Great piece. I've noticed whenever a Liberal is cornered on this so called deficit, they always say they inherited a "structural deficit". Can anyone explain what the hell that means? From what I can piece together from their vague answers, it sounds like they're claiming costs would out-pace revenues, but can this be true? How can a claim like this be made— is it based solely on forecasts? It sounds like smoke and mirrors to me.

I think the fact that they lied is not so surprising as the people in collusion perpetuating it. If we go into problem regression, it sits squarely on the table of the CRTC allowing the concentration of media ownership to the extent it has. It would be nice to see this (Tyee) paper on my desk as opposed to the Scum and Provincial, papers I won't let my parrot poop on for fear she might read it and start telling me about phrenological economic theory or the latest sham drug testing.

An excellent story debunking the myth of the Liberals as conscientious stewarts of the economy, and the NDP as an architect of disaster. Well done, Mr. Dobbin.

What I'm still waiting for is an explosion of the Liberal's record on job creation. We constantly hear about how we were the worst job creator in Canada in 1998 (never mind that we were consistently above average before then), but we never seem to hear about 2002 - when we were again the worst job creator in Canada. Or how our unemployment shot up from 7% to 9% on the Liberal watch.

Verso, even as inheirited debt it still isn't true OR as cost verus income go read a press release at the AG's website bcauditor.com dated 14 February 2002 it's evaluating the last 5yr period of the NDP era. In essence though,he says that our assets grew more than our liabilities and our income grew more than our costs. So far I haven't found anything or anyone right who has come up with verifiable information to contradict it.....

Just curious you guys any body know how much the NDP lost on their various schemes ie;fast cats,Skenna,and what ever else the record holds...'cause seems to me that they probably don't begin to add up to the 4 Billion the Gordo's little experiment on "Taxcuts pay for themselves".....

These liberal folk constantly spew how bad things were in the 90's. You'd think their lives were destroyed by bankruptcies, kraft dinner every night and no new shoes. Moving forward is the favorite term of the day, and makes me sick every time I hear it. Forward to less services, forward to higher user fees. Forward to less money in my pocket. Please take me backward NDP.

pump it up tyee!!!!!

The BC Liberals and their disciples in the business press don’t like to talk about what has happened to business investment in BC since 2001, because the straight answer is “not a lot.”.

From Statistics Canada (Cat 61-205) come figures on public and private investment. In 2001, total investment in BC was $14.2B, in 2004 $19.7B. Intentions for 2005 amount to $21.4B. It sounds good so far, an increase of $5.5B to 2004, and maybe even $7.2B if this year works out as intended. But hold the phone. What happens when housing, which has gone from $5.7B in 2001 to an intended $10.6B this year is excluded, since this is really consumer investment, not business investment in productive plants? And when public sector investment, which has risen from $1.4B in 2001 to an intended $2.1B in 2005, is also factored out, then what?

Then we are left with figures of $7.1B for 2001, $7.6B for 2004, and an intended figure of $8.6B for this year. So the increase in genuine business investment, in industries like mining and energy, utilities, transportation, and numerous trade and service sectors has increased only half a billion dollars from 2001 to 2004, a year now completed. Even if we take the 2005 planned figure for comparison purposed, the increase is just $1.5B, not the sort of amount that would even be noticed in neighboring Alberta.

Just ask yourself this question. What major factories, smelters or other major manufacturing plants are under construction in BC today? Are they any new pulp mills being built or major rebuilds going on? Are they any major electrical plants, hydro, coal, or wind/tidal under construction anywhere in BC? The answer in every case is no.

Whatever Premier Gordon Campbell’s ultimate political legacy is likely to be, it is not going to a reputation as some kind of BC version of C. D. Howe who could truthfully boast that he knew business and they knew him and responded with big investments when he told them to go ahead. BC may be open for business, but the business it’s open for is politics, lobbying and public relations, not manufacturing or intelligent services. The Liberal policy of cutting business taxes and reducing regulations were supposed to produce a business investment boom. But there has been no boom, just a modest increase that owes as much to lower interest rates and higher output prices, and even to US tariffs as it does to any BC policy changes.

What a bunch of BS. Not surprising coming from the unbiased tyee though.

"While the economic cycle would have led to a deficit regardless of Liberal cuts"

Does that mean that even though we did in fact have a surplus from the NDP that a deficit was unavoidable and changes did need to made? Why won't the NDP reverse the tax cuts if they do not work? I hear raising taxes attracts investment.

The closing paragraph is another nice piece of propaganda. When the NDP had these record growth rates. What was the average growth rate of Canada? Well above BC's growth rate. When the Liberals reached 3.9% that is the highest rate of growth in Canada. (they even surpassed oil rich Alberta)Are you going to tell me oil prices haven't gone up recently. In the 2 years before this record growth rate. What was BC's growth rate compared to the rest of Canada?

The NDP underperformed compared to the rest of Canada, now the Liberals are out performing the rest of Canada. But I guess it's much better being a follower than a leader.

If outside influences are the only factor in economic performance you think that the NDP should of had growth rates beyond the national average due to the fact that BC was traditionally had one of the best economies.

"giving the Liberals the dubious distinction of being able to claim four of the highest deficits in BC history"

How much debt did the NDP build up over their term? (You can split the grand total in half if you like for accurate comparison to the Liberals) How much have the Liberals increased our debt?

Crh, You have less money in your pocket. So what do you propose to alleviate that problem? Probably take someone else's money by raising taxes. Hypocrite.

Thanks Blonde...

JIm-BOb solemly states that "The NDP underperformed compared to the rest of Canada, now the Liberals are out performing the rest of Canada. But I guess it's much better being a follower than a leader.

If outside influences are the only factor in economic performance you think that the NDP should of had growth rates beyond the national average due to the fact that BC was traditionally had one of the best economies."

But JIm-BOb knows that these are such shady comparisons it's not even funny. Look at it this way. If you hold your speed at 50kmh while others are going 80kmh, you are going slower. But if the others slow down to 40kmh, you are now leading the pack!!! {YAY!!!} That's what's happened here. BC had real economic growth rates of:

1999 3.2%
2000 4.6%
2001 0.9%
2002 3.3%
2003 2.5%
2004 3.9%

and the respective Canadian rates are:

1999 5.5%
2000 5.2%
2001 1.8%
2002 3.4%
2003 2.0%
2004 2.8%

Source? BCStats and StatsCan:
http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/data/bus_stat/bcea/tab1.htm

You forgot 1998 when BC growth rate was 1.3% and Canada's was 4.1%. That's terrible, almost 3 full percentage points behind Canada's growth rate.

"But JIm-BOb knows that these are such shady comparisons it's not even funny."

What it's called Budd is looking at stats with context. Stats looked at in a vacuum are meaningless. Those stats show that the macro economic conditions under the NDP were much better, yet BC almost equaled that growth in a slower economic time. That's an accomplishment.

The economic conditions are favourable right now, but compared to the macro economic conditions during the late 90's, today almost looks like a recession.

desperate times, desperate measures.

Blonde Pitbull, if you are calculating in the complete financial loss on the fast-cat ferries to the NDP, I suggest you reduce it somewhat.

Certainly the ferries were mothballed for a time (and I think written off in 2000 or 2001 as a loss, as the Clark NDP government was fading out.

But there was absolutely no need for the incoming Liberal government to turn around and sell them for less than scrap metal prices.

The sale was an ideologically driven performance by Campbell and his advisors to help them continue villifying the then defeated NDP.

The sale had nothing to do with logic, sound fiscal management or anything else rational people would pursue in good faith.

In hindsight, it was the beginning of the sale of $billions in BC assets.

That loss was wilfully advanced on (like BC Rail), assets that were debt free. The loss rests with the Liberals.

And BTW, that's how you get structural deficits.

The Debt held by BC Rail was about $550,000,000. I'm not sure how that equates to debt free.

The Liberals tried to sell the fast ferries for a higher price but got no takers. They finally held an auction with qualified buyers. What were they supposed to do with the Ferries? We had no leverage to get a higher purchase price.

Also Blonde Pitbull the total accumulated debt by the NDP was about 16 billion dollars.

"And BTW, that's how you get structural deficits"

I'm not an expert on this subject, but I would say that's an incorrect definiton. I would look it up yourself to get the best answer.

How come whenever the rigt-wing political parties and think tanks talk tax cuts they never want to start at the lowest paid people.

It seems to me if you cut taxes for lower paid people this money will immediately be put back in the local economy while they try to improve their standard of living. As opposed to giveing a tax break to corporate shareholders who don't even live in Canada with no guarantee the money will ever come back.

The trickle down doesn't happen. The tax cut model developed by Ronald Reagan "Supply and Demand" has it backward. It should be "Demand and Supply" as demand fuels the economy.

JIm: BC rail debt manufactured by Fiberals to enable them to give it away.And Gordo was right it wasn't sold it was given.
Fast Ferries: 2 bids (considerably larger than the giveaway auction) were turned down by the Fiberals.
And you had better take another look at the growth rates. BC's is not the largest. The NWT is.
I can't understand how some people can lie, alter the facts, and selectively pull out of a situation only those things that will benefit their way of thinking.
Of course we all know why Gordo does it. he's a pathologocal Liar. What's your excuse JIm.
I think the pair of you had better get your respective heads out of you asses and smell the regular roses.

Mel, the think tanks and right wing parties are paid by big business. It goes the same for wage and price controls. Wages are frozen but not prices.

Well, what can you expect from the most DISHONEST and CORRUPT BC provincial government ever! Hmmm... Those raids on the Ledge...

Anyhow, the well known strategy of the right is to always run HUGE deficits by the way of such things as tax cuts to the wealthiest few/corporations and outrageous military spending to make their argument for cutting back and privatizing public assets/programs (Just look at the conservative’s poster boy for money management, George Bush and his needless humongous deficit).

Witness the corporate agenda spearheaded continually by the likes of the corporate media and the Fraser Institute to tear down our public institutions to further the corporate cause. It’s also no secret that the Fraser Institute’s agenda, like Gordon Liars is to privatize everything, yes even the air we breathe if they could get away with it!

I personally think that we have come full circle to a new Era of Corporate communism. We tell you what to read, eat, buy, think, while eventually controlling every possible conceivable thing on earth, even the DNA blueprint to life itself. Scary!

Remember, Gordo’s no Liberal but rather a corporate conservative who can’t wait to sell us out to the States and his corporate Albertan buddies.

Campbell and his corporate agenda must be terminated. It’s as simple as that. So get out and vote!

JIm off hand I can think of a few projects like the Milllenium Line, the new Island highway, A BILLION on sensitive habitat land preservation,new schools,etc. so while they did rack up debt not all was bad. Please tell what infastructure we acquired for the Liberals debt? Nothing, just a gamble that has yet to pay off.
Also, JIm there was a firm Bid on the Fast Ferries as they came into power but they chose not act on it. I agree with Allen it was deliberately sold off dirt cheap for political gain NOT because of uselessness.

Allan, I think that you mis understood what I was trying to say earlier; what I was trying to say is that the NDP's "mistakes" with our money are probably no worse than the Liberals "mistakes". Who knows maybe even alot less...

Blonde Pittbull, sorry I was just trying to expand on your line of thought. I agree totally with what you said.

Any mistake that can be blamed on the NDP regarding the ferries was only compounded (as far as taxpayers are concerned), by the political decision to have a show auction that netted little in return other than cheap political points.

That's the dangerous thing about this party's leadership. It will make statements and decisions based entirely on what they feel will advance an ideological goal that has never been placed before the public for any real discussion.
That's cheap politics and has nothing to do with good business practices.

JIm: BC taxpayers were never on the hook for the BC Rail debt. It was paid by BC Rail through its revenues, not by taxpayers. All railways carry an operating debt and BC Rail had one of the lowest operatng debts in all of North America.

BC Rail paid dividends to the public - money that could be used for health care and education. A total of $137.7 million in dividends to the public. There was also an $150 million surplus in the BC Rail pension fund. Who knows what happpened to that...

the liberals never should have sold the fast ferries. they could have saved a bundle on this campaign by docking one underneath the lion's gate bridge, one under the annacis island bridge, and one beside the pitt river bridge. add three big banners saying 'ndp make work for unions project' and you've won the election hands down.

JIm, buddy, you seem to believe that being the head of the pack is the only goal for our gov't, and yes, it would be nice, but it is not the primary goal for most canadains / BCer's. Like in our families having a well fed, healthy and happy family is more our concern than chasing money.Of course we do it- chasing money that is, because it pays for what you need in this day and age to raise and support those we are closest to. This is the goal that most canadains/BCer's want from their gov'ts. Please note I say most canadains, not all. I wouldn't dream to speak for those who might differ.....

More proof that the BC Liberals have made things worse for the actual people of BC in this very good analysis by Schreck on the Stats Canada data released today:

On May 5th Statistics Canada released more bad news for the Campbell re-election effort. Analyzing income tax returns filed in 2004 for the 2003 tax year, Statistics Canada calculated the median income for individuals and found that: "Median employment income fell in 21 of 27 census metropolitan areas in 2003, with the biggest declines in the three British Columbia urban centres: Victoria (-3.1%), Vancouver (-2.7%) and Abbotsford (-2.3%)." The "median" is a statistic that is the middle point; by definition exactly half are below and half are above the median whereas more than half of the population have incomes below the "average" because the top income earners have a much higher proportion of total income than their number represents as part of the population. It is possible for median incomes to be declining, even if the average shows an increase, if inequality is increasing.

On the defensive, the Liberal campaign issued a news release saying: "If you look at the median incomes for the province as a whole, they are actually UP by 1.8%." Unfortunately for Mike Morton (listed as the contact for the BC Liberal Party release), he forgot to allow for inflation. The news release put out by Statistics Canada said: "All figures for previous years have been adjusted for inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index." The Consumer Price Index for BC increased by 2.1% between 2002 and 2003, so a 1.8% province wide increase in the median wage still means a loss in real income. Everyone knows that the Interior got hit hard, but the latest data shows that even Victoria and the Lower Mainland lost ground for most individuals. (Family data will be released next week.)

The data from the taxation statistics raises the question of who is benefiting from BC's "booming" economy. Some say that things will get better, but the previous week Statistics Canada released gross domestic product (GDP) data for 2004 which raises even more concerns. Personal savings as a percentage of income was a record NEGATIVE 7.9% in 2004. Families who are seeing their incomes fall behind inflation certainly aren't benefiting. Data from Statistics Canada on the 2004 provincial GDP accounts show that corporations were the big winners with profits up by 33% in BC compared to an increase of 17% for Canada. Few would say that is bad news, but the gains are not being shared by everyone.

GDP is a concept of what is called the national or provincial accounts. The accounts reflect the identity that everyone's cost is someone else's income, hence there are expenditure accounts and income accounts. In simple terms, the expenditure side is broken down by consumption, investment, government spending and net exports. That is equal to the break down on the income side which includes labour income, corporation profits, investment income and taxes. Wages, salaries and supplementary labour income made up 51.6% of GDP in 2003 but decreased to 50.2% in 2004. Corporation profits, before taxes, increased from 8.6% of GDP in 2003 to 10.7% in 2004. Other components on the income side changed by less than 2 tenths of one percent between 2003 and 2004.

The increase in inflation adjusted GDP for BC in 2004 was 3.9%. When inflation is included economists call the figures "nominal"; nominal GDP increased by 7.5%. Wages, salaries and supplementary labour income increased by only 4.5%, just over half the rate of increase in nominal GDP. The 33% increase in corporate profits was more than four times the rate of increase in nominal GDP.

Changes in after tax income, "per capita disposable personal income", are more important for most people than are changes in GDP. The growth in BC's GDP was highest amongst the provinces in 2004, but average personal after tax income remained lower than the Canadian average, and for many it declined.

Sirjohna, you just made my point, thank you.

JIm-BOb posted this one yesterday:

"You forgot 1998 when BC growth rate was 1.3% and Canada's was 4.1%. That's terrible, almost 3 full percentage points behind Canada's growth rate."

Yes, those are the figure for 1998. And in 1997 the figures were BC 3.2%, Canada 4.2%. And in 1996, BC 2.5%, Canada 1.6%. I suppose you could boil this done to a pick your time period contest, a manouvre which has a certain tradition in BC politics going back to the days of WAC Bennett, when all government literature used the watershed year 1952 as though it represented the beginning of recorded time. Again, if one wants to compare BC to Canada, as between 1996 and 1997, BC did relatively better compared to Canada in the year where its growth rate was actually lower!

If, as the BC Business Council and people like Jock Finlayson maintain, the 1990s were a period of less than stellar growth for BC, what do they say were the reasons? As far as they are concerned, it's all just one thing, taxes and regulations brought in by the BC NDP Govts under Harcourt and Clark, especially tougher pollution regulations for the key pulp sector.

But if that were really the case, why hasn't business investment really taken off in BC now that the Liberals are in power? There are still no big mills, factories, smelters, or hydro generation projects under construction. And notice too, the only big highway jobs, despite all the prattle about twinning Port Mann, the only ACTUAL MAJOR HIGHWAYS JOBS, not election-period artist's sketches, are the Olympics driven Sea-to-Sky upgrades and the Kicking Horse Pass project, where the Feds are picking up a major share of the cost.

In fairness to Jock Finlayson, some years ago he pointed out in one or two interviews that the high cost of real estate in BC was a major deterrent to real economic growth. And then he neven mentioned it again. I think he was told to shutup.

sirjohna figures the game this way:

"... the liberals never should have sold the fast ferries. they could have saved a bundle on this campaign by docking one underneath the lion's gate bridge, one under the annacis island bridge, and one beside the pitt river bridge. add three big banners saying 'ndp make work for unions project' and you've won the election hands down."

I think this is really quite helpful. It really shows that all the anti-NDP rhetoric and all the anti-union rhetoric coming from Liberals is just pure, raw, unaldulterated electoral politics. It's not part of some actual economic policy they believe in, it's just about winning elections by appealing to some peoples likes and dislikes.

Thanks to Sue Clark for an excellent post. I hadn't noticed the StatCan material on incomes.

What I do notice is the name Mike Morton. He is normally the press secretary to the Premier, not the Liberal Party. Since it is election time, I guess he has left his government job to work for the party?

Jean Binette writes: More piles upon piles of crap from the bowels of the Tyee "Department of Misinformation".

(Bailey "God I luv charts..", I just checked your electrical activity chart and I'm sorry to report that you've definitely flatlined)

budd; critiquing the libs for anti-ndp rhetoric? look in the mirror buddy. that's all the ndp have done for the past four years. no ideas, no vision, no innovation, and most disgusting of all, NO CHANGES!!!
what a massive joke!!! it won't work. you'll get the ndp'ers back but that will be all. mcmartin's numbers correspond with the party's polling. 49 liberals, 30 ndp, no green.

Dear sirj; So you don't share my love of charts? I can see why you don't love that one.

Just a point. The Liberals could have sold the Fastcats to a ship breaker for pure scrap. I've been told that because of the expensive high-tech materials used in them, they would have gotten up to $60 million for them.

They sold them for $20 million. That's $40 million taxpayers money thrown away just so they could continue slandering their opponents.

How nice for them to have their hands on so much of other people's money!

Sorry. That last post was for Jean Binette, not sirj.

I get confused reading these guys, sometimes hard to tell them apart.

But while I'm here, sirj does need answering on the make work point.

Those ferries weren't make work. They were a serious attempt to assist BCs shipbuilding industry into the new era of aluminum. It was to provide paid on-the-job training for thousands of BC shipyard workers to be able to develop the expertise and experience to allow them to compete with say, Germany or Poland.

It would have cost hundreds of millions to train those workers in traditional classroom courses in the community colleges. And if they'd done that there wouldn't be three world class boats being refitted for high class casino cruise ships now.

That the training was effective is shown by the fact that each successive boat was done cheaper and more efficiently than the one before, as the training progressed.

The Liberals saw no use for well trained BC industrial workers. What good are BC workers when China has workers who can be forced to work for next to nothing?

As long as they can get our resources to work with.

Thanks for all of your great posts on this and other Tyee forums. I see a lot of you have posted on other sites and have your own blogs and stuff. It’s great. I don’t to have any time to post on mine.

This is kind off the topic but could you please stop thinking about Gordzilla http://www.members.shaw.ca/fluxdesign/ for a while and be proactive (said with just a touch of irony!) Hey I hate to be the nagging sister here but candidates need help! Tons.

While it was incredibly empowering to be at that first rally in front of the Ledge in February 2001 (haveI got the date right?), all that physical and passionate enthusiasm has waned. Try cutting down your posting time and go on out to your local candidate's http://candidates.bc.ndp.ca/ office. There are any number of unpaid jobs that have to be done to get your vote on.

All campaign offices need food as many members and staff on pathetic salaries stay from 9-9.

We have pole cats in our office too and they need energy to cope with the death threats – really they’re getting threatened. This is a sure sign that people still need to be convinced that we can do better than the fibs..

So convince yourself, your family, your friends and everyone else to actually support the campaign as there are many undecided that just go for the best sounding ad or don’t think it’s worth voting at all.

The NDP are the best that we’ve got right now. We can always force them to do more than they promised. Hahaha. They can make up for all the mistakes they made in their last terms.

Off to Jenny’s headquarters now. We need masses of people and any help you can do. Only two weeks left.

LZ

Jean Binette writes: Bailey - Everybody knows you tend to get confused, but don't let that stop you.

If you're really interested in getting at the truth of NDP financial management, you ought to grab hold of Carole James and rip off her shoes and socks and expose the eleven toes.

Clark had eleven toes too! - Except his were all on one foot and it drove him mad because he could never learn to hop and count at the same time (pity).

sirjohna intentially missed the point today:

"budd; critiquing the libs for anti-ndp rhetoric? look in the mirror buddy."

The point is that the Liberal's anti-union and anti-NDP rhetoric is just politics, pure and simple. No one should take it seriously.

Unfortunately, some people, a bit unversed in the ways of democratic politics, and believing that the media as an institution is one they ought to be able to rely on for a degree of neutrality and objectivity, don't understand that this stuff is just talk.

Being serious people with real world concerns about the economy they assume that the press spin they hear, much of it attributed to business sources not Liberals (at least not officially Liberals), which complains about 1990s NDP taxes and regulations and about union wages and benefits is intended as a serious economic critique, one that actually has some kind of economic content.

This is what I find disturbing, that hundreds of thousands of people are being intentionally and systematically misled into mistaking a political pitch line for an honest assessment of economic realities.

Jean Binette writes:- That's absolutely correct Budd, any chimpanzee with opposing thumbs can pick up a calculator and rearrange the budget, and that fact is well documented in this province.

Jean Binette: I hear Gordo has webbing between his toes, which makes any kind of financial accountability near impossible.

bailey; there's one thing you should understand clearly before you go any further in your quest for political enlightenment:
THE FAST FERRIES WERE A MAKE WORK PROJECT. period. end of story. until you realize that you should not discuss the issue again.

Jean Binette writes" - but he can sure clap!

Hi Bailey: Talk about Liberal Lies ... it seems to be high time for a thorough re-write of the PacifiCats. As an aside ...

My old Dad, an engineer, would often lapse into a story about the Stanley Steamer. [Pause ... (a) do you know what it is? (b) did you laugh? ]

After a drink of good scotch, he'd describe the Stanley Steamer car ... how it moved soundlessly, like a whisper ... how efficient it was ... ran without gasoline ... ran without pollution ... ran on steam ... ran very, very cheaply.

After another drink, he'd denounce the rascals who felt that their inferior work on diesel and gas-powered engines was threatened by the Stanley Steamer. Dad ripped a strip off the oil barons, too, who had their black gold to sell and wars to fight over it.

Then Dad would describe their decision to launch a campaign of ridicule against the Stanley Steamer. People weren't nearly so sophisticated in those days, so it worked. Even my old Dad couldn't believe how thoroughly it had worked. He felt that the world had been cheated.

The result of that propaganda campaign was simply that whenever those two words were mentioned -- Stanley Steamer -- people would laugh uproariously. I remember those days. But now, you rarely hear those two words at all. These days, oil is king. Noise and pollution surround him. And us.

It's amazing how these things can be managed. Goebels seized upon the technique and used it for the Nazis of Germany in the 1930s. But it does require complete control of the media before whole lines of production -- like the Stanley Steamer or the Fast Ferries -- can be wiped out, leaving people the poorer.

Thanks, Bailey, for translating the cost of British Columbia's Fast Cats into terms of tuition for the workers who were trained on them. Nice to know that.

campbell doesn't want skilled workers in this province. If he did he wouldn't have scrapped the apprenticeship program and replace it with system he did.

Now instead of learning a trade from start to finish, you can learn the first step and someone else learns the second and so on.

There are so many reasons to get the liberal party out of office.

You may be against union but at least with unions you get the benefit of a decent wage..
and in turn put that money back into the economy.

Todays news says

"About 13,000 jobs were created in B.C. in April, according to Statistics Canada. The biggest increase came in food services and accommodation. "

Yes, those high paying service jobs, where you need three of them to be able to pay your rent and forget about saving for a mortgage.

quote from
http://vancouver.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=bc_jobs-rate20050506

Good one, Jean Binette.

Good write, Mary. I agree.

When the path of ridicule was chosen over continuing with the careful, scientific development of the FastCats, in order for the Fibs and the Kept Media to score political points against the NDP as the main priority of the period, we lost an opportunity to develop a unique, and over time, profitable shipyard manufacturing product. Private enterprise, continues to soak up huge quantities of private and public capital, after more than twenty years, of trying to bring the fuel cell to a satisfactory conlusion. Most major new product development involves significant and desheartening cost over-runs.

I forget the exact figures, but even the "relatively" straight forward developmet of such as the Coquihalla Highway, as another example, involved huge over-runs to complete.

For all my criticism of the NDP, the FastCats were not so much a victim of objective technological or product development issues, as they were the politics of the day, and the particular atmosphere of hysteria generated by Fiberal and partisan Big Media interests. The hysteria was carried to such a level that it even over-rode the making of a prudent business decision, and the good sense and self-interest even of the public. It was a demostration of the power of media to shape public opinion, more than it was a poor business decision by the NDP.

Had it been an idea of the private sector primarily, and not served the interests of the NDP, even the Sun and Province would still be happy to see it soaking up overages.

Bullshit, amoke and mirrors won in the end however, as but another demonstration of the severe limitations of our capitalist class dominated democracy, and the failure of folks to rein them and their power and influence in.

It's the measure of the point we have to get beyong as a society and an economy.

Interesting piece on NDP financial BS. Yes we all agree that the last NDP Budget was more or less (mostly less) balanced. However, most of the balanced funds were based on one time winfalls from BCHydro, ICBC, plus anticipated revenues from sources such as Skeena Celleous etc. Not only that, but the NDP failed to include funding required for both education

Hi yourself, BCMary,

I enjoyed your story about the old Stanley steamer.

I can imagine the silky whooshing sound of a steam engine under the hood as you cruised down the road.

I've heard a different tale about the reason for the internal combustion engine's winning out over steam, though. Apparently they felt they shouldn't vent steam at street level, since they would need to re-water more often than they'd need to re-fuel. So they needed huge radiators to cool and condense the steam. The only place to put these was in the doors, which made it pretty hot inside.

But the decider was what happened in a side on collision. I guess the occupants of the Stanley tended to get pretty steamed. Getting t-boned left you medium rare.

Oh, and sirj; I'm so so sorry. How could I be so foolish as to continue to believe things I know from my own experience, when you make such a great point by CAPITALIZING YOUR BS.

I just failed to realize how easy it is for you to prove a point is true. Just hit the CAPSLOCK button, and HEY PRESTO! Everyone is convinced.

Then just add "Period. End of story." and then I guess nobody can disagree no more.

Sweet!

And the Libs have been using Federal transfer payments, service charge increases for all government services from parks to driver's licenses etc., previously provided as a public service, and draconian cut-backs in hard won gains in services of benefit to the great mass of people, in order to balance their budget-, in lieu of a huge imbalance in tax breaks given to the most wealth in the province.

(The top 1% of income earners, which doesn't even then take into account other forms of earned capital wealth over a certain figure, I believe $100,000, got more in tax breaks than the bottom 15% of income earners put together. This Fiberal apologist bullshit just never stops.) (Whenever I see the name sdgreen, I hear a great sucking sound that rises to a point where he disappears up his own anus.)

By and large, at very least, the balancing of the NDP budget, for all their many faults, did not result by putting the primary burden of it onto the backs of the poorest and other working class elements. Given a choice between burdening the poorest and the wealthiest, there is never any illusion here, as upon whom the Fiberal choice will alwasy fall.

Time to punish the Fiberals for their lies, broken promises and attacks upon the peoples' interests. Time to proclaim, loud and clear, unapologetically and with determination, that ALL they have done WILL BE UNDONE! That is the main failing of the NDP to here.

And it is time to launch a declaration of intent to reduce and circumscribe society's dependancy on Big Capitalist domination of the economy, and to move towards a system of greater worker and public particicpation and control over the main Corporate sectors of the economy, its plant and facilities. This bullshit has gone on too long already, and is leading society and its economy towards environmental degradation, impoverishment of the great mass of people, and the eventual collapse of the economy.

We have to live in the decay, squalor, pollution and diminishing economic prospects and outcomes you, or more accurately those whose asses apologists like sdgreen kiss so fervently and shamelessly, leave behind in our communitites and lives, while they move to isolated upscale and gated communities of the priviledged, where they can actually go about their lives like we don't even exist.

Eh, folks are patient, they are continuing to hope that the assholes of the ruling class will smarten up, and they are hesitant and reluctant to engage in conflict-, to a fault. Mostly they just want to go about their family and community business and raise their kids. Keep going the way you assholes are, and that may not always be the case.

and healthcare labour contracts. Of more serious nature was the devasting exodus of job creating organizations because of NDP policies that applied to both small and large corporations and businesses. Yes the budget was more or less balanced with the exception of the 'forgotten' and 'unrecorded' obligations required of government.

To add to the issue was the number of failed programs that substracted funds from revenues.

The NDP at their conclusion, and specifically under the direction of Paul Ramsey and Ujahl Dosange, clearly understood the predicament. If they won the election of 2001, both the mentioned NDP Ministers new that they would be in tough times in order meet the NDP objectives. You will recall that the NDP were in the process of disbanding Forest Renewal, acknowleged the failure of the Fast Ferries, acknowledged the issue with Skeena and other obligations.

The major issue here is the flawed application of funding resources relative to the balanced needs of ALL the population of British Columbia. Two terms of the NDP clearly have demonstrated a severe imbalance.

On the other hand, the BCLIbs have in some cases reduced funding in areas that the NDP emphasized and at the same time provided funding in areas of greater economic importance. Socialists will say that one can not abandon people, but if one does not have revenues to support those lessor folks then that becomes a problem. The Libs are resolving tose issues.

the Health care issue is a non issue fro the point that ALL provinces, indeed a good number of world wide nations are wrestling with the very high costs of healthcare. This is not going to be solved overnight or indeed in the next several years.

The matter of privatization is only of interest to those who are unionists. The rest of us really do not care as long as the result is satisfactory. The negative stories coming out is basically union propaganda.

In sum, the authur is dead wrong in assumptions and fact.

In reviewing the article leading this thread, I see I was wrong. That "tax break imbalance was even greater than I indicated, going from memory.

Coyote:

I certainly recognise that your principals are more in favour of the 'grey uniform' style of governance, and that likely you are a bit, actually 'more than a bit' critical of anyone that makes a 'profit' from some enterprise.

But I must ask ... Why is it really really bad to make a profit? Secondly in realistic terms one has to ask how your vision could ever be implemented in both the short term/long term, given the current world economics.

My position Coyote, as you have very correctly identified, is not that of a socialistic approach, but rather one of open market competition. I strongly believe in competition and non-subsidized industry. The socialist parties, that is the NDP, and to some extent in Canada the Federal Liberals have not found any success in this arena, except by illegal means.

The BCLIbs, qas opposed to the BCNDP have established what I think is a good environment to create employment.

Why do you object for this?

Sorry about that, but somehow it seems that the msg fromCoyote and I somehow got split in time!

Coyote, are we positives/negatives?

Understandable. I think they are all Spinning Binnette in various stages of drag and disguise; same politics, same-o styles, and tiresome one line grunts, belches and farts. Zero new ideas, concept development capacity or objective analytical ability, poor language and sentence structure skills.

In conclusion, all three are possessed of a certain child-like naivete. (Or immaturity.) They all get the same failing grade on their next report cards.

Certainly she's not very lady-like. :-) (I mean, everyone knows ladies don't belch or fart, but suffer in silence and maybe "fluff" quietly outdoors. :-)

I am on the side of whatever serves the majority class interests of society, as determined by same-, not some priviledged ruling class and their political servants in parliaments and legislatures they fundamentally control.

Which means. I am not in principle even opposed to "private initiative" and reward at certain levels. Small business particularly, in my opinion, is the most likely place of embryonic new "industry and enterprise development" in the social economy. At those levels, however, in the development of an enterprise, assuming it has that kind of growth potential to begin with, and many do not, where it begins to develop a community wide impact, and large scale worker involvement, combined with various/ and all forms of public subsidy, incentive, product and market development assistance, public breaks in land and taxes on income etc, guaranteed public loans, etc., that this should come with an equity position attached to it, going to the public, as is otherwise typical in current similar relations between enterprises and private capitalist investors and loan guarantors etc themselves. And that means, at that level of an enterprises development/ expansion, worker and public interests should begin to play an increasing role in its operation, day to day management and strategic direction control.

At the level of the large Corporations today, where much of that which I have described has already provided a public feed trough from which their activities, profitability and development has fed, in many cases to excess, they should IMMEDIATELY be made subject to democratic worker and community participation and exercise of a management role, even at the level of outright control.

I am not even, in principle opposed to profit per se, which is really the excess in income to an enterprise over material expenses and the cost paid to labour. It is the difference between these costs of production and what the market is willing to pay.

The question is, to whom should the profit go, and for what purpose? My position being, that in the changed social and economic circumstances I advance, that should be decided by the workers and community interests involved, not by a priviledged ruling class skimming off the top, from what the labour and activity, tolerance and largesse of others has largely made possible. Profit is a social product, not a private one, gleaned from the activity of large numbers of people, and should accrue to them and their communities.

Neither am I particularly against these "social enterprises" engaging in "competition" at some level, so long as it facilitates production and economic activity to a level that is not harmful to workers and their society, or the natural environment by which grace they exist in the first place. And they, across the whole of society and the agreements they make amongst themselves should and will decide that relationship between competition, and social and environmental responsibility, for themselves.

In short, primarily what I advocate is a new kind of economic and societal democracy that has a multitude of implications, at many levels, for the whole of society.

You see, what is primarily wrong here, in this discussion, is your understanding of my position, from the ground up. I, on the other hand, have the advantage of understanding yours fully, because I daily live its inequitable consequences.

Now aren't you glad you fed me this opportunity to have this rant? :-)

I would say, we are more opposing evolutionary forces within society. Yourself that conservative force that benefits from, presumably, the status quo arrangement, wheras I am more a force for change arising from within that which is inadequate, nay even harmful to the "living thing" of which we are both a part, or an aspect.

What will determine, in the end, and possibly over even an extended period of time, the eventual outcome between us, or people much like us, is how and where that larger "living organism" comes to see what it needs are, and what adaptations to its changing social, economic and natural environment it concludes it must make or not, in order to continue to survive and exist.

Right now, yourself, the conservative force has the advantage, unquestionably-, but nothing in life or nature is ever completely static, at a permanent place or state of rest. More it is ever in motion, in a permanent state of evolutionary flux and development. No one place, point or state of being will last forever. :-)

We shall have to see, not? :-)

Rome was not built in a day, nor was it brought down in a day, or with a single assault.

sdgreen; you are making far too much sense for coyote, b.c.mary and the like. nothing short of anarchy will satiate them.

Wow.

Lots of intelligent comments by lots of people.

Has anyone even bothered to check the figures that have been presented in this article or are we just taking it for truth?

The figures don't matter to the animals or their handlers Ginger, they only want to feed on your money while they live in Coyote nirvana, a place or state of oblivion to care, pain, or external reality - otherwise known as the world of New Democrats.

Jean Binette

The figures don't matter to the animals or their handlers Ginger, they only want to feed on your money while they pine for Coyote nirvana, a place or state of oblivion to care, pain, or external reality - otherwise known as the world of New Democrats.

Jean Binette

Aw binnie, and I thought you might actually add to the conversation this time.

Isn't your shift over yet?

What a bunch of drivel !!

Some of you people have a way too much time on your hands. Instead of complaining about how little you make on welfare (quadrapalegics excepted) maybe you should go out and find a job (if you have a job, find a better one). The quads shoud get a raise.

sdgreen, your criticism of the last days of the NDP administration is in error. The NDP left office with a higher growth rate in the economy than any year under the Libs. That high growth rate is always ignored by the Liberal apologists.

Attacking the budget itself as a problem that the Liberals had to "fix" is also an outright exaggeration because the NDP budget wasn't passed. It was the Liberals that passed that budget after adding substantially to the spending of it. They thought they could afford it no doubt because of the current surplus and the current growth rate in the economy.

You can't have it both ways, either the Liberals were wrong to pass that budget or they didn't "fix" anything. I would suggest they in fact created the problems that led to their huge deficits.

Until the Liberals ever produce a surplus higher than the transfers they get from Ottawa, they won't get much respect from anyone who can read a balance sheet. Facts can be stubborn.

Frank;

The only problem was the fact that the NDP created a structural deficit, and were madly trying to find ways to reduce programs. I know coz I was on the inside looking in!!!!

The NDP knew that they could not maintain either their current programs nor support most of their promises.

That is why the BCLIBs had to reduce many programs. The NDP also left the Province with twice as much deficit as when they took power; almost 2 billion dollars per year in their tenure. Pretty sad really!

sdgreen, you ignored my point. What structural deficit? The NDP didn't pass that budget, the Liberals did, after adding considerably to the spending.

I would need more than your say-so to believe in a myth.

As for NDP deficits, it was the Libs that rewrote the record books. Without the massive influx of money from the feds and the savings on debt payments due to lower interest rates the Libs pretty much would have racked up in 4 years what it took the NDP 10.

Also, your last paragraph says "deficit". I believe you mean debt. The NDP did not leave any "deficit" at all.

That was quite ignorant of you Frank, considering that "deficit" spending is the spending of public funds raised by borrowing rather than by taxation. WAC used to call it "funny money".

Once again you provide proof beyond a shadow that you can't fix stupid.

Jean Binette

Carole James May 6, 2005 - "my word and my integrity are important to me".

If that is the truth Carole James, (whomever you are), why did you walk away and turn your back on your best candidate Rollie Keith? - and why do you continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with Hairy Lali?

Jean Binette

sdgreen maybe you'd like to define what you mean by "structural deficit" as I've been to the Auditor General's site and read, among others, a report/news release February 14th 2002 that in essence our assets grew more than our liabilities, and our income grew more than our costs so please explain the where,what and how of your "structural deficit". You say all you like but until you back it up it's just propanganda.....

...Should of proof read that last part: You can say all you like but until you back it up it's just propaganda....

Come on, capitalism functions by borrowing the savings of the nation all the time, it's part of what the banking system is all about; taking in the savings of working folks and others and making it available to "business"-, at interest rates that return dick all to the original provider of the savings cash.

There is apparently a court case going forward right now, either in this country or the US, I can't immediately recall, where the private banks are being sued for "creating money capital" out of nothing, which is supposed to be the charter function of the central bank exclusively. (There was a brief "blip" about it in the Kept Corporate Media, but has since disappeared from the radar screen, all hush, hush.)

What is going on is, the banks are providing loans, where no actual money ever changes hands, it all occurs digitally only, and moves about as if it was real cash-, which the advancing litigant claims poses real risks to the market and the value of money-, it is essentially non-existant, as in funny money.

For chriz sake Spinney Binney & Co., it is capitalism that has advanced the state of credit debt across society to the absurd levels that it is, as a means of capturing and controlling people and markets. And what do you think credit is, if it is not funny money? More of the asswipe you should hand out with your comments?

Capitalism is all about economic and market sleights of hand, and "funny" money and irrational social relationships generally, bearing little resemblance to most folks realities.

More stupid than stupid, and another perfect example why my Ancestor Alfred Binet always maintained that mankind could never bridge the formidable intelligence quota gap existing between human and animal.

Jean Binette

Some analysis please, Spinnette, as opposed to mere grunts, belches and farts. :-)

Lacking the grey cell power, are we?

Please refer to the previous post.

Jean Binette

:-) Clearly, grey cells are the issue, which you seem prepared to concede.

More humour, less bad breath display, please.

Time to resurrect The Punished, Binney. Bring your butch sideback from the Caymans. We need a break in persona here. There being no content development in what you have to say, we want another pretty face, at least. ;-)

Please Coyote - you're covered in your own excrement.

Jean Binette

Jean, do you know the difference between debt and deficit? what sdgreen referred to is "debt", not deficit. Once again you prove you can't spell stupid.

Coming from the fellow who wanted to call out the PPLCI to raid Bountifull, I'd say you spell stupid - FRANK.

regards
Jean Binette

It just occurred to me, we were largely ignoring you, Ginger.

By and large, I think, Frank has done an excellent job of analyzing these figures and their significance. In that regards, I would read his posts most carefully. Frank is a good technician. :-)

Additionally, contrary to the "official" Fiberal Party position, if you read carefully and what is contained much within the comments of the extreme right's minions here, from persons such as sdgreen, one of the more intelligent and lucid of their number, and even the more rabid "Spinning" element, they generally concede that the deficit left behind by the NDP did not in fact exist, as claimed by their Great Leader and his power "intoxicated" party.

Sdgreen said above, and I quote, "Yes we all agree that the last NDP Budget was more or less (mostly less) balanced."

That they add the kind of codicil, without any real corroborating evidence, that the auditor general's report of "a balanced budget" being the real NDP legacy-, that there was, in fact, what they call a "structural deficit" built into the system they left behind, is again without any hard evidence , other than their own claims. It is more propaganda than substance, designed to bamboozle a, they hope, gullible electorate.

On the other hand, that they, The Fibs have gutted the finances of the province with their largesse to their rich friends and "backers", and then only covered it up with service cuts to education, health and the other needs of the population, with the largesse of Federal transfer payments, and the introduction of a whole range of fees and fee hikes for other government services-, and the circumstantial good fortune of a brief blip in capitalist market performance, especially with rising world wide raw resource demand, is indisputable. (Capitalist markets are constantly up and down, like whore's (male or female) drawers.) It is well reported, noted and lived by the population, with real declines in purchasing power, recently brought out in new "income stats", where BCs urban centres suffered the biggest actual purchasing power declines of all major centres in Canada. (Globe and Mail within the last few days.) Additionally, the growth in part time jobs over family supporting full time jobs at decent union wages, and in increasing reliance on minimum wage jobs, having to work more than one minimum wage job etc. etc. in order to function at all, is the increasing reality faced by growing numbers of individuals and whole families.

But really, I think you and other folks have to look at the circumstances of your own life and ask, am I better off today than I was four years ago, is the quality of my life improving or declining, and are my prospects for the kind of life I want and need better or worse. (Figures don't lie, but liars figure.) If everyone in the province applies those simple questions and standards to their own lives, looks around them at those of others, and stops worrying so much about the quantitative statistical minutia, as THEY would have, this Fiberal government will be gone May 17th.

That done, I don't really think the NDP has what it takes to undo what this government has destroyed of the people's interests and lives, but we will have at least punished these particular assholes. If we do that, and take that attitude, over simple "partisan" politics in the narrow sense, we'll also get to dealing with the NDP's inadequacies as well, in the fullness of time, I think.

It's just unfortunate, in a way, that one has to look after the problems of today, in order to get to the ones that will remain for tomorrow to deal with. :-) But, ehhh, what's a body to do? That's life, right? :-)

And Frank is right, I too confused debt and deficit in some places in the above. Deficit being what is left after one's debts are insufficiently paid. The revenue was there to cover "the debt", so there was no "deficit".

For example, I often use my Visa card as cash, especially when travelling, but I never charge more than I can pay off at the end of the month, in order not to pay interest on it. My debts are thus always covered, so that there is no deficit.

Neither, says the auditor general, a non-partisan dept of governance, did the NDP leave any "deficit".

Somebody should take you outside and hose you down critter.

Frank - Imagine if Rollie Keith would have deserted his troops while under enemy fire.

Now imagine your leader "Who's Carole James" - not even a bonified politician yet, and already a proven liar.

Jean Binette

Ooooo! There you go, trying to excite me again. :-D This is a political forum, not one of your Dominatrix "Personals" chat rooms.

Yup, Jeannie, I read your comments of "stupid, stupid" and realise why the Fibs have been so successful on their campaigns: just keep on calling other people stupid while providing no analysis yourself and eventually the sheep will believe you.

Instead of being so simple, how about hauling out some of your proof, instead of lies so that we the "stupid" may see the incredible wisdom of your ways.

Thank you,

LZ

Frank - now imagine that all Coyote wants to do is fing her "G" spot.

Jean Binette

Frank - now imagine that all Coyote wants to do is find her "G" spot.

Jean Binette

I know, I know. It was a Freudian slip. You meant to say, "finger her G spot.", right? :-D

You are soooo naughty.

Jean, I'm happy that the people at the home let you have internet access so that you can post on the Tyee every waking hour of the day. I'm sure its better than staring at a tv. But your comments lead me to believe your time would be better spent with a book.

The supporters of the BC Liberals that read this site must cringe every time they see a post from you.

I'm sure they do Frank -

Jean Binette

No I didn't, Coyote's don't have fingers.

Jean Binette

I heard Ginger's question too. I went back and reread the article, because I realised I'd been assuming the chart flowed from Auditor Generals reports.

I have read some of those, and where my reading coincided with Mr Dobbin's chart, they agree. Since charts usually draw all their info from the same source, I guess that was it, but he doesn't say so directly in the body of the article.

Maybe we should ask him, if he's still around.

Mr. Doooooobbiiiiiinn! Oh, Mr Dooooobbiiiiiinn!
Wheredja get your data for that great chart?

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/bona%2520fide.html

bo·na fide
adjective

1. authentic: authentic and genuine in nature a bona fide offer
2. sincere and honest: without any intention to deceive
[From Latin, literally “with good faith”]

You see, Spinny Binnette, you may think it is enough to be cute, but folks know.

Provide this person the evidence they request, or put on the pointy wee dunce's cap and go stand in the corner for the rest of the day.

I agree with your prior post leonie, but why would the coyote lump you in with his "we the stupid" followers?

Or was it just a spelling lesson?

Jean Binette

Just reading your comments and observing that you have no basis in reality. Plus of course, your spelling sucks.

Oops, surely I'll take a big hit for that nasty note.

Thanks for your visceral comment Leonie, I'm sure others share your view.

Jean Binette

Dear Jeannie, Sweet!

Oh, boy, wonder if Spinney's care givers realize she thinks that she's conversing with a Coyote with no fingers? You gotta admit that he types pretty good for an animal with no fingers,Spinney, yes?!

BP, Notice that I said "she" has no basis in reality, not just her political views - whatever they may be!

It's a button pushing thing.

She only cares about the IQ of her followers, he lower the better, and not who they are. -
Eg:(sic). Rollie Keith.

Jean Binette

To say the least. ;-)

Now, it's bloody noon. I must get something real done today. Catch ya's all later.

You ladies gotta stop this.

Every time I see a post from Jean Binette, Ron Erwin, et al, I 'm reminded of an old northern saying about throwing a rock into a pack of dogs. If one yelps that means you've hit something.

Wow.

I take it back

Lots of comments by lots of people that are no longer intelligent, and no one seems to bother with the fact that this is just one source of information...again, has anyone gone and bothered to check these figures out for themselves? Or are we just taking what we see as truth and not bothering to form opinions on backed up fact.

Oh, and the insults gotta stop...they're quite silly, and they actually make you look bad (instead of your intended 'victim'

But that's just my $0.02

I'm not a lady.

hahahahahaha OK, that was really silly. In fact I am a female.

Your absolutely right Ginger - the figures come from Schreck, and I wouldn't rely on them at all.

And just like I said before, almost all of them don't care because it's Nirvana they seek. - (unfortunately, and to the detriment of everyone else in BC)

Jean Binette

ginger, for an in-depth look at the numbers you can check out Will McMartin's 70 page or so chapter in the book Liberalized. Everything he says is sourced. Draw your own conclusions.

What Frank fails to mention is that Schreck helped write the book.

Fact is not welcome at the Tyee, while baseless allegations are cherished. - if you don't believe it, read the Tyee from cover to cover.

Jean Binette

PS, I wouldn't buy the book just yet. It will soon end up on the "Bargain" table at the local Cole's bookstore along with the Harcourt Chronicles and Rafe's fish stories.

Jean Binette

And by the Way Frank, Cabot discovered newfoundland for the British, but he couldn't understand what the "Newfies" were saying so they left and didn't come back until 1949.

Honest Injin, Look it up!

Jean Binette

Ginger, while I can't say I've checked out this article out, as in where he got his info, I have done quite a bit of reading from the Auditor Generals' website and his info seems to match the authors'. Want to read for yourself? Go to bcauditor.com .The only info I specifically will direct you to is a news release/report released on the 14th of February 2002 ....after that go look for yourself I found it quite informative, you might too.....

Back to business:

I’m just guessing but I’m sure that everyone posting here has read 100’s if not 1000’s of hard copy documents, newspapers, pamphlets, faxes from the Freedom of Information and Privacy Office and internal documents leaked by actual provincial government personnel, watched hours of TV, CDs and DVDs, heard Rafe Mair and the CBC, read countless articles on the net, posted by experts of all kinds.

They’ve probably gone to a lot of meetings, done some door knocking, have an NDP sign on their lawn or window and are on several enewslists. They forward email to their friends after reading that too.

They’ve read and heard not only the mainstream news but the news about the Asper family who owns the news here in BC. No doubt they talk about it in person and not just on the net.

So I’m pretty sure that everyone here is well-educated whether in a formal or informal setting and can judge for themselves which are the bona fide sites and which are the fake wanker non-bona fide sites. Plus, there are many other topical sites besides David Schreck’s – some folks might need to look around a bit more.

I’ve got so much bona fide documentation I don’t have enough time to get it all organized without missing the new information coming through. Sorry.

"Profit is a social product, not a private one, gleaned from the activity of large numbers of people, and should accrue to them and their communities"....Neither am I particularly against those "social enterprises" engaging in "competition" at some level, so long as it facilitates production and economic activity to a level that is not harmful to workers and their society, or the natural environment by which grace they exist in the first place."

Coyote, you have quite a remarkable and life-affirming ( I would say "lovely" but hey, you're a guy) take on the world. Basically treating all people well. It seems so simple - why do we make it all so complicated...

Tres amusante. :-) All that for this?

Don't have anybody's sign on my lawn, don't read Schrek's site or knock on any doors for the NDP. No doubt you are a bright lady, but there's more to politics than all these things, and from down here at street level, close enough to the gutter to be able to reach down and touch it, I'll match your ivory tower knowledge of the subject anytime.

Did take a short university level sociology course one time, on the subject of morality and attitudes towards the issues of Peace, War & Sex. He was an interesting fellow leading the course, a little wierd for me at the start of the hippy period, when I was really just a rebellious but straight working class kid with many mouths to feed and support, as a consequence of lust issues, mostly my own. (Welll, far from entirely.)

Long haired he was, smelled of patch oil, and with the new, then just emerging look in university professors that would come to typify everything redneck right wingers hate about the type. (How I came to be there, way out of my element, is too long a story.)

Anyway, on the day of the course, he walked in and went straight to the board without even looking at us, picked up a piece of chalk and raised it up to the board.

KILL, he wrote in very large, bold letters. Then, MURDER. RAPE followed.

By this time, we are all shrugging our shoulders, looking from one to the other, trying to figure out what this dude thought he was doing. Mostly, he still seemed just strange.

WAR, he printed. ATOMIC BOMB, followed quickly by HIROSHIMA.

By this time, I mean, eyes were beginning to glaze over and heads starting to nod from sheer boredom.

Then, without hesitation, he wrote, "FUCK."

Well, bedlam immediately ensured, with much aghast sucking in of breath, laughing, chatter, expressions of outrage and indignation from the gals, and snickering glancing about amongst the males and some of the ladies. The place was galvanized, male and female.

"Now", the what I certainly considered hippy professor said, turning around from the board, "Let's talk about what your collective reaction to these different words reveals about majority society's attitudes to the issues of Peace, War and Sex."

That little course was one of the best and most enlightening I ever took, from the point of view of what it taught me about people and their attitudes, and what often passes for morality. I even managed to get a really good mark on the paper we had to write at the end of it. And I'm generally too easily distracted to be a top knotch scholar, by any stretch.

I'll just leave the story with yas.

Well, whilst I thank you for your kind words, you may be getting too far out on a limb there. :-) Like most guys, there is that darkside thingy that can be tapped into by particular situations. Maybe ladies too? (You know, just when one or the other of us thinks the other is perfect, it turns out they are human and fallible afterall. :-)

But hey, good woman, you can call me lovely anytime. :-) I'm not that squeamish, or insecure in my manhood. :-)

I, of course, thinking you are lovely as well.

Jeannie, why don't you go in search of a few crumbs that Gordo leaves behind in the woods and get off this site. Your posts are sooooo tiresome.

"Everybody Matters"

Jean Binette

Perhaps I'm confused, or am not reading the correct report from bcauditor.com....

But, on page 12 of 56 (of the report titled Monitoring the Government Finances) 2001 shows a significant surplus.

Am I reading this right or does this completely discredit this article? Most good authors will disclose their source at time of writing, or at least have mention of it in the chart provided.

If the author of said article and creator of the chart above is reading this, where exactly did you get your figures?

Chuckling. Really good one.

To really push the concept to its extreme outer limit. :-)

Ginger, I don't have access to my computer I woke this morning and it wouldn't work (I have no idea....can't get hold of my computer guy...)any ways this one doesn't open the big files -I don't know why.... But the news report(Report # 4) I'm talking about came from February 14 2002 and is a report evaluating the last 5yrs of the NDP era it was called "AG's Report on monitoring the Gov't Finances ...Is this the same report you were looking at? All I can see right now is the press release so I can't get to any pages of that file....

sirjohna,
jim,
dearpremier,
sdgreen:

Please, all of you, take a hike.

You are the mules carrying the bad drugs to the people.
I urge you to get lost. You disgust me, and the rest of us here, who just want a more hospitable province...not one in which LIARS WIN!!!!

ginger, the chart and the article both claim a large surplus for 2001 too.

YOU GO GIRLFRIENDS!, but please realize that it won't matter how many times you re-arrange the figures, it will always add up to "Fudge-it budget" (see HELPBC - BC Supreme Court). However, if you still insist on hurting yourself then you ought to use the same method and data bank that the former "Gang of Six' and current resident NDP financial guru Schreck used throughout 10 years of disastrous NDP government that "can do whatever it wants" - Just pick them out of thin air, that way they will always add up to your satisfaction.

Besides, I can't see how any of the various manipulations can assist you, because nothing will change the fact that we now know who Carole James is. She is your leader. A leader who in an act of desecration had no qualms about sacrificing her troops by letting them commit suicide. A leader who will turn her back on you in the blink of an eye and never look back and one who clearly doesn't mind covering herself in the filth of Coyote's excrement in order to win.

Regretfully, Carole James doesn't understand that fighting fair is more important than winning. If nothing else that should be as plain as the nose on your collective faces and you should be careful about who you trust with your future.

(It's important that you remember that I tried my level best to defend Rollie Keith and slammed Penner and his malicious behaviour repeatedly while not one of you came to his rescue.)

PS - did you know that the former head of ICBC was a union secretary who lived in a multi-million dollar West Vancouver waterfront home and helped run a secret stock trading boiler-room at ICBC headquarters in concert with Bob William's using our 6 billion as the poke?

What about McMartin the diehard" socialist" and his personal NDP book of lies. How come he sinks himself to the level of the much despised "capitalist" by offering it for sale instead of posting it on the Tyee? What ever happened to civic duty

"Born Again C?" - I presume.

Jean Binette

Coyote - my comment was in regards to Ginger and Jean who state that those who write on this forum haven't done their research and are just writing whatever they feel like writing.

Had to laugh about your comment Jean, that Carol is the liar and that she will desert us asap. That remains to be seen but Campbell was never with us though he promised he would be (no worries, I didn't believe him then either), and has proved it with his actions.

More proof on the money:

1. AG’s report by year
http://bcauditor.com/PUBS/year.htm

2. Ag's comments 2001-2
http://bcauditor.com/PUBS/2001-02/Report4/news.htm
actual report
http://bcauditor.com/PUBS/2001-02/Report4/MonitorGovFinances.pdf

3. AG hits Lib gov 2002
http://www.strategicthoughts.com/record2002/monitoringgov.html

4. AG receives award from fellow Accountants feb2004
http://www.ica.bc.ca/kb.php3?catid=506&artid=1586&pageid=2493 just in case you thought he might be lying. Then again, why would he lie in favour of the NDP gov? There's just no rationale for it. This is the fatal flaw of the myth of the “Fudgit Budget”. The only real reason this slur can’t be irradiated is because people think it’s cute!

5. AG’s hit list Nov 2004
http://nid-1425.newsdetail.bc.ndp.ca/

6. Tyee suggests Libs stop breaking the bank on frivolous things Apr 12 2005
http://www.thetyee.ca/News/2005/04/12/EndSpendingBinge/?tyee_message=Login

7. Apr 2005 economy (just had to slip in Schreck site, where there are numerous well-researched articles, many of them based on his FOI requests.)
http://strategicthoughts.com/

8. Equalization
http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/eqpe.html additional proof that BC was doing well during the NDP years as we received NO equalization payments then. Since the Liberals came into power, we’ve had billions in equalization payments. Where did that money go? Maybe we were fine financially, as Gordon said we were and someone has connections with the generous Federal Liberals.

9. Canadian Charter
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/index.html

10. from Dose.ca news April 18, p.3 (only appears in print edition)

How much were people putting away in 2002?
EU: 9.6%
Alberta: 8%
Ontario: 6%
Quebec: 5.5% (yet note large equalization payments)
Japan: 5.2%
USA: 2.4%
BC: -5% (yes, that’s a minus sign)

And once more to Ginger and those who think humour is inappropriate in a place like this:

The truth is so awful that every now and then some people break out their sense of humour.

For example, I was at the Vancouver Public Forum on Women’s Issues April 19, 2005. Jenny Kwan, Adriane Carr and Linda Reid attended.

The audience, comprised of both men, women and children of both genders, laughed aloud when Linda Reid muttered that the Liberals had opened 4100 new beds of the 5000 they promised.

We laughed even louder when Linda said that the hospital workers got the 15% drop in their wages because they “wanted it”. Of course, the topper was when she was speechless as to why the Liberals cut more than $50 million from child care programs under her watch.

That was a pretty funny debate!

http://www.thetyee.ca/News/2005/03/16/MugShotTooHotforAds/

http://www.pink-slips.com/cgi/site/

http://www.haveyouhadenoughyet.com/mediawatch.php#nofrombruce

http://members.shaw.ca/bookembc/

I was following the orange NPD bus heading east on Highway 1 with Bailey at the wheel the other day, and it cracked me right up when I spotted the big yellow triangle stuck in the rear window that said - CAUTION! "Crybaby's" on Board".

Jean Binette

Hi Jean, I can always tell when I've made a point that convinced you.

You respond with a misspelled insult, or an offensive personal remark from your overheated little imagination.

It's just soooo cute!

Speaking of media bias(apparently the Tyee is guilty of it according to one of our all knowing rightwing armchair pundits)the Province certainly topped themselves today with that full page shot of Campbell "vowing" to get tough on the growing Meth problem.Isn't it great to have the media looking out for your interests-making you look heroic just days after getting your pudgy ass kicked at the Leaders Debate by Carol James?This publication has been so,so,so good to you Gordy boy.

jazz; thanks for rekindling my interest in this propaganda site, as i haven't posted since friday and was losing interest b/c you lefties are all so predictably boring. if you want to talk about liars we can certainly do that. let's see, how about dave stupidich, moe sihota, glen clark, dave zirnheldt, harry lali or adrian dix? or perhaps you'd like to talk about morons, like elizabeth cull, corky evans, dave barrett, david chudnovsky or you?
either way you lose, but again, much thanks.

dearpremier:

Do you have any proof or links to support your scurrilous allegations about the former ICBC President who traded stocks at ICBC head office? Secondly, is it a crime to own a West Van home?

Unless you can rationalize a comment like that, then it's quite foolish to make. Is this part of the desperate Liberal last dash?

No desperation here. I'll get back to you if you are sure you can take the pain of it.

Did you know that the NDP privatized one of our largest public assets?

Jean Binette

Still waiting for that proof my "dear".

It's common knowledge Village Idiot - so don't wait for me, look it up in the OIC's yourself then go sit in the back of the big bus being driven eastbound by the "cute" turnip.

Jean Binette
Ps, by the way, scurrilous is a perfect descriptive term for the NDP, crooked as a dog's hind leg would be another.

Before I forget Village Idiot - No! there is nothing wrong about owning an opulent West Vancouver waterfront home - unless you happen to be a closet "socialist" who constantly whines about corporate greed.

Jean Binette

Dear Jeeves, It's pointless asking Binette to back up his remarks. He never does. He doesn't seem to have any real arguments at all.

He just sits back hinting at some superhuman knowledge nobody else has, pretends you could find his data yourself if you weren't so stupid, and throws out unwarrented insults and outrageously offensive personal remarks.

That way he gets people all worked up and engages them in these interminable slanging matches, which then become all there is on the thread. He repels all reasonable people from carrying on any debate and that seems to be his goal.

To wreck free Democratic debate for everybody. Shouting gibberish and dancing around like a misbehaving two year old in a restaurant to make the adults stop whatever they're doing to look at him.

Whoever he works for must be pleased with his tactic because it's been very successful. In thread after thread here he has prevented people from exploring any topic that shines a poor light on BC Liberals. And that's a lot of topics.

If you browse around this site you'll find topic after topic that ends in days and days of his nonsense and nothing else.

The only defense is to just ignore him. Unless he actually contributes something intelligible and on topic, just don't respond at all. Carry on your conversation and scroll down through all the foolish quips and bullhockey as if they don't exist.

He can only succeed if he catches somebody and sucks them in.

Hi Village Idiot Bailey - I was just trolling on another TYEE THREAD OF MISINFORMATION and whadayaknow, I actually learned how to properly spell the word "crybaby's" so just for you my friend here it is.

B-A-I-L-E-Y. (sounds exactly the same as crybabies)

I hope you find that intelligible enough for the academics at the Tyee

Regards

Jean Binette

It's amusing to see flagrant troll tactics in operation, especially when they come under the ostensible banner of the so-called "Liberal" party. When confronted with facts and logic these induhviduals will always resort to baseless accusations and ad hominem attacks. They've got nothing else to offer.

I never stated that it was misinformation, I was just curious as to where it came from, and was asking for clarification. Feel free to re-read my posts. Most people that put up charts will reference where they get their numbers...or at least in any credible journals/posts/articles etc. Encyclopedias do this too.

This thread has officially gotten ridiculous...with the name calling and the misinterpretations of what people say (from what I have read...misinterpretations choice to cause more havoc)... I actually thought that this was a genuine civil debate.

I am ashamed to say I participated.

I wish you all the best, have fun with your flaming and name calling...at least it's close to being political in that sense.

It will be interesting to see the outcome of this election.

Ciao

Gee Ginger, try to stay calm. Been on the internet long?

Ginger, if you're still out there I'm just curious as why you don't believe the Auditor General? I understand your point that sources are generally listed, but when you are directed to an educated, non partisan analyst such as the AG who gives out the info in question...

Thanks to rkewen and [I]jesterjogger for bringing insight to the discussion. Also kudos to bc mary for reminding us not to be thrown off-track or into a tizzy by the bear-baiters like J1m and binnie.

Now, back to the sale of BC Rail to CN, and how we might be affected by its privatization. Mark my words, one of the reasons Gordo's Gang wanted to privatize our transportation infrastructure was to make it available for Americans to use it as they see fit, without interference from the public. If BC Rail had remained a public operation, the public could have put heat on government regarding how/for what that asset could be used. Now that it's been bought by CN (which is no longer even a Canadian company, I believe), the rail line can be used with impunity. How?

Bush & Co. is currently building missile silos in Alaska for Missile Defence (the other such site is in California), and documents just released show they plan to use CN/BC Rail to supply that missile installation -- with or without public approval. (Just like when the U.S. installed nuclear weapons on Canadian soil in Newfoundland/Labrador in the 1960s without Canada's knowledge, nevermind agreement.

I agree with a previous correspondent who said the corporate elite have no country allegiance. The live wherever they like in the world, and buy whatever services they need (healthcare, security, etc.) with dollars provided by the lowlife's like you and I who pay taxes to their corrupt buddy governments. They need us -- to subsidize their lifestyles -- and they don't mind doing it by taking money out of ordinary people's pockets.

One week to go -- sure would like to see all us "little people" get down to our polling stations. It always amazes me when people say it there's no point in voting. I'm especially incensed when two groups cop out on voting: young people and aboriginal people. Young people have been hit by huge tuition increases, reduced minimum wages for their first jobs and a proliferation of poor-paying service/sales jobs. Kinda matches the proliferation of stores selling decorator junk made in China. Is that the good life??? Get out and vote. What is it that they all think it's so cool to look stupid whenever a reporter asks them if they know whether there's an election going on or if they're going to vote? The joke will be on them in a couple of years stuck in dead-end jobs, praying the lottery will come through for them. And aboriginals! Aboriginals are hurting from the stone-walling of Slick Willy Campbell's government but hey, they don't come out to vote. Why?? Nag your kids to vote, your neighbour, the person next to you in some public line-up...

Get out and vote. And vote for STV too. When former politicians come out against it (Dave Barrett and Bill Bennett) it's a sure sign that it will be good for the public.

Vote NDP and STV!

Ginger--Don't leave. You ask good questions. You make good observations.

You make people examine their thinking, and that is a very good thing in a place like this.

Thanks Bailey.

I have no idea who "Ginger" is but if she is unable to comprehend the massive destruction these NDP/TYEE ideologues caused to the Province of British Columbia over ten short years (led by no less that four Premier's who have all jumped ship since) then she definitely needs to have her head examined.

CHOW (sic)

Jean Binette
PS, Judging by the pitiful plea of Bailey, Head Crybaby at the Tyee Department of Misinformation, I'd say "Ginger" is most likely just another village idiot, (probably married to him or living with the Blonde Pitbull).

Jim, Johna and Binete must be related since they all resort to the same big lie. The data used by the Mr. Dobbin and the rational commntators is as
sound as th eBank of Canada.
The three shrill critics are living in the wrong era.They were needed in 1935-1944. They could allhav eworn spiffy grey uniforms and really been lords of their dommain.

Hitler writes in Mein Kampf (James Murphy translation, page 134):
"...that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods".