Why Can't Softwoods Be Resolved ?

[TCBF]

The efficiencies to be made in health care are in the areas of competitive provision of services: clinics, doctors, hospitals all properly run and competing against each other to bid on the services needed.  Competition keeps productivity up and costs low.  The trick is to have the government provide the structure, and the private sector provide the contractual services. 

That is for life and limb stuff.  If you want a face lift, a boob job, a sex change or whatever, you go buy it.

If other services are available that the govt did not contract (maybe they lost the bid) then by all means buy it - but don't expect the govt to fund THAT - you do.

We keep looking at cCabnada vs the USA on this.  Lets widen our arcs - look at Japan, etc.

Tom

 

[tomahawk6]

A monopoly is what you have already with a government run healthcare system. I do not think the government should provide healthcare, unless you are employed by the government. Healthcare is best provided through the work place.

 

[Infanteer]

I do not think the government should provide healthcare

I do, but maybe that is just the Canadian in me.  The workplace is not the best place to provide healthcare, as it must filter through employers who see it as another administrative burden when dealing with their employees (trust me, I've been in this position) - as well, the labour market is (or should be) quite fluid - it is a pain in the butt when D9'er can't get important dental work she needs done (your teeth are a health issue, no?) because of the condition of employment she is in.  Tom was right when he said we have to look farther than a US/Canada comparison.  To date, MSP's and the ideas of Dr David Grazer have been the best I've seen.  A system in which the government guarantee's all major health problems and consumers (patients) run their own account for the normal health concerns (perscriptions, check-ups, glasses, etc, etc) seems ideal.  I don't care who provides the service.

 

[TCBF]

Believe it or not, that was the system envisioned by Paul Hellyer when he was MND.   He thought Walter Gordon and his ilk had it backwards and that they were out of their depth because they had never had to meet a payroll - which Hellyer did.   When Hellyer - still MND - submitted his counter proposal, Gordon - a leadership rival - said "It's not politic" and Pearson said "Well, that's it then."

And here we are today.

On the other hand, tagging your boss with health care just pulls down the company.   Right now, GM is a health care provider that also happens to build cars.

The truth is out there, but may not necessarily be found either side of the 49th parallel.

Tom

Edited for my usual sloppy spelling.

 

[Infanteer]

Right now, GM is a health care provider that also happens to build cars.

Yeah, and look how they're doing right now.... :-\

 

[Britney Spears]

Well, I think it has less to do with their health care program and more to do with their make-POS-cars program.

 

[TCBF]

Maybe a bit of both.  But, when part of your negotiated benefits program is the provision of healthcare after retirement, massive layoffs and early retirement means you have fewer workers producing but lots of retirees consuming.

So who carries the can when GM goes under?  John Q US Taxpayer. 

Meantime, how much R&D can GM put into better cars and trucks when everyone  is screaming about their underfunded pension and healthcare benefit programs.

Dogma, right and left, only cloud this issue.  I am normally slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun on most issues, but on this I would be willing to hear a scientific solution.

Tom

 

[RangerRay]

The Yanks aren't in a hurry to settle trade disputes with us because the Liberal government finds it politically expedient to poke their fingers into the Yanks' eyes at every opportunity.  Is it any wonder why the White House isn't doing us any favours?

Look at the Aussies.  They have been faithful allies to the Yanks and have had their trade disputes resolved.

 

[geo]

since we've taken a tangent on health care & insurance, thought I'd slip this little gem in

US Army Recruits........

Boudreaux, the smoothest-talking Cajun in the Louisiana National Guard, got called up to active duty one day. Boudreaux's first assignment was to a military induction center, and because he was a good talker they assigned him the duty of advising new recruits about government benefits, especially the GI insurance to which they were entitled.

Before long, the Captain in charge of the induction center began noticing that Boudreaux was getting a 99% sign-up rate for the more expensive supplemental form of GI insurance. This was odd, because it would cost these low-income recruits $30.00 per month more for the higher coverage, compared to what the government was already providing at no charge.

The Captain decided that he would   not ask Boudreaux directly about his selling techniques, but instead he would sit in the back of the room at the next briefing and observe Boudreaux's sales pitch.

Boudreaux stood up before the latest group of inductees and said, "If you has da normal GI insurans an' you goes to Iraq an' gets youself killed, da governmen' pays you beneficiary $20,000.   If you takes out da supplemental insurans, which cost you only t'irty dollars a mons, den da the governmen' gots ta pay you beneficiary $200,000!"

"NOW," Boudreaux concluded, "which bunch you tink dey gonna send ta Iraq first?"

 

[Demophobia]

GO!!! My post wasn't intended to say that we needed to try and all get along no matter what, it was to try and view the argument from more than one side.
Yes we need to take a firm stand on the issues that affect us, and I don't believe that we have truly been doing that as much as we should. But we must be able to empathize with the other side, not necessarily sympathize with them rather just understand where they are coming from. If we close ourselves off and take the position that our way is the only true and right way then I believe we are doing a disservice to our negotiations. We can take decisive action without having to slag our opposition and I believe that we have a stronger case if we stay away from such politics. Understanding is the first step to overcoming.

 

[tomahawk6]

since we've taken a tangent on health care & insurance, thought I'd slip this little gem in

US Army Recruits........

Boudreaux, the smoothest-talking Cajun in the Louisiana National Guard, got called up to active duty one day. Boudreaux's first assignment was to a military induction center, and because he was a good talker they assigned him the duty of advising new recruits about government benefits, especially the GI insurance to which they were entitled.

Before long, the Captain in charge of the induction center began noticing that Boudreaux was getting a 99% sign-up rate for the more expensive supplemental form of GI insurance. This was odd, because it would cost these low-income recruits $30.00 per month more for the higher coverage, compared to what the government was already providing at no charge.

The Captain decided that he would   not ask Boudreaux directly about his selling techniques, but instead he would sit in the back of the room at the next briefing and observe Boudreaux's sales pitch.

Boudreaux stood up before the latest group of inductees and said, "If you has da normal GI insurans an' you goes to Iraq an' gets youself killed, da governmen' pays you beneficiary $20,000.   If you takes out da supplemental insurans, which cost you only t'irty dollars a mons, den da the governmen' gots ta pay you beneficiary $200,000!"

"NOW," Boudreaux concluded, "which bunch you tink dey gonna send ta Iraq first?"

;D

 

[Cloud Cover]

I'm curious as to what each party defines "subsidy" as.

 

[geo]

that's easy.... both do
which goes to explain why this is going on.... ad nauseum

 

[tomahawk6]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060424.wsoftwood0425/BNStory/National/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20060424.wsoftwood0425

Looks like a deal is in the works. The US would give back most of the $5b collected in duties and lift the tariff. In exchange Canada will agree to cap its share of the market at 1/3, which is current market share.

 

[The Bread Guy]

More "good news" for parts of the country making their living from lumber 

The USA agrees to give back most of the funding they weren't supposed to take in the first place, and we agree to limit the ability of softwood lumber producers to sell to the States - free trade, indeed...

I guess there's not enough Conservative votes in saving the lumber industry.

(Can you tell I live in a part of the world where lumber, once, was king?

 

[tomahawk6]

And your solution would be ?

 

[George Wallace]

I have a possible solution.  Canadian governments give up the socialist planned sectors of their economy, i.e. Canada Wheat Board, milk, eggs, alcohol, subsidized stumpage fees, etc . .  . no cap on CDN exports, and I don't agree with the CDN government setting the stumpage fee either.   Sell the right to cut logs on government land at auction instead of an absurdly low fee.  Free markets, low cost to government (no more planned economy, govt. monopoly)  especially since all governments arounds the world have shown they are poor managers of the "peoples money!

WHOA There!

Subsidies.  You want to talk about subsidies.  Our farmers are spending more in planting crops than they are getting in selling those crops.  Subsidies to US and other Foreign farmers are killing the family farm here in Canada.  NAFTA and the free movement of goods, without any duties or tariffs placed on them is a serious factor in this problem.

 

[George Wallace]

I suppose you do have a point about the 'mafias' that are in control of our various Marketing Boards.  I am hearing plenty of horror stories about the Dairy and Beef Marketing Boards and the control that the Party Quebecois has over some of them through their 'Associations'.  Perhaps they have served their purpose and should now be disbanded.

 

[geo]

Funny thing that......
Canada, the USA and all of Europe have subsidies. They're just not called by the same name from place to place.
No point in name calling - it's a lose / lose situation...

With respect to the softwood tarifs, if GATT and NAFTA boards and appeal review boards have, at one time or another, all agreed that the tarifs were not justified - then it is high time that they be removed.  Maybe Condoleza Rice is warming up to Stockwell Day (lord knows he was tripping over himself heaping praise on her - she almost looked embarassed).

 

[geo]

correct me if I'm wrong but, wasn't the intent of the tarifs to raise the price of lumber going into the US so that US consumers would have to pay more for the lumber that was already going into the US.  The coin collected was supposed to go to lumber company owners weren't prepared to sell to US consumers at the same price the Cdn producers were......
So it's the US Consumer who gets it in the neck here - right?