What the hell happened to Texas?Follow

The Right 1%.

Didn't you hear? It's only because they're close enough to the U.S. to benefit from the side effects of our capitalist awesomeness.

This is an excellent example of why anecdotes are not data. Thank you.

He asked specifically for a single example of how the US health care system is better than the UK system. I gave him one. What's strange is that in all the times this topic has come up on this forum, the generally accepted assumption that the US health care system invests much more money in R&D, while others (like in the UK) focus more on treatment has never been disputed. The result is that if not for that R&D spending in the US, advancements in treatments for certain medical conditions would not occur (or would occur more slowly). Countries who use socialized medicine get to reap the rewards of this, and I think it's unfair to praise the value of those systems without acknowledging this.


In the specific case I cited, I asked Nobby what the likelihood of a 16 year old girl diagnosed with a large AVM in the mid 80s to survive to the age of 40 if she were solely depending on the UK health care system. He basically said if she relied only on medical advancements in the UK, she was screwed. Given that I celebrated said girls 40th birthday with her last year, forgive me if I don't heap the same accolades on socialized medicine that some people do. I saw firsthand (ok, second hand) as medical advancements changed her chances from nearly zero, to better odds of not dying at some random time to a burst, to complete elimination of bleed or burst risk. And that didn't happen because of a system which focuses on treating the most common ailments which affect the most people and can be treated for the least money (bang for buck).


So while there are problems with the US health care system (lots of them), it's incredibly short sighted to assume that other systems are automatically "better". They are better if you measure them based on the things they do well. The reality is that they are just "different".

Honestly, there was no good reason for the cons to drop two points off the GST - and I don't even like flat taxes (they're regressive) but it did us no good in terms of stimulus and blew a gaping wound in our revenues. That's the kind of faux-populist crap (along with the crime bill this thread is about) that the conservatives do that costs us money and leaves us in debt.

I bet if we still had a Liberal government (again, I don't even like the Liberals) our deficit would be half of what it is now.

Edited, Nov 9th 2011 3:05pm by Olorinus

The conservative minority govt also had a surplus before the recession. The benefit the Liberal governments had previously was an economically rich US, that wasn't involved in costly wars, and wasn't in the worst economic crisis since the great depression. The liberals had the Clinton years, they had the tech boom, they had the automotive boom, they had the housing bubble.

The conservatives got dealt a ****** hand and have handled it pretty well. Granted a lot of that is thanks to the Paul Martins economic oversight additions with Chretien (for which the liberals deserve all the credit.) However since the Conservative government we have seen an increase in minimum wage (it rose a dollar through the recession) decreased federal taxes, and we are only running a 2% deficit, the GDP was expected to grow by about 3% next year, which is a whole 1.7 billion more than we need, and the budget predictions state that if the economy can stay as it is then we will have a balanced budget.

The only issue is that economist fear we might have a slight downturn over the next several months, however this is perfectly acceptable in an accelerated economy, if you look at the economical trend we spike down in 2009, and spike back up by 2010. We are a super hot economy right now as far as the data shows, a cool down is perfectly normal, and economically wise for a few reasons.

1. Our biggest trading partner is not keeping pace, we can currently allow them several months+ to catch up riding a small small deficit. As the US picks up so will the Canadian employment and the nations money with it.

2. Our dollar is high, A lower canadian dollar makes for good business here. As shown in the late 90's to mid 2000's it was only after we started paring the US dollar that business began to slow down (why pay the same out of country, for what you get in country). It was also a glaring warning sign that the US economy was stalling. (it also shows that our economies are ridiculously intertwined and why until the US employment picks up, ours can't either and they are slowing our rocket ship down.)

Its like tying a bottle rocket to a stake in the ground, it can fly around a lot, but unless the stake flies with it, its not going to go very far.

Very true, but at higher tax rates. And with economies that weren't affected by a full world economic crisis.

Same deal with your NDP.

Ow, we want the funk.

Ok I can't believe you know anything about Canadian politics because if you did you would know that the minumum wage is a provincial matter set by provincial policy. There is no federal minumum wage in Canada.

Linky: (lolwiki) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_wages_in_Canada

Something besides "Glurge Storytime With Gbaji"?


It is, however, what was actually said in the thread you keep referencing.


Cry more? Maybe find a source besides the Heritage Foundation or LifeNews or CNS News?


Now THERE'S a strawman!


Well, actually... no. You cry "What do you need?!" but I already offered a suggestion. I assume the reason you haven't tried to find any actual data on it is because it didn't match your preconceived ideas.


As much as your glurgy story and using your "friend" as "data" deserves, right?

This doesn't even make sense. The rise and fall of minumum wages has nothing to do with federal politics and everything to do with whose in power trying to prove what in the provinces.

I mean if you had tried to claim the conservative gov't ship building contracts had such and such of an effect in the provinces I would be willing to concede that, but to claim that minimum wages went up because of federal gov't policies is ludicrous.

I'll give an example - the minumum wage just started going up (AFTER A TEN YEAR FREEZE) in B.C. - do you know why? Because it was frozen for 10 years and even chamber of commerces had started to tell the Liberals to raise it because it was unfair. They didn't start raising it because of some imaginary good policy of the federal conservatives but because even their supporters were starting to think they were a little heartless to keep BC with the lowest minumum wage and highest cost of living in Canada.

Yea, I'm familiar with the NDP in Nova Scotia, I'm suffering through their poor economic decisions right now, which included raising taxes by taking back the 2% decrease in the GST. They stole that idea from a Liberal.


As for Mulroney, he was a tool. I wasn't speaking about him, because I wasn't defending the Cons in general, but how Harper has guided us through a crisis rather well.