Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site utecfc.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!utai!uthub!utecfa!utecfc!thompso From: thompso@utecfc.UUCP (Mark Thompson) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Doing only that... Message-ID: <6@utecfc.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Aug-84 17:18:31 EDT Article-I.D.: utecfc.6 Posted: Tue Aug 21 17:18:31 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 21-Aug-84 22:28:57 EDT Organization: Engineering Computing Facility, University of Toronto Lines: 59 Eugene Fiume writes: >I am always amused by the argument that business should be left to >businessmen, because they know how to make a profit. I suspect a >large proportion of them are just as adept at losing money as our >favourite whipping post. ("Ah, but that's different, because when >businesses lose money, all that happens is that people lose their jobs >and go on pogey, and then businesses can claim to have a 'lean, tough' >new outlook and apply for government subsidies.") Oh really Eugene? I think your suspicions are totally unfounded since a majority of businesses do seem to make a profit (despite the government) otherwise they wouldn't exist very long. The big difference between the private sector and public sector is that incompetents are quickly eliminated in the private sector or the company dies (unless the government decides to buy it or it is swallowed up by a more soundly run corporation). Unfortunately those that bungle up in the public sector are not easily eradicated and they normally are just shuffled off to screw something else up (example: Bryce Mackasey) sp?. This is one of the main problems of socialist philosphy which seems to absolve people of responsibility for their own actions and upkeep. I mean really, who should business be left to Eugene? Flower arrangers? >I am always amused when business leaders blame the government for >their financial woes (invariably getting a sympathetic ear), and >yet when our government says that maybe the policies of our Good >Friends down south have something to do with our financial situation, >the same people cry foul. The financial policies of the United States have certainly helped their economy and have helped bring inflation down throughout much of the Western world. The shear size of the American economy means that effects (good and bad) on other countries are unavoidable. It appears that the countries complaining the most are the ones who through their own incompetence have created economic difficulties in their own countries. The economic policies of the U.S. don't seem to be hurting Japan too much. Why? Because their government in cooperation with industry seem to know what they are doing unlike the turkeys we have had in Ottawa for over 20 years. Canada's economy is closely linked to that of the U.S. and the financial obstacles Canadians face are similar. Then why is the U.S. economy healthier? It could be related to the fact that the government their has decided to butt out of business as much as possible and leave it to those who know what it's about. It may be argued that the deficit created to pay for defense expenditures is priming their economy but it is certainly not the major reason. Canada's federal government maintains a much larger deficit (based on % of GNP) and our economy certainly isn't thriving. Why shouldn't business cry foul when government steps in and screws up the rhyme and reason of things? Just look at what the NEP did to Alberta's economy. When it is said that the federal government should have done more for the economy in the past I am inclined to think that it would have been better if they had kept their noses right out of it. Hopefully if the Conservatives win the election(which thank god seems likely), they will stick by their promise of encouraging business. It should certainly help all Canadians except public sector fatcats and those not interested in earning their own keep. Mark Thompson @U. of T. Mechanical Engineering