I suppose you could say the same about an ISO quality management system, but you won't.
Harper predicts pain at gas pumps if Layton is in power
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
I suppose you could say the same about an ISO quality management system, but you won't.
Yep, write down what you do, and only do what is written down. This is a rule right out of the Union books. And I thank them for it.
You should ask yourself, 'were the Liberals not in power before the conservatives', would the deficit have been even greater?
The answer to that question is undoubtedly, yes.
OK, just one example:
According to the Swiss economist Prof. Grin of the University of Geneva in his Rapport Grin presented to the Hight Council for Education (a French-government body) at its request, the EU subsidizes the UK economy (the wealthiest of the US economies) from 17 to 18 thousand million euros annually via its language-education industry (textbook and dictionary purchases, foreign students, 'linguistic tourism'. etc.). the same report suggests that if the EU switched to an easier language like Esperanto, that it could save the EU 25 thousand million euros a year (in other words, it would save the EU more than the UK economy would lose, meaning a net gain overall).
(http://lingvo.org/GRIN_en.pdf)
Though the idea might sound crazy, consider that ministries of education have added Esperanto to the list of languages from which pupils could choose to fulfill second-language requirements for high school graduation in Italy (1993), the Australian State of Queensland (1997), Poland, Hungary, and the UK (2000), and Croatia (2001). consider too that UNESCO has also passed resolutions in favour of Esperanto in 1954 (still in effect), with an attempt at strengthening it again in 2001 (http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001240/124020e.pdf)
Accordingly, we could simply propose to the UN that:
1. It gather together experts in related fields to either adopt one of the existing languages or create a new one to stand as the UN's sole official language in future, and in the mean time,
2. gradually replace English and French with Esperanto as a temporary and partial solution. For example, pass a resolution requiring all UN ambassadors born 1 year or later from the day the resolution is passed to know one of the new official language of the UN (i.e. Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Mandarin Chinese and Esperanto), while those born prior would be required to know one of the current official languages (i.e. English, French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic, and Mandarin Chinese).
This combination of long-term and short-term strategies would be a highly economical, rational and research-based strategy to help poor countries not by taking money from rich countries to give to poor countries, but rather by making a small modification to the prestige status of languages at the UN to gradually reduce pressure on the English-language industry abroad, so as to slow the flow of wealth from poorer countries to wealthier ones in the first place. This reduction of the international prestige status of English and French on the world stage could also increase interest among Canada's first Nations to study their own languages rather than French or English as a second language.
Ironically enough, this strategy would in fact involve not an increase in spending, but a spending reduction, as the UN's translation and interpretation costs at least at the UN General Assembly level, would gradually be reduced by 1/6th (owing to a reduction of the UN's official languages from 6 to 5), and possibly more owing to one language being much easier to learn (according to research, Esperanto is at absolute minimum 3 times easier to learn than any national language, and even multiple times easier than some languages depending on the language you're comparing it to).
So here you'd have a fiscally responsible yet socially progressive policy, both at the same time.
Of course one can come up with plenty of other examples of policies that would involve a minor structural change resulting in reduced costs, increased efficiency, and more social justice all at the same time. The policy change above would be but one example of such structural changes.
And, even if it doesn't work, keep doing the same thing, the same way, until someone tells you to do it differently.
ISO9000. Been there, done that.
Didn't we just come out of a total war and the world's economy was in ruins. At the time we were the #3 sea power after the US and USSR. If it wasn't for the post WW II growth, Canada would have had serious economic problems managing that level of debt.
Spending more money than you have or staying within your means isn't left or right. That's called fiscal responsibility.
Tommy Douglas is a good example of a fiscally responsible lefty. George W. Bush is an example of a fiscally irresponsible righty.
The only reason why Canada is in good shape relative to other Western nations is that we didn't de-regulate our banks like the US and Europe. As a result our banks could not assume the same level of risk as US or European banks. Clinton actually started US bank de-regulation in the US. Guess who was pushing for bank deregulation in Canada?
Harper government pushed financial deregulation | rabble.ca
If the Subprime Mortgage crisis occurred after Harper had a chance to implement his bank de-regulation agenda, we'd be just as screwed as the Americans and Europeans.
I'm all for eliminating minimum wage, once we guarantee a minimum standard of living to all Canadians like they do in Sweden. But ending minimum wage without a safety net first would be a cruel disaster for the poor.
I'm against the government giving people money. I support the government making the basic necessities free. (Basic food, clothing, shelter as well as all education including university)
Last edited:
At the cash only place it was $3.87. So on average around here it is about $3.97.
And a bunch of what you buy comes from the refinery right here, that I can see from my office.
lets me ask you a mock interview question "How would you cut corners to meet a deadline?"
How you answer will tell me if you understand ISO2005
I dont follow your thread of posts anymore, are you saying that the Liberals had a hand in creating the economic disaster? because we know that the economic stimulus package didn't happen during those years, ie your time line is a bit screwed up.
No, they had a hand in curbing the effect of the recession. Essentially what conservatives are now taking credit for.
Not really. Didn't Martin have the books balanced before the Harper gang took over?
For the most part, i agree with what you're saying there. I have no qualms about high taxes and heavy government investment in education, job training, etc. as long as the money is spent efficiently. I have no issue with democratization of the workplace either. In fact for the most part I am for those things.
However, we could say that Sweden's social system functions within economic constraints, not separate from it. When the NDP comes across as anti-free trade and for wage floors, etc. It's going against basic economic principles.
In Sweden, there is a quality safety net, but at the same time, while in good economic times workers can negotiate wage increases via co-determination laws, in bad economic times they can also negotiate wage reductions too. Briefly put, Sweden's social-democrats are pragmatic idealists, idealistic in their goals but realistic in their expectations and means to those idealistic ends. They also make no pretentions about their social programmes being expensive and that sometimes society will need to take wage reductions to save jobs and fight inflation. It's a very different kind of socialism from what we find in Canada. It's more of a partnership between workers and business rather than conflict all the time.
now you are saying that the martin balance books caused the economic 'disaster'
please remember what the original point is.
Yes. They gave the conservatives a $13 Billiion surplus.
And now we're in a $30 Billion deficit.
If Paul Martin were in my riding, I don't know if I'd vote for him necessarily, but I do know I'd trust him at least on fiscal management if nothing else.
Harpoer and Flaherty? Forget it.
Harpoer and Flaherty? Forget it.