Open Letter to Young Libs on CKA
RedBull @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:36 am
MaelstromRider MaelstromRider:
Either Martin is culpable in the sponsorship scam becuse as finance minister he knew that millions were being illegally spent, or he didn't know enough about his cabinet portfolio to be aware that millions were being illegally spent and was a completely incompetant finance minister.
Maelstrom, I am going to use a quote from you to capture an argument that I have heard time and time again...my post is not directed to you directly.
To be honest, this line of argument is tired and shows a lack of understanding on the part of those who use of how our federal government works.
1) The federal budget is massive and there are hundred of millions spent by each and every ministry. To argue that the Finance Minister must be able to account for every dollar spent is ridiculous. Moreso in the Department of Public Works, which has one of the biggest budgets of all the departments. To not know how every dollar is being spent is not incompetency. Martin's job was to set the economic agenda for the country, not watch over the shoulders of each and every cabinet colleague. Thats why the Auditor General position was created. Each Minister is responsible for how their department's money is spent....our system requires that each Minister be somewhat trustworthy and competent. Otherwise, they are asked to resign - like we saw continually with Mulroney's government and a couple of times with Chretien. Love it or leave it - thats the way things are. Granted, there need to be improvements and to be fair, I think that the system has been improved quickly by Martin. There is a challenge in all of these efforts though, because I think there is a risk to making things to bureaucratic and adding too much red tape and limiting the timliness and effectiveness of programs - personally I think that Harpers ideas tread on this dangerous ground.
2) Do you really think that Chretien, who always had an uneasy relationship with Martin (and hated his guts), would keep him in the loop on the political machinations of the Libs in Quebec? These guys could barely be in the same room together, let alone share the political goings-on of a region that was integral to maintaining Liberal majorities.
To try and embroil Martin in the adscam diverts away from the real issue at hand which is: our system was weak and was exploited - who has the best plan to fix it?
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:45 am
Streaker Streaker:
$1:
But maybe your right. Perhaps we could rescind all our bilateral trade agreements. Let's get rid of Diefenbaker's AUTOPACT!
uhh... MCB, just to set the record straight, the Auto Pact was Pearson's doing, not Diefenbaker's.
WHAT? You mean a LIBERAL signed a bilateral trade agreement with the evil United States!
Isn't that a direct threat to Canadian values? Why aren't you Liberals decrying what a loser the Autopact has been? Does Paul Martin realize this? How about Chretien and Trudeau? Were they aware that one of their predecessors had "Sold Canada out to the highest bidder?"
Or are North American trade agreements only positive when a Liberal Government implements them?
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:52 am
RedBull RedBull:
To try and embroil Martin in the adscam diverts away from the real issue at hand which is: our system was weak and was exploited - who has the best plan to fix it?
That's easy. Harper. He's the one who introduced the Federal Accountability Act. Martin on the other hand has said nothing on ethics during this campaign.
He also failed to implement things like an ethics commissioner with teeth, despite his 2004 electoral promises to do so. And now, almost two years after Adscam broke, we're in the midst of another likely Liberal scam with the Income Trust/insider trading investigation and David Dingwall's "entitlement to his entitlements."
Let's assume for a moment that Martin was indeed blameless over adscam. He can't duck responsibility for these latest matters.
RedBull @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:55 am
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
Streaker Streaker:
$1:
But maybe your right. Perhaps we could rescind all our bilateral trade agreements. Let's get rid of Diefenbaker's AUTOPACT!
uhh... MCB, just to set the record straight, the Auto Pact was Pearson's doing, not Diefenbaker's.
WHAT? You mean a LIBERAL signed a bilateral trade agreement with the evil United States!
Isn't that a direct threat to Canadian values? Why aren't you Liberals decrying what a loser the Autopact has been? Does Paul Martin realize this? How about Chretien and Trudeau? Were they aware that one of their predecessors had "Sold Canada out to the highest bidder?"
Or are North American trade agreements only positive when a Liberal Government implements them?
Fact check: the Atuo-pact was abolished in 2001.
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:56 am
Delwin Delwin:
Ok lets just tell the Americans to pack up and go home, Unfortunately, nafta is ingrained in our economy now, like a festering boil.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
I'm confused Dilbert. All I've been hearing from you Liberals for the last couple of elections is how brilliantly you've mastered the Canadian economy. Are you now saying that's not the case?
Are you telling us the economy is a mess despite 12 years of uninterupted Liberal rule?
Dayseed @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:57 am
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
No, it's not a gang war. But I haven't heard that Hwacker did a drive by shooting on Blue Nose's house either.
Bad example. Hwacker was rather proud of himself for attacking a Liberal candidate in his riding at a Tim Horton's.
$1:
An election is a time for people to take a good hard look at the party's positions and debate them vigorously. That's all this is about.
Why do you have a problem with that?
Why do you have a problem with that?
I like Motorcycleboy's post. When a factual mistake he made about the Autopact is demonstrated to him, instead of admitting he's erred, he instead uses the strength of his own ignorance to polemicize things further.
I reiterate my stand that this isn't a spirited discussion of ideas as opined by the one of the combatants, but rather a Cons/Libs Beat-It Video Hands-Tied-At-Wrist Knife Fight with the history of anything left or right allowable as a substitute knife.
Hats off!
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 10:59 am
RedBull RedBull:
Fact check: the Atuo-pact was abolished in 2001.
You're just splitting hairs. Auto-pact may have been rescinded, but it was the forerunner of the other myriad of agreements that now govern US-Canada trade.
It was also the foundation on which our automotive sector was built.
Delwin @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:02 am
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
Delwin Delwin:
Ok lets just tell the Americans to pack up and go home, Unfortunately, nafta is ingrained in our economy now, like a festering boil.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
I'm confused Dilbert. All I've been hearing from you Liberals for the last couple of elections is how brilliantly you've mastered the Canadian economy. Are you now saying that's not the case?
Are you telling us the economy is a mess despite 12 years of uninterupted Liberal rule?
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:06 am
Dayseed Dayseed:
I reiterate my stand that this isn't a spirited discussion of ideas as opined by the one of the combatants, but rather a Cons/Libs Beat-It Video Hands-Tied-At-Wrist Knife Fight with the history of anything left or right allowable as a substitute knife.
Hats off!
Hats off!
Well Dayseed, if the debate's a bit too passionate and involved for you, then don't partake.
I'm sure there's a thread about "What's your Favourite Movie Quote" or "Is Rome-Total War Superior to Ghost Recon 2" out there somewhere. Maybe that would be more your speed!
RedBull @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:16 am
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
RedBull RedBull:
Fact check: the Atuo-pact was abolished in 2001.
You're just splitting hairs. Auto-pact may have been rescinded, but it was the forerunner of the other myriad of agreements that now govern US-Canada trade.
It was also the foundation on which our automotive sector was built.
I was merely correcting a factual error...not participating one way or the other in the argument.
PluggyRug @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:45 am
Delwin Delwin:
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
Delwin Delwin:
Ok lets just tell the Americans to pack up and go home, Unfortunately, nafta is ingrained in our economy now, like a festering boil.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
Canada's growth profile is being reshaped by a rising currency and strong commodity markets. The appreciation of
the Canadian dollar has already dampened exports, production and job creation in the manufacturing sector. At the
same time, high commodity prices are supporting the resource sector. Overall, we expect growth to average a fairly
tepid 2½% this year and next — lagging the U.S. performance by half a percentage point.
Canada's export-oriented manufacturers are facing a number of growth-sapping hurdles, not the least strong competition
from lower-cost overseas producers, a high-valued currency and rising input costs. A relatively high level of finished
product inventories is also constraining production. The deceleration in foreign shipments that began to emerge in mid-
2004 will likely persist into 2006 as U.S. consumers rein in purchases and global growth moderates.
On a more positive note, business capital spending is on the upswing, supported by the lower cost of imported machinery
and the desire to bolster operational efficiencies, a development that will hopefully generate stronger productivity
gains. The focus on cutting costs, however, is also constraining the pace of hiring. Manufacturers have shed just over
50,000 jobs in the past two years, or 2% of its workforce, and further cutbacks are likely.(This was from scotiabanks groups nafta quarterly winter 2005)
I think our best bet now is to amend the current legislation and not rush into some huge new trade deal without considering the ramifications the way that "others" have.
I'm confused Dilbert. All I've been hearing from you Liberals for the last couple of elections is how brilliantly you've mastered the Canadian economy. Are you now saying that's not the case?
Are you telling us the economy is a mess despite 12 years of uninterupted Liberal rule?
That was the point you was trying to make earlier.
Say yes or say no but please stick to it.
Delwin @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 11:54 am
Oh contraire, to say that something is ingrained is to say that it is a firmly established part of something and quite the opposite of being the sum total of something.
Motorcycleboy @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:05 pm
Delwin Delwin:
Oh contraire, to say that something is ingrained is to say that it is a firmly established part of something and quite the opposite of being the sum total of something.
Are you Liberals capable of anything other than vascilation and digression?
Is the economy strong or not?
If it's strong, then that abrogates your point that NAFTA has devastated the Canadian economy.
If not, then it stands to reason the Liberals are to blame as they've been at the helm for 12 years.
Would you like an easier question Dilbert?
Blue_Nose @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:11 pm
I'm in agreement with Dayseed's stance in this case (gasp).
I challenge any one of you armchair politicians to give an example of a previous or ongoing debate on a political issue that hasn't digressed into a partisan smear-fest of attacks on stereotypical ideologies. Even one that didn't resort to the, "Pht, those damned liberals are all crooks," argument at least once would impress me. If you think the above is actually a legitimate, rational argument, you've proven my point.
Blue_Nose @ Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:12 pm
Exhibit A:
Motorcycleboy Motorcycleboy:
All I've been hearing from you Liberals....