Thursday, November 4, 2010

Pauline Marois Circling the Drain

About two weeks ago I wrote a piece entitled "Is Pauline Marois Toast?", in which I pointed out what seemed to me the obvious, that poor Pauline is circling the drain. While I wouldn't claim that I was the first to come out and say it, it is with some satisfaction that I follow the avalanche of stories that are just now being published, essentially parroting this very same theme.

Enough with my false modesty.

It appears that the squabble over Pauline's leadership has morphed from an internal
affair to a full bloom public attack launched on many fronts by PQ party members, both young and old, looking to dump Madame Marois for her heretical decision to shelve plans for a unwinnable referendum.

Her pragmatic decision has dismayed hard-liners who dream of a referendum win or lose and so, they have unleashed a savage attack on Marois' leadership, determined to bring her down, in favour of a more militant leader.
The manifest and public disloyalty aimed at the dear leader can be construed as nothing less than a huge embarrassment and as one commentator noted, the eternal back-stabbing, ultimately damaging to the the party's 'marque de commerce'.

For Pauline Marois the famous quote by the immortal Yogi Berra remains more than prescient,

"It's deja vu,- all over again"

The Parti Quebecois is once again devouring it's leader in a most humiliating display of cruel betrayal more suited to a Bacchanalian orgy than to members of a respected political party.

For the PQ, it isn't anything new, the party has an unbroken record of unglamorously destroying its leaders in a sad public act of patricide.

Even the iconic Rene Levesque suffered an ignominious end, reminiscent of the changing of the guard at the old Russian Politburo, where leaders were unceremoniously disposed of and dumped from the dizzying heights of power to the obscurity of a silent forced 'retirement.'
At least the commies had the good manners to do it behind closed doors!

The latest salvo in the  destruction of Pauline Marois, is a letter sent to a Montreal newspaper by a group of young PQ pissants dissidents complaining that Marois is giving up on the concept of a referendum. While such sniping from such an insignificant a group would usually go largely unnoticed, given the context of the movement to destroy her leadership, the letter is being played up by party militants, much to the delight of the press.

Ironically, the PQ remains high in the polls and would form a majority government if an election were to be held tomorrow.
What is driving the panic in the PQ, is the news that a new party may be in the formative stage. Led by ex-PQ heavyweight, Francois Legault, 'Force Quebec' as it has been dubbed by the media, is advocating a policy of strong nationalism without a referendum, coupled with conservative financial polices which would supposedly right Quebec's sinking debt boat.

It seems that Mr. Legault's message is resonating with the public, if he were to proceed with forming this party, polls indicate that the new party would likely win the most seats of any party in a new Parliament, mostly at the expense of the PQ.

Although Mr Legault remains a stalwart separatist, he is a realistic one.
His platform reflects the reality that a referendum would be un-winnable and the loss humiliating and destructive. According to him, Quebec is not financially prepared for sovereignty, because of the huge debt and its dependence on Canadian largess via transfer payments.

As for constitutional reform, he admits that it is out of the question. He, like all other sovereignists, maintain the fiction that both Quebec and the Rest of Canada are in no mood for negotiations, fudging the reality that it is the ROC that will brook no more concessions.

At this juncture, Quebec couldn't negotiate change for a quarter.

All this is lost on PQ militants, whose reaction to this realistic assessment, is to ramp up demands that a referendum be placed, front and center.

Boosted by dinosaurs like Jacques Parizeau (it's better at the Jewish General Hospital) and the eternal Bernard Landry, (I shoudda never quit) the radical wing of the party is pushing for a political platform that is so out of touch with what Quebeckers want, that it makes veteran realists in the party wince in pain and commentators laugh.

One of the arguments for keeping a referendum on the table, is the notion that without the threat, Quebec will lose any leverage it has to get Canada to make more concessions.

Hmmm. Methinks that ship has sailed long ago....

Being leader of the Parti Quebecois has always been an exasperating affair.

The party has always been home to out of touch ideologues and disloyal and impatient know-it-alls.

The reality of power and good governance is lost on those who believe that sovereignty is a matter of faith. Just like Never-Never Land, these sovereignists believe that wishing really hard will make it happen.
For them holding a referendum and losing is a noble endeavour. Better to have loved and lost.

For the realists, a referendum loss represents a disastrous and humiliating setback that will humble Quebec before the Rest of Canada, who will wag their fingers and tut-tut,  saying  'I told you so.'

It's a bit sad to see Pauline dancing to the radicals' tune, huffing and puffing, talking up sovereignty in a undignified attempt to stem the tide. Just yesterday she announced that she is calling for sovereignty plans drawn up in 1995 to be updated. Yea sure......

The future of Madame Marois will be decided at a leadership review in the Spring. It's likely that she won't do better than Bernard Landry in 2005, when he received 76% of the votes of support at his leadership review. Mr. Landry decided that the number was too low, resigned, but lived to regret the decision.

Perhaps Madame Marois should be more realistic and set her sights a bit lower. The Clarity Act doesn't apply here and she should consider setting a more reasonable benchmark, one which will allow her to continue as leader.

50% +1.... Perhaps?

81 comments:

  1. The party has always been home to out of touch ideologues ... and impatient know-it-alls

    look who's talking.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Mississauga Guy to Jacques:

    Whaddyamean (...look who's talking)? Please elaborate. I and I'm sure a host of other readers would like to know what you mean.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mississauga Guy also said...

    Editor, you're coming up with a slew of feel-good stories this week! Did you ship come in?

    I hope they come up with 100 permutations and combinations of nationalist political parties. Quebec is ever the more quickly sinking into the role of third world country with no strong governance. I hope they sink to the point the ROC, the Real Canada, doesn't want to have what to do with them anymore. They have the PQ, they have Solidarity and now they have this new hybrid le Go is proposing.

    Now what they need is a federalist party that will throw a referendum even if they know it's a big loser, and a serpentine party that will be federalist on sunny days, separatist on rainy and snowy days, and undeterminable on fair weather days. They can have another serpentine party that bases its political philosophy on which way the wind blows, and finally an ultra fascist party that blames the minorities for everything from breathing to all the flying creatures that drop dead falling from the sky!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mississauga Guy on a sentimental note...

    I just thought I'd let my fellow readers know today marks my 26th full year away from Quebec, happily and unregrettably living in the GTA.

    I still support the Habs, I still like Montreal bagels best (St-V and Fairmount) and I also still love Schwartz's. I've heard a lot of good about Smokemeat Pete's and hopefully one day on a trip into Montreal, I'll get to try them. BTW, I didn't even know what poutine was until a return trip to Montreal about a year or so after I left. As good as a good poutine is (like La Belle Province, or Ashton's in Quebec City), too much of a good thing...

    GO HABS GO!

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Quebec is ever the more quickly sinking into the role of third world country with no strong governance..."

    Vous devriez jeter un coup d'oeil sur l'économie de vos amis américains.Ils s'approchent lentement mais surement des pays tiers-mondistes.Des milliers de maisons récupérées chaque jour par les banques.Si rien est fait presto,ils vont crasher et c'est l'économie Chinoise qui va les récupérer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "...and finally an ultra fascist party that blames the minorities for everything from breathing to all the flying creatures that drop dead falling from the sky!"

    Vos allégories ainsi que votre prose chargée d'idées revanchardes m'émeut.Pourquoi ne pas publier votre oeuvre?

    ReplyDelete
  7. To Jacques who said:

    look who's talking.

    He has a refreshing look at the crap idiots like you pull everyday. You and your kind are still in a time warp from the 70's keep on dreaming the dream. and i like the usual comment the us is in worst shape, lol the ROC is in better shape than this province, check:
    http://www.antagoniste.net/2010/11/01/les-annees-charest-les-annees-gauchistes/

    that should enlighten you that your own backyard is far worse than the US. Enjoy keeping your head in the sand.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow, thats an interestinig bunch of tables.

    The debt per capita is astonishing in Quebec as the table clearly indicates.

    No just imagine what that debt per capita would be if Quebec did not receive the 8.5 Billion from the feds in equalization payments which account for over 13% of the Quebec governments revenue.

    Unbelievable!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Unlike Quebec, the ROC is not in such a high debt. Get over yourself Jacques.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To Anonymous 1:42
    you said:
    "No just imagine what that debt per capita would be if Quebec did not receive the 8.5 Billion from the feds in equalization payments which account for over 13% of the Quebec governments revenue. "

    An independant quebec would instantly fall into the greek situation, also dependiong on how much debt they would inherit from the feds, i am sure the nationalist would claim a per capita value, but i think they would inherit 25% to match their parliamentary weight. They woudl default quickly on their current debt level, especially with a socialist minded political class.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Unlike Quebec, the ROC is not in such a high debt."

    Yes, true. Look at little SK which has a debt of about 4.6 Billion at this time. There are 1 million people plus or minus. Multiply the 4.6 B x 7 to equate to Quebec. That would be about 32 Billion dollars. The table indicates the debt per capita in Quebec is about 16K or for 7 million people about 112 Billion or roughly four times the equivalent debt of SK.

    They don't have subsidized day care or capped university tuitions in SK. Not in AB, Not in BC either. What's wrong with this picture.

    WOW.

    ReplyDelete
  12. One of the arguments for keeping a referendum on the table, is the notion that without the threat, Quebec will lose any leverage it has to get Canada to make more concessions.

    P. Marois is embarrassing, not to mention utterly hideous. I cringe every time is see her imploring face with her beady, soulless eyes peering into the cameras. When will this nauseating cycle end? I hope Canadians are finally wise to these worn out extortionists, and are ready to call their bluff? By the way, what the hell is 'Force Quebec' talking about with their policy of strong nationalism without a referendum? What is does ‘strong nationalism’ mean? Me thinks it means more iron fisted fascism aimed at ‘the others’. Anyway, in the end it doesn’t matter which party is steering Quebecois nationalism, they all are programmed to endorse and continue the pogrom against Anglos, after all it's de rigueur.

    ReplyDelete
  13. To anonymous 2:01 the debt of 112B$ does not take into account the debt accumulated by parapublic instution who do not show in the provincial ledger (one of Landy neat trick for the deficit 0) the real debt is more like 199B$

    ReplyDelete
  14. "after all it's de rigueur."

    Bien sure, c'est leur raison d'etre. Je croire que des pequistes sont "f'Ked". The ROC is getting wise and is now yawning at everything coming out of Quebec. Same old, same old. Nous somme tres fatigue de Quebec et tout leur "whining".

    ReplyDelete
  15. From Mississauga Guy, today celebrating his 26th anniversary of the day he emancipated from the fettered and festering sewer called Quebec, to the Anonymous contributor at 10:39 AM...

    I AM in progress of writing my book on the very subject, and I fully intend to publish it! Trust me, you WILL NOT like it!!! If I play my cards right it should drive you and your ilk into apoplexy!

    ReplyDelete
  16. "To anonymous 2:01 the debt of 112B$ does not take into account the debt accumulated by parapublic instution who do not show in the provincial ledger (one of Landy neat trick for the deficit 0) the real debt is more like 199B$"

    Yes, if you take for instance Hydro Quebec into the mix. Actually the Fraser Institute talks of close to 220 Billion dollars of total provincial debt. If interest rates return to even 8% levels this would be a total payment of 17.6 Billion per year in interest alone. That works out to 2500.00 per year in interest alone or four a family of 4 it would be 10,000.00 per year. (after tax) At a 50% tax burden a family of four would be giving up 20,000.00 of pre tax income.

    The interest alone will strangle the provinces economy. Someone had better cut the credit card in half.

    Incredible.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "...that should enlighten you that your own backyard is far worse than the US."

    Yeah right!Mouhahahaha!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Look at little SK which has a debt of about 4.6 Billion at this time. There are 1 million people plus or minus. Multiply the 4.6 B x 7 to equate to Quebec. That would be about 32 Billion dollars. The table indicates the debt per capita in Quebec is about 16K or for 7 million people about 112 Billion or roughly four times the equivalent debt of SK.

    They don't have subsidized day care or capped university tuitions in SK.


    Then somebody's ripping the folks of "Little Saskatchewan" off, because "little" SK (and "little" Manitoba and the "little" Maritimes) receives far more net $ in federal transfers per capita than "big" Belle Province does, and has so for decades.

    And for that much greater dough per capita from the feds they don't have capped tuitions or public daycare? Where's all the federal largesse going then? To build more jails to stick the Indians in?

    net federal transfers to La Big Belle Province, 2007:

    4,883 bn$

    net federal transfers to Little Province on the Prairie, 2007:

    1,427 bn$

    So they have less than a 7th of the population of Québec but get almost a 3rd as much of the net federal transfers? Aye, ça coûte cher, cette p'tite province-là!

    Et pour le p'tit Manitoba, c'est encore pire!! Soit un prêt net de 4,118 milliards pour l'année 2007. Ayoye! C'est presque autant que celui octroyé au Québec. Non mais ça se peut pas ça! Moi là, j'ai mon voyage de ces p'tites provinces dans la prairie pourries gâtées. Là, ça va faire!

    And los federales, I don't git all their figgerin' neither. Like, here, where they say for 2007 that they took in 45 billion$ in revenue in QC and transferred 50 billion$ to QC. But then it turns out that of that 50 bn$ "transfer" 7.3 bn$ is "interest payments" on the federal debt, which is being assigned as a "transfer" to Québec based on "demography". Demography? But if all these lil' English provinces (at least six of 'em) are receiving much more per capita from the feds than Québec is year after year, why are federal debt service payments being assigned by "demography"?

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0724-fra.htm

    I guess it's just a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in an Occupation.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Then somebody's ripping the folks of "Little Saskatchewan" off, because "little" SK (and "little" Manitoba and the "little" Maritimes) receives far more net $ in federal transfers per capita than "big" Belle Province does, and has so for decades."
    That's because Quebec has a such a bloated bureaucracy that it needs as much money as possible from the federal government to maintain it. Which is also the Praire Provinces get almost a 3rd of Quebec's income. It's not that hard to understand.Separatists only want to be "maitre chez nous" when it's convenient for them.

    "And for that much greater dough per capita from the feds they don't have capped tuitions or public daycare? Where's all the federal largesse going then? To build more jails to stick the Indians in?"
    To boost up French across the country when it's not necessary and giving tons of money that a spoiled brat that doesn't appreciate anything. Look who's talking, coming from a place where discrimination against minorities is socially acceptable. Typical separatist hypocracy and double standard

    "Demography? But if all these lil' English provinces (at least six of 'em) are receiving much more per capita from the feds than Québec is year after year, why are federal debt service payments being assigned by "demography"?
    Basic economics tell you that the demographics of a state can influence its government's ability to maintain a balanced fiscal budget. Which is why Ontario should be getting the most money, and not Quebec.

    "I guess it's just a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in an Occupation"
    HAHAHAHAHAHAH occupation *giggles*. Man, you clowns always find a way to amuse me(and people with a brain) and give us a good laugh. Keep it up!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Poor little Jacques, he loses the debt argument, and he goes and find something else to whine about, enjoy your unsustainable debt Jacques. In the end your third world mentality will give you the country u deserve a nice bannaa republic, with it's new metropolis renamed parizeauville.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "...enjoy your unsustainable debt Jacques..."

    Are you talking about your american cousins?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Doh nope i am talking quebec's is Jacques american? Americans under Obama are burying themselves in debt, but even at that, Quebec is in worse shape. Scary no?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anglo Montrealer says...

    Yes, it is scary. Separatists like Jacques will find a way to blame the ROC for this and hilariously fail at it. Too bad, Quebec could have one of the richest jurisdictions in the world if it weren't for their socialist mentality.

    ReplyDelete
  24. He Jacques,

    Your numbers are f'ked. Don't look at transfers idiot. Look at equalization payments. Don't confuse the two. Your province is destitute as I clearly indicated from real figures as presented. Your own Government indicates that Quebec's GDP/debt ratio is close to 94% putting the province's ranking in with the lowest six countries in the industrialized world.

    Why don't you separate, because I doubt there is enough oil in Alberta, Potash in SK and Gas in BC to pay for Quebec's reckless pattern of spending other peoples money. When can we expect you to separate and get you hands out of our pockets?

    And don't give me the per capita BS. You have 7 million people and receive over 60% of the equalization payments in Canada. When, has ever, Quebec contributed to the country other than in a negative way.?

    Quebec= the welfare province.

    Nice try Jacques, your a welfare bum. Ha ha ha.

    How does it feel!! Such a proud little Quebecois that you are.

    ReplyDelete
  25. To clarify on the per capita BS presented by our little pequiste ami.

    22% of the population receiving 60% of the equalization pot.

    How wrong is that!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mississauga Guy reminds the readers...

    This is why it's time for a federal party that focuses on loyal Canadians and puts Quebec in its place.

    Jacques, in his contribution last night @ 9:30 PM presented a link to StatsCan, namely Table 7, Federal Government Revenue and Expenditure, Quebec.

    Without cuttinG any personal payments by the federal government directly to Quebec individuals and entrepreneurs, most of the differential between what is paid out to Quebec vs what Quebecrs pay in taxes, social insurance levies (namely EI) vs what they get back from the federal system in goods, services and transfers could be saved by cutting out direct transfers that go directly to the Quebec government.

    The information Jacques presented in that Table 7 from StatsCan covers the 27-year period from 1981 to 2007. That last year, 2007, shows the federal government transfered to the Quebec government $13.532 billion, but only took back $666 million, a difference of $12.866 billion!

    In 2007, the federal government paid out $4.816 billion dollars more, net, than it collected from Quebec, so that entire differece could have been recovered through federal transfers to Quebec--EASILY!

    In prior years, however, that would not have been the case. For the six consecutive years 1990 to 1995, net payouts to the Quebecers exceeded $10 billion to as high as $13.458 billion in 1993. In NONE of those years did net payouts to the Quebec government alone amply cover the total amounts the federal goverment paid to Quebecers as a whole. In 1995 alone, net payouts to the Quebec government were $9.168 billion, while the total net payout was a sliver short of $13 billion, a difference of almost $4 billion!

    Most of that difference could have been recovered through the 16.5% refundable Quebec Tax Abatement (RQFT). The Department of Finance Canada readily indicates in their link http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/altpay-eng.asp that 3%, or $650 million in 2010-11 is being paid out for a discontinued Youth Allowance Program (YAP). HUH? Quebec is still getting over a half billion dollars for a program that no longer exists? That should be cut out IMMEDIATELY! The other 13.5% of the Abatement works out to $2.9 billion. Eliminating the Abatement would therefore take care of over $3½ billion of that $4 billion shortfall. The remainder would be much more easily recovered by small trimmings of other programs. That discontinued YAP program, however, is a no-brainer!

    There you have it. If equalization payments can't be completely eliminated, other programs can be cut back to make up the difference. How about that, Jacques?

    ReplyDelete
  27. "...Quebec is in worse shape..."

    Aucune banque ne saisie nos maisons par dizaines de milliers (per capita) chaque jour.
    Nos politiciens ne font pas leurs publicité avec fusil et bat de baseball a la main!
    Peu être en alberta mais pas ici.

    ReplyDelete
  28. You said:
    "Aucune banque ne saisie nos maisons par dizaines de milliers (per capita) chaque jour.
    Nos politiciens ne font pas leurs publicité avec fusil et bat de baseball a la main!
    Peu être en alberta mais pas ici."

    Let me see, the reckoning is not there because canada is shoring up your debts, do not fear the reckoning is goin gto come, i.e. look at greece to get an idea. And if you insist on comparing to the Us, you just make my point, you are the cream of the crap, you are still crap, but man you are the cream of it. Shout it out loud. One day you may open your eyes.
    Oh and BTW the bonds the quebec government is issuing have a termof 2058. Basically you are so without shame as to pass the debt to your grand children, indebting your kids was not enough apparently.
    Keep shouting the us is worse, while your ship is sinking.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anglo Montrealer reminds Mississagua Guy...

    In Quebec we have politicians that greatly misrepresents the Quebec population as a whole. Many of them do not even know about the unfair equalization payments that Quebec gets, and I know this first hand. The majority of Quebecers are proud Canadians, with French ancestry. It is the provincial politicians that target French Canadians' insecurity in an Anglo dominated North America, which in turn creates nationalism and of course, more votes for th PQ and the ilk. This, unfortunately, is the political psychological fact of Quebec politics. Politicians have to flare up old woes in order to successfully brake up this country. Disgusting!

    Having said this, I believe Quebec should be treated just like everybody else, no better, no worse. And if the separatists don't like it well, they can f off. It's as simple as that.

    ReplyDelete
  30. To Jacques (aka Blacque Jacque Shellacque of Looney Tunes fame)

    The only province that receives more money in equalization payments than Quebec on a per capita basis is tiny, rural, non-industrialized Prince Edward Island.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "The only province that receives more money in equalization payments than Quebec"

    Not the issue the issue is proportions. 22% of the population and 60% of the pot. That is the crime especially when people like Jacques indicate that Quebec is superior in culture to the other regions of Canada. Maybe so...but certainly not from a work ethic perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  32. To AngloBashers/AngloMontrealer/various "Anonymice"/Mississauga Mensa et cie,

    "Equalization" is now and always has been a *fraction* of the total envelope of transfer payments which the feds accord to provinces *after raising 100's of billions of $* in said provinces. The notion that an 8bn$ transfer from "English Canada" somehow "finances" the "nanny state* in Québec is something which a high-functioning 9 year old examining the budgetary processes in Québec and Canada and looking at the numbers in the columns would have no trouble seeing through. So what's your excuse? That you're clueless, innumerate bigots with an agenda? Ok, I'll buy that.

    There are 6 anglo provinces which receive - *net* - more per capita federal transfers than Québec, based on the 2007 budgetary exercise, and which have for decades. Some receive *much* more per capita. "net" means that the feds spend more in the province in question than they take in. Ya got that?

    In Manitoba's case, it received about 85% of the net federal transfer amount that QC did in the same year, with less than 1/7th of the population. MB's "share" of the *federal* debt servicing "transfer" is 1,143bn$. QC's for the same year is 7,363bn$.

    The 6 English Canadian « BS » provinces (SK,MB,NF,NB,NS,PEI) received a combined net federal transfer of 19,065bn$ for 2007. Their total population was about 4,5 million. Québec, which had a total population of 7,9 million, received 4,883bn$ in net federal transfer. The 6 anglo « BS » were "assigned" a "transfer" of 4,162bn$ in federal debt servicing charges. Québec, as noted, was assigned 7,363bn$. If we take out this "transfer" which is in fact federally incurred debt which is not being assigned based on how much the feds actually end up shovelling into these places, there is still a vast net federal transfer to the anglo « BS » provinces of over 14bn$, while Québec becomes a *net transferer* of over 2bn$.

    For the budgetary exercise 07-08, the feds projected raising 237bn$ in revenue, of which 47bn$ or 20% was to come from *us*, Quebeckers. Of that 47bn$, 15,2bn$ was to be *transferred back* to us, 7,2bn$ in equalization and 8 bn$ in other "social" transfers. That leaves a net payment from *us* of 32bn$. We "recover" *most* of that too, in the form of aid to individuals (seniors, children) industrial subsidies, etc, but some of it also goes, as mentioned, to *federal* debt servicing, and "defence" including a colonial war most of us oppose, etc.

    Miss. Mensa, I see you're faring no better in interpreting Statscan tables than with Mme Legault's blog. Into the eggnog a bit early this year?

    In any event, what this *does* show is that it's *us*, Quebeckers, who've made certain decisions about what services and programmes to provide and it's *us* who pay for them and it's part of *our* national conversation about whether we need more or less government, more or less services and so on and how we want to pay for it. A conversation we could conduct much better without the background noise of colonial fraudsters and hypocrites posing as benefactors.

    ReplyDelete
  33. "There are 6 anglo provinces which receive - *net* - more per capita federal transfers than Québec, based on the 2007 budgetary exercise, and which have for decades. Some receive *much* more per capita. "net" means that the feds spend more in the province in question than they take in. Ya got that? "
    Repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true, mon petit frere. Quebec's bad money management is the reason it has a low net income. Got that?

    "The 6 English Canadian « BS » provinces (SK,MB,NF,NB,NS,PEI) received a combined net federal transfer of 19,065bn$ for 2007. Their total population was about 4,5 million. Québec, which had a total population of 7,9 million, received 4,883bn$ in net federal transfer"
    ZOMG! 6 provinces combined getting moore than a single province??!!!!! I WOULD HAVE NEVER THOUGH OF THAT ONE!!!... Btw, did you know that Quebec will receiving $8 522 000 in equalizaion payments for 2010-11 year, which is more than some of those provinces you just mentioned?

    "For the budgetary exercise 07-08, the feds projected raising 237bn$ in revenue, of which 47bn$ or 20% was to come from *us*, Quebeckers."
    Quebec makes up a little more than 20% of the population, doesn'nt it? This is not surprising

    " We "recover" *most* of that too, in the form of aid to individuals (seniors, children) industrial subsidies, etc, but some of it also goes, as mentioned, to *federal* debt servicing, and "defence" including a colonial war most of us oppose, etc. "
    Ya, you attempt to recover from your colossal debt from raising taxes so that you can pay it off. Although I do agree that we are fighting a colonial war oversees and should be spending money in better ways.

    "In any event, what this *does* show is that it's *us*, Quebeckers, who've made certain decisions about what services and programmes to provide and it's *us* who pay for them and it's part of *our* national conversation about whether we need more or less government, more or less services and so on and how we want to pay for it."
    If this were true, Quebec wouldn't be so dependent on the equalization payments and it most certainly would not the 6th most indebted jurisdiction in the industrialized world.

    ReplyDelete
  34. he jaques.

    60% of the equalization to 22% of the population. A province with 7 million people who are heavily in debt. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how the second largest province in Canada has such a dismal economic performance. Actually rated 55th in GDP/capita of the 60 provinces and states in NA by your esteemed leadr Pauline Marois.

    SSo tell me, do you get subsidized power from HQ in order to keep the revenue down so as not to impact the equalization formulae. I think we know who the fraudsters might be. Right!

    Oh and BTW, SK has not received any equallizaton since the paltry 232 million was handed out to them whilst the broken promise on non renewable resource income being taken out of eequalization formulae cost SK 800 million. Wonder where that money went when the feds raised the payments to Quebec from 3.7 billion to 8.5 billion over a period of three years.

    As I said, when can we look forward to the perenniel ball an chain being cut from the ankles of Canada. Any time soon...I doubt as the french in Quebec don't seem to get anything right. My goodness, they can't even walk out the door. Leave and take your folklore language with you.

    ReplyDelete
  35. "In any event, what this *does* show is that it's *us*, Quebeckers, who've made certain decisions about what services and programmes to provide and it's *us* who pay for them "

    Then if its you that pays for them why do you need 8.5 billion a year in assistance from the ROC? Of course that 220 billion dollar debt is really the issue that will eventually tighten the noose on your necks. How do you say stangulation in joual?

    ReplyDelete
  36. For the PQ, it isn't anything new, the party has an unbroken record of unglamorously destroying its leaders in a sad public act of patricide.

    yes you do sound kind of sad about it. Here's hoping that they can someday rise to the level of collegiality of Messrs. Charest and Bellemare.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Mississauga Guy comes back with...

    Anglo Montrealer: Sorry, but unlike you who advoctes the perpetual ignorance of the Quebec majority, I don't. Not by a damn longshot! You can cry that this was a people led astray by the anals of ignorance of the Roman Catholic church for two centuries, with Maurice Duplessis adding fuel to the fires of ignorance for his 30 years or so at the helm. Why should I take responsibility when my ancestors came to Quebec and created businesses to either employ themselves, or in the case of my maternal side of the family, create jobs for THEM? Then you have Jean "Premier Goldilocks" Charest, a former cabinet minister in Mulroney's federal government, turning on the minority population like a rabid dog, and you're telling me HE is as ignorant as the rest of them, or at least playing on the collective ignorance of the majority?

    HELL, NO, Anglo Montrealer, HELL, NO! I've written before and I'll write again here that people see what they WANT to see, hear what they WANT to hear, and believe what they WANT to believe. I cannot believe Goldilocks is so provincial in his thinking (pardon the pun) that he cannot see the bigger picture, and if his politics is to play on and perpetuate the Quebec majority's collective ignorance, he is a far worse human being than anybody else in Quebec, or the whole world for that matter. He is no better than the PQ, or the Nazis for that matter. The Nazis did exactly that and you KNOW all too well how THAT went! The Nazis played on the dispair, frustration, anger and ignorance of the population by making scapegoats of the Jews, Gypsies and other minorities. Now you're advocating successive separatist and so-called federalist Quebec governments and sympathizing with the majority for perpetuating the anals of ignorance? For shame, Anglo Montrealer, FOR SHAME!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Mississauga Guy comes back with...

    Jacques, there is an old cliché, "The man who argues with the fool is indeed the fool." Translation: Don't argue with an idiot!

    First of all, it's YOUR precious Quebec that is the «BS» province, not the other recipient provinces of the equalization payments. Those provinces don't use their funds to subsidize hydro rates, university tuition fees, daycares, and othe programs of the sort. In addition, they are LOYAL to Canada, something far too much of Quebec is not.

    Stephen Harper, fool that he was, handed Charest $700 million in the last provincial election to defray the costs of the election, but instead "Goldilocks" turned around and gave the population $700 million of tax relief. Fool Harper once, shame on you, fool him twice, shame on him. When Quebec was supposed to be given $2.1 billion in compensation for collecting the GST, guess what happened to that compensation money?

    Jacques, I don't need ANY lessons on calculating budget figures. I studied accounting as my major and took a few economics courses over the years sho I'm more than capable of calculating budget figures, thank you very much.

    I'd certainly LOVE to know where you obtained YOUR fictitious numbers, or if they are the genuine article, (I'm quite skeptical) where they were obtained?

    As I wrote recently, what I have in mind for Quebec is shamelessly vindictive and would send you into a state of complete and eternal apoplexy!

    ReplyDelete
  39. In prior years, however, that would not have been the case. For the six consecutive years 1990 to 1995, net payouts to the Quebecers exceeded $10 billion to as high as $13.458 billion in 1993.

    And if you look at those 6 consecutive years, you'll find that the servicing of the federal debt "assigned" to Québec as a "transfer" almost matches and in some cases exceeds the amount of the net federal transfer to Québec over the same period. Federal debt servicing charges were higher then, and a recession had gutted manufacturing employment in Central Canada. During that period even Ontario received some net federal transfers as I recall.

    During the 6-year period 1990 to 1995 which you "reviewed" for us, the 6 anglo « BS » provinces MB/SK/NB/NS/NF/PEI received vastly more $ in net federal transfers than QC did, and their population then, as now, was less than 60% of QC's. Let's take 1993 for example, the subject of your exclamation and scandalment supra: the 6 anglo « BS » provinces pulled in $18.820 billion in net federal transfer money in that year, and the "transfer" assigned to them as federal debt servicing was less than 2/3 that assigned to QC. So we see the same pattern we see in all other years: the anglo provincial net transfer recipients, with a total population less than 60% of QC's, receive net vastly more money from the feds in absolute terms, and vastly more per capita than QC.

    Btw, any particular reason for cherry-picking that 6-yr period? What about the 6-yr period from 1999-2004 during which net federal transfers per capita to QC were chump change? What about the years when Alberta was a recipient of equalization and getting then, as now, tons of federal tax dollars to develop and expand its petroleum industry?

    Why not go back even further down memory lane, to when Lower Canada was made to assume Upper Canada's debt? C'est pas beautiful ça?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Don't look at transfers idiot. Look at equalization payments. Don't confuse the two.

    Oh, you want me to *just* look at equalization, Sport? (which btw, *is* a transfer, just one among many)

    Ok, here's what happens if I "only" look at equalization for the federal budget 2007-08:

    47 billion paid by Quebeckers in revenue to the feds
    7.2 billion transferred back to Quebeckers in equalization

    total net paid *by* Quebeckers to the fed: 39.8 bn$

    there, ya happy? Is that how you want the balance sheet to look? That's what happens when I don't look at any other transfers except equalization. Maybe it's better to look at all the transfers after all huh?

    And that, btw, is the approach taken in this study web-posted by Statistics Canada, whose title looks to be right up your alley Sport:

    "Federal Government Revenue and Spending by Province: A Scorecard of Winners and Losers in Confederation? "

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-010-x/00207/9586-eng.htm

    And what is the calculation used to surmise the "winners" and "losers" in Confederation? Why, the net federal transfers per capita.

    Génial.

    In the year the study reviews, the net federal transfers per capita to Québec were 281$. For the 6 anglo « BS » provinces the figures for net federal transfers per capita are as follows:

    Newfoundland and Labrador 4 615$
    Prince Edward Island 5,254$
    Nova Scotia 4,783$
    New Brunswick 4,250$
    Manitoba 3,145$
    Saskatchewan 2,783$

    Ladies and Germs, I think we have a "winner".

    What would we Quebeckers have done without the 281$ per head we received from Mother Canada that year? Shut down all the garderies? Closed down La Grande and asked Vermont if they could spare some electricity? Asked Haiti and Zambia for bridging loans?

    After all, we lack the business acumen and work ethic of Albertans, who had the prescience to actually settle on ground under which federal money would later extract oil. How could we have managed without the bootstraps ethos of Albertans and Ontarians and Saskatchewaners and Newfoundlanders who got many 10's of billions of $ in federal subsidies to develop their fossil fuel and nuclear sectors?

    We were just lucky, is all.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Mississauga Guy comes back with...

    Jacques, there is an old cliché, "The man who argues with the fool is indeed the fool." Translation: Don't argue with an idiot!


    Especially when you're getting your head handed to you huh?

    As Robert Lacroix did when he tried using voodoo math too:

    http://www.action-nationale.qc.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=564&Itemid=99999999

    ReplyDelete
  42. Jacques, I don't need ANY lessons on calculating budget figures. I studied accounting as my major and took a few economics courses over the years sho I'm more than capable of calculating budget figures, thank you very much.

    I'd certainly LOVE to know where you obtained YOUR fictitious numbers, or if they are the genuine article, (I'm quite skeptical) where they were obtained?


    Dear Ernst & Young,

    It would be my pleasure to share the sources of these "fictitious" figures with you.

    Conveniently, they're all found at the same place, the Statscan website. I already shared with you and the Conference Board of Caca here the link for Québec. Here are the tables for the the six anglophone « BS » provinces but first, here's the table for Canada overall:

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0701-fra.htm

    And now without futher ado, the tables for your provincial « BS » de préférence:

    NF

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0710-fra.htm

    NS

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0712-fra.htm

    PEI

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0711-fra.htm

    NB

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0713-fra.htm

    MB

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0746-fra.htm

    SK

    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0747-fra.htm

    oh and if for any reason the Statscan website is undergoing servicing, all you need do is paste any of these url into the google search engine, and then access the cached files.

    Je vous propose donc un buffet de chiffres « fictifs » certifiés par le gouvernement du Canada. Rien de moins.

    Bon appétit, et bon scepticisme!

    ReplyDelete
  43. "...The Nazis played on the dispair, frustration, anger and ignorance..."

    Vous feriez donc un très bon nazi.

    ReplyDelete
  44. "...C'est pas beautiful ça?"

    Bravo Jacques!T'es un as!

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anglo Montrealer said...

    Mississagua Guy: My assumption is that you believe "Premier Goldilocks" has a sovereignist way of thinking because he caves in to their demands. Well, by your definition, everyone in the federal government are separatists because they always cave in the French language bigots as well. This is also regarding the treatment of minorities. When was the last the federal government actually did anything for the Anglophopne minority in Quebec, while spending millions upon millions of dollars propping up the French language across the country, in places where it's not even needed? See, MG, this is just another example of not informing the people of what's actually going on in this country.

    "HELL, NO! I've written before and I'll write again here that people see what they WANT to see, hear what they WANT to hear, and believe what they WANT to believe."
    Exactly. But who do you think convinced the early everyday sovereignist that separating from Canada would be the best thing for Quebec?

    You know, I'm really not sure why you're so shocked that any government would play into the collective ignorance of the masses to achieve their end. All governments around the world do this. Heck, it's why we're in Iraq right now. Politicians play dirty tricks all the time in order to get votes. This should not shock you.

    "Now you're advocating successive separatist and so-called federalist Quebec governments and sympathizing with the majority for perpetuating the anals of ignorance? For shame, Anglo Montrealer, FOR SHAME!"
    Whoa there buddy. I'm not advocating anything. I'm simply stating what THEY'RE doing. And yes, separatist governments convince the masses that Canadian federalism is not good for Quebec. As I recall, there was no major sovereignist movement in Quebec prior to the creation of the PQ. This tells me that the sovereignty was not a social movement per se.

    Disputes between Quebec and Ottawa go back way before the PQ, most noably during the Conscription Crises and the Boer War. Even before the Duplessis days, Quebec would often argue with Ottawa over what should be provincial and federal jurisdictions.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Dear Jacques, again your cherry picking, Quebec has been more out Thant it has given in, especially since with the socialist policy of the last 40 years has put Quebec in a hole. Now you say we paid that much in federal taxes, ergo we gave more out... look at where it is spent, because if u become independent you will have to pay what the Feds pay with that 39 billion. And you will not cover the cost with that amount. But that is ok in your petty mindset. Equalization payment have been in Qc favor for a long time, no matter how u cut it, Quebec is a spoilt child.
    as for the usual nationalist rant about lower Canada joining upper Canada, well most of the French Canadian wealth was going to build churches nit roads, like you said you decided on what you wanted to spend. The debt burden somehow does not seem to bother you now, why worry about something that happened 170 years ago.

    Typical nationalist socialist calculator where 1+1=25
    The sad part les mooring all believe your crap, you even tried to slip it in the school text book , but had to backtrack shamefully with that lie

    ReplyDelete
  47. as for the usual nationalist rant about lower Canada joining upper Canada, well most of the French Canadian wealth was going to build churches nit roads...

    Can't take him anywhere can you NoDogs?

    Dis-moi qui tu hantes...

    ReplyDelete
  48. Cher jacquouille la fripouille,
    Qui je hante? mais toi mon vieux.

    ReplyDelete
  49. As a Montrealer-turned-Calgarian, I’d like to thank “Jacques” and all other Quebec taxpayers (assuming "Jacques" is indeed a taxpayer) for the inexpensive B. Comm that allowed me to establish a lucrative career in Alberta. It actually compensated for the psychological grind of living in Quebec for eight years.

    I heartily encourage all other ambitious and educated Quebecers (separatists need not apply), no matter what their first language, to seriously consider getting the heck out. Alberta in particular is a very attractive long-term option given its low taxes, youthful population, and entrepreneurial culture.

    This is a great resource:

    http://quitterlequebec.com/

    ReplyDelete
  50. Ils l'ont-tu l'affaire, les Albertains.

    ReplyDelete
  51. "Ils l'ont-tu l'affaire, les Albertains."

    En effet Jacques,une des mentalité les respectueuse de l'environnement sur la planète.

    ReplyDelete
  52. "...It actually compensated for the psychological grind of living in Quebec for eight years."

    Croyez-vous réellement que porter un chapeau de cowboy pour faire votre marché, va compenser votre instabilité psychologique?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Mississauga Guy doesn't back down...

    Jacques, any further words with you, as per my cliché above, only makes me the fool. Bonne soirée!

    Montrealer in Alberta: Very eloquently worded!

    Anglo Montrealer: No, pal, the federal politicians are NOT separatists, they're yellow-bellied Quislings who are too goddamn afraid to say anything against the policies set by the fascist state in which you have chosen to remain. You're not the only one, but then you can't complain about their fascist policies. I don't care anymore because Anglo complainers don't do anything beyond complain.

    Nothing for the Anglo community in Quebec since the Equality Party in 1989. The feds have done sweet f-all for you, hence my reason for wanting a federal political party that puts the Real Canada first and Quebec back in its place! That party would run candidates in Quebec where the minorities hold the majority of the votes, like the West Island, a riding or two on the South Shore and maybe Chomedey in Laval. This would give Anglophone remnants like yourself to let the feds and Quebec know YOU mean business!

    The status quo for Quebec minorities is absolutely no good unless too many of you vote for the Tories and Grits. That would tell Quebec the status quo is just fine. Is it?

    Of course Goldilocks won't change a comma of the language legislation because to do so is political suicide. Asking that s.o.b. to do the right thing would cost him the $75,000-a-year stipend from his party that was a secret until recently, and I suppose he wants his full 15 year tenure in the National Assembly to assure he gets his full pension--a double dip to go with the federal pension he's already drawing! To hell with politicians doing anything for the greater good. How naïve of me to think politicians would want to do anything for the greater good! Maybe you just of an I.Q. of 10,000 and comprehend more than mere mortals like myself!!!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Speaking from experience, Calgarians are on the whole very active outdoorsy people. The city has an extensive network of bike paths (very well-maintained I might add, like all other Calgary infrastructure) that are filled with cyclists, joggers, you name it. Skiing and hiking in the nearby Rockies is very popular, as is fishing and hunting.

    Albertans (and that includes tens of thousands of ex-Quebecers) appreciate their environment as much as any other Canadians. The oil and gas industry is much more regulated than most Canadians probably imagine (although that’s not to say that further scrutiny won’t, or shouldn't, be necessary).

    Also speaking from experience, I wouldn’t say Quebecers overall are any more, or less, environmentally-conscious than other Canadians. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the City of Montreal dump its raw sewage direct into the Saint Lawrence River until sometime in the late 1980s?

    I’m also pretty sure Quebec still exports substantial amounts of asbestos to developing countries with weak / non-existent environmental laws. Also, does anyone seriously think that hydro-electric mega-projects are environmentally “clean”?

    By the way, one generally won’t see cowboy hats around Calgary except in the airport gift shop, or if the Stampede is on.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "The feds have done sweet f-all for you, hence my reason for wanting a federal political party that puts the Real Canada first and Quebec back in its place!"
    Problem is, the federal government is mainly controlled by these same bigots who have pissed the laws in Quebec. This problem is no longer just happening in Quebec, it's also spreading to New Brunswick and more recently, in northern Ontario. Federal "bilingual"(French) positions consist of 62% of Francophones. Official bilingualism is nothing more than a Francophone hiring quota, which goes hand and hand with Trudeau's plans to make Canada a French speaking country. Francophones are always favored over Anglophones, regardless of province.

    " No, pal, the federal politicians are NOT separatists, they're yellow-bellied Quislings who are too goddamn afraid to say anything against the policies set by the fascist state in which you have chosen to remain. You're not the only one, but then you can't complain about their fascist policies. I don't care anymore because Anglo complainers don't do anything beyond complain"
    I'm a 20 year old university student with a part time job. I don't have any means to get out of this province, at least not for a few years, depending on when I finish my studies. I love Montreal and the people, but the politics are just horrible and which is why many Anglophones like myself are compelled to leave this problem. While I have learned to live with the French fact, and I love Montreal because of the fact that both English and French are spoken and because it's very cultural, unlike Toronto or your city of Mississagua. I just wish Anglos and Francos could get along much better and realize that the "maudit anglais" nonsense they've been fed all these years is a bunch of crock. I do however wish to move elsewhere in the country, but mainly for career purposes. At the very least, areas with an Anglo population of 50% are "officially" bilingual and have perfectly bilingual signs.

    " You're not the only one, but then you can't complain about their fascist policies. I don't care anymore because Anglo complainers don't do anything beyond complain."
    The problem is that they're too afraid to be called racists from the French language militants. They want to maintain a good image. I, for one, always speak in English in public and contrary to NoDogs, I ALWAYS start a conversation in English and if they don't like it, I give them to look and pretty much tell them to f*$@ off. That's my way of rebelling against discrimination, at least for now.

    "That party would run candidates in Quebec where the minorities hold the majority of the votes, like the West Island, a riding or two on the South Shore and maybe Chomedey in Laval. This would give Anglophone remnants like yourself to let the feds and Quebec know YOU mean business!"
    In order to show that we mean business, I'd propose something less complicated. For instance, the Anglos of the West Island could do what the French did in the 1970s with English signs. They should spray pint every single French sign and only leave out English signs. An open act of rebellion would be a good start, but it;s wishful thinking, just like the idea that puts Quebec Anglos before the Francophone majority.

    I wholeheartedly agree with you that Goldilocks only wants to maintain his position as the premier, but then again, who doesn't? It's the feds man up and stand up to the zealots!!

    ReplyDelete
  56. "...I give them to look and pretty much tell them to f*$@ off..."

    Très mauvaise attitude mon ami.Pour ce qui est de la signalisation et de l'affichage en anglais, vous pouvez toujours rêver.Des mesures encore plus cohercitives vont seront appliquées.Désolé!

    ReplyDelete
  57. "...An open act of rebellion would be a good start...."

    A votre place,j'éviterais ce genre de comportement.Les Québécois détestent quand les anglos s'agitent un peu trop.Charest a été très très gentil avec vous dernièrement avec la loi 115.Pas facile pour lui d'avoir eu a utiliser le baîllon mais ce n'est que partie remise.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Jacques, you are a true master of distractions, but even you can’t hide the sad reality. Quebec, which aspires to be an independent country, is on the receiving end of payments coming from the very people it wants to jettison.

    By pursuing a hopeless course of relativizing transfer payments per capita, you are not noticing (or maybe you are noticing if your goal is to deflect) that you’re comparing your motherland to such powerhouses as NB, PEI, and MB. Instead, provinces which could realistically become independent if they wanted (ON, AB, BC) are sending you money.

    You’re also failing to note that the other provinces on the receiving end have something that every recipient should have – humility and gratitude. Quebec prefers instead to go with arrogance, ingratitude and the bit about the uniqueness of its culture and language.

    Also, instead of getting bogged down in irrelevant stuff, these other provinces are working hard to get out of a hole. NFLD and SK are projected to become donors in the near future, if they continue their smart use of their natural resources, and the policy of getting people off of welfare and back into the workforce. Quebec, in the meantime, does something totally different…”nous sommes les peuple, il nous faut un pays, notre culture et notre langue, bla, bla, bla…

    If language and culture is all you have, then you’re screwed. You want o be North America’s Norway, a country of not even 5 million which opted to stay out of the EU because it could afford to, but you’re failing to realize that they have two things that you don’t: tons of oil and a work ethic you could only dream of. Not to mention that they do nothing to antagonize the EU, so if ever their oil runs out, they’ll be welcome with open arms. That’s smart and mature policy, unlike in Quebec, where the politics of sovereignty are the domain of people with the maturity of kindergarten kids.

    What’s meant to be for some is not meant to be for all, Jacques. Norway has got what it takes to be a country. Quebec does not. Not with people like you at the helm, anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  59. To Jacques/Jackass:

    "After all, we lack the business acumen and work ethic of Albertans, who had the prescience to actually settle on ground under which federal money would later extract oil."

    'Quebeckians' settled on land with a diverse wealth of natural resources: a multitude of rivers that provide hydro-electric power, rich farmland along the St. Lawrence River alluvial plain, vast expanses of lumber producing forests and rich mineral deposits.

    Despite all of these resources and the steady influx of cash from the federal government, Quebec is the most highly taxed jurisdiction in North America and one of the most heavily indebted districts in the world. What a bunch of f*@kups!

    ReplyDelete
  60. "...one of the most heavily indebted districts in the world."

    Je vous suggère d'aller faire un petit tour de voiture aux É.U surtout si vous songez a acheter une maison a très bon prix.En passant vous partagez la même langue.

    ReplyDelete
  61. "Jacques/Jackass ?"

    "What a bunch of f*@kups"

    Cher Éditeur : Je trouve les anglos très impolis envers nous.Serait-ce possible d'échanger de façon civilisée?Je crois qu'un rappel a l'ordre s'impose.

    Merci!

    ReplyDelete
  62. "...NFLD and SK are projected to become donors in the near future."

    Et nous,nous projetons d'aller sur la lune.Quoiqu'au moins trois Québécois ont voyagé dans l'espace dont un par pure dillétente...Bonne moyenne pour un peuple de 5 millions adski.A-t-on déja vu un polonais dans l'espace ?

    Sans vodka ,j'entend.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anglo Montrealer said...

    Les Québécois détestent quand les anglos s'agitent un peu trop.Charest a été très très gentil avec vous dernièrement avec la loi 115.Pas facile pour lui d'avoir eu a utiliser le baîllon mais ce n'est que partie remise"
    I really don't care what the Quebecois hate or like. Bill 115 is a crock because is even more restrictive than Bill 104 in numerous respects. And btw, what I meant to say was that I only tell people F off if they have a problem with me speaking English. If they simply are not able to speak English, I switch to French.

    ReplyDelete
  64. "...d'aller faire un petit tour de voiture aux É.U surtout si vous songez a acheter une maison a très bon prix."

    Quebec welfare recipients are allowed to retain ownership of their homes despite being wards of the state. This is not the case in the United States. In Ontario, a lien is placed on homes after one year of welfare payments.

    If the welfare rules were changed in Quebec and home ownership was no longer permitted, there would probably be a real estate market collapse with more foreclosures and fire sales than are currently occurring in the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Jacques, you are a true master of distractions,

    You know you might as well stop trying to play Judge Gomery here because you don't pull it off.

    It's just a fact that 2/3 of English Canada's provinces, with less than 2/3 Québec's population, end up receiving far more in federal monies every year than Québec does, while they're "assigned" a much smaller share of Canada's debt and offer far fewer services to their populations. And that, for decades and still counting. The idea that the « modèle québécois » depends on the teat of English Canada is an urban legend, a fraud, une fumisterie. And I showed that, which is the real reason that Mississauga Mensa took his marbles and went home. If you don't like it either, well, take it up with Judge Gomery.

    Productivity per person/hour is the same in Québec as it is in Ontario, and has been growing faster in QC than in ON for years. Unemployment is lower as is the poverty rate, despite higher average income in Ontario. So Quebeckers realize the same productivity per hour for less money. Ontario's net public debt, not including its share of the federal debt, was 34% of its GDP in 2009. Québec's was 42% and had been going down for years. Ontario's deficit for 2009 was 25bn. Québec's, about 5bn.

    So much for the lessons in anglo-saxon work ethic. If we need any more advice from the herrenvolk, we won't hesitate to ask.

    Québec is the national community with North America's most egalitarian distribution of income, the lowest poverty rate and lowest concentration of poverty, the safest cities, the lowest rate of violent crime and which has the metropolis with the lowest rate of hate crimes.

    We're also the province where, according to Angus-Reid, the lowest percentage of the population believes immigration is having a negative effect on the country, a datum perhaps unnoticed at the NoDogs blogs and by its blog dogs. The province with the highest percentage of people thinking immigration is harming the country, a majority of 56%, is Alberta.

    Oh and yes you may assume I pay taxes too. I've been paying them for decades, with no tax credit accruing for being "less loyal." I guess that means I too helped pay for Alberta BComm's "discount" education. Perhaps this is one of those cases then of where "you get what you pay for."

    ReplyDelete
  66. Man Jacquouille, you must be smoking some awesome Quebec gold, urban legend, nationalist like you have tried to make that lie stick, by repeating it ad nauseum, you went as far as trying to change school text books to repeat that lie. The backlash was big and the province had to back track from that lie.
    You can repeat it as often as you like jacquouille, I will make sure to reveal how much of a liar you are.

    ReplyDelete
  67. You can repeat it as often as you like jacquouille, I will make sure to reveal how much of a liar you are.

    one can almost hear the Sergio Leone film soundtrack playing in the background.

    ooohhhh. I better watch my back.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I have to chuckle at “Jacques” touting “North America’s most egalitarian distribution of income”. A falling tide does indeed lower all boats, I’ll give you that. And is having better productivity and a lower deficit than Ontario really something to brag about these days?

    I don’t doubt that most Quebecers on an individual level have good work ethics and are productive individuals. It’s their political apparatus that’s the problem, which is why I left.

    BTW, for anyone interested, the chief economist of Desjardins (fellow named François Dupuis) put out a great paper on Quebec’s over-levered balance sheet. The paper is subtly entitled “The sheer size of Québec’s debt is cause for concern”:

    http://www.desjardins.com/en/a_propos/etudes_economiques/actualites/point_vue_economique/pv100323.pdf

    One choice quote (of many):

    “Comparisons of Québec’s debt level are unequivocal: the province is one of the regions with the highest public debt in Canada and in other industrialized countries. And yet there are major risks to carrying such high debt. Further still, the province is more vulnerable to sudden fluctuations in financial markets, more vulnerable to money-lenders’ moods and more vulnerable to the evaluations set by the different rating agencies. In addition, the high level of interest charges monopolizes a large portion of budget revenues, reducing the Québec government’s financial leeway and generating an opportunity cost.”

    ReplyDelete
  69. Mississauga Guy said... (1 of 2)

    Fellow readers and contributors, you're arguing with Jacques. Here's what I wrote just after noon yesterday: "...there is an old cliché: "The man who argues with the fool is indeed the fool." Translation: Don't argue with an idiot! I reminded Jacques of this cliché just over 24 hours ago, let him know I will not respond to his utterly ridiculous statistical machinations, and I would suggest you follow the same advice. Jacques is a troll, albeit perhaps a little more genteel than the ones who Editor finally started censoring, and with good reason.

    To Anglo Montrealer: You're "a 20 year old university student with a part time job", and "don't have any means to get out of this province, at least not for a few years, depending on when [you] finish [your] studies".

    So you're some young pisher [http://www.yourdictionary.com/pisher] who has never been to Toronto or Mississauga, and you're saying there is no culture here? Considering you have been confined for the first 20 years of your life in Montreal and have never been employed full time trying to build a career?

    I suggest you do some growing up, start a career and maybe travel a bit before you accuse other parts of the world of being what they are not. Mississauga is the largest suburban city in North America (followed by Surrey, BC, then Mesa, Arizona and finally Laval, QC.) Mississauga has grown to triple the size of Laval, has no long-term debt and has its own performing centre for the arts, just like Toronto. Toronto has more than one. Place des Arts and Théâtre St-Denis are midgets in comparison to live arts in Toronto.

    The last week of every May for the last 25 years and counting, Carassauga has been an international festival celebrating the arts, food and culture of different countries throughout the world. Last May there were 64 pavillions throughout Mississauga representing different cultures and nations. This stemmed out of a similar cultural festival called Caravan in Toronto. They ran their festival first, starting in the 1970s and unfortunately it ended in the 90s when the couple who organized and ran it for over 20 years retired, and nobody took it over. It's fabulous, popular and successful! MONTREAL HAS NEVER HAD ANYTHING LIKE IT--FAR, FAR FROM IT!

    ReplyDelete
  70. Mississauga Guy also said...(2 of 2)

    So don't presume you know Toronto when you've never been. Montreal has its cultural diversity notwithstanding the PQ's efforts to kill other cultures. Drapeau shrunk Chinatown down, almost killing it, and why should Chinatown have to have French signs in bigger writing than Chinese? MORONIC!

    Telling Francophones that are in your opinion able to understand English where to get off using profane language is NOT appropriate. It doesn't solve anything. Do remember the language laws protect them, they DO NOT PROTECT YOU! That, my young, naïve ex-compatriot is how life is in the Fascist State of Quebec.

    I left Quebec six years before you were born, and yet YOU have been better prepared to survive in French than I was. The French as a second language program in the English schools is much more enriched now than when I went through the system. I finished high school in 1975, just one short year after Bill 22 was passed. Do you even know what the hell Bill 22 was? I was in CEGEP when Bill 101 passed into law!

    Having been born post-Bill 101, the Quebec government would prefer you live in French. I get a pass having been labelled an «anglophone de souche», or English who has been in Quebec for a long time (how long has never been properly defined, but being born pre-Bill 101, the government MAY let me die in English as I was born in English).

    Using this philosophy, the «Anglophones de souche» will eventually die out. I'm near the end of the generation put in that protective vacuum. You won't have that same privilege.

    While my late mother talked a good fight against the tyranny of the majority, the only act she did to follow through, and many years later was to vote Equality in 1989. Even then, by coincidence, I was in Montreal on a business trip, took my mother out for dinner on that election day and then took her to the polls. She really didn't want to go (she was terminally ill and died 6½ months later), but she instilled the virtues of democracy in me (having been the daughter of Russian Jews who were chased off their land, coming to Canada with little more than the clothes on their backs and a couple of suitcases, right before the Bolshevik Revolution), and so against her will I drove her to the poll, the poll officials came to our car with a ballot and the box for her to vote, and thanked her profusely for coming. My stubbornness attributed to the circumstances, but if you live by the sword, you die by the sword, and I turned the tables on the person who instilled the merits of democracy more than any other human being.

    Our politicians, both inside and outside Quebec, are too cowardly to deal with the cruelties of the latest concoction of punishing legislation. Goldilocks is too afraid to fight the zealots, and the feds are futilely looking for ways to gain constituencies in Quebec. There really aren't many available, say about 25 or so. The others are a given the BQ (gaaaaag meeeee) will win the lion's share, but they figure they need those precious few seats to barely form a majority government.

    This is why I believe an English First type federal political party has a chance of winning without Quebec. It's a matter of educating those outside Quebec the damage Quebec has caused them, and how all the billions upon billions of dollars spent on official bilingualism and lack of job offers going to unilingual English speakers robbed them of job opportunities. Those hundreds of billions of dollars could have been spent on better health, education and infrastructure.

    Worse yet, now the Franco Ontarians and Acadians in New Brunswick are starting to flex their muscles and demand more and more and more in French. When will enough be enough?

    ReplyDelete
  71. Forget about the transfers from the rest of canada. I am sure that anglophones and allophones also pay a disproportionately higher amount of taxes to the Quebec Government(in name only, because it does really care for the 20% of quebecers that are not of the pur laine stock)If partition happened alot of that tax income would disappear too. Anglophones and Allophones also are also much more likely to work in the private sector, which is responsible for real wealth creation. Hardly get any middle or upper level couchy quebec government jobs.

    dada r baap

    ReplyDelete
  72. Mississauga Guy said...

    Anon @ 12:42 AM this morning: Yes, you're right about minority contributions, and with over ¼ million Anglophones leaving Quebec since the rise of the PQ, they don't know or want to acknowledge the costs they have incurred going back to that time. Trust me, it has been astronomical!

    ReplyDelete
  73. @ Jock,

    "Productivity per person/hour is the same in Québec as it is in Ontario...Quebeckers realize the same productivity per hour for less money...So much for the lessons in anglo-saxon work ethic."

    Why is it then that Lucien Bouchard, the former BQ leader and PQ premier of Quebec, stated in a TVA interview that the Quebecois don't work as hard as Canadians in other provinces or Americans? He also said that this lack of work ethic was damaging to the economy and fiscal situation in Quebec. One would think that he had access to better, more detailed statistics than yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  74. "A-t-on déja vu un polonais dans l'espace ? "

    Not that it's even remotely relevant to anything we've been discussing here, but yes:

    http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miroslaw_Hermaszewski

    Anon, please don’t tell me that you are using Julie Payette as Quebec ego boost. Because if you are, then you are more desperate than I thought.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Cher Jacquouille,
    Tu nous ce magnifique liens:
    http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/13-018-x/2009002/t/tab0724-eng.htm

    Comme comptable tu est vraiment pas fort, le Quebec reçoit plus du fédéral qu'il n'en paie depuis 1981 selon ce tableau, et ceci ne tient pas compte de certain privilège, genre 60% des quotas de lait allouer au Quebec et autre exemple.
    Comme je le disais tu est un fieffer menteur.
    Parlons de déséquilibre, Montréal paie plus qu'il n'en reçoit, quelle injustice, vive Montréal libre, libre de la peste nationaliste des régions.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anglo basher, don't worry about jacquouill/Jock he pulls stats out of his a**, he is just an emmerdeur.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Comme comptable tu est vraiment pas fort, le Quebec reçoit plus du fédéral qu'il n'en paie depuis 1981 selon ce tableau

    et comme lecteur t'es pas mal minable. Ce que j'ai dit, c'est que les 6 provinces « BS » anglophones reçoivent bcp plus que QC chaque année en transferts nets du fédéral et ce, depuis des décennies et qu'en plus, ces 6 « BS » n'ont même pas 60% de la population de QC. Et les autres tableaux dont j'ai fournis les hyperliens le confirment. Les tableaux confiment également que les 6 « BS » se font attribuer bcp moins de la dette fédérale tout en recevant bcp plus d'argent. D'ailleurs pour l'année la plus récente, soit 2007, les paiements sur la dette fédérale attribuées au Québec dépassent de loin le montant des transferts nets du fédéral. C'est non seulement le cas en 2007, mais dans la majorité des autres années en cause.

    Donc c'est ça votre belle revanche mon Henry Fonda? C'est *minable*. Va jouer dans un autre film.

    ReplyDelete
  78. One would think that he had access to better, more detailed statistics than yourself.

    which ones? Mine were reported by Pierre Fortin, one of Bouchard's fellow « lucides ». Fortin's source is Statistics Canada. Statscan reports a 0,78 (where U.S. productivity represents par, 1,00)for QC and ON in 2008. ON productivity grew at 6,4% since 2000, QC's at 7,5%

    btw, I must say, in light of all the foregoing "commentary", that I'm truly surprised to learn that Statistics Canada has been taken over by "separatist" "liars". Who have we left to trust?

    ReplyDelete
  79. @ Jacques,

    If the stats are the same, it is interesting then that Bouchard came to a completely different conclusion about the work ethic of the Quebecois (i.e. they're lazy) than you have.

    ReplyDelete
  80. which stats? Bouchard a-t-il donné des chiffres au moment de son intervention? Lesquels?

    ReplyDelete
  81. Les gens de Toronto vous êtes emmerdants.

    ReplyDelete