Liberals to reject deal

[CHIMO]

OTTAWA — The Liberals will vote against the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber deal as expected.

Liberal international trade critic Dominic LeBlanc and Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale confirmed the party’s position today.

But even with NDP support, the Liberals would not be able to defeat a Conservative and Bloc Quebecois alliance when the government brings in softwood legislation as expected later this month.

LeBlanc said the Liberals will seek help for workers in the industry. He said the government should craft an aid package for industry to help it cope with the tariffs they will not get back as part of the Conservative deal.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1157709187354&call_pageid=968350072197&col=969048863851

Now if I were Layton or the Liberal leader I would propose a zero net resource effect. What does it mean?

Well when a trading country wishes to cherry pick our resources then our total resources are for sale at a total net price. A penalty in one area results in a tax on the other areas. All these commodities are sold as a spot price with export tax added as calculated on a time basis. Each customer must deposit a bond to guarantee payment.

At least something to capture the imagination when it is now possible to track people at the border then commodities can't be that hard to track.

Besides who knows. Harper might fall and the NDP and the Liberals might be able to become the government if they could convince the Queen's representative that they were able to govern.

[IntravenousDemilo]

1. Yes, they announced this ONLY after the BQ said they'd support the deal.

Thus it was safe to oppose it, with no fear of precipitating an election.

Cowardly, that...

[MrPrax]

2. Good idea...

Also, placing a surcharge on unprocessed RAW materials for everyone would also help -- consider it compensation for the loss of 'value added' industries. You want a RAW log, you get taxed at a certain rate...you process it here, you don't get taxed...simple.

But I like your idea as well Chimo -- if you add costs early in the production cycle, then the costs to the end consumer at retail is negligible.

None of this will occur or even be mentioned because corporations run our governments and all the politicians are lobbyists for their flexible nature that does nothing for this economy.

Capitalism needs to be re-thought; politicians will have to start doing this. I get tired of listening to Klein and Alberta continunally challenging this country's social medical system, without a single politician of note simply telling Alberta, with it's huge surpluses, that rather than talk about a Third Way -- go back to the OLD WAY and PAY for your medical premiums like they do in 7 other provinces that have a hell of a lot less money.

Unfortuantely the social democrats we have are too goddamned interested in their small interest lobby groups and 'playing with existing programs' instead of coming up with more creative ways of capturing some of the profit the public is entitled.

Imagine a policy where personal income tax can be cut at the expense of corporate taxes in order to bring the level of wages UP to something remotely reflecting the PROFITS that these companies have collected on behalf of their shareholders. They don't invest here and they don't pay the wages anymore...make them an offer they can't refuse and start demanding a 'social profit'.

Something like your idea, Chimo goes a long way -- good on yeah.
t