Author Topic: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread  (Read 503153 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 181,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,118
  • Freespeecher
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1600 on: October 07, 2016, 19:36:42 »
Anyone who voted for the Liberals on the basis of policy should receive a mental health examination immediately.

Like everything else, projects and initiatives will be examined for the amount of votes or kickback they can generate on an individual basis, not on how well they support any sort of overarching philosophy (even if only in the breach). If you were looking for that, you could have voted for the Conservatives or NDP, Canada's two major transformative parties.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Brad Sallows

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 50,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,417
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1601 on: October 07, 2016, 22:20:19 »
"Trudeau government approves Petronas' $36-billion LNG project in BC"

And the pipeline to connect sources to the delivery terminal is in what state at present?
That which does not kill me has made a grave tactical error.

Omnia praesidia vestra capta sunt nobis.

"It is a damned heavy blow; but whining don't help."

"Yet another in a long line of books about how libertarians are plotting to enslave you by devolving power to the individual and leaving you alone" - Warren Meyer, author of Coyote Blog

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 99,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,712
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1602 on: October 25, 2016, 17:07:11 »
PRGT has applied for early access works and has done most of the route survey, now they wait for the PNW LNG final investment decision

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,984
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,115
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1603 on: January 16, 2017, 09:47:59 »
Also, apparently Canada is doomed. With the trifecta of having lower corporate taxes than Canada, no carbon tax and the border tax implemented on good imported into the USA Canada is going to look a lot less competitive in a very short order. 35 percent to 15 percent. 10 per cent lower than the federal-provincial corporate tax rate in Canada.

Ouch.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 163,940
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,687
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1604 on: January 16, 2017, 11:12:41 »
The trifecta you describe pales in comparison to the effectiveness of McGWynnty's impact on the soaring cost of energy and doing business in Ontario. :nod:

Regards
G2G

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 170,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,523
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1605 on: January 16, 2017, 11:51:01 »
Uh oh...

Trump Claims America Should Never Have Given Canada Its Independence

http://www.burrardstreetjournal.com/trump-canada-independence-was-mistake/


"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,984
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,115
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1606 on: January 16, 2017, 11:57:12 »
The trifecta you describe pales in comparison to the effectiveness of McGWynnty's impact on the soaring cost of energy and doing business in Ontario. :nod:

Regards
G2G
That's fine, Quebec to the east has cheap electricity and plenty of manufacturing capacity. Amazon picked Montreal as the location for its new cloud computing data center recently citing low electricity costs.

Jobs can shift east or west in Canada based on things like taxes or electricity costs, with no net loss for Canada overall, the fear now is jobs Canada wide shifting south due to the trifecta mentioned earlier.
Uh oh...

Trump Claims America Should Never Have Given Canada Its Independence

http://www.burrardstreetjournal.com/trump-canada-independence-was-mistake/
That's funny. I knew about the Onion, did not know about BS journal.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2017, 12:00:27 by Altair »
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline Altair

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 21,984
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,115
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1607 on: January 23, 2017, 07:46:31 »
So TPP is dead and NAFTA is to be "renegotiated"

Hard times coming for Canada it appears.
Someday I'll care about milpoints.

Offline sailorprivateer

  • New Member
  • **
  • 800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1608 on: January 27, 2017, 17:24:46 »
GM just moved 600 jobs from Ingersoll, ON to Mexico. I think this is just the beginning of outsourcing jobs from Canada now we have a combined jacked-up hydro, labour, carbon tax, and etc.

Recruiting Centre: Hamilton
Regular/Reserve: Regular
Officer/NCM: NCM
Trade Choice 1: Communicator Research Operator
Applied: June 12th, 2016
First Contact: June 15th, 2016
CFAT: July 8th, 2016 [PASSED]
Medical: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Interview: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Merit List: n/a
Position Offered: February 14th, 2017
Enrolment/Swearing-In: March 16, 2017
BMQ: March 27th, 2017

Offline QV

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 217
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1609 on: January 27, 2017, 23:03:59 »
GM just moved 600 jobs from Ingersoll, ON to Mexico. I think this is just the beginning of outsourcing jobs from Canada now we have a combined jacked-up hydro, labour, carbon tax, and etc.

They won't take those jobs out of the US because Trump, but Canada has Trudeau so we're just begging to be crushed.

I wonder how many of those 600 voted Liberal last election?

Liberanos were counting on other world leaders to gouge their populace with more and more taxes, but they have been Trumped. 

Offline sailorprivateer

  • New Member
  • **
  • 800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1610 on: January 28, 2017, 04:01:35 »
They won't take those jobs out of the US because Trump, but Canada has Trudeau so we're just begging to be crushed.

I wonder how many of those 600 voted Liberal last election?

Liberanos were counting on other world leaders to gouge their populace with more and more taxes, but they have been Trumped.
In my opinion, they want to focus in Latin America as they are thriving there. Here's a 2009 article from LA Times:

Quote
BOGOTA, COLOMBIA, AND LOS ANGELES — For all its miscues at home, General Motors Corp. has built a powerhouse operation in Latin America, where its fuel-efficient vehicles could play a crucial role in returning the battered company to health.

Since it filed for bankruptcy a month ago, the automaker has been striking deals to shed much of its operations, including its Hummer, Saturn and Saab brands and its Opel division in Europe. GM is closing more North American factories, laying off workers and slashing its U.S. dealership ranks.

But despite rumors this spring, GM's thriving Latin America operations are likely to escape the ax, analysts said.

If my assumption is right, GM Ingersoll workers are mostly live in Oxford County and some in London area. The former is under Oxford riding and it has been represented by a Conservative MP since 2004. While London has 4 ridings: Both London North Centre and London West ridings are under Liberal MP, London-Fanshawe is under an NDP MP, Elgin-Middlesex-London is under a Conservative MP. Then again, it's only my assumption that they may be some workers from London and don't have info on how much GM workers are from the city. Purely speculation on my side.
Recruiting Centre: Hamilton
Regular/Reserve: Regular
Officer/NCM: NCM
Trade Choice 1: Communicator Research Operator
Applied: June 12th, 2016
First Contact: June 15th, 2016
CFAT: July 8th, 2016 [PASSED]
Medical: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Interview: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Merit List: n/a
Position Offered: February 14th, 2017
Enrolment/Swearing-In: March 16, 2017
BMQ: March 27th, 2017

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 423,545
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,185
  • Crewman
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1611 on: January 28, 2017, 09:24:05 »

I wonder how many of those 600 voted Liberal last election?


It depends on whether or not they were "Liberal Lifers" or "Diehard Union Followers" vise non-partisan or Conservative/NDP/Green/etc. Party Card Holders.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline sailorprivateer

  • New Member
  • **
  • 800
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1612 on: January 28, 2017, 20:45:17 »
It depends on whether or not they were "Liberal Lifers" or "Diehard Union Followers" vise non-partisan or Conservative/NDP/Green/etc. Party Card Holders.
Remember when Trudeau got a standing ovation when he showed up at a Unifor conference? lmfao... Who knew 5 months later their 600 members will be out of work this summer.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/news/trudeau-gets-standing-ovation-while-outlining-labour-priorities-at-unifor-conference/vi-BBvZXi4

Recruiting Centre: Hamilton
Regular/Reserve: Regular
Officer/NCM: NCM
Trade Choice 1: Communicator Research Operator
Applied: June 12th, 2016
First Contact: June 15th, 2016
CFAT: July 8th, 2016 [PASSED]
Medical: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Interview: July 27th, 2016 [PASSED]
Merit List: n/a
Position Offered: February 14th, 2017
Enrolment/Swearing-In: March 16, 2017
BMQ: March 27th, 2017

Offline Cdn Blackshirt

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 10,600
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,321
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1613 on: January 29, 2017, 13:18:11 »
Heard Unifor rep interviewed on radio and he was pissed.

He said a couple of things about GM's record profits, but his main point was that until Canadian consumers get in GM's face, this will continue.  He added the most frustrating part is that GM continues to shift production to Mexico where they don'the even buy GMonday, much less the trucks that are the issue in this case.

It may be against Trudeau's sensibilities but he should be trying to get on same side as Trump.with China and Mexico on other side, otherwise I think Canadian manufacturing is about to get destroyed.
IMPORTANT - 'Blackshirt' is a reference to Nebraska Cornhuskers Football and not naziism.   National Champions '70, '71, '94, '95 and '97.    Go Huskers!!!!

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 423,545
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,185
  • Crewman
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1614 on: January 29, 2017, 13:50:10 »

It may be against Trudeau's sensibilities but he should be trying to get on same side as Trump.with China and Mexico on other side, otherwise I think Canadian manufacturing is about to get destroyed.

That barn door has been open for quite some time now.  It may already be too late to close it.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline YZT580

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 479
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1615 on: January 29, 2017, 20:06:35 »
With the price of electricity and a carbon tax as well, there is little chance of industry remaining competitive in this country.  Expect more closures and more layoffs as industries relocate to a more welcoming environment.  For proof, take a drive around Belgium or France and count the shuttered factories and empty parking lots at Opel and others.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 181,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,118
  • Freespeecher
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1616 on: April 21, 2017, 20:19:28 »
Even Greens are not fooled:

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/04/17/bill-mckibben-calls-out-green-hypocrisy/

Quote
Bill McKibben Calls Out Green Hypocrisy

Everyone’s favorite environmentalist Bill McKibben ranted against Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau, scolding the public for “swooning” for the leader who, in McKibben’s own words, “sure is cute” and who “appears to have recently quit a boy band.” Trudeau’s sin? Green hypocrisy. McKibben writes for the Guardian:

Trudeau says all the right things, over and over. He’s got no Scott Pruitts in his cabinet: everyone who works for him says the right things. Indeed, they specialize in getting others to say them too – it was Canadian diplomats, and the country’s environment minister Catherine McKenna, who pushed at the Paris climate talks for a tougher-than-expected goal: holding the planet’s rise in temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

But those words are meaningless if you keep digging up more carbon and selling it to people to burn, and that’s exactly what Trudeau is doing. He’s hard at work pushing for new pipelines through Canada and the US to carry yet more oil out of Alberta’s tarsands, which is one of the greatest climate disasters on the planet.

Last month, speaking at a Houston petroleum industry gathering, he got a standing ovation from the oilmen for saying “No country would find 173bn barrels of oil in the ground and just leave them there.”

McKibben savages Trudeau but stops short of the final truth: none of the world’s important leaders back the green agenda. The difference is between the sly hypocrites who pretend to be green for the cameras, and the Trump types who don’t bother. He seems more bothered by the former, but the truth is that neither type of leader is sympathetic to the green cause that McKibben embodies.

But from McKibben’s point of view, there is even worse news. The hypocrites reflect what voters want: they want to feel that something nice and green is being done, but they don’t vote for parties who are willing to make the huge changes McKibben and his colleagues claim are necessary.

This is what we mean at TAI when we say that the conventional green agenda is a Dead Man Walking and that all the green activists and all the climate diplomats won’t move the needle.

We think there is a better alternative: not to deny the dangers of climate change but to develop a new green agenda that could actually command enough political support to bring real change. That isn’t as hard as it looks; the information revolution is producing a Great Decoupling, with economic growth increasingly unrelated to resource intensive manufacturing and other greenhouse promoting activities. American emissions dropped three percent last year even as the economy grew, not because of green policymaking (then-president Obama’s Clean Power Plan never had a chance to go into effect), but rather because a flood of cheap shale gas displaced coal as our nation’s primary source of power. The United States is showing that you can grow, and do it green.

For reasons that are essentially non-rational and even religious, McKibben and the Hair Shirt Green lobby he represents will never buy this, but the anti-tech, dystopian greens aren’t the only people who care about the future of our beautiful planet.

In many ways McKibben is a more clear-sighted and honest observer than the gassy green mainstream media and Davos groupies who fall for the Trudeau hypocrites and vacuous Paris accords, but his path still leads only to futility and despair. If the green movement and the human race are to flourish, we must find a better way forward, and we need fewer hypocrites and more smart greens to lead the way.

Of course most governments (including ours) are beholden to various interest groups who get their power and privilege from how things are set up today; don't expect decoupling to come from government mandates, indeed mandated "green" energy is what is driving up costs and decreasing reliability. "Decoupling" will likely come from individuals and industry disconnecting from the grid IOT have a reliable, less expensive source of energy (co generation and micro generation in this generation of technology).
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 181,780
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,118
  • Freespeecher
Re: Making Canada Relevant Again- The Economic Super-Thread
« Reply #1617 on: July 09, 2017, 13:22:10 »
While the specific example is from the United State, the general case is proof positive that Kenyan economics in all its forms (including stimulus spending, deficits etc. simply does not work. (Remember, this is distinct from borrowing money to invest, politicians are notorious for deeming whatever they spend is an "investment", even when it is not). Perhaps the only positive thing that running $30 billion deficits into the foreseeable future is wealth destruction on that scale will be the deflationary counterweight to the inflationary effects of pumping vast amounts of money into a slowly growing, stagnant or shrinking economy.

https://fee.org/articles/cash-for-clunkers-was-a-complete-failure/

Quote
Cash for Clunkers Was a Complete Failure
Daniel J. Mitchell
Thursday, July 06, 2017

Keynesian economics is fundamentally misguided because it focuses on how to encourage more spending when the real goal should be to figure out policies that result in more income.

Consumption doesn’t drive growth, it’s a consequence of growth.

This is one of the reasons I wish people focused more on “gross domestic income,” which is a measure of how we earn our national income (i.e., wages, small business income, corporate profits, etc) rather than on “gross domestic product,” which is a measure of how our national income gets allocated (consumption, investment, government, etc).

Simply stated, Keynesians put the cart before the horse. Consumption doesn’t drive growth, it’s a consequence of growth.

But let’s set all that aside because we have new evidence that Keynesian stimulus schemes aren’t even very good at artificially goosing consumption.

The Impact of Cash for Clunkers

Three economists (from MIT and Tex A&M) have crunched the numbers and discovered that Obama’s Cash-for-Clunkers scheme back in 2009 was a failure even by Keynesian standards.

The abstract of the study tells you everything you need to know.

The 2009 Cash for Clunkers program aimed to stimulate consumer spending in the new automobile industry, which was experiencing disproportionate reductions in demand and employment during the Great Recession. Exploiting program eligibility criteria in a regression discontinuity design, we show nearly 60 percent of the subsidies went to households who would have purchased during the two-month program anyway; the rest accelerated sales by no more than eight months. Moreover, the program’s fuel efficiency restrictions shifted purchases toward vehicles that cost on average $5,000 less. On net, Cash for Clunkers significantly reduced total new vehicle spending over the ten month period.

This is remarkable. At the time, the most obvious criticism of the scheme was that it would simply alter the timing of purchases.

And scholars the following year confirmed that the program didn’t have any long-run impact.

But now we find out that there was impact, but it was negative. Here’s the most relevant graph from the study. It shows actual vehicle spending and estimated spending in the absence of the program.

Bad Policy

For readers who like wonky details, here’s the explanatory text for Figure 7 from the study.

The effect of the program on cumulative new vehicle spending by CfC-eligible households is shown in Figure 7. The figure shows actual spending and estimates of counterfactual spending if there had been no CfC program. Cumulative spending under the CfC program was larger than counterfactual spending for the months immediately after the program. However, by February 1 the counterfactual expenditures becomes larger and by April has grown to be $4.0 billion more than actual expenditures under the program. It is difficult to make the case that the brief acceleration in spending justifies the loss of $4.0 billion in revenues to the auto industry, for two reasons. First, we calculate that in order to justify the estimated longer-term reduction in cumulative spending to boost spending for a few months, one would need a discount rate of 208 percent. Given the expected (and realized) duration of the recession, it seems difficult to argue in favor of such a discount rate. Second, we note that Cash for Clunkers seems especially unattractive compared to a counterfactual stimulus policy that left out the environmental component, which also would have accelerated purchases for some households without reducing longer-term spending.

By the way, the authors point out that Cash-for-Clunkers wasn’t even good environmental policy.

One could also argue that this decline in industry revenue over less than a year could be justified to the extent the program offered a cost-effective environmental benefit. Unfortunately, the existing evidence overwhelmingly indicates that this program was a costly way of reducing environmental damage. For example, Knittel [2009] estimates that the most optimistic implied cost of carbon reduced by the program is $237 per ton, while Li et al. [2013] estimate the cost per ton as between $92 and $288. These implied cost of carbon figures are much larger than the social costs of carbon of $33 per ton (in 2007 dollars) estimated by the IWG on the Social Cost of Carbon [Interagency Working Group, 2013].

So let’s see where we stand. The program was bad fiscal policy, bad economic policy, and bad environmental policy. The trifecta of Obamanomics. No wonder the United States suffered the weakest recovery of the post-WWII era.
(/quote]

In Canada, the average family of 4 spends between 40-44% of their income on taxes and government fees. Now some of the money spent by the government pays for essential services like the police and Armed Forces, and some actually does get spent on infrastructure like roads and rails, but the vast majority is used to intervene in markets, social welfare spending and social engineering, which may not seem as egregious as "Cash for clunkers", but is as counterproductive. Imagine if the government simply didn't spend that money, but left it in your or my pockets instead?
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.