General discussion

Canada can't save you

Some 10,000 to 20,000 Americans, unable to come to terms with the re-election of President Bush, are believed poised to leave the United States and become Canadians. Many, of course, will remain permanently in the poised position, just like Alec Baldwin, who has apparently been on the tarmac for four years awaiting a plane to some other country.




Browse through an archive of columns by John Leo.



But suppose the disaffected 10,000 to 20,000 actually depart. Will they find happiness? Will they achieve peace of mind north of the border? No, they won't. Instead they will find the following:

Strange and maddening football games. For reasons nobody can fathom, Canadian football is played on an enormous field, with 12 players on a side and only three downs, so every third play tends to be a punt. Canadian football alone is said to have driven an estimated 2 million Canadians across the border to become U.S. citizens. Many believe Bush could not have won without the disaffected Canadian football vote.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/050221/opinion/21john.htm


some funny stuff or is so funnyGrin

Discussion is locked

Follow
Reply to: Canada can't save you
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Canada can't save you
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Does that mean

Americans can run but Americans will never

come to terms with the re-election of President Bush

Maybe they could have an American Jihad

- Collapse -
or the can make

Dean head of the dnc oh wait they did

oh well will be another republican president next election.

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Loved the football-vote line. LOL
- Collapse -
You know, they probably could if you would listen and learn

but that's never going to happen. The US is convinced of its own superiority in all things, shame its economy is in such a mess. All major economic indicators say that Canada has been doing better than the US for a number of years.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
keep remembering

the us is the best forget the rest and some day you mite just relize that

- Collapse -
Fact Check
All major economic indicators say that Canada has been doing better than the US for a number of years.

FALSE

It has done better in some for isolated years, but US economy outperforms Canada's on average for the past decade and probably beyond.

http://www.edmonton.ca/infraplan/Economic%20Information/Economic%20Trends/Major%20Economic%20Indicators-historical.pdf


I'm beginning to see the cause of your problem with Bush. His election somehow seems to have dampened your economy Wink Our 2001 growth numbers are understandably depressed due to 9/11. 2004 growth rate was 4.1% vs. Canada's 3.3%.

How about unemployment rates? http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/labor23a.htm
http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/71-222-XIE/2004000/chart-p84.htm
Our unemployment rate hovered around 5.5% in 2004 and just dipped to 5.2%. Yours is around 7% by US definition I believe.
- Collapse -
Way to baffle with *******t Evie, what that Edmonton link

has to do with anything I cannot fathom. One link for the economic indicators for one City in the whole of Canada?

I believe if you investigate you may find that Canada's calculations of unemployment are more liberal than the US and that they count people who have stopped looking for work because there is none rather than dropping them from the rolls as is the case in the US.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) whatever just more double talk on your part
- Collapse -
Giggle ...

... apparently Rob is exhibiting the fairly rare side effect of prednisone use by liberals, that being an allergic reaction to facts. Wink

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) SMACK. OH NO SHE DIDN'T!
- Collapse -
You're right, you posted a site where we broke even.

And that's your US economic superiority? you can keep up with Canada? And all that in the face of a Canadian dollar performing well above that of the US dollar.

Thanks to some ill-advised economic jiggery-pokery
like Metrification and Bilingualism accross Canada Pierre Trudeau's liberals drove the Canadian dollar below 70 cents US in the 70's and business in Canada have fought tooth and nail to keep it there because its good for wages to be paid in a cheap currency and its good for exports to be paid for in a stronger currency. This has been changing slowly since the heat-death of Brian Mulroney and the Chretien Prime Ministership. so now the dollar is up around 85 cents depending on the day and They still beat you 5 years out of ten with that disadvantage. Oh yeah and we're dragging those terrible economic anchors with us, a complete and comprehensive healthcare program for everyone in Canada including the far north, a generous welfare and social assistance plan, and a pension scheme, and we carry people on Unemployment benefits much longer than the US to. Every woman is entitled to 6 months paid Maternity leave and is guaranteed her old job back with continued seniority. All that economic dead weight and you still couldn't beat us half the time.

You must be very proud.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
just dont wait on elective surgery in canada

and you say its better there thats a long streetch of the truth as rob sees it

- Collapse -
Unfortunately for you ...

... economic strength isn't measured by how long we pay people for not working.

The average growths over the decade are almost equal -- US edges out Canada, but 2001 takes a toll on that one. Projections have us ahead for the coming year.

In November your dollar spiked up to around $0.85 of yours, but for most of 2004 it hovered around $0.75, and it is around $0.80 today. However "outperforming" would mean it bought more than the US Dollar. While the USD has been falling it still hasn't fallen to a point where your dollar buys more. (So you are again exaggerating just a tad)

Last time I was in Canada we walked through some dealerships, and of course, had to buy some gas. Just to drive in Canada, in Canadian dollars, you pay about $0.20/litre more for gasoline. Pricing a basic Dodge Caravan minivan, your MSRP + Delivery is about $30K vs. our $20K. Your GST&PST brings the total to $34,500, using an average 7.5% state sales tax here our's is $21,500, adjusted to CND (0.80 CND/USD) $26,875. An international of CPI's would be neat to see. I haven't been able to find one.

This is just one example of my anecdotal experiences with Canada. When the exchange rate is better, the cost of stuff up there evens out for us. But in dollar buying power numbers, some of your basic stuff costs a lot more then ours.

Bottom line, I'm not the one spamming the board with erroneous boasts of superiority. The sum total of economic indicators -- GDP growth, unemployment and per capita GDP -- have the US outperforming Canada.

But at least you acknowledge that I didn't baffle you with bullshi+ and you can indeed read when prodded to.

- Collapse -
Ummm...

... open your eyes. The link listed economic growth for several years, for Edmonton, Alberta and Canada.

Economic statistics put out by YOUR government's "Canada Statistics" is "bullshi+"??

You are correct about internal unemployment rates for Canada vs. the US. However if you had opened your eyes you would see that one of the links I provided clearly stated that it adjusted the rates to US standards.

Might not keep sticking your foot in your mouth if your knee didn't keep jerking so badly in defense of your doublejointed speak.

- Collapse -
lets do some math

Can USA

10.8 - 7.5 = 3.3 difference

6.1 - 4.0 = 2.1 difference

6.9 - 6.0 = 0.9 difference

Does this indicate that the Unemployment rate is almost the same as in the US?

# n the last decade, the Canadian unemployment rate (adjusted to the U.S. definition) reached a high of 10.8% in 1993, declined to a low of 6.1% in 2000, and then increased again to 6.9% by 2003. The U.S. unemployment rate reached a high of 7.5% in 1992 and fell to a low of 4.0% in 2000, only to increase to 6.0% by 2003.

# This significant increase in the American unemployment rate in the last few years has narrowed the gap between the two countries. In fact, the Canadian rate is now less than 1 percentage point higher than the U.S. rate. The last time the gap was so small was in 1982.

- Collapse -
No...

It shows that in 2003, Canada's unemployment rate was 0.9% higher than ours. Hardly whipping butt now is it?

Today, Canada's is around 7%, ours is down to 5.2%.

- Collapse -
Response

92 US was 7.5 minus (03) 6.0 difference 1.5

93 Can was 10.8 minus (03) 6.1 difference 4.7

1.5 / 7.5 * 100 = 20 %

4.7/10.8 * 100 = 43.5 %

Does the difference look any larger now?

- Collapse -
What's the difference?

The unemployment rate in the US is consistently lower than Canada's. Any closing of the gap -- as even highlighted by you -- was due to increases in US unemployment, not improvements in Canada's.

Play with the numbers all you want. They will never support Rob's statements.

- Collapse -
Response

Canadian Unemployment decreased by 43.5 %

US unemployment decreased by 20%

Doesn't that indicate a greater decrease in unemployment in Canada than in the US?

Play with the numbers all you want. They will never support Rob's statements.

Shouldn't that be

play with the numbers all you want I'll never admit that unemployment decreased more in Canada than US


In 92/93 it was lower by 4.3 % in 03 it was lower by .9%

Any closing of the gap-- was due to increases in US unemployment, not improvements in Canada's.

10.8 - .9 = 9.9

So, did the US rate go up to 9.9 %.?

How come the US unemployment rate increased more than Canadas, but the US economy was doing better, according to you?

Please show me the numbers to back your argument.

- Collapse -
The % increase or decrease ....

... in unemployment rate isn't reported because it is not a meaningful statistic. It's like the old adage about weight loss and losing those last 5 or 10 pounds. The more overweight you are, probably the easier it is to lose the first 5 or 10 lbs, the last are the hardest. Same with unemployment. The closer you are to "full employment" (and there is a train of thought that somewhere around 5% is "full employment") the harder it is to lower the rate.

In any case, Canada's unemployment rate is higher than the US and has also been historically higher than the US at any given time.

How come the US unemployment rate increased more than Canadas, but the US economy was doing better, according to you?

Hey, not according to me JP, according to the economic statistics. Canada is not "whipping our butts" in the economic arena.

And BTW, US unemployment is down to 5.2%.

- Collapse -
Response

The unemployment rate in the US is consistently lower than Canada's.

True

Any closing of the gap -- as even highlighted by you -- was due to increases in US unemployment, not improvements in Canada's.

Hey, not according to me JP, according to the economic statistics.

now you say that Unemployment in US is down to 5.2

The figures show US unemployment dropping over the period yet you say it was due to increases.

- Collapse -
The comment about the gap ...

... was reiterated by you, and me, from the Canadian site. Not either of our words.

You are mixing apples and oranges and time frames. If you can't follow simple numbers I'm sure not going to waste time explaining things to you.

- Collapse -
OK

neither one of us will waste the others time then.

- Collapse -
Evie! You know Rob doesn't deal well with facts. He likes to

think that things are as he says they are. If you can't grasp his reality, you are a narrow minded, illiterate bigot. Wink

- Collapse -
This from a man who will contradict the Lord on the

Day of Judgement and tell him what His religion should believe. Go back to sleep KP.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Of course, it does help to have zero defense costs.
- Collapse -
and thats because of the

powerfull sounthern neighbor you think?Grin

- Collapse -
Utterly untrue, and your usual mistaken assertion KP

We have a significant Army, a Navy, an Airforce, and a Coast Guard. We have more coastline to defend than you do. We have troops in Europe as part of Nato, we have troops in Afghanistan as part of the intervention there, we took the usual kind of casualties you can expect when working with Americans, "friendly fire". We saved American asses there as posted by me on this forum, beat the American record for sniping at long distance, and were awarded medals by the US military for it and a number of thanks from the units they worked with. Try looking it up. We do peacekeeping for the UN and our humanitarian aid as a percentage of our national budget and on a per capita basis is high. Certainly we have donated far more to tsunami relief per capita than the United States has. But don't get truth get in the way of your rant KP, you know truth means nothing to you Bushies. You only care about winning and tax cuts no matter who gets hurt. That's sort of your "friendly fire at home" program.

Rob Boyter

- Collapse -
The other thing about the US and Canada

is that except for rare cases... we're more humorous.

- Collapse -
Oh Canada

But they'll have "free" health care

CNET Forums

Forum Info