Canada = Great Right North: Cato Institute

[Malthus]

While we're on the subject of Canada, I find that the anti-Ignatieff ads have traction with me.

He's the MP in my riding, and the perception here is that he was "parachuted" in - leaves a bit of a bad taste.

[Neil]

While we're on the subject of Canada, I find that the anti-Ignatieff ads have traction with me.

the cons could hammer Iggy on being a supporter of torture. however, that's probably not where they want to go.

I would imagine it's not much of an issue.  Most Canadians are soft and cowardly, and they weep crocodile tears at all the appropriate times.  Fortunately, Canada doesn't have to deal with the issue.

Still, the fact that he's Belinda Stronach Mk. II and that he'll go away and leave the country after he flubs his first election is kind of annoying to me.

[Neil]

While we're on the subject of Canada, I find that the anti-Ignatieff ads have traction with me.

He's the MP in my riding, and the perception here is that he was "parachuted" in - leaves a bit of a bad taste.

See, and I have the perception that he 'parachuted' into the country to become prime minister, and that once a roadblock shows up, he'll go back to where he came from.

[Camerus]

While we're on the subject of Canada, I find that the anti-Ignatieff ads have traction with me.

  Especially when one factors in his dreadfully insulting counter-attack ads.

[ulmont]

Pick 5 publicly traded companies at random and I'll look the rate up real quick and you can judge for yourself.

MSFT, MRK, MCD, AA, and DIS.

[Grey Fox]

You guys really care on why he came back?

[grumbler]

In your opinion, is "economic freedom" as defined by the Cato Instute a fair description of being "economically to the right", according to them?

I have no opinion on this.  I have never seriously considered Cato's "economic freedom" and have no clear idea of what you mean by "economically to the right."

You (and Yi) may find this interesting: (snip)

Not really.  I find people who categorize the things they like as "freedoms" to be lacking the intellectual honesty and impartiality that I find persuasive.

The Cato Institute - in its official study, not an op-ed - finds as a matter of fact that Canada is now more "economically free". I would be curious to know what "ecomomically right" means, if not this:

How amusingly circular. Canada is "economically right" because it is "economically more free" and you are now defining "economically more free" to be "economically to the right."

So long as you simply maintain that this is your contention, and not the authors', I have no problem with such an assertion.  Both terms are pretty much meaningless, as far as I am concerned.

[Neil]

While we're on the subject of Canada, I find that the anti-Ignatieff ads have traction with me.

  Especially when one factors in his dreadfully insulting counter-attack ads.

I haven't seen them.  The federal Liberals don't bother buying TV time in Alberta.

[alfred russel]

I haven't done some grand study on this and don't know all the details, but I think the following are my impressions when comparing the US and Canada:
a) Government spending as a percent of GDP is equalizing
b) We finance more of our spending with debt
c) Our taxation system is more progressive (at least in terms of rates)
d) The business environment is more explicitly regulated in Canada
e) The legal environment is more harsh in the US
f) I think the Canadian government tends to give Canadians better bang for their tax dollar

[Malthus]

In your opinion, is "economic freedom" as defined by the Cato Instute a fair description of being "economically to the right", according to them?

I have no opinion on this.  I have never seriously considered Cato's "economic freedom" and have no clear idea of what you mean by "economically to the right."

You (and Yi) may find this interesting: (snip)

Not really.  I find people who categorize the things they like as "freedoms" to be lacking the intellectual honesty and impartiality that I find persuasive.

The Cato Institute - in its official study, not an op-ed - finds as a matter of fact that Canada is now more "economically free". I would be curious to know what "ecomomically right" means, if not this:

How amusingly circular. Canada is "economically right" because it is "economically more free" and you are now defining "economically more free" to be "economically to the right."

So long as you simply maintain that this is your contention, and not the authors', I have no problem with such an assertion.  Both terms are pretty much meaningless, as far as I am concerned.

I don't generally put any stock in lists that rate countries for stuff like quality of life or economic freedom. I merely take issue with Yi's contention that I have mis-characterized the Cato Institute's position on the issue, that is all.

I do not see any "circularity" here. The Cato institute claims to rank countries in order of how well they measure up to a list of factors that they contend demonstrate adherence to the principles of successful economic life as stated by Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, and Friedrich Hayek - in short, "economic freedom". To hold that adherence to these principles is a good in of itself is, I would say, pretty much an "economically right" perspective - I welcome any disagreement on this, of course.

And according to the Cato Institute, Canada ranks ahead of the US.

If you find all of this "meaningless", well, that's your prerogative: I am simply remarking on what the Cato Institute has stated.

[grumbler]

I don't generally put any stock in lists that rate countries for stuff like quality of life or economic freedom. I merely take issue with Yi's contention that I have mis-characterized the Cato Institute's position on the issue, that is all.

No, Yi was talking about what the article said.  The article is not the Cato Institute - now was it written for, or published by, the Cato Institute.

I do not see any "circularity" here. The Cato institute claims to rank countries in order of how well they measure up to a list of factors that they contend demonstrate adherence to the principles of successful economic life as stated by Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, and Friedrich Hayek - in short, "economic freedom". To hold that adherence to these principles is a good in of itself is, I would say, pretty much an "economically right" perspective - I welcome any disagreement on this, of course.

And according to the Cato Institute, Canada ranks ahead of the US.

If you find all of this "meaningless", well, that's your prerogative: I am simply remarking on what the Cato Institute has stated.

What the Cato institute has said is, perhaps, interesting and entertaining to you, but isn't relevant to the discussion of what the article itself was saying.  The article doesn't discuss "economic freedoms" or the "economic right."  Those are terms you have introduced to the discussion.  I don't find either of them particularly illuminating on the point raised by the actual Op-Ed piece in question, which is that even "center-left" governments can find government cost-cutting virtuous, so the (Democratic) US Congress should not be so afraid to embrace it.

[Malthus]

I don't generally put any stock in lists that rate countries for stuff like quality of life or economic freedom. I merely take issue with Yi's contention that I have mis-characterized the Cato Institute's position on the issue, that is all.

No, Yi was talking about what the article said.  The article is not the Cato Institute - now was it written for, or published by, the Cato Institute.

What the Cato institute has said is, perhaps, interesting and entertaining to you, but isn't relevant to the discussion of what the article itself was saying.  The article doesn't discuss "economic freedoms" or the "economic right."  Those are terms you have introduced to the discussion.  I don't find either of them particularly illuminating on the point raised by the actual Op-Ed piece in question, which is that even "center-left" governments can find government cost-cutting virtuous, so the (Democratic) US Congress should not be so afraid to embrace it.

The fact that the Cato Institute just happens to hold the opinion I described in its official report, that the article was republished on the Cato Institute website, that one of the authors is a member of the Cato institute and that the piece was entitled "Great Right North"  ... makes no difference to you?

Okay, that makes perfect sense, if one assumes that the authors were entirely ignorant of the Cato Institute's reports in spite of one being a member, and chose his article title at random.

Seems an awful mountain you have constructed over the mole-hill of the commonplace and I would have thought uncontroversial remark that the article referenced the (to me startling) fact that the Cato Institute appears to have found that Canada has moved to the economic right of the US (which again it strains credulity to assume that the authors were unaware); Yi's comment was merely made in ignorance of this, when he said:

You said the Cato Institute considers Canada more economically right than the US.  That doesn't follow from this article, and I sincerely doubt you'd find anybody at Cato who would sign off on that claim.

The fact is that the Cato Institute does consider Canada to be economically to the right of the US, quibbling about whether "right" means "free" aside. You disputed that initially by pointing out this was an op-ed piece (true) - and then I pointed to the actual official Cato report ...

[Admiral Yi]

Interesting info Malthus.  Accusation withdrawn.