Its all going to the olympics

Time to move.

How can our political leaders think for an instant that 100 to 150 people with no income is O.K.
This makes me feel sick inside......these people have families to try to feed and homes to pay for. What has this world come to?....It seems like the only people left in this world in power positions are narcissistic in nature!

Thank you all who voted for Harper. You are responsible for allowing this to be O.K.

Yea right. You call yourself a REALIST? The Liberals are the ones that raided EI. If they hadnt done that there would be money there to easily extend benefits. There is no such thing as a lefty realist.

Perhaps you missed the budget that did virtually nothing to help these workers.

Just like it is a right trait to arrogantly assume they know who anyone supports. Typical right wing extremely limited linear thinking.

What ever happened to looking out for yourself? EI eventually runs out. Move forward with your life. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but sooner or later you're gonna have to.

Dude if you didnt vote for Harper then you are a lefty, unless you voted for a party to the right of Harper, which of course doesnt exist (with the exception of the Bloc, which didnt run alot of candidates out here). It is an assumption, but one based on pretty clear logic. I did assume that you arent a communist of a hippy, and therefore didnt vote NDP or Green when I assumed you Liberal.

I work in the lumber industry to my friend. What would you propose the government do in the budget? Propping up failed industry is a waste of money (as proven by the NDP re:Skeena Cellulose). Besides the SLA pretty much guarantees that doesnt happen. I feel for these people and I realize that it could happen to me too, but handing out money is not a sustainable answer.

Time to start a real revolution. But then again, fomenting and talking about and starting a revolution is against the law. Wait a minute...What law? Looking around there are lotsa laws, but no penalties. I say go for it. Start a revolution. I dare ya.

100 to 150 people in Mackenzie have no income. What about the people who have already left Mackenzie? Do they have an income elsewhere?

Born in BC, "What would you propose the government do in the budget?"

Well Born in BC, what I propose first and formost is if I was elected as a Conservatve I would think that I was to lead the country with Conservative values.
I would not abandon my values to pursue personal power as has happened with our present Prime Minister.
Then as a Prime Minister who is elected by the people to represent them with Conservative values I would live and die by values in which I believe in which clearly our present Prime Minister doesn't have.

If the country can't be advantaged by these people's continued 'production', (and if it could, they'd still be working), then how can it be disadvantaged by their continued 'consumption'? Extend the EI, it's only 'money'!

"If the country can't be advantaged by these people's continued 'production', (and if it could, they'd still be working)"

Of course, this assumes that there is no work available anywhere in the country, which is a significant flaw in your theory.

Sounds like NMG has been hiding his head in the sand the last half year!

I said work, not work at a pulp or saw mill. BIG difference don't you think?

Well, where is all this "work", NMG? It costs a lot of money to relocate, and if the job that these people are relocating to do isn't going to last or pay them as much as they're currently getting on EI, what's the point?

At least they're in homes where they are, and their continued 'consumption' keeps what is still going in Mackenzie operational.

And if you're one of those people who still believes that ancient nonsense from the 1st Century AD that we should "let no man eat unless he's first worked", well, as soon as the ground thaws out up there we can give all the unemployed a bare piece of earth and a pick and shovel, and have them all dig holes, and then fill them in again.

That should solve the 'moral' problem quite nicely. As far as the 'economics' of it all go, what I said originally stands. The problem today is NOT a shortage of 'production'. There's more than enough of that. It's a problem of 'distribution' ~ and the means of distribution is 'money'. And there's no reason in the world that if there's no physical shortage of 'production' the means for its 'distribution' should be lacking either. Otherwise we ALL are "working" for nothing.

We as "human beings" (which includes all those in the Gov as well) need to change the way we treat and feel about each other. Most of us do not realize that we have created this environment of pain, greed, hate, and disrespect that we continue to portray to each other and it's up to us to change it. The truth is simple and basic, people need to be able to eat, they need a home to go to and they need to feel like they are important enough to humanity that they can live and survive with some semblance of dignity and respect given them.
This simple need is not being allowed right now to many of us out their. It is not being allowed because of the system that we have voted in, which is being supported by the people that have been voted in (please do not think this this statement is pointed at any Gov, this is pointed at us as people of the human race). Out of respect for people it must be said it is very easy to remove yourself from a decision that has been made that might hurt others when you convince yourself that you can have no influence over the making of that decision anyway. It is up to us as individuals to stop this thought process, we need to know we do have influence and we can change things even as a single person.
You get the picture....it is all about us not accepting anything that will not better us as humanity.
We are taught as children to "look after ourselves first" and if we have the means and the time then "consider" what you can do for others, rather than "do" what you can do for others.
To change we need to be aware that change is needed......I think change is not just "needed" but it is a requirement right now, and we need to look to the source of the original decision, which came from within us all to determine where to begin again.
If we wish to survive as a species we need to stop pointing fingers and start looking within to make change.
That is my sermon for the day.....Have great weekend all.

Good Lord socredible!

Who suggested that these people shouldn't take the EI they are entitled to? Who said that looking for a new job or career would be pain free? Who said that there are 60K a year jobs floating around like fine particulate on a PG day? It certainly wasn't me!

All I've ever talked about is the REALITY of what is going on. I know that you are passionate about your economic theory and how it could solve this problem (and that's cool), but I think the REALITY is that it will never come to fruition. Much like the REALITY is that EI will not be extended for up to 2 years. Much like the REAILITY is that many of these lost jobs are not coming back. Much like the REALITY that some of these small towns may be done.

I truly would love to see every unemployed worker back on the job Monday, but it ain't hapenning. So now what? I just did a Workopolis search and it shows 38 jobs in PG and area, 85 in Kamloops and area, 40 in Nanaimo and area, over 500 in Edmonton, Calgary and Vancouver and area, 156 in Regina and area, 240 in Saskatoon and area, 298 in Fort McMurray and area, 38 in Medicine Hat and area, 106 in Lethbridge and area, 186 in Red Deer and area, etc. There are other cities you can search and that's only one online job site, among others. That's not even looking at the papers and help wanted signs you see, even around town here.

I get that this is a terrible situation. Anyone can see that. All I'm suggetsing (and all that I've ever suggested) is that people have to take it upon themselves to do whatever they can to get through it. I was born in raised in PG and I love it here but if I had to packup and leave to keep things going, I would do so. Many a person has had to do that exact thing and I know that it is not a nice thing to have to contemplate but when the money runs out, what choice do people have? Does protesting in front of the EI office put food on the table?

You can quote 'statistics' that match jobless in Mackenzie with jobs available elsewhere endlessly, NMG, but it does nothing to match specific people in specific circumstances with regards to either the unemployed individual or his prospective new employer.

Have you ever been to a Canada Manpower Centre and watched the unemployed scanning the "jobs available" computer screens searching for anything that might improve their present circumstances?

The article above relates that people from Mackenzie HAVE gone away from home seeking alternate employment, where jobs they might be qualified to do WERE available, but now have also ended. That's a pretty good indication, I think, that these people ARE quite willing to work, provided they can see they can still get a living from their work.

No doubt there are other jobs out there, there always are, but do they provide anyone with a living they can actually 'live' on? And of the ones that do, will they still be there by the time the guy who's worked in a sawmill or pulpmill for the last 10 or 15 or 20 years gets re-trained to do them? And uproots himself and his family, likely at a considerable loss on everything he's managed to accumulate in 'equity' over that time, to move where they are?

That's the REALITY. It might be different if the mills had been auctioned and dismantled, and the timber resource that provided the reason for their existence had been exhausted. But none of that has happened.

And to tear out and abandon facilities that all were, in the final analysis, already paid for by the 'public', only to find a short time later that the temporary lack of 'effective demand' for products they made, ones that are still very much in 'real demand', causes us to have to re-create what we've just dismantled, only now at a new and greater cost to the same 'public', (the same 'public' that will BUY the products of those mills, or the products exchanged through export for them), is going to be far more costly than extending these workers EI benefits they, and we, have already provided more than enough of a fund to continue to do.

Just remember that every dollar taken from a worker's gross pay in EI deductions is matched by $ 1.40 taken from his employer. Just remember also that it is the worker's NET pay, after all deductions that has to liquidate the PRICE of the products he, and every other worker has made. Or their exchange through export.

And don't forget that it is the worker's GROSS pay PLUS the employer's EI contribution that is costed into that PRICE.

So tell me, if you as a BC Liberal supporter, who always pride themselves on their mathematical ability when it comes to managing money, just how is the worker to pay for, out of NET, for more
than what is being charged to him through the impressing of GROSS 'PLUS' into PRICE?


Think about that REALITY for awhile, and maybe, just maybe, you'll begin to realize where the REAL problem lies and why no one currently in politics can ever solve it.

We really need to try to come up with some alternative employment options in MacKenzie. It sits in the middle of an enormous forest range, and we need to do something else with those resources, whether it is manufacturing wood pellets or burning wood fibre to create electrical generation. There is little else that is viable for development in that region.

They have lots of wood, it's pretty much the only thing they can derive employment from, we need to do something with it that can sustain some type of gainful employment.

Minister Bell&Mackenzie mayor have everything under control,they are a thriving town...ya right...just listen to Bell tell us how well off Mackenzie is doing.Sugarcoating all the B.S. still does'nt make it smell any better,but who cares they are still thriving in their own little world.

"No doubt there are other jobs out there, there always are, but do they provide anyone with a living they can actually 'live' on"

That's impossible to answer since every single person lives in a different manner. People making 70K a year in PG or Mackenzie may find the thought of living on 30K a year impossible even though there are loads of people that do it, even in cities where the cost of living is significantly more than in Prince George or Mackenzie.

"And to tear out and abandon facilities that all were, in the final analysis, already paid for by the 'public', only to find a short time later that the temporary lack of 'effective demand' for products they made, ones that are still very much in real demand"

It seems like you feel that the sustained "real demand" for the quantity of goods that were being produced in BC over the past few years will continue after this crisis. I think you are terribly mistaken. I think that level of production was completely unsustainable in comparison to actual demand and that it was a purely artificial bubble created in our haste to harvest as many trees as we could before they were worthless.

"How is the worker to pay for, out of NET, for more
than what is being charged to him through the impressing of GROSS 'PLUS' into PRICE"

So how does your theory explain those people who are able to offset their expenditures (and save money even) out of the net wages that they receive?

Personally I think thereasonableman's post is bang on. I think the government should be investing money into that type of development instead of focusing on dying industries.

NMG;Are you unemployed?Have you run out of E.I?

"So how does your theory explain those people who are able to offset their expenditures (and save money even) out of the net wages that they receive?"
----------------------------------------

Simply by looking at whether the growth of overall "Debt" is keeping pace with that of actual 'growth' in the economy as a whole, or whether it's always exceeding it.

Until the economy periodically 'collapses', as is happening now, when a great deal of that "Debt" is written off. Unfortunately at the cost of much personal misery and distress and an enormous waste of useful productive capacity.

There is no doubt that 'individually' a large number of people ARE able to "offset their expenditures" and "save money" out of what they receive. But they'll only be able to continue to do so as long as overall "Debt" itself continues to rise.

"It seems like you feel that the sustained "real demand" for the quantity of goods that were being produced in BC over the past few years will continue after this crisis. I think you are terribly mistaken. I think that level of production was completely unsustainable in comparison to actual demand and that it was a purely artificial bubble created in our haste to harvest as many trees as we could before they were worthless."

"Personally I think thereasonableman's post is bang on. I think the government should be investing money into that type of development instead of focusing on dying industries."
------------------------------------------

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but it was my impression that the forests around Mackenzie haven't been as badly hit by the MPB outbreak as those around Prince George.

If this is so, it would be reasonable, I think, to concentrate timber harvest in those areas where the timber WILL soon be worthless for lumber, particularly during a downturn in the lumber markets. And concentrate any investment in future alternate, non-lumber, forest products like energy production, in those areas. Since they'll likely be the places that are going to need it more.

I personally believe we going to see the "quantity of goods" in the form of lumber go from a massive oversupply right now, to a shortage in years ahead. The largest problem we'll face then will be to keep the price competitive with lumber substitutes, and maintain market share.

Much of the northern LP lumber does not lend itself to 'value-adding', and is only suitable for commodity lumber. Which still can be competitive with non-wood substitutes and return a better overall dollar than alternate products, like energy chips or pellets.

So I wouldn't be in too big a hurry to write Mackenzie off just yet. Extending the EI benefits to keep that community alive still seems to me to be the best way to go.