[Guest]

[QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br />

[Ed King]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE]Delenda, your assertion that farmers in the province of Quebec are not assisted is false. You don't mention any specifics, but I know that cattle farmers in the province of Quebec are entitled to exactly the same compensation as those in any other province.<BR><BR>As I said in two posts, your point about the auto pact is completely ridiculous. Tell me this Delenda: in light if the fact that the greatest share of the Canadian auto industry consists of manufacturing parts that are shipped to the United States for assembly, where is the most logical place to build these factories? In Ontario, where they are only a few hours away from the assembly plants in Michigan and Ohio? Or in the province Quebec or Western Canada or the Atlantic, where they are nowhere near the industrial hub of America?<BR><BR>As I said in the post you have twice declined replying to, if the American auto industry were in Vermont or Maine, then the Canadian parts manufacturers would set up shop in Quebec. If the American plants were in Montana, our plants would be in Alberta or BC. But that isn't so: the main industrial regions of America are contiguous to the province of Ontario. That is the source of Ontario's wealth; it's proximity to the highly-industrialized Great Lakes basin, NOT the federal government.

[Perturbed]

[QUOTE BY= Ed King] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE]Delenda, your assertion that farmers in the province of Quebec are not assisted is false. You don't mention any specifics, but I know that cattle farmers in the province of Quebec are entitled to exactly the same compensation as those in any other province.<BR><BR>As I said in two posts, your point about the auto pact is completely ridiculous. Tell me this Delenda: in light if the fact that the greatest share of the Canadian auto industry consists of manufacturing parts that are shipped to the United States for assembly, where is the most logical place to build these factories? In Ontario, where they are only a few hours away from the assembly plants in Michigan and Ohio? Or in the province Quebec or Western Canada or the Atlantic, where they are nowhere near the industrial hub of America?<BR><BR>As I said in the post you have twice declined replying to, if the American auto industry were in Vermont or Maine, then the Canadian parts manufacturers would set up shop in Quebec. If the American plants were in Montana, our plants would be in Alberta or BC. But that isn't so: the main industrial regions of America are contiguous to the province of Ontario. That is the source of Ontario's wealth; it's proximity to the highly-industrialized Great Lakes basin, NOT the federal government.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />I made it clear months ago on this site that I disagree with the auto pact. <br /> <br />What we disagree on is how to fiz the problem. I believe in a better federal government that fosters a Canadian car industry. <br /> <br />You want to run away and hope things work out.

[Perturbed]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Not so much begging as persuading you that you'd only be destroying yourselves.

[Guest]

[QUOTE BY= Perturbed] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Not so much begging as persuading you that you'd only be destroying yourselves.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Then why do you care if we're destroying ourselves? That is condescending, and pompous of you. As if you know better what is good for us. Go to bed, Perturbed, it is passed 10:00.

[Ed King]

[QUOTE BY= Perturbed] [QUOTE BY= Ed King] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE]Delenda, your assertion that farmers in the province of Quebec are not assisted is false. You don't mention any specifics, but I know that cattle farmers in the province of Quebec are entitled to exactly the same compensation as those in any other province.<BR><BR>As I said in two posts, your point about the auto pact is completely ridiculous. Tell me this Delenda: in light if the fact that the greatest share of the Canadian auto industry consists of manufacturing parts that are shipped to the United States for assembly, where is the most logical place to build these factories? In Ontario, where they are only a few hours away from the assembly plants in Michigan and Ohio? Or in the province Quebec or Western Canada or the Atlantic, where they are nowhere near the industrial hub of America?<BR><BR>As I said in the post you have twice declined replying to, if the American auto industry were in Vermont or Maine, then the Canadian parts manufacturers would set up shop in Quebec. If the American plants were in Montana, our plants would be in Alberta or BC. But that isn't so: the main industrial regions of America are contiguous to the province of Ontario. That is the source of Ontario's wealth; it's proximity to the highly-industrialized Great Lakes basin, NOT the federal government.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />I made it clear months ago on this site that I disagree with the auto pact. <br /> <br />What we disagree on is how to fiz the problem. I believe in a better federal government that fosters a Canadian car industry. <br /> <br />You want to run away and hope things work out.[/QUOTE]Are you refering to an article you posted? I quickly scanned the forum topics and couldn't find anything relevant. Anyway, if it's still around, please let me know.<BR><BR>What do you mean by "run away and hope things work out"? Wether we manufacture Canadian cars or not, we should continue to sell parts to the assembly plants in the US, which, I've been told, already accounts for most of the auto-manufacturing related industry in this country.

[Guest]

Ed, je t'ai répondu sur un autre fil au sujet du pacte de l'auto (how do you justify, je pense). <br />

[Perturbed]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Perturbed] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Not so much begging as persuading you that you'd only be destroying yourselves.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Then why do you care if we're destroying ourselves? That is condescending, and pompous of you. As if you know better what is good for us. Go to bed, Perturbed, it is passed 10:00. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Why do I care? Because destabilizing Quebec destrabilizes all of Canada--and that affects ME TOO. You can say wahtever you wan tot say--but when you threaten Canada's stability, that's when the gloves are off for most people. <br /> <br />I would appreciate it if you grew up.

[Perturbed]

[QUOTE BY= Ed King] [QUOTE BY= Perturbed] [QUOTE BY= Ed King] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] [QUOTE BY= Dr Caleb] [QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada can`t afford to lose Quebec. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Let's see . . . <br /> <br />http://www.fin.gc.ca/FEDPROV/mtpe.html#Quebec <br /> <br />The population of Saskatchewan west is roughly the same as Quebec. Federal transfer payments in October 2004 for Quebec were 13.2 billion dollars, transfer payments to all provinces west of Saskatchewan were 11.2 billion dollars. <br /> <br />From the federal balance sheet: <br /> <br />http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/govt51b.htm <br /> <br />Quebec's revenues are 76.9 billion, while expenses are 80.2 billion. <br /> <br />Quebec is bleeding money, and as a 'family provider', it isn't doing well. <br /> <br />Until Quebec balances it's books, I'd say we'd do better without them. Economically speaking. <br /> <br /> <br />Quebec on it's own, would starve.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I won't argue with the numbers. Wee see the results of federal decisions favouring the ROC. Ontario with the Auto pact, R & D,; the West with subsidies to agriculture (Quebec didn't get subsidies for agriculture) and the East with Hibernia. <br /> <br />Tell me, what structuring activity the federal government has done for Quebec? <br /> <br />(We could stay here thinking for a long time, because there are none) <br /> <br />And yet, we are being accused of being poor! <br /> <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br /> <br /> <br /> [/QUOTE]Delenda, your assertion that farmers in the province of Quebec are not assisted is false. You don't mention any specifics, but I know that cattle farmers in the province of Quebec are entitled to exactly the same compensation as those in any other province.<BR><BR>As I said in two posts, your point about the auto pact is completely ridiculous. Tell me this Delenda: in light if the fact that the greatest share of the Canadian auto industry consists of manufacturing parts that are shipped to the United States for assembly, where is the most logical place to build these factories? In Ontario, where they are only a few hours away from the assembly plants in Michigan and Ohio? Or in the province Quebec or Western Canada or the Atlantic, where they are nowhere near the industrial hub of America?<BR><BR>As I said in the post you have twice declined replying to, if the American auto industry were in Vermont or Maine, then the Canadian parts manufacturers would set up shop in Quebec. If the American plants were in Montana, our plants would be in Alberta or BC. But that isn't so: the main industrial regions of America are contiguous to the province of Ontario. That is the source of Ontario's wealth; it's proximity to the highly-industrialized Great Lakes basin, NOT the federal government.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />I made it clear months ago on this site that I disagree with the auto pact. <br /> <br />What we disagree on is how to fiz the problem. I believe in a better federal government that fosters a Canadian car industry. <br /> <br />You want to run away and hope things work out.[/QUOTE]Are you refering to an article you posted? I quickly scanned the forum topics and couldn't find anything relevant. Anyway, if it's still around, please let me know.<BR><BR>What do you mean by "run away and hope things work out"? Wether we manufacture Canadian cars or not, we should continue to sell parts to the assembly plants in the US, which, I've been told, already accounts for most of the auto-manufacturing related industry in this country.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />1. I am referring to various stories that have been posted on this topc over the last year or two. I have over 600 comments, so you'd have to dig pretty hard.....you will find refernces to Lester Pearson's auto pact signing, as well as his refusal to give us a national energy grid. <br /> <br />2. I meant "run away from Canada's problems." I was assuming oyu wanted separatism, which I believe is avoiding the real problem--our federal government in Ottawa and what we must do to improve it <br /> <br />I agree we should keep selling parts--but I believe auto-assembly for the big three American companies, as well as Japaness companie is bigger or at least as big as auto parts companies like the Stronach's Magna in Aurora, Ontario. <br /> <br />I DO believe we can cut all ties some day to foreign car companies however. Look what Japan did: they kicked out the U.S. car companies, and now they have several dominating car companies. <br /> <br />davidorchard.com has a recent article that outlines how we could develpo our own industry like Swedenm, Norway, etc....

[Guest]

<br />[QUOTE]PERTURBED <br /> <br />Why do I care? Because destabilizing Quebec destrabilizes all of Canada--and that affects ME TOO. You can say wahtever you wan tot say--but when you threaten Canada's stability, that's when the gloves are off for most people. <br /> <br />I would appreciate it if you grew up.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />What I have been thinking all along was that Canada only cares about itself. Under the guise of "caring for Quebec" Canada is only preoccupied with its own fate. <br /> <br />That strategy has been used over and over again, and it simply does not work. We are not afraid of the U.S. and we are confident we can build a prosperous, French-speaking country in North America. <br /> <br /><u>Quebec will not be used as a shield to protect Canada's interests. </u> <br /> <br /> <br />

[Ed King]

[QUOTE BY= Perturbed] <br />1. I am referring to various stories that have been posted on this topc over the last year or two. I have over 600 comments, so you'd have to dig pretty hard.....you will find refernces to Lester Pearson's auto pact signing, as well as his refusal to give us a national energy grid. <br /> <br />2. I meant "run away from Canada's problems." I was assuming oyu wanted separatism, which I believe is avoiding the real problem--our federal government in Ottawa and what we must do to improve it <br /> <br />I agree we should keep selling parts--but I believe auto-assembly for the big three American companies, as well as Japaness companie is bigger or at least as big as auto parts companies like the Stronach's Magna in Aurora, Ontario. <br /> <br />I DO believe we can cut all ties some day to foreign car companies however. Look what Japan did: they kicked out the U.S. car companies, and now they have several dominating car companies. <br /> <br />davidorchard.com has a recent article that outlines how we could develpo our own industry like Swedenm, Norway, etc.... [/QUOTE]I stand corrected. I looked it up at the Departments of International Trade and Industry, and sales of assembled vehicles are indeed worth more than parts, $60 billion to $34 billion. Also, we produced 2.5 million vehicles in 2000, while sales of vehicles were 1.5 million. We export 97.5% of the parts and vehicles produced in Canada. <BR><BR>Clearly, we already produce far more cars than we buy. Maybe it could be a good idea to produce our own autos, but I don't see the point unless it's a niche market, like energy-efficient vehicles.<BR><BR>As for point #2, I think you are sorely mistaken if you think I'm a seperatist. Don't take my word for it though: just ask Delenda, Samuel or Michou if I'm a seperatist! <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[Dr Caleb]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />I tell you, my dear Dr., that Quebec, on its own, will be a prosperous country. Quebec is strategically located, has a bunch of resources, has bright, opened people, in short, it has everything to succeed. <u>YOU WILL BE BEGGING US NOT TO LEAVE</u>! Besides, I know you would love to see us starving. But too bad it isn't going to happen. Canada has a lot more to lose than the other way around. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />And I am telling you Delinda, Quebec spends more than it earns. If it leaves, it has two choices: Increase taxes or cut government spending. If it leaves, many people and corporations will leave Quebec, further reducing the tax base. <br /> <br />No, I would not love to see anyone starving, but I am showing you that is your fate. If you leave, I want you to do it with your eyes wide open. <br /> <br />Canada has much to lose by way of the uniqueness of Quebec. As I said above, economically, we'll be much further ahead, but diminished as a people. <br />

[michou]

self censored

[Guest]

<br />DOCTOR C <br /> <br />[QUOTE]And I am telling you Delinda, Quebec spends more than it earns. If it leaves, it has two choices: Increase taxes or cut government spending. If it leaves, many people and corporations will leave Quebec, further reducing the tax base. No, I would not love to see anyone starving, but I am showing you that is your fate. If you leave, I want you to do it with your eyes wide open. <br /> <br />Canada has much to lose by way of the uniqueness of Quebec. As I said above, economically, we'll be much further ahead, but diminished as a people.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Dear doctor, your talk comes straight out of the 1970s. We`ve heard these stories in 1976 when the PQ came into power. Corporations would leave, people would flee, Quebec would become a ghost town (or ghost province). Well, it didn`t happen. <br /> <br />When you say it has to whether increase taxes or cut spending, I think it can do well just by rapatriating the taxes it sends to Ottawa. This will eliminate duplication, channel money where it is most wanted (do you know that the federal department of health has 10,000 civil servants? 10,000 people that don`t know how an hospital works! Where is the utility of this?) <br /> <br />Freeing this money will allow for better health care services and economic development. Economic development means a broader tax base. In 1976, the Sunlife left. So what??? It was replaced by something else that had respect for the French majority. If corporations want to leave after sovereignty, they can by all means go! Others will come. The Quebec govt has done wonders with what was left of our taxes to boost our economy, so imagine what it can do when we have full use of our taxes! <br /> <br />Quebec can develop partnerships with other countries. Canada knows it and Canada doesn`t like it. Just the reaction in the English media when "Patapouf" visited Mexico is an example. Quebec wants out of that Canadian yoke. It wants to spread its wings for what it sees fit. Quebec doesn`t feel it is represented inside Canada. It wants to be self-sufficient and is fed up with that paternalistic attitude in Ottawa. Quebec is not interested in getting daddy's permission to achieve its goals and most of all <b><u>QUEBEC DOESN`T WANT TO STAY IN A SITUATION WHERE IT GETS EQUALIZATION MONEY! </u></b> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />

[Ed King]

On a lighter note, did anyone see the Bloc Québécois of Ontario website ? It's hilarious! I love the slogan "Our Quebec includes Ontario"! It's worth reading for humour's sake. Check out the sections for the Québécisation of Ontario and Association-Sovereignty and the frequently asked questions.