do you respect their views on policy?

I would distinguish between the concepts of economics and economists. Economics is a powerful explicative science, but a difficult one to apply.

Economists are people who practice or study economics and their views differ and some are right, some not. It is important to note (given the tenor of this thread so far) that economists are not all neo-conservatives.

Do they tend to ignore the poor?

Neo-conservative economists tend to ignore the interests, motivations, incentives, challenges and aspirations of the poor. They do quietly take note of the importance for them of the poor in sustaining a particular economic paradigm.

Economics as a science is 'concerned' with poverty in the sense of a phenomenon to be explained, and in a normative context, ameliorated.

Are they too focused on money?

General speaking, yes.

Have they been a major reason for the increase in wealth and well-being over the past half century?

Not really, but I don't think the full potential of advanced economics has yet been felt.

Should we move quicker to take on economists ideas?

I think there is a lot of potential for improving management decisionmaking (public or private sector) through improved application of economics in policymaking.

[NovaScotian]

I used to think that all economists where uber theorical free-marketers that thought taxes where the devils work and welfare was evil....

but after working with them in class it was the opposite. They where all free market, but they also knew it had limits and that governments had to intervene into the market to make corrections. They also stressed the economic importance of taxes, welfare and equalization.

[mikedavid00]

I used to think that all economists where uber theorical free-marketers that thought taxes where the devils work and welfare was evil....

but after working with them in class it was the opposite. They where all free market, but they also knew it had limits and that governments had to intervene into the market to make corrections. They also stressed the economic importance of taxes, welfare and equalization.

Yes and the problem with Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Bew Brunswick and PEI is that you guys have gotten too used to welfare and gov't services. Anyone with an education there thinks they are owed some sort of gov't funding. I was watching CBC Atlantic on satellite yesterday.

I saw that story that all youguys are talking about non stop. Looks like a lot of your leaders got caught with their hands in the cookie jar!

Lol... that was so sad and pathetic to see the theft of public funds (our tax funds) to see some Novascotia MP paying her personal car insurance with my tax dollars and then having it refunded twice. And over 60 times double and tripe refunded and it's a 'clerical error'. And that MP was there half crying on TV saying that she was sick and needed help.

I coudln't beleive what I saw. You guys have big problems over there. But you know what? You guys are Canadians and able to work. You need to stop the culture of handouts over there. You need to start building your coast. You need to declare tax fee zones and find employment and STOP looking at the gov't for all your problems.

[Catchme]

Cultural geography, I find has a far more of comprehensive view of utilities, resources and what drives markets than do economists.

http://geography.about.com/cs/culturalgeography/

http://www.fortunecity.com/victorian/updik...8/cultural.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_geography

There is only one Economist that I have ever respected and thought that person just might know what they are speaking of as well as care about humanity as other than a commodity or human capital, and that is Sir Nicholas Stern.

Stern The Economist

As long as economists look at peoples, as being commodity or human capital, they will have it all wrong!

[NovaScotian]

I used to think that all economists where uber theorical free-marketers that thought taxes where the devils work and welfare was evil....

but after working with them in class it was the opposite. They where all free market, but they also knew it had limits and that governments had to intervene into the market to make corrections. They also stressed the economic importance of taxes, welfare and equalization.

Yes and the problem with Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Bew Brunswick and PEI is that you guys have gotten too used to welfare and gov't services. Anyone with an education there thinks they are owed some sort of gov't funding. I was watching CBC Atlantic on satellite yesterday.

All national surveys of government services show that the Atlantic region generally has the lowest level of service or worst quality services of all Canada. So what are you talking about.

Equalization is an important economic measure to make sure all Canadians have equal services. It also has the added benefit of making sure people from one part of the country do not move to areas new areas solely based on the fact that they have better services.

I saw that story that all youguys are talking about non stop. Looks like a lot of your leaders got caught with their hands in the cookie jar!

Lol... that was so sad and pathetic to see the theft of public funds (our tax funds) to see some Novascotia MP paying her personal car insurance with my tax dollars and then having it refunded twice. And over 60 times double and tripe refunded and it's a 'clerical error'. And that MP was there half crying on TV saying that she was sick and needed help.

If we are thinking about the same story then she is a provincal politician and therefore very little/ if any of your money was payed by you. Speaking of tax money....wanna explain why Atlantic Canadians should help fund the subsidization of Ontario's auto industy or Bombardier. How about the construction of the Saint Lawerence seaway that Ontario benefits from so greatly? What about during WW2 when CD Howe created a multitude of crown corporations...located in Ontario, which after the war become the base on which Ontario's mighty manufacturing sector. Was it fair when Howe subsidized Ontario steel, while leaving Maritime steel producers out in the cold?

I coudln't beleive what I saw. You guys have big problems over there. But you know what? You guys are Canadians and able to work. You need to stop the culture of handouts over there. You need to start building your coast. You need to declare tax fee zones and find employment and STOP looking at the gov't for all your problems.

I agree that Atlantic Canadians rely on the government to much(whether it be provincal or federal)...but the culture of handouts is such an old sterotype...please. Unemployment in Halifax is 4.9%, Nova Scotia overall is at 7.3%.

I agree, build up the coast....but with what money? That would require a large amount federal investment...something A.C. hasnt seen in...well...ever..

[Curiouscanuck]

I agree that Atlantic Canadians rely on the government to much(whether it be provincal or federal)...but the culture of handouts is such an old sterotype...please. Unemployment in Halifax is 4.9%, Nova Scotia overall is at 7.3%.

I agree, build up the coast....but with what money? That would require a large amount federal investment...something A.C. hasnt seen in...well...ever..

Im sorry NovaScotian, I disagree with your defense. The east is in a welfare trap that can only be relived through less government support, not more.

Here are numerous articles stating the reasons for hardship.

http://www.aims.ca/equalization.asp?cmPageID=159

Human nature is tough, no one wants to change the status quo and even more so no one wants to be told they are wrong. I know how it feels. But the fact of the matter is nearly every economist academic disagrees with you and that ideology. And they have felt this way for a long time now, with more and more evidence supporting their side everyday.

[NovaScotian]

I agree that Atlantic Canadians rely on the government to much(whether it be provincal or federal)...but the culture of handouts is such an old sterotype...please. Unemployment in Halifax is 4.9%, Nova Scotia overall is at 7.3%.

I agree, build up the coast....but with what money? That would require a large amount federal investment...something A.C. hasnt seen in...well...ever..

Im sorry NovaScotian, I disagree with your defense. The east is in a welfare trap that can only be relived through less government support, not more.

Here are numerous articles stating the reasons for hardship.

http://www.aims.ca/equalization.asp?cmPageID=159

Human nature is tough, no one wants to change the status quo and even more so no one wants to be told they are wrong. I know how it feels. But the fact of the matter is nearly every economist academic disagrees with you and that ideology. And they have felt this way for a long time now, with more and more evidence supporting their side everyday.

So are you saying that Ontario become the powerhouse solely on hardwork and self-relience? Hardly. Anyway..what "ideology" do you think I prescribe too? I do not think we need any equalization, I would rather less. But there is a big difference between equalization and investment. Something like the Atlantic Gateway would be an investment.

P.S. - I have read those articles before, I had to for my Atlantic economy class.

[Curiouscanuck]

So are you saying that Ontario become the powerhouse solely on hardwork and self-relience? Hardly. Anyway..what "ideology" do you think I prescribe too? I do not think we need any equalization, I would rather less. But there is a big difference between equalization and investment. Something like the Atlantic Gateway would be an investment.

P.S. - I have read those articles before, I had to for my Atlantic economy class.

I did not say that at all. If you would like to know why southern Ontario has been so successful in my opinion it is being so close to the northeastern US consumer, which was and still is very strong. This proximity historically fed markets in the mid west to the east coast. Not as much a factor anymore, with decreasing transportation costs, but historically it was vital.

The ideology I am referring to is your claim that government should step in and spur the economy (government investment). Doesn't work, and for any paper you find saying it is true (no communist Russia papers please) , I can find 100 that say private investment is the better way the overwhelming majority of the time.

In terms of infrastructure I agree government funding is sometimes necessary, but provincially (or even better municipalities) not federally. Dont expect handouts from the federal government, if you want to invest in infrastructure, draw investment (by cutting taxes), and fund the projects provincially through your own tax dollars. Take Ireland for example, they cut taxes years ago and low and behold 20 years later they have MORE tax revenue than before. They are able to spend it on such projects. Don't whine to the federal government anymore, in my opinion that's is the argument that is REALLY getting old.

[jdobbin]

“Did you ever think that making a speech on economics is a lot like pissing down your leg? It seems hot to you, but it never does to anyone else.”

Lyndon B. Johnson quotes (American 36th US President (1963-69). 1908-1973)

That about sums it up

And yet Canada elected an economist as prime minister.

[mikedavid00]

I agree that Atlantic Canadians rely on the government to much(whether it be provincal or federal)...but the culture of handouts is such an old sterotype...please. Unemployment in Halifax is 4.9%, Nova Scotia overall is at 7.3%.

I agree, build up the coast....but with what money? That would require a large amount federal investment...something A.C. hasnt seen in...well...ever..

You just contradicted yourself.

I sympathise with your ways of thinking. I'm from ottawa where it's programmed into you from an ealy age that your failures are due to not speaking French. That is true to large extent. Ottawa jobs went to Quebecers 70% of the time. That was unfair and life in Ottawa. There was litterally no private sector so I had to move here to the GTA.

But you know what the difference is? There is nothing Ottawans can do about this issue. It's the nature of the city. Atlantic Canada holds all the cards to fix it's problems. It just need to take those steps.

You guys in Atlantic Canada have been culturally programmed to think that the answer to your problems is more gov't intervention and more handouts. You hold your own cards at this point. What I saw on the CBC was honestly pathetic watching a grown PM crying asking for pitty because she was sick and and stealing tax dollars and the reason was clerical errors and sure enough, lack of funding. It was so 3rd world.

You guys hold your own cards. You are blessed with an extrememly low immigration rate, you have a strong culture, low cost of living, and you speak English. We don't have this in Ontario. I would consider this place a mess with no potential when compared to Atlantic Canada.

Atlantic Canada holds the most potential. It's a hidden gem within Canada. The answer is to announce to North American that you are open for business, and declare tax free zones, open gas competition, and let the gov't step out of private enterprise. You will see your part of the country thrive. And oops, your gov't as a side effect will collecet MORE taxes.

But you have been taught against this mindset and it's so sad. Your leaders who are theives and crooks want to protect themselves and keep you the lowely citizen down. This is how it was done in Ireland, and this is how it's done now in the second and third world.

If you were to completely manage your own affairs, you would learn some hard lessons of your provinces and be forced to take a conservative stance on this issue.

Just some advice from someone who hasn't grown up with the social programming that you have.

[NovaScotian]

I agree that Atlantic Canadians rely on the government to much(whether it be provincal or federal)...but the culture of handouts is such an old sterotype...please. Unemployment in Halifax is 4.9%, Nova Scotia overall is at 7.3%.

I agree, build up the coast....but with what money? That would require a large amount federal investment...something A.C. hasnt seen in...well...ever..

You just contradicted yourself.

I sympathise with your ways of thinking. I'm from ottawa where it's programmed into you from an ealy age that your failures are due to not speaking French. That is true to large extent. Ottawa jobs went to Quebecers 70% of the time. That was unfair and life in Ottawa. There was litterally no private sector so I had to move here to the GTA.

But you know what the difference is? There is nothing Ottawans can do about this issue. It's the nature of the city. Atlantic Canada holds all the cards to fix it's problems. It just need to take those steps.

You guys in Atlantic Canada have been culturally programmed to think that the answer to your problems is more gov't intervention and more handouts. You hold your own cards at this point. What I saw on the CBC was honestly pathetic watching a grown PM crying asking for pitty because she was sick and and stealing tax dollars and the reason was clerical errors and sure enough, lack of funding. It was so 3rd world.

You guys hold your own cards. You are blessed with an extrememly low immigration rate, you have a strong culture, low cost of living, and you speak English. We don't have this in Ontario. I would consider this place a mess with no potential when compared to Atlantic Canada.

Atlantic Canada holds the most potential. It's a hidden gem within Canada. The answer is to announce to North American that you are open for business, and declare tax free zones, open gas competition, and let the gov't step out of private enterprise. You will see your part of the country thrive. And oops, your gov't as a side effect will collecet MORE taxes.

But you have been taught against this mindset and it's so sad. Your leaders who are theives and crooks want to protect themselves and keep you the lowely citizen down. This is how it was done in Ireland, and this is how it's done now in the second and third world.

If you were to completely manage your own affairs, you would learn some hard lessons of your provinces and be forced to take a conservative stance on this issue.

Just some advice from someone who hasn't grown up with the social programming that you have.

wow, ok, you completely miss understood me.

In general I am against government intervention into the economy, but I understand that in certain cases it is neccessary. In the real economy, its never so black and white. I also find it ironic that a part of the country that has benefited so much from government intervention is so againist it. Was the contruction of the Saint Lawerence Seaway a handout? Its not like that piece of infracture was solely fiananced by the provinces. I see the Atlantic Gateway or Canadian-US highway from Halifax to Buffalo the same way, as a federal investment, built by the feds to benefit the region and the country. A "handout" like those to the now defunked Sydney Steel are definatly bad, and do not help the region or country in the long run.

I agree with using the Irish example, they slashed taxes, easied regulations, but also provided lucritive incentives (subsidies). They also kept there infrastructre(both hard and soft) up to date thanks to subsidies from the EU.

Nova Scotia is also beginning to follow the Irish model and in some communities, especially the financial service sector, Halifax is being called the new Dublin. An estimated 2000-2500 highpaying jobs in the IT and Financial service sector are expected to be created in Halifax over the next 5 years. But you are right, overall government intervention in the economy should be minimized. I hope oneday soon N.S. will not need equalization.

[NovaScotian]

So are you saying that Ontario become the powerhouse solely on hardwork and self-relience? Hardly. Anyway..what "ideology" do you think I prescribe too? I do not think we need any equalization, I would rather less. But there is a big difference between equalization and investment. Something like the Atlantic Gateway would be an investment.

P.S. - I have read those articles before, I had to for my Atlantic economy class.

I did not say that at all. If you would like to know why southern Ontario has been so successful in my opinion it is being so close to the northeastern US consumer, which was and still is very strong. This proximity historically fed markets in the mid west to the east coast. Not as much a factor anymore, with decreasing transportation costs, but historically it was vital.

The ideology I am referring to is your claim that government should step in and spur the economy (government investment). Doesn't work, and for any paper you find saying it is true (no communist Russia papers please) , I can find 100 that say private investment is the better way the overwhelming majority of the time.

In terms of infrastructure I agree government funding is sometimes necessary, but provincially (or even better municipalities) not federally. Dont expect handouts from the federal government, if you want to invest in infrastructure, draw investment (by cutting taxes), and fund the projects provincially through your own tax dollars. Take Ireland for example, they cut taxes years ago and low and behold 20 years later they have MORE tax revenue than before. They are able to spend it on such projects. Don't whine to the federal government anymore, in my opinion that's is the argument that is REALLY getting old.

Private investment is certainly WAY better, but sometimes it isnt enough. For example in the Alberta Tarsands the federal government invested billions into the project and it was ready for the Oil boom long before it would have if it was solely left up to private investment. Perhaps thats money that should have been provided by the Alberta government?

As I said in Mike's post, the Irish provided plenty of incentives and had help from the EU to help cover the cost of lost tax revunue.

I just do not think the issue very black and white. There is a large grey zone where the economy operates. Sometimes subsidies are neccessary, sometimes not. Sometimes government intervention is neccessary, most of the time it is not.

[mikedavid00]

An estimated 2000-2500 highpaying jobs in the IT and Financial service sector are expected to be created in Halifax over the next 5 years.

From watching the CBC, it didn't look like Atlantic Canada was the new Dublin. And I really hope you guys get those white collar jobs.

I highly, highly, recommend your province control it's immigration because if white collar jobs really do open up (which the probably wont, but that's just my opinion), you will have litterally thousands of people flooding in from other countries to take those jobs from you guys. And believe me, they *will* take them due to their paper credentials.

You need major expansion of white collar jobs. Your under employed need to trickly their way up to these white collar jobs where they rightfully belong. This will only work well if you do not let in immigrants.

You will also get a housing boom with this too.

But I just don't feel your gov't wants to let go if it's control of the people.

Just a hunch... =)

[NovaScotian]

An estimated 2000-2500 highpaying jobs in the IT and Financial service sector are expected to be created in Halifax over the next 5 years.

From watching the CBC, it didn't look like Atlantic Canada was the new Dublin. And I really hope you guys get those white collar jobs.

I highly, highly, recommend your province control it's immigration because if white collar jobs really do open up (which the probably wont, but that's just my opinion), you will have litterally thousands of people flooding in from other countries to take those jobs from you guys. And believe me, they *will* take them due to their paper credentials.

You need major expansion of white collar jobs. Your under employed need to trickly their way up to these white collar jobs where they rightfully belong. This will only work well if you do not let in immigrants.

You will also get a housing boom with this too.

But I just don't feel your gov't wants to let go if it's control of the people.

Just a hunch... =)

Not all of AC is doing well, look at Sydney. However there are bright spots like Halifax, Moncton, even St. John's.

Here is an article about the recent activity. sorry I dont have a direct link because the story is from about a month ago

Big plans to set up in Nova Scotia

Technology, financial companies create stir with announcements they’re coming east and will be hiring

By STEVE PROCTOR Business Editor

Stephen Lund believes 2006 was the most significant year for the development of Nova Scotia since Michelin announced it was going to make tires in the province 35 years ago.

The head of the province’s development agency, Nova Scotia Business Inc., says that with Research In Motion investing $230 million to build a technology centre in Hammonds Plains, and several finance and insurance companies committing to set up shop and create 1,000 high-paying jobs over the next six years, the province is set to thrive.

"What is the single biggest driver of growth in world economies today? Technology. Who is leading the charge? RIM. Where did they choose to locate when they had 20 other communities shortlisted in Canada? Halifax. It doesn’t really get any better than that, does it?"

The RIM deal is far more significant than the 1,200 jobs the maker of the BlackBerry promises to create, says Mr. Lund. It gives the province a global profile that will lead to other companies looking at the province.

"They’ll say, ‘If RIM is there, and they’re the best, what are we missing? Why aren’t we there?’ "

The same kind of talk is going on about Halifax as a financial centre. After four international companies announced in the fall they were coming to the provincial capital to create almost 1,000 jobs, Mr. Lund said he spent hours fielding calls from reporters and financial companies around the globe wanting to know what was going on.

"People don’t realize how different it’s going to be. They don’t get how significant these announcements are."

The companies that announced new offices or expansion of existing ones included Olympia Capital, a hedge fund; Marsh Inc., a global risk specialist; Butterfield Bank of Bermuda; and fund administrator Citco Group of Curacao.

"It’s not just the direct jobs," said Mr. Lund. "Everyone is going to benefit — restaurant owners, taxi drivers, cleaners. Over the next 10 years, the taxes the new finance companies will pay could allow the province to buy 30 to 40 MRIs for hospitals. Everyone in the economy is going to benefit."

Sunny Marche, an associate business professor at Dalhousie, said the deals announced this year are substantial.

"This is not government smoke and mirrors. These are very good-paying jobs. These are not call-centre positions. This is the knowledge economy at its best."

He said new finance clusters and booming global interest in hedge funds mean Nova Scotia graduates are in a good position to land good jobs. He said the province’s competitive advantage lies in its highly educated workforce, its improving technology infrastructure and the relatively low costs for doing business.

Don Mills, president of Corporate Research Associates in Halifax, believes the ties established with Bermuda and the Caribbean this year can be further exploited.

"There are literally hundreds of Dalhousie grads working there already, so we have links that can be strengthened," he said. "They have lots of major companies on the island that could see Nova Scotia as a good place to expand."

As a partner in Total Marketing and Communications, a Bermuda marketing and research firm, Mr. Mills said he visits the island frequently and is pleased to hear locals there talking about Halifax as the new Dublin, Ireland.

Dublin, once a down-and-out community with tremendous economic problems, is now one of the economic bright lights of Europe. The city, and the country as a whole, was able to turn it around by targeting development in technology, insurance and banking, the same sectors Nova Scotia has been pursing.

David Wicks, head of the Sobey School of Business at Saint Mary’s University, said the activity has been exciting for students. He said RIM has been on campus recruiting a couple of times, as have the financial companies.

"Students are seeing first-hand they don’t have to go out west to make a good living," Mr. Wicks said. "They can stay in Nova Scotia and have a rewarding career. Our universities and the community colleges are going to play an important role in keeping this good-news story. These companies are looking for innovative thinkers, and you can’t innovate if you don’t have an education."

The province is giving RIM a $14-million payroll rebate program, a tax rebate linked to numbers of employees hired, and a $5 million financial package with recruitment and training incentives. The financing packages made available for the other projects appear in the charts below.

[geoffrey]

“Did you ever think that making a speech on economics is a lot like pissing down your leg? It seems hot to you, but it never does to anyone else.”

Lyndon B. Johnson quotes (American 36th US President (1963-69). 1908-1973)

That about sums it up

And yet Canada elected an economist as prime minister.

His policies don't reflect his profession.

[jdobbin]

His policies don't reflect his profession.

How so?

[Saturn]

His policies don't reflect his profession.

How so?

In that he hands out money like a drunken Liberal. Many of his policies are economically stupid. But he is a politician first and an economist second. As a politician, his number 1 objective is to get votes and he uses his skills from economics to maximize his votes. Bad economic policy translates into good politics and many votes.

[Higgly]

Yet every once in a while, one comes along who changes everything for the better: Keynes, Galbraith, Friedmann...