Socialist Canada's Economy the Envy of the World

[rotary]

I'm not backpedaling. Go read my first post in this thread, which states exactly what I did above. Their size has nothing to do with it; how they're managed does.

I'll ask, again, if size has nothing to do with it, why mention their limited assets in comparison to large 'risk taking' American banks on two separate occasions?

 

[Corny]

^^^
I blame it on a general failure of the US Dept of Education to properly regulate the education of the American public.

regulate? that sounds commu .. er .. socia .. whatever .. LIST!
don't regulate, let evolution take it's course. after all .. there is no such thing as evolution

but now this post is totally offtopic and I withdraw myself from this thread

 

[JB3]

I'll ask, again, if size has nothing to do with it, why mention their limited assets in comparison to large 'risk taking' American banks on two separate occasions?

Go read the context of my post again. I brought in size for reference only.

 

[rotary]

Go read the context of my post again. I brought in size for reference only.

Yes, reference to size vs ability to shoulder risk.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

It was more stalinism then communism or socialism...

Of course it was...

You socialists are pathetic.

 

[MercuryJones]

Of course it was...

You socialists are pathetic.

Define SOCIALISM please.

 

[MercuryJones]

[Quoted post: Removed by Moderator]

I'm sure it's awkward for you to be held to the things you say.

But you already made clear your fantasy that there is a global socialist conspiracy spanning generations, including even our closest allies.

So now I'm asking you to please define SOCIALISM.

 

[Edward Twinkletoes]

I think you thinking of Fascism and "National Socialism" which are both far different from a true socialist society which has never been seen by man.

For the reason that socialism gives those who control things so much power they don't want to give it up. It's a tyrant's dream come true.

 

[MercuryJones]

For the reason that socialism gives those who control things so much power they don't want to give it up. It's a tyrant's dream come true.

And how do you define "socialism"?

 

[MercuryJones]

[Quoted post: Removed by Moderator]

Personal attacks are a poor excuse for a cogent position.

Are you unable to define socialism?

 

[Jack Springer]

The truth is that true socialism can never exist. Man will never be equal with others.

There will always be people who will not settle for being equal. It just doesn't work that way.

Free enterprise on the other hand works very well with some controls. However when controls go too far or too little problems can occur.

In socialism the ones that want the power generally opt to become dictators.

 

[MercuryJones]

In socialism the ones that want the power generally opt to become dictators.

Please define socialism, and please cite 5 socialist nations. Thank you.

 

[laikaNYC]

Please define socialism, and please cite 5 socialist nations. Thank you.

Socialism is not a form of government, It is an economic system. But a number of European countries, especially the Scandinavian ones are considered to be socialist democracies. Look at Greece, they're rioting like savages because the government can't hand feed them anymore.

Thatcher cleverly said "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

 

[BostonPirate]

she also cried in public when the people of her country heaved her out of office and replaced her with labor.

 

[laikaNYC]

she also cried in public when the people of her country heaved her out of office and replaced her with labor.

She was succeeded by a fellow Conservative; one of her Cabinet Ministers, John Major.

 

[BostonPirate]

She was succeeded by a fellow Conservative; one of her Cabinet Ministers, John Major.

you are correct. thanks for pointing that out.

I don't like this trend of calling something you don't like socialist or nazi or terrorist or whatever.

And I am not a fan of Ms Thatcher.

 

[MercuryJones]

Socialism is not a form of government, It is an economic system.

Indeed!

But a number of European countries, especially the Scandinavian ones are considered to be socialist democracies. Look at Greece, they're rioting like savages because the government can't hand feed them anymore.

They're behaving like Greeks, IMO. They're an expressive culture.

Of course we're in a global economic crisis, impacting many nations with many economic models How are those Scandinavian nations doing?

Thatcher cleverly said "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

Interesting, since Thatcher's nation has a troubling bit of rioting like savages, as I consider your earlier post.

 

[bankside]

Canadians understand that a free market does not require a deregulated market. It only requires fair rules and a level playing field. But once those things are in place, we're quite keen on capitalist competition. Indeed most of our economy is in the hands of the private sector, and has been for decades now.

We aren't at all socialist. Don't quite see how that aapplies.

 

[bankside]

And yet Canada is probably to the right of most OECD countries in terms of its market orientation. I'm not sure the world would be envying us for socialism.

Of the other OECD countries, only maybe the new countries joining the EU (Poland etc) and the United States would be further right. Oh, and maybe Australia but I think that is only a mater of degree.

But even places like the states is not all that capitalist.
They have employment insurance. They have welfare. Taxes pay for schools. They're about to have health care. There is huge government intervention in the economy (not just during the recession - even in good years they prop up manufacturing with military contracts).

 

[JB3]

Droid, I'll let Jockboy answer this.



Jockboy, I'm so glad to see you I could hug you.

What you're seeing here with Droid's posts is a textbook example of the cognitive dissonance we've discussed.

Poor Droid's wiggling like a worm, desperately trying to make the contents of the article fit somehow in his world view...From a psychological viewpoint, it's interesting to watch.

@Droid: Droid, my good friend, the reason the Canadian banks weren't exposed to those kinds of loans was because....they were heavily regulated.

Again, no it was not. The culture of the company was very different, because they're canadian. You can assign that to regulation if you'd like, but I don't (and the article doesn't) believe thats the reason why.