Bright Spark
Posts: 324 
Location: calgary,ab
Location: calgary,ab
July 6th, 2006, 09:51 PM
As for the government spending more money hear at home I do tend to agree with you that the government needs to spend more money at home. However I also think that helping other countries is important and I think we could help out more.I guess the question I must ask myself is "When do we say the government has spent enough?" I no matter what there will always be someone who says "The government does not spend enough."
I agree with LRG, our homeless people in Canada live much better then people in Africa. At least here in Canada they have access to clean drinking water and one meal a day.
Quoting
They already pay for more then half the tutition. There are always ways to get money for school. If you are living on welfare you would probably qualify for student loans and fanancial aid scholorships. If you are going to go this route make sure you actually make a career for yourself or you will never be able to pay back your loan money.
Yes, the government could spend the money to reduce tuition fees so that people could go to university and have a career.
As for the government spending more money hear at home I do tend to agree with you that the government needs to spend more money at home. However I also think that helping other countries is important and I think we could help out more.I guess the question I must ask myself is "When do we say the government has spent enough?" I no matter what there will always be someone who says "The government does not spend enough."
I agree with LRG, our homeless people in Canada live much better then people in Africa. At least here in Canada they have access to clean drinking water and one meal a day.
sick and twisted
Posts: 2,355 
Location: Backwater, Ontario.
Location: Backwater, Ontario.
July 7th, 2006, 06:34 AM
Aww shucks Lil'Runnin, ya shouldn't a
Actually, I didn't request it, just mentioned that it was too large a topic to discuss as an interjection, but, seein as how we're here:
Over the years it has been fairly well documented that a great deal of the money donated to (seems to be mostly) African countries winds up in the pockets of some tin pot dictator or his family or his buddies.
Or the money is siphoned off as it trickles through the various bureaucracies involved. Bottom line seems to be that the most needy get the least.
Should we continue to give. Yes. Should there be the political will to
make sure that the money goes to the most needy. Most definately. So far, this doesn't seem to exist except in a few cases. Canadians drilling wells and employing basic methods such as hand pumps to ensure safe water to African communities is one example. No doubt there are others. I'm no expert on Africa. Know very little about it as a matter of fact; except that the division of wealth is skewed terribly.
Some African countries hold their populations hostage. If we don't give, they starve. If we give, the pres. buys a new personal jet, or new arms for his personal army. Thats the stuff we read about, and it leads to very deep cynicism with regards to donating. Am I way off here (wish)?
Canada eh? Ok, lets help Canadians. No one disagrees with that. Probably an increase in welfare wouldn't hurt. The ones that use it as a tool to get off welfare will do just that,and they should be encouraged to do so. The ones that don't, won't, and we're stuck with them. It makes no sense to increase the rates then make the rules so draconian that no one qualifies.
Back quite a few years ago when welfare rates were higher (in Ontario at least), I don't remember too many people quitting jobs to go on it. Probably some did. Know of any, personally?
IMHO the whole "help the people" thing has to START with a family which is able to educate their children, and have the desire to do this. Then the education has to be MADE AVAILABLE. And the education has to include TRADE COURSES as well as the much vaunted UNIVERISTY education. Everything comes from a supportive family, and a supportive government (we used to have a great apprenticeship system). On and on it's possible to go: bla bla bla.
People seem to be shellshocked these days, by the meaness inherent in our system. Long hours, low pay, McJobs, no job security, no benefits or pensions. Not exactly a way to encourage a population to excellence. Good way to pissem off. We are starting to reap this lovely whirlwind as the kids grow older, and we seem to be building more jails. This we get from NOT INVESTING in our people, but rather, using them as a commodity to provide wealth for the wealthy. Will only work for so long.
OK, just my opinions. I'm not universtity educated and my beliefs are based on life experience, access to a public library, and the internet. Help others. Yep. Help Canadians. Yep.
Go figure.
Aww shucks Lil'Runnin, ya shouldn't a
Actually, I didn't request it, just mentioned that it was too large a topic to discuss as an interjection, but, seein as how we're here:
Over the years it has been fairly well documented that a great deal of the money donated to (seems to be mostly) African countries winds up in the pockets of some tin pot dictator or his family or his buddies.
Or the money is siphoned off as it trickles through the various bureaucracies involved. Bottom line seems to be that the most needy get the least.
Should we continue to give. Yes. Should there be the political will to
make sure that the money goes to the most needy. Most definately. So far, this doesn't seem to exist except in a few cases. Canadians drilling wells and employing basic methods such as hand pumps to ensure safe water to African communities is one example. No doubt there are others. I'm no expert on Africa. Know very little about it as a matter of fact; except that the division of wealth is skewed terribly.
Some African countries hold their populations hostage. If we don't give, they starve. If we give, the pres. buys a new personal jet, or new arms for his personal army. Thats the stuff we read about, and it leads to very deep cynicism with regards to donating. Am I way off here (wish)?
Canada eh? Ok, lets help Canadians. No one disagrees with that. Probably an increase in welfare wouldn't hurt. The ones that use it as a tool to get off welfare will do just that,and they should be encouraged to do so. The ones that don't, won't, and we're stuck with them. It makes no sense to increase the rates then make the rules so draconian that no one qualifies.
Back quite a few years ago when welfare rates were higher (in Ontario at least), I don't remember too many people quitting jobs to go on it. Probably some did. Know of any, personally?
IMHO the whole "help the people" thing has to START with a family which is able to educate their children, and have the desire to do this. Then the education has to be MADE AVAILABLE. And the education has to include TRADE COURSES as well as the much vaunted UNIVERISTY education. Everything comes from a supportive family, and a supportive government (we used to have a great apprenticeship system). On and on it's possible to go: bla bla bla.
People seem to be shellshocked these days, by the meaness inherent in our system. Long hours, low pay, McJobs, no job security, no benefits or pensions. Not exactly a way to encourage a population to excellence. Good way to pissem off. We are starting to reap this lovely whirlwind as the kids grow older, and we seem to be building more jails. This we get from NOT INVESTING in our people, but rather, using them as a commodity to provide wealth for the wealthy. Will only work for so long.
OK, just my opinions. I'm not universtity educated and my beliefs are based on life experience, access to a public library, and the internet. Help others. Yep. Help Canadians. Yep.
Go figure.
Metal King
Posts: 938
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
Location: Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
July 7th, 2006, 08:05 AM
Good post, old'n
Much of what you brought up doesn't usually get mentioned. Another thing about the whole welfare-BAD argument that never gets mentioned is that people's MPC and MPS (marginal propensities to concume vs save) are very important in driving the economy, the more money that is pumped directly back into the economy and not saved, the better things are in econo-math or whatever you wanna call the hokum that is economics- well, oddly enough, people on welfare (again, not my fave name for the system but oh well) have a 0% MPS, and as such are the most efficient consumers- it's like the government actually pumping up the economy directly, and actually good for the economy as a whole- especially when ya can get away with giving folks 500 bucks a month to "live" on and still manage to vilify the recipients
And as for foreign aid, I think much of it that is not actually, physically administered to the actual folks it is aimed at amounts to little more than corporate welfare- look at how much money we give to China every year fer cryin out loud, I thought that country had a booming economy, why don't the folks making the money THERE contribute enough to the society from which they profit so immensely??
And a disclaimer, I'm in the same boat as old'n so far as I don't have any formal "training" in these matters, just a lot of self-teaching and plenty of empiricism, stuff like that (oh and our library isn't too good either so I stick to the 'net)
Good post, old'n
Much of what you brought up doesn't usually get mentioned. Another thing about the whole welfare-BAD argument that never gets mentioned is that people's MPC and MPS (marginal propensities to concume vs save) are very important in driving the economy, the more money that is pumped directly back into the economy and not saved, the better things are in econo-math or whatever you wanna call the hokum that is economics- well, oddly enough, people on welfare (again, not my fave name for the system but oh well) have a 0% MPS, and as such are the most efficient consumers- it's like the government actually pumping up the economy directly, and actually good for the economy as a whole- especially when ya can get away with giving folks 500 bucks a month to "live" on and still manage to vilify the recipients
And as for foreign aid, I think much of it that is not actually, physically administered to the actual folks it is aimed at amounts to little more than corporate welfare- look at how much money we give to China every year fer cryin out loud, I thought that country had a booming economy, why don't the folks making the money THERE contribute enough to the society from which they profit so immensely??
And a disclaimer, I'm in the same boat as old'n so far as I don't have any formal "training" in these matters, just a lot of self-teaching and plenty of empiricism, stuff like that (oh and our library isn't too good either so I stick to the 'net)
Member
Posts: 53
July 7th, 2006, 09:58 PM
Like I said, considering the fact that every Canadian has access to clean drinking water and at least one meal a day (soup kitchens),
well in today time and transcript (moncton paper) in big heading
POOR DRINKING WATER SAID CAUSING SICKNESS, DEATH IN OUR RESERVES
well let keep helping other countries and let our own die .....of dirty water which everyone says we do not have in Canada
ummmmmmm
Like I said, considering the fact that every Canadian has access to clean drinking water and at least one meal a day (soup kitchens),
well in today time and transcript (moncton paper) in big heading
POOR DRINKING WATER SAID CAUSING SICKNESS, DEATH IN OUR RESERVES
well let keep helping other countries and let our own die .....of dirty water which everyone says we do not have in Canada
ummmmmmm
