peapod said:
See, its that perspective again. From my point of view, he follows me around. Whatever, nice is as nice does. :twisted:
Can Canada Survive?
- Thread starter The Philosopher
- Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
See, its that perspective again. From my point of view, he follows me around. Whatever, nice is as nice does. :twisted:
Yes, everyone has their own presectives, nothing new there, I am only here for the name calling :wink:
peapod said:Yes, everyone has their own presectives, nothing new there, I am only here for the name calling :wink:
Thank you very much.
You wonder why we ship raw products to the US then buy it back as finished? That is exactly what happened in the 50s and 50s with the west shipping raw products to eastern canada, then having the finished products sent back west.
That's not exactly true though, is it? We milled flour here in Winnipeg. We also slaughtered our own cattle, hogs, and chickens. Dominion Malting, where the raw materials for your beer are prepared, has been in business in Winnipeg since the early part of the century. What we shipped east ws generally used in the east or sent to foreign (generally European or American) markets via the great lakes.
We did get cars shipped back to us, but then most of the steel etc came from mines in North Ontario, so you can't really claim that it was raw materials from the west.
Reverend Blair said:You wonder why we ship raw products to the US then buy it back as finished? That is exactly what happened in the 50s and 50s with the west shipping raw products to eastern canada, then having the finished products sent back west.
That's not exactly true though, is it? We milled flour here in Winnipeg. We also slaughtered our own cattle, hogs, and chickens. Dominion Malting, where the raw materials for your beer are prepared, has been in business in Winnipeg since the early part of the century. What we shipped east ws generally used in the east or sent to foreign (generally European or American) markets via the great lakes.
We did get cars shipped back to us, but then most of the steel etc came from mines in North Ontario, so you can't really claim that it was raw materials from the west.
Grain from Alberta, lumber from BC, to name two, were shipped east at the cost of the western producers, then the finished products were sent back west, at the cost of the western retailers. Freight paid both ways.
What finished products? Is flour a finished product? You had mills there too, I know. So did Regina. Baked goods don't keep well, so that's generally done locally. You also had your own beer industry, although you likely got your malt etc from Winnipeg...that's kind of specialized.
Lumber? Again, local mills could and did supply local need. Exports were generally raw goods, but they didn't come back. Your provincial government could have developed value-added industry, but chose not to.
Lumber? Again, local mills could and did supply local need. Exports were generally raw goods, but they didn't come back. Your provincial government could have developed value-added industry, but chose not to.
bluealberta said:Reverend Blair said:You wonder why we ship raw products to the US then buy it back as finished? That is exactly what happened in the 50s and 50s with the west shipping raw products to eastern canada, then having the finished products sent back west.
That's not exactly true though, is it? We milled flour here in Winnipeg. We also slaughtered our own cattle, hogs, and chickens. Dominion Malting, where the raw materials for your beer are prepared, has been in business in Winnipeg since the early part of the century. What we shipped east ws generally used in the east or sent to foreign (generally European or American) markets via the great lakes.
We did get cars shipped back to us, but then most of the steel etc came from mines in North Ontario, so you can't really claim that it was raw materials from the west.
Grain from Alberta, lumber from BC, to name two, were shipped east at the cost of the western producers, then the finished products were sent back west, at the cost of the western retailers. Freight paid both ways.
Maybe furniture was made here, but thats normal. You didnt have the population to support it. Wasnt profitable enough. Use your own capitalist system, and you will see that your logic doesnt stand.
Furniture is far different than construction lumber though. Most of our lumber has always been used as building products, and local demand had, until recently, been supplied from local mills.
The discussions I've read simply underscore how diverse this country is. Canada isn't just Quebec and the ROC. Newfoundlanders are completely different than BC. Ontario is completely different than New Bruinswick. Alberta is completely different than Saskatchewan. All have different histories and social needs. That is why the current system is unworkable. The Liberals feel the need to centralize their grip on power. This results in these ridiculous social programs that become political tools rather than tools to address the needs of the various constituents. The provinces are better placed to address the needs of the provinces. The federal role should be to get out of the way. Albertans know what daycare to send their children to. Quebecers know how to run their pension plan and BC knows how to manage their fisheries. The only way that we can ensure that Canada does survive is to stick to the Constitutions division of power. The federal government has no constitutional role in the delivery of health care (except natives and military/RCMP). So they should get out of the way other than ensuring that the provinces receive from them the proper amount of constitutionally mandated transfer payments. Canada can survive. What is needed is a recognition from central Canada that this country is evolving with shifting power bases. The fact that a PEI vote carries more weight than an Alberta vote (three to one) is undemorcratic. Same goes for the distribution of seats in the Senate. Changes need to be made but central Canada has so far been unwilling to change the current system. Until these issues are addressed Canada will be in constant crisis, which suits the Liberals just fine. I'm not talking about someything radical here. Respect the constitution, respect the differences that exist throughout the country and don't impose ideology from one portion of this large landmass onto others with different histories and needs.
The discussions I've read simply underscore how diverse this country is. Canada isn't just Quebec and the ROC. Newfoundlanders are completely different than BC. Ontario is completely different than New Bruinswick. Alberta is completely different than Saskatchewan. All have different histories and social needs. That is why the current system is unworkable. The Liberals feel the need to centralize their grip on power. This results in these ridiculous social programs that become political tools rather than tools to address the needs of the various constituents. The provinces are better placed to address the needs of the provinces. The federal role should be to get out of the way. Albertans know what daycare to send their children to. Quebecers know how to run their pension plan and BC knows how to manage their fisheries. The only way that we can ensure that Canada does survive is to stick to the Constitutions division of power. The federal government has no constitutional role in the delivery of health care (except natives and military/RCMP). So they should get out of the way other than ensuring that the provinces receive from them the proper amount of constitutionally mandated transfer payments. Canada can survive. What is needed is a recognition from central Canada that this country is evolving with shifting power bases. The fact that a PEI vote carries more weight than an Alberta vote (three to one) is undemorcratic. Same goes for the distribution of seats in the Senate. Changes need to be made but central Canada has so far been unwilling to change the current system. Until these issues are addressed Canada will be in constant crisis, which suits the Liberals just fine. I'm not talking about someything radical here. Respect the constitution, respect the differences that exist throughout the country and don't impose ideology from one portion of this large landmass onto others with different histories and needs.
Excellent points, Red, The framers of the constitution gave the provinces the powers in the constitution for a reason. Unfortunately, centrist governments like the Liberals want to take these powers away, and it is now to the point where many people do not know the division of powers as described in the constitution, things like health care, resource ownership, etc. Until this is understood, nothing will change, and Canada will continue to limp along like a puppy with a sore leg. Or a beaver with a sore tail, or.....you get the picture. Power to the Provinces! :lol:
To the original subject of this post I have to say that you aren't giving our system enough credit. It is in many ways flawed in my opinion on the more micro level but as far as the level of functionibility it is just fine.
Proportional representation won't do anything about the current state of affairs though I am not opposed to the idea really depending on what form it took.
I think in a lot of ways that minority governments are a positive thing. No one it seems is ever 100% happy but the right person and political circumstances can really make for good government. I don't think this will be the case with the current government though.
Proportional representation won't do anything about the current state of affairs though I am not opposed to the idea really depending on what form it took.
I think in a lot of ways that minority governments are a positive thing. No one it seems is ever 100% happy but the right person and political circumstances can really make for good government. I don't think this will be the case with the current government though.
Proportional representation won't do anything about the current state of affairs though I am not opposed to the idea really depending on what form it took.
I think it can address a lot of things, although it not specifically designed to. It will force a perpetual minority government though. That will necessitate cooperation between parties.
A spin off of that cooperation is that corruption becomes much less likely because members of the opposition would become more involved in the development and administration of programs.
PR would also force either fixed election dates, or at least some more equitable method of deciding when to have an election than we have now. That should go a long way to getting rid of the constant non-productive political grandstanding we see in the House now.