<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The coming raid of Canada&#8217;s treasury</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pointbite.com/2008/11/29/the-coming-raid-on-canadas-treasury/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pointbite.com/2008/11/29/the-coming-raid-on-canadas-treasury/</link>
	<description>pointbite.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:20:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: point</title>
		<link>http://www.pointbite.com/2008/11/29/the-coming-raid-on-canadas-treasury/comment-page-1/#comment-2433</link>
		<dc:creator>point</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 04:06:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pointbite.com/?p=332#comment-2433</guid>
		<description>Are you arguing that Harper didn&#039;t cut enough spending to balance his tax cuts, therefore Canada should increase spending by tens of billions of dollars? What kind of logic is that? Nobody should care what the IMF thinks, they have a track record of destroying countries. I am wondering if you even read the post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Are you arguing that Harper didn&#8217;t cut enough spending to balance his tax cuts, therefore Canada should increase spending by tens of billions of dollars? What kind of logic is that? Nobody should care what the IMF thinks, they have a track record of destroying countries. I am wondering if you even read the post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sb</title>
		<link>http://www.pointbite.com/2008/11/29/the-coming-raid-on-canadas-treasury/comment-page-1/#comment-2432</link>
		<dc:creator>sb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 02:25:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pointbite.com/?p=332#comment-2432</guid>
		<description>http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home

Umm, hate to break it to you, but Harper spent our way into a deficit. 

Furthermore, even the IMF is calling for massive stimulus packages.

And conservative governments from the US to Germany have done the same.

Maybe if you didn&#039;t pre-drain the Treasury based on useless GST cuts and wasteful military spending...and maybe if you had done something to smooth the transition in the manufacturing sector caused by an overvalued dollar caused by your snake oil energy policies...then maybe you&#039;d have a point...but you don&#039;t so tough luck. Or if you cared about the shrinking trade surplus or the negative productivity growth under Harper&#039;s helm...

Plus, there is nothing unconstitutional to what the opposition is proposing.

Harper is not president and the Cons don&#039;t have a majority.

They failed to establish a working Parliament (and resorted to more Karl Rovian tactics) and now are getting their just desserts.

There is ample precedent in Parliamentary history for a new coalition to take power without an election.

Consider the federal election in 1925. Or the Ontario election in 1985.

If the opposition can establish a working majority, then so be it. The representatives of the people can make Parliament work without the Cons...so too bad for you.

See this:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home" rel="nofollow">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home</a></p>
<p>Umm, hate to break it to you, but Harper spent our way into a deficit. </p>
<p>Furthermore, even the IMF is calling for massive stimulus packages.</p>
<p>And conservative governments from the US to Germany have done the same.</p>
<p>Maybe if you didn&#8217;t pre-drain the Treasury based on useless GST cuts and wasteful military spending&#8230;and maybe if you had done something to smooth the transition in the manufacturing sector caused by an overvalued dollar caused by your snake oil energy policies&#8230;then maybe you&#8217;d have a point&#8230;but you don&#8217;t so tough luck. Or if you cared about the shrinking trade surplus or the negative productivity growth under Harper&#8217;s helm&#8230;</p>
<p>Plus, there is nothing unconstitutional to what the opposition is proposing.</p>
<p>Harper is not president and the Cons don&#8217;t have a majority.</p>
<p>They failed to establish a working Parliament (and resorted to more Karl Rovian tactics) and now are getting their just desserts.</p>
<p>There is ample precedent in Parliamentary history for a new coalition to take power without an election.</p>
<p>Consider the federal election in 1925. Or the Ontario election in 1985.</p>
<p>If the opposition can establish a working majority, then so be it. The representatives of the people can make Parliament work without the Cons&#8230;so too bad for you.</p>
<p>See this:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home" rel="nofollow">http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/home</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

