Canada v. US

pachebel, flushd, detano,

Thank you all for illustrating my points so well.

Pachebel takes the prize for a very compact combination of moral judgements, preaching, and accusing us of what he himself does so incessently. Impressive hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness.

For flushd - I truly sympathize with the after effects of the import ban on Canadian cattle producers. However America's export market suffered exactly the same injury with respect to all of our customers. The action we took was entirely in keeping with the actions of all trading nations following such BSE discoveries. (Recall what befell the UK a decade ago.) Had the situation been reversed I'm quite sure Canada would have done the same -- it is the only effective way to contain the spread of the disease. I have seen other references from Canadians that the BSE case in question "really" came from the U.S. Frankly, I doin't know what this is intended to mean. The cow in question was indeed imported from Canada. I agree the disease could occur here as well, but the only effective way to contain any outbreak is to isolate the source, wherever it occurs - and this one occurred in Canada. Frankly, I am surprised to see such indifference on the part of Canadians to the attitudes of their largest customer in the world regarding the products you export to us.

detano -- Evidently you take great pleasure in one of many statistical measures and numerical rankings of quality of life that happens to give Canada a four tenths of one percent advantage over the U.S. Even the accompanying article noted the variability of the ranking among the top fifteen or so countries and the different results yielded by a similar rankings taken only a month later. What rational consideration could possibly induce you to take satisfaction in and brag about such a trivial difference in such an arbitrary and variable ranking? I don't begrudge Canada or Canadians for the many attractive features of your country. Some are to my taste, some are not. But your choice of them is your affair, and, as long as it doesn't affect me directly, I don't believe I have standing to criticize you for these choices.

0 Replies

Sorry that it doesn't address the topic of Canada, George, but I was wondering what your thoughts were on the Non-profit pharma company idea; as well as the fact that Pharma spends so much more money on advertising, wining and dining doctors, and Dividend payouts than it has been on R&D lately, if you don't mind.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Depends on what you mean by R&D. If you restrict the category to basic scientific research then government institutions such as NIH, CDC, and even (surprisingly) DoE, along with universities have an advantage (but not an overwhelming one). If, instead, you include the activities required to develop a specific drug formula for a specific purpose, test it for efficacy and unwanted side effects, figure out how to produce it in quantity, and then undergo very lengthy, expensive and uncertain FDA trials - big pharma wins hands down. These costs - all of which must be met before any drug hits the market - are very real and they dwarf the promotional costs by a wide margin. This is an area in which the statistics are much manipulated by people with a point of view needing justification.

There have been a few cases where government research efforts have proceeded in parallel with private sector ones. The human genome project is the most prominent example. The NIH/DoE government effort started earlier and spent several times what the private sector project did, but it lost the race by a large margin. No surprise here - bureaucracies are not known for their speed or efficiency. Ovewrall I believe a dollar spent in research by 'Big Pharma' generally yields more that is of practical benefit than a dollar spent by NIH or certainly DoE. Spending your own money helps in preserving focus on the real objective of your efforts.

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

detano :
i'm sure you know the saying :

"don't confuse me with the facts".

and here is another one (translated from the german) :
"do not trust any statistical information that you have not falsified personally".

(today it was announced that the 4th quarter of 2005, canada had the greatest trade surplus in any quarter .
but as i said earlier , we better not confuse the other folks with the facts. won't be appreciated . sure hope that our new government doesn't start spending like a drunken sailor - we've been through it before). hbg

You are confusing the short term narrow focus of the present day trade surplus with the long tem (50 years) increase in real debt per capita and large increases in real net taxes vis-a-vis (love that phrase!) the real net of an individual's buying power.

Or do you not understood what I am saying, no shame in that.

0 Replies

georgeob1,

I agree fully with your perspectives and add that there are a surprising number of Canadians who are anti-American, many of whom you will either never meet and/or not recognize as such. Why? They often will not voice their views to Americans but only with other Canadians in the privacy of their own cliques.

0 Replies

We are one of the few countries with several years of surplus. That is good news and makes others envious.

If it pleases you to run down your country, great. I like the idea of living in a good country, warts and all.

Sorry to have taken you for an American. The way you talked, it seemed like that to me.

You are right; I do not understand your spin and double talk. I like facts.

0 Replies

Why don't you answer my questions and stop your ignorant personal attacks?

0 Replies

georgeob1,

I understand your points.

I don't understand how I illustrated your earlier points so well, though. There was no American bashing in my post. I was simply offering another perspective on some possible causes for bitterness on this side of the border.

shrug

0 Replies

"detano inipo",

I'll post them again and perhaps you'll answer them and stop the emotionalized rhetoric and personal attacks:

detano inipo wrote:

Chumly, you have the right to feel great about the US financial situation.

You are confused here as did not say nor imply "I feel great about US financial situation".

detano inipo wrote:

It is fascinating to see someone spin a disaster into a positive miracle.

What disaster I are you referring to, Katrina? I have no idea what you are referring to here.

detano inipo wrote:

I read somewhere that Clinton left Bush a whopping surplus, which has been replaced by a huge deficit. Is that true?

It must be true if you "read" it "somewhere" Smile

But seriously I do not know how the total debt considerations have changed relative to specific administrations. I will point out though that it is a mistake of the most grievous kind to associate a political party with economic wellbeing in the US or in Canada. Wall Street Week did a super long in-depth in review of the Republicans versus the Democrats using the stock market as a barometer and the market did fractionally better under the Democrats. A statistical insignificance.

It would be much more accurate to say that the popular media and the politicians themselves try very hard to align themselves as being in control of the economy when the actual facts dictate that such a view is nonsense. If you wish the rationale as to why the stock market is an apt barometer for a country's debt etc. just ask.

detano inipo wrote:

We in Canada had scandals and problems, so we elected another party. The scandal-ridden Liberals left a whopping surplus and a smaller debt.

Again I will point out that it is a mistake of the most grievous kind to associate a political party and economic well being. Again it would be much more accurate to say that the popular media and the politicians themselves try very hard to align themselves as being in control of the economy when the actual facts dictate that such a view is nonsense.

detano inipo wrote:

There is no comparison between our problems and yours.

What are you talking about I am CANADIAN, I was born in CANADA, my parents were born in CANADA!

detano inipo wrote:

I admire your faith in an administration that stumbles from one mistake to the next.

What are you talking about here? I AM CANADIAN plus I have no idea where you got the notion I have "faith in an administration" You are confused, I did not say nor imply any "faith" in any "administration".

detano inipo wrote:

Good luck to you and all the other spin meisters. You'll need it.

It is you who appear to have the belief in so-called "spin meisters". Why? Because so far all the references you have provided have not been of your own sourcing, and/or are based on the false presumption as amplified by the popular media that one political party will garner consequentially better economic progress and hence lesser debt than another.

That is not to say however, that politics does not play a part in Canada's economic health, but the political parties balance each other out in such a fashion, that for all intents and purposes it matters not which one is in power.

As to your other 'facts' again I see nothing of your own views in them but only regurgitated 'information'. Where are yours? And again I see your copy pasted 'facts' rife with short term assessments and so-called "predictions" which I have demolished in my major points and of which you do not respond. In fact the copy and pasted 'information' that you have provided support my claims that such short term improvements are mere volatility and that the so-called "predictions" have no reliability.

Is there some reason you cannot or will not converse with me directly and succinctly and on point and insist on copy pasting and relying on political rhetoric and claims about me on a personal level?

I should point that political rhetoric in general and claims about me on a personal level seriously diminish your arguments.

Again I see that you have completely ignored my questions and points, so I will for the sake of expediency put them to you in the hopes that you will respond in a like fashion from one CANADIAN to another CANADIAN eh!

detano inipo wrote:

Surpluses both achieved and anticipated

Bogus political rhetoric by combining "achieved and anticipated", how very peculiar! Do you expect me to assess this as quantifiable and qualifyable, if so how? Further do you expect me to believe the Government (or anyone for that matter) can predict surpluses, if so how?

detano inipo wrote:

As a result, the cost of paying interest on the debt has dropped from a high of 33 cents of every dollar of revenue collected by the federal government in 1995/96 to 19 cents in 2001/02.

Again entirely irrelative to the bigger picture, again look at the last 50 years. Again you are looking at short term volatility only.

detano inipo wrote:

Though still high by historical and international standards, Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio had fallen from 69% in 1995/1996 to 46% in 2001/02.

My point "still high by historical and international standards", again look at the last 50 years, not the last few years, you will not see the debt decrease in terms of quantifiable and qualifyable real buying power decreases. Do you know what real buying power from a net position over time means?

I get the feeling you did not read my post very closely and/or have not done your own assessments vis-a-vis my suggestions. Am I correct on this that you are simply regurgitating pre-digested snippets as passed to you from sources you approve of?

You have in fact not responded directly to any of my assessments "on point" but instead have chosen a time span of little relevance to my assessments at hand, from a source not of your own confirmation. Please address my assessments in your own words and on point.

Since Burger copy & pasted an overly large piece of text I'll present them again here for your convenience.

Chumly wrote:

detano inipo wrote:
The fact is that an operation like that in the US would have cost me my condo instead of $15.
If so, that is certainly not all the so-called "facts" as you could have US health insurance, let alone the lower taxes, lower interest rates, higher US dollar, higher purchasing power, lower taxes, lower governmental debts, that you would benefit from.
detano inipo wrote:
Chumly, you are painting a frightening picture of Canadian conditions based on opinions.
No I am assessing a given contrast.
detano inipo wrote:
We are slowly paying down our debt.
Completely and entirely false. That is short term government supplied rhetoric. The truth is, from a long term perspective of the last 50 years, the amount of debt in absolute and relative terms in any quantifiable measure has massively increased and there is no indications from governments or otherwise that such increasing debts are reversing irrelative of any short term assessments or claims over some few years.
detano inipo wrote:
We are enjoying a surplus for several years now.
A short term irrelevancy against a long term historical trending increase. Look at the long term big picture of 50 years. The short term variations you refer to have nothing whatsoever to do with the historical increases, what you refer to is called volatility and in no way expresses what has happened over the last 50 years.
detano inipo wrote:
Our taxes are going down as well.
Are they really? By exactly how much in real buying power relative to 20 years ago? Please let me know!
-Ever heard of tax creep?
-Ever heard of the $100,000 life time capital gains exemption being revoked?
-Ever heard of the % capital gains rate going up?
-Ever heard of the massive tightening of business deductions?
-Ever heard of being forced to withdraw pension funds earlier?
-Ever heard of OAC claw-back?
-The list of tax increases has been huge over the last 20 years!
detano inipo wrote:
We have more freedom than our neighbors.
Do we? How do you intend to show this vis-à-vis health care, given one cannot opt out of our socialized system?
detano inipo wrote:
Our Canadian dollar is rising and predictions are that our dollar will supass the US dollar in 2010.
That is the most incorrect. It is correct to say that the Canadian dollar has *risen* not that it is so-called "rising", it's not like watching bread.

It is also much more correct to say our dollar has bounced back from extreme lows due to decreased fears of Quebec separation and increasing commodity prices of which our economy is very reliant on.

Further it is 100% speculation to predict what the exchange rates will be in 2010, no one can do such a thing! Just as no one can predict what inflation will be, nor what the stock market will do; specifically the stock market in the short to mid term i.e. less than 15 - 20 years.
detano inipo wrote:
Your finances are in bad shape.
I do not know what you are referring to here but your comment appears out of context, please edify.
detano inipo wrote:
Perhaps you should direct your criticism at your government
I do not know what you are referring to here but your comment appears out of context, please edify.

I am not suggesting with certainty that you "detano inipo" read the Globe & Mail newspaper and/or other popular Canadian media sources but those sources would tend to provide views parallel to yours. But that does not make them correct.

It is rather easy to exempt oneself from poplar political and media rhetoric and do your own research. I would suggest that if you have not done this you start with the Bank of Canada's web site and the US's Federal Reserve web site.

[/quote]

0 Replies

flushd wrote:

georgeob1,

I understand your points.

I don't understand how I illustrated your earlier points so well, though. There was no American bashing in my post. I was simply offering another perspective on some possible causes for bitterness on this side of the border.

It was not my purpose to offend - If I did I apologize for it.

I guess the issue comes down to the "bitterness on this side of the border" to which you referred. Bitter at whom and for what reason? Did we do this to you? How about Japan and other Asian markets to which both of our countries exported large quantities of processed beef? All of that was cut off for both of us, and that constituted the major export loss. What action do you believe Canada would have taken if the shoe was on the other foot?

0 Replies

detano inipo wrote:

We are one of the few countries with several years of surplus. That is good news and makes others envious.

I frequently go for days at a time without thinking of Canada's budget surplus. I suspect others do too.

Quote:

If it pleases you to run down your country, great. I like the idea of living in a good country, warts and all.

Sorry to have taken you for an American. The way you talked, it seemed like that to me.

Has it occurred to you that Americans feel the same way about their country as you do yours?

What does it mean to 'talk like an American'? Is that some kind of collective slur?

Quote:

You are right; I do not understand your spin and double talk. I like facts.

That surprises me. You have shown a powerful resistence to them here so far.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

georgeob1,

I agree fully with your perspectives and add that there are a surprising number of Canadians who are anti-American, many of whom you will either never meet and/or not recognize as such. Why? They often will not voice their views to Americans but only with other Canadians in the privacy of their own cliques.

That is very true, chumly. It's the Canadian way :wink:

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

It seems to me the real difference here is that many Canadians, either through real dislike or perhaps a neurotic mix of feelings of inferiority & insecurity (or something like that) feel compelled to express rather strong criticisms and occasionally moral judgements about the United States in areas that really don't affect them much at all. Americans, on the other hand (not me particularly though) seem in these discussions more willing to acknowledge our own faults and see the occasional advantages in the Canadian side of the differences between us.

The rather lengthy discussions of our health care systems is a case in point. It started here precisely because several Canadian posters briought it up as an example of the "unenlightened" character of American society - an illustration of why Canadians disapprove of us. This was done without acknowledging any of the very real tradeoffs involved between your system and ours, and the fact that, despite the multiplicity of views in this country on the subject, we have chosen ours through a process as democratic as the one by which you chose yours. I have tried to point out the significance to us of these tradeoffs and the likely reasons why we have chosen our system. The response, instead of simply acknowledging these facts, is a bunch of snide remarks about busloads of Americans coming to Canada to find cheaper prescription drugs -- As though this is yet another indicator of Canadian moral and social superiority, when in fact it is an obvious example of government directed and unfair manipulation of a free market by Canada , and one that directly penalizes American consumers.

On other issues including softwood lumber and live cattle Canadians exhibit an extraordinary sensitivity when it is their ox that appears to be gored, but perplexing indifference when the issue goes the other way. Indeed the cattle question is a further illustration of my point. When the case of BSE was discovered here in a cow imported from Canada two things happened almost immediately. All inporters of live and processed beef immediately banned further imports from both countries, and we banned further imports of live cattle from Canada. These are normal measures for quaranteen, and the injury to both U.S. and Canadian exports was immense. However the howls from Canada suggested an odd degree of self-centeredness and ignorance of the injury done to others, by a problem that originated in Canada, and, as well, an unreasoning belief that we were somehow the cause of the damage to Canada's trade and that they were the only victim. Rather amazing when you think about it.

I detect a degree of what psychologists call projection here as some Canadians uninhibitedly pass judgements on American politics, culture, and economic performance, and in the next breath accuse Americans of being overbearing and arrogant. I'm quite sure these views do not characterize most Canadians, whom I have generally found to be a very polite and genial people. However for those to whom they do apply, you should recognize that it indicates ignorance, childishness, and hypocrisy.

feel compelled to express rather strong criticisms and occasionally moral judgements about the United States in areas that really don't affect them much at all.

Recognize your post? georgebob, you can't have it both ways. America tells Canada that they are the big elephant and we, the little mouse, feel it's every twitch. Then you say we make judgements about the US in areas that don't affect us???? The US inserts itself whether wanted or not on other countries; that is called imperialism and it's been going on for a long time. Rome tried it and failed, England tried and failed. They are no longer superpowers as you know. Since America has such an attitude of hubris, how would you expect other countries to react? Canadians love Canada, not America.

Yes, we are polite - to your faces, however, you don't hear what we Canadians say behind your backs. America thrusts itself upon everyone: we get your TV stations, magazines, cheap high fat fast food chains, etc. That's American 'culture', sadly. Contrary to popular belief promulgated by your hyperactive media, the world does not like America -what is there to admire? America is fond of stepping on the little guys - hey, that's how you get to be a superpower eh? Canada has no such aspirations. We want quality of life for the citizens, and we have that.

We'd also like to be paid by the US for the softwoods. Hopefully Harper will keep pushing Bush on that one. If it were the other way around we'd probably be having sanctions against us!

Message: no one messes with the US, but the US can mess with anyone they please. And we're supposed to LIKE it? Pleaseeeeee....... Rolling Eyes

0 Replies

The posts with mertible and rational points versus the posts with politicized uninformed rhetoric speak for themselves.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know