TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Canadian GDP to Skyrocket in 2005-2006
Canadian GDP to Skyrocket in 2005-2006
Now that the NHL back, and with its laughably small salary cap, the Canadian teams will finally be in the green. This will of course spur the Candian economy, as the past year of the lock-out has resulted in a depression. In addition, heavy drinking will most likely decrease drastically until playoff time when an American team will be hoisting the cup, then beer sales will increase again, so look for a strong second quarter in the Canadian economy with increased beer sales, and the revenues of the teams start to show.
I though this was going to be a serious thread like the Canadian economy grows due to high oil costs.
Acually I read that the NHL strike did of course affect the Canadian economy (by a couple tenths of a percentage point of GDP?) due to losses in hotel/restaurant/hospitality industry, reduction of business in bars, etc. (lol)
Surely the US was similarly affected, having more and higher paid teams. I know some Americans much more rabid than the typical Canadian about hockey.
But that's all behind us now, game on! (And BTW, if you enjoy the delusion and illusion of "an American team hoisting the cup" when all players of import on said 'American team' are all Canadians wearing the jersey of the highest bidder, enjoy!)
Cheers,
-Noble
Of course the teams are full of imports, you canucks have hockey and thats wonderful. Let's just hope no elite American athletes begin getting involved, as they are preoccupied with other more athletically demanding sports.
| quote: |
| Let's just hope no elite American athletes begin getting involved, as they are preoccupied with other more athletically demanding sports. |
Don't forget poker!
Whew!
Ha. You must be kidding. Hitting a baseball is one of the toughest skills in all of sports. Football players are twice the athletes hockey players are. I don't even know why golf is even in there, perhaps try basketball? Face it, the athletes in hockey, while elite, are not nearly up to snuff of basketball and football, and argueably baseball.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kush paintings Ha. You must be kidding. Hitting a baseball is one of the toughest skills in all of sports. Football players are twice the athletes hockey players are. I don't even know why golf is even in there, perhaps try basketball? Face it, the athletes in hockey, while elite, are not nearly up to snuff of basketball and football, and argueably baseball. |
WOW. Because if ESPN says it, it must be true. Why was Football not ahead of hockey. Explain that to me. Granted not every position in football consists of better athletes, but on the whole it does. Why do you think the football season is as short as it is? Because it is more physically demanding.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kush paintings WOW. Because if ESPN says it, it must be true. Why was Football not ahead of hockey. Explain that to me. Granted not every position in football consists of better athletes, but on the whole it does. Why do you think the football season is as short as it is? Because it is more physically demanding. |
I have to say you all are sadly mistaken. Now, hockey players are no slouches. I am a hockey player. But, football players arent fat asses. You are so sorely mistaken. Some of the linemen could outsprint me, and I am a college athlete. Football players aren't fast enough. Laughable. Do some research and then try and say that with a straight face. You see players beginning to come in to the league that are Todd Bertuzzi's size. I am a goalie and I am 6 foot, which is now no longer considered tall, whereas just 5 years ago it was. Goalies are also gaining weight, we are no longer these 160 pound poles, we are expected to be elite athletes to. Once again, all happening in the past 5 years. Hockey is beginning to become a sport played by "freaks of nature" where football and boxing have had these guys around in droves for over a decade. And as far as saying football players don't have the stamina! HA. 45 seconds shifts my friend, balls to the wall albeit, but are you telling me a football player wouldn't have the stamina for less than 20, 45 minute shifts. My point is, as it stands today, hockey players are not the top athletes in the world. Oh and lastly, hockey is a tough, tough game, but to claim it is more physical than football is outrageous. Have you watched a game of hockey lately? There are just a handful of big hits in a game, very few which happen in open ice. Whereas with football, those big openfield hits happen nearly every play. Why is it said playing through an NFL game is like being in a car crash? I have never heard that be said about a NHL game.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kush paintings Why is it said playing through an NFL game is like being in a car crash? I have never heard that be said about a NHL game. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r ESPN did a study of all sports from fly fishing to gymantics and guess what was number 2 behind boxing.....yea...you guessed it....HOCKEY... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lira Mate, that study was more biased than a Brazilian claiming world football (aka: soccer) is the best sport ever. Football is indeed the best sport ever, by the way, and then there's hockey and tae kwon do, as both kick ass. |
Oh, and football (SOCCER!!) rules!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z Tae Kwan Do has to be one of the least practical and effectie martial arts. Might as well cut of your hands since you're not going to use them for much. |
Haha, yeah right, in basketball when someone gets slightly touched they fall to the ground and literally cry to get the ref's attention.
In hockey, it's fair game to deliver punishing checks.
Clearly fotball is the best sport ever and american fotboll is amongst the worst
http://craigread.com/displayArticle...%20job%20growth
US job growth vs. Canadian and EU job growth
There are good reasons why the US creates jobs and the Canada-EU socialist axis does not
August 10 2005
There is barely a whimper in the Canadian media on the July �05 jobs report � or more accurately, the no job creation report. Incredibly no jobs were created in Canada during July. If the same happened in the US, the media would be full of tales of US economic weakness and empire decline. The US is creating 190.000 jobs per month with its economy growing at 3.5-4.0 % per annum. Combined with productivity rates of 2.5 % per annum � double and in some years triple the Canadian average � the US will experience higher incomes, higher standards of living and more tax revenues as the economy expands, and these monies can be reinvested in health, education and infrastructure furthering US economic advantage.
This difference in job creationism is massive. In Canada in 2004 225.000 jobs were created and in 2005 the estimates are that about 130.000 new jobs will be generated. The trend to lower economic and job growth in Canada is self-evident. Indeed in Canada thus far in 2005, less than 8.000 jobs per month have been created. Such a job creation growth translated to the US would mean a US job creation rate of 80.000 per month or about 1 million per annum. In fact the US job creation level is 2.2 million per annum. The difference in US job creationism and its impact on society and employment levels cannot be downplayed.
The lack of real job creation in Canada and in Europe underscores the weakness of the big government society model. In both locales, there are fewer jobs produced on a per capita basis, than in the US and crucially both Canada and Europe have less full time and non-governmental job creation than the US. In Europe in the past 15 years according to the OECD, fully 90 % of jobs have been government based. In Canada it is 50 % with about � of the remainder in part-time positions. The exact opposite has occurred in the US where 90 % or more of jobs are full time and non-government based and indeed until recent months one of the biggest job losers in the US was the government sector [along with manufacturing and transportation].
The US has a labor force participation rate of 66 % trending to 70 %, which is higher than the European average of 60% and the Canadian average of 62%, both of which are trending lower. This large discrepancy in the % employed leads to burdensome taxation in both Canada and Europe as less people work fewer hours. The lack of labor force participation is exacerbated by declining birth rates in Canada and the EU which are lower than in the US and by less dynamic labor, industry and services sectors which militate against ease of labor and capital mobility. Big government ensures lower rates of employment, higher unemployment with EU levels double that of the US [10 vs. 5 %] and Canadian rates 2 % above US levels [7% vs. 5 %], and market rigidity leading to lower wages and lower living standards.
Not only are workforce rates lower in Canada and the EU but both Europeans and Canadians work significantly less hours than Americans at far lower productivity rates. In Canada the average worker productivity is at about 80 % of a US worker�s rate [see this article on the factors involved in lower Canadian productivity Productivity problems in Canada]. Though Canadians work more hours than Europeans they work 10 % less hours than Americans. With lower outputs and less hours Canadians are assured of being poorer than their US counterparts.
Similar gaps exist between Europe and the US. Alarmingly the number of hours worked in Europe is now 25 % below US levels [about 2100 hours per year in the US vs. 1600 in the EU], falling from parity in the 1970s [OECD data]. Around six weeks of paid time off is now the annual norm across Europe. This is 2 to 3 times as many paid days off per year than Americans. Vacation time has nearly doubled since the 1970s in Italy, Spain and the Netherlands. France recently extended its three-year law reducing the workweek to 35 hours from 39. The law now includes companies with fewer than 20 employees. The trend in Europe is towards 30-hour work weeks which would mean 1400 hours per year of work, or fully 33 % below US levels. Indeed in Canada and Europe workers not only work less but as well take off more �sick� time further reducing the number of working hours.
In 2002 Timbro Institute of Sweden conducted a study found that the average European worker took more than 30 days of sick time per year. According to a New York Times report, on an average day in Norway, 25 percent of Norway�s workers call in sick. Shorter work-weeks in both Europe and Canada and increased �sick� time, have done nothing to reduce higher unemployment. Both Europe and Canada have destroyed the fallacy of a fixed division of labor, which is a favorite of socialists and big government supporters. Supposedly under this inane idea, the quantity of society�s work is fixed and ergo by dividing this fixed amount of work by requiring less hours and more vacation or sick time from a population, the greater will be the number of workers, and hence the lower the unemployment rate. In fact the exact opposite occurs.
One reason why Europeans and Canadians work less than Americans is the punitive level of taxation. The US is certainly not a free market nirvana of low tax rates and unfettered trade. Far from it. The US economy is over-taxed, over-regulated and over-protected. In fact the U.S. has the highest per capita taxes of any developed country. But importantly the Americans also have lower marginal tax rates. This difference occurs because Americans work and consume more, and so have higher tax bases and therefore pay in total higher per capita taxes.
Why do Americans work more? Well living in the US is expensive with housing, education and health care costing small fortunes. So Americans must work more. The propensity to greater work and higher productivity in the US coincided however, with its marginal tax rates decreases. As the US lowered its marginal tax rates, the economy grew, and hours of work and wages per hour increased. The cycle of economic growth was stimulated by marginal tax and investment reductions, further enhanced by the $1.3 Trillion Bush tax cuts.
Similarly, Europe�s change to shorter hours coincides with its marginal tax increases. Three completely independent recent studies reach the same conclusions: The Federal Reserve of Minneapolis concludes that twenty years ago, Europeans worked just as long as hard as the rest of the developed world. The Federal Reserve�s report said that when European tax levels were comparable to those in the U.S., work hours were similar. As Europe�s taxes increased, workers responded by working less and those that do find jobs, find them in government. The only exception to Europe�s poor job and tax performance has of course been Ireland and the UK. Ireland currently has the lowest European marginal tax rate, even lower than the U.S and UK.
The recent Timbro study cited above concludes that marginal tax rates have a material impact on explaining the difference in economic performance. In approximately the last 30 years, taxes in the U.S (as well as in Ireland) have increased by 1.5 percent. In contrast, European country tax rates (except in Ireland) have increased much more - closer to 4 %. The sum of ruinous taxation is evinced in the low per capita GDP rates in Canada and Europe. Canada GDP per capita (at purchasing power parity) is $29,800 [2003 est. CIA Factbook] and the EU�s is $25,326, versus the US GDP per capita (at purchasing power parity) of $37,800. Even if Americans must buy health care and guns, they are far better off then they would be in Canada or the EU.
Importantly Americans produce private sector jobs, eschewing the big government-union alliance that impedes productivity growth in Canada and the EU. A recent OECD study concludes that practically all (97 percent) of all European civilian job creation has been in the government sector. Europe�s higher taxes fuel public sector growth, while its social welfare programs eliminate some of the penalties for not working. The OECD blames European�s unwillingness to work as the principal reason for lower output per worker and the resulting lower standard of living compared to Americans. According to OECD, �Research has clearly established a remarkable fact: namely that the sizable U.S. advantage in real GDP per capita � is largely due to differences in total hours worked per capita.� This unwillingness to work is compounded by the political and economic leverage of big unions. Union rates in Canada more than double US rates [32 % vs. 14 %], though lower than in Western Europe [34 %, ranging from 12% in France to 45 % in Sweden]. Unionism increases costs, reduces flexibility and reduces productivity. The higher a society�s union membership rate, the worse off its economy.
We see the media bias in not reporting the above facts. Lower job creationism, higher tax rates and over-spending in Canada and the EU doom these societies to be also-rans in the world economy. The Canadians given their proximity and dependence on the US market where 40 % of GDP is tied to US trade are becoming uncompetitive. Yet such proximity also allows the Canadians to muddle through with bad policy choice in their socialist obsession with being different than the USA since they can count more or less, on US market access. The EU is in of course worse shape than Canada and will experience even graver economic and political dislocation as big government and militant Islam change the EU political-economy.
In the race to the top in international economic competition it is clear that both Canada and the EU need job growth and far reaching economic reforms. But don�t bet on the media covering that story.
CraigRead.com �
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.