[quote=“BigJohn”][quote=“Chewycorns”][quote=“BigJohn”][quote=“Chewycorns”]
And when you say socialists can make money, I think you really don’t understand how statist policies can harm industry. You subsidize a sector (e.g. dairy) it starts to lose its competitive advantage. Look at New Zealand dairy. It’s a worldwide player exactly because it ended the quota system decades ago.
[/quote]
Sorry about the name thing, Chewy.
As to you message, it’s a lot of blah blah blah. The New Zealand dairy sector? Is that your best example to analyze Canadian economic success? :eh: Canada’s economy is doing well because we use the free-market,but we are not ideological slaves to the notion that liberty means the right of big corporations to do what they want. It’s all about balance.[/quote]
Again, you obviously don’t understand these issues so why try to make it look like you do? It’s ok not to know things, just be humble about it and people will be glad to their knowledge.
My example of the New Zealand Dairy issue is highlighting a Canadian failure of still maintaining quotas for certain industries. They haven’t got rid of this like other developed nations, especially New Zealand, which did away with supply management in the late 1980s. Let me spell it out for you in Grade 1 style:
Grade One Tutorial for BigJim
Canada in good financial shape because:
- When the country was in bad economic shape in early 90s with record deficits, government kept the GST which increased revenue for the government (money the goverment brings in).
- Paul Martin as Finance Minister borrowed the playbookfrom Ralph Klein and Preston Manning and cut, cut, and cut. This belt tightening helped significantly reduce spending.
- Global tech boom mean substantive stock market and economic growth. Resulted in Canada going from record deficits to surpluses in only a few years.
- Other countries in bad shape today almost two decades later, even if they cut and gained more revenue would not be able to relplicate Canada’s sucess. Only emerging countries such as China, Brazil, Russia etc. have growth rates and wealth creation similar to the expansion seen in developing countries in the mid-90s. That was a once in a lifetime event where technological advances revolutionized the way we worked etc. Today, even with cuts and more revenue, the global growth in US and Europe would mean a turn around could take decades instead of a few years.
Canada still has challenges:
- Way too much subsidies and protection of local industries.
- Low productivity and poor commercialization of innovation (too many professors with their head up their ass IMHO).
- Risk adverse management class.
- Reliance on certain industries (commodities in the West, Manufacturing in Ontario, Handouts/Equalization payments in the maritimes.
- Educating people such as BigJim.
And who says I wouldn’t make a good teacher hahahahhaha. BigJim, you are dismissed for recess. [/quote]
Yes, Canada still has many challenges. Very deep, very wise. Thanks, Yoda.
But, tell me: what’s your point?
You know, “point” - that thing that supposedly relating to the thread title? Mine is that Canada’s economy is doing very well, despite having reasonably generous social programs. This is to a large extent because we were careful about debt / GDP ratios and had stronger financial regulation, plus of course having lots of natural resources.
You got a problem with that? I’m not arguing that Paul Martin didn’t help, or that we don’t have to spend so much on defence.
So: relating to the thread title: what’s your point?[/quote]
The original point of this thread was that Socialist Canada is outdoing America in growth and job creation. My point all along is that it has been the stewardship of the centre right (something I would classify Martin, Mulroney and Harper as representing). Sure, Canada is a mixed economy and has maintained this growth with a social safety net. But as mentioned in my last thread, Martin’s changes to the CPP in the 90s, for exampe, ensured its long term viability.
Likewise, dickwaving about commodities is pretty short sighted IMHO. Sure, we have a lot of oil, timber, and potash etc., but for a lot of our commodities do we add value added? No, we ship them out and have them changed overseas. Not nearly as much wealth creation in just shipping out the commodity. And when the prices fall, it’s hard times indeed. Diversification and valued added increases would be something to brag about. Hasn’t happened to a great extent yet.