“The single greatest challenge posed by the SIDI approach is that it requires political discipline of the kind seldom seen among politicians in Newfoundland and Labrador. The pressures from interest groups addicted to government spending is enormous. That addiction is just as strong among the business community as it is any other group.”
Conan O’Brien Screeched In…with water. Boo.
HOLY FUCK HOW TERRIBLE THAT NATIVES HAVE POLITICAL CONNECTIONS. MOST CANADIAN CORPORATIONS ARE ISLOATED FROM THE POLITICAL ARENA, HAVING NO LEVERAGE OR INPUT INTO POLICY DECISION MAKING. SHAME, YOU INDIANS, SHAME! YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO LIVE IN IGLOOS AND WEAR FEATHER HATS!
We had a good reason for not going,” Cranford told CBC News. “We’re right in the middle of university exams.
A 2009 report by the Office for Systemic Justice of the Sisters of St. Joseph in London, Ontario (yup! Nuns. Them black-clad radicals!)
HAHAHAHA. SHANNIE DUFF, SHAME! CORRUPTION IN ST JOHNS NEWFOUNDLAND?
An email from Col. Jeff Tasseron, one of Natynczyk’s senior advisors, describes a phone call he got from MacKay’s chief of staff, John MacDonell, about Reid’s support.
Describing the phone call as “odd,” Tasseron says MacDonell wanted to make sure there was no retribution against Reid for defending MacKay.
“He [MacDonell] also made sure I understood that they were dissatisfied that this individual only came out on his own recognizance, rather than as part of a concerted plan to defend the minister,” Tasseron wrote to Natynczyk.
“Flaherty, recalling his own years spent toiling as a referee in the wretched, undervalued and invisible Canadian hockey industry, posited that “the only bad job is not having a job.” Most unemployment in Canada, viewed through Flaherty’s diamond-encrusted monocle, is the result of jobless people being too choosy about which jobs they’ll do.
The rest of it, apparently, is the result of laziness.
That’s what the National Post’s Sarah Boesveld oh-so-subtly suggests in her article, based on a series of confessional interviews with people-who-have-friends-who-might-have-at-one-time-spent-a-few-extra-months-on-EI.
EI is the only thing that allows seasonal industries to survive in our day and age. EI lets employers off the hook for three or six months of the year, so that when they’re not making money, they’re not paying anyone.
There are two alternatives to seasonal workers going on EI: employers could continue to pay them all year round, or they could resort to subsistence living in the off-months. If either of those scenarios happened, the economic consequences would be disastrous. When people have money, they spend it. That’s what we need. That’s why we’re in a flap over Canadians shopping in the U.S. That’s why the ’50s were so prosperous for so many people and we’re in so much debt trying to maintain old consumer standards with lower incomes today. That’s why wage stagnation is followed by economic recession. Why that’s so difficult a lesson to learn is beyond us.
If middle-class people want to eat lobster in the summer, bite into Annapolis Valley apples in the fall, haul the kids to PEI for vacation in June, golf at Dundee Resort in July, listen to fiddle music and get plastered on George Street or the Liquor Dome in August, and then forget about everything east of Montreal for the rest of the year, they’re going to have to damned well deal with the consequences, and one of the main consequences is EI. In that sense, EI is for you, Ontario and Alberta. Is your PEI Dirt Shirt feeling a little tight?
The response to this line of thought is predictable. “There’s a third alternative to EI,” the privileged silver-spooners and wealthy-person sycophants will say: those out-of-workers should move somewhere else when the seasonal employment dries up. To that, we say, are you serious? While your version of “summering” in one place and “wintering” in another is a good way to stay tanned all year round, the one you propose for the wage labourers that prop up your privilege is far from sunny. It breaks up families and it destroys communities.
In this rendering of the way the world works, EI should be reserved only for the imaginary people who lose their jobs in the context of full-employment — the last people without jobs in the entire country, as if the job market was a game of musical chairs.”