Not a surprise, try 20% to be more honest about it.

Agreed!

I believe there is a possiblity to manipulate stats to prevent hysteria, especially before the election.

Have the statistics recorded the amount of people whom have no unemployment or employment? ( no E.I. and no job) so what happens when the RRSP runs out?

welfare. Well, those people who has RRSP's should likely have gone to welfare first.

To qualify for welfare you can't have any assets. If you own a home, vehicle or have investments, you would be required to liquidate everything before you quality for benefits. And there is a 21-day waiting period while you do a job search. It's not like you can walk into an office and have a cheque cut for you right away. There's tons of hoops to jump through and you're still not guaranteed any help.

As the unemployment rises,and with no effective policing, the crime will rise and we will see the hell breaking loose again in BC.

There is no Hong Kong to come and save BC this time and the capital will migrate to safer provinces.

Yes if you listen to Gordon and the Liberals - the economy is strong - there are many people who no longer have EI - and therefore they are not been recorded - the unemployment is horrendous in the North!

In fact, in 23 days of campaigning the NDP have not put forward a single positive suggestion that will create jobs in our energy industry. It appears that if the NDP get their way British Columbians will be left to freeze in the dark.

Unemployement is still lower with all the world economic mess than when the NDP where in and it was good times.

Press release –

Canfor - Interfor - West Fraser Timber - Forest Industry CEOs correct the record on forestry issues

The three signatories to this statement wish to set the record straight on what is occurring in our industry today and what we see as critical for it to survive and thrive in the future.

First, to those who are quick to blame the current B.C. government for the woes of our industry we can only say it is either a clear demonstration of their lack of understanding of BC’s core business, or that they are willing to play politics with the lives of the thousands of people who depend on forestry. Simply put, B.C.’s forest sector is blessed by having the world’s largest housing market as a neighbour. That also means we are heavily dependent upon the U.S. home-building market which has collapsed. That collapse is not something our governments can fix.

Secondly, the NDP has advocated opening up the Softwood Lumber Agreement and we cannot help but think that indicates a fundamental lack of understanding of the agreement. To renege on that deal today would be high risk in the extreme and would undoubtedly lead to costly legal wrangling and duties at the border which in turn would further jeopardize the economic stability of B.C. companies, their employees and the communities in which they live and work.

We have modern, efficient mills today that are the result of the confidence provided by our tenure system in B.C. Without that certainty, our three companies could not have invested the hundreds of millions of dollars to build and rebuild the mills we have in the last few years. The NDP have talked of blowing up the tenure system in B.C. and we can tell you that there has never been a more powerful reminder of the lack of a strong business investment climate we had during the NDP government of the 1990s. They do not seem to appreciate the link between security of tenure and the ability to encourage the investment required to remain competitive in a global business. The NDP forestry policies of the past discouraged investment in B.C. and resulted in significant costs being imposed on our industry. Those costs damaged our ability to compete. Many of the policies being put forward by the NDP of today are just as discouraging.

Finally, we would be remiss if we did not credit Premier Gordon Campbell for being a champion for our industry. The Premier has set the course in opening up Asian markets, in developing new uses for BC wood products, in expanding BC as a showcase for the use of wood products whether it be in iconic structures like the expanded convention centre or Olympic skating oval. For the first time in our history, our provincial government has aWood First policy that ensures B.C .government building projects first consider how best to use wood products and in that manner establish B.C. as a global showcase for the use of wood products.

In conclusion, our industry is in the midst of the worst crisis since the Great Depression. We are going to get through this and we believe there is a bright future for forestry in B.C. and for the tens of thousands of us who depend directly upon it. It will be a different industry with new products, new applications and new, growing markets. But realizing that future requires everyone working together and strong leadership.

Our entire industry and those who are employed within it have benefited from the leadership of Gordon Campbell and his team. We appreciate that leadership as being critically important to the future and sincerely hope that British Columbians will ensure it continues.

Duncan Davies
President & CEO Chair
Interfor

Hank Ketcham
President & CEO
West Fraser Timber

Jim Shepard
President & CEO
Canfor

According to Stats Can, BC added 17,000 jobs in April.

The NDP will destroy the livelyhood of most British Columbians.

hey we did that press release already!
My question is this: Is there any reason to be surprised that the unemployment rate is high here relative to down south? Given that the whole forest industry is in hibernation and we are still very much a forestry town i should think we could expect to suffer til the market picks up. I dont see much point in dragging out the doom and gloom and belabouring the point when there isnt a damn thing that can be done about it. Unless, of course some of those people, currently unemployed went to look for work elsewhere, while they are waiting for the mills/woods to open up again. It seemed a good idea when the oil patch was paying 300 plus a day...

That press release makes it sound like Gordo is in a panic that he might actually lose! This election will be very interesting from a non-partisan standpoint.

NDPers love welfare. Its what they all aspire to - living off government handouts. If they had usable skills, they'd be working.

I wonder if the stats on unemployment takes our homeless into consideration. After all,they are important enough to get an 8 million dollar building with only 30 rooms and geothermal heating (which took 3 or 4 trys to get it right) and we, the taxpayers paying for the whole damn thing. Some contracters are looking at pretty fat bank accounts right now. Give me 8 million and I'll build eight of them and have money left over. It doesn't matter which level of Government donates the money, it still comes out of our pockets and it really irritates me. These bottom feeders are not required to do any community work to receive our donations. As long as they have the sympathy of our city council this will keep happening. How about a referendum on some of this theft from the citizens? Chain 'em all together for 6 hours a day with a shovel and they will soon lose the drug habit and become contributing citizens. They are treated much better than a person who didn't lock the gun cabinet.

I would have no issues voting Liberal if Gordo wasn't leader. That smug moron needs a reality check. Accountability and sound moral practices would go a long way in justifying voting Liberal this time around.

smug moron--well said. He made more sense when he was drinking.

Wow, It appears free enterprise really like this article below, I see it posted several times in non related areas. I've read this several times already, is this some new form of hypnotism or what?


Comment Posted by: Free Enterprise on May 8 2009 3:12 PM
Press release –

Canfor - Interfor - West Fraser Timber - Forest Industry CEOs correct the record on forestry issues

The three signatories to this statement wish to set the record straight on what is occurring in our industry today and what we see as critical for it to survive and thrive in the future.

First, to those who are quick to blame the current B.C. government for the woes of our industry we can only say it is either a clear demonstration of their lack of understanding of BC’s core business, or that they are willing to play politics with the lives of the thousands of people who depend on forestry. Simply put, B.C.’s forest sector is blessed by having the world’s largest housing market as a neighbour. That also means we are heavily dependent upon the U.S. home-building market which has collapsed. That collapse is not something our governments can fix.

Secondly, the NDP has advocated opening up the Softwood Lumber Agreement and we cannot help but think that indicates a fundamental lack of understanding of the agreement. To renege on that deal today would be high risk in the extreme and would undoubtedly lead to costly legal wrangling and duties at the border which in turn would further jeopardize the economic stability of B.C. companies, their employees and the communities in which they live and work.

We have modern, efficient mills today that are the result of the confidence provided by our tenure system in B.C. Without that certainty, our three companies could not have invested the hundreds of millions of dollars to build and rebuild the mills we have in the last few years. The NDP have talked of blowing up the tenure system in B.C. and we can tell you that there has never been a more powerful reminder of the lack of a strong business investment climate we had during the NDP government of the 1990s. They do not seem to appreciate the link between security of tenure and the ability to encourage the investment required to remain competitive in a global business. The NDP forestry policies of the past discouraged investment in B.C. and resulted in significant costs being imposed on our industry. Those costs damaged our ability to compete. Many of the policies being put forward by the NDP of today are just as discouraging.

Finally, we would be remiss if we did not credit Premier Gordon Campbell for being a champion for our industry. The Premier has set the course in opening up Asian markets, in developing new uses for BC wood products, in expanding BC as a showcase for the use of wood products whether it be in iconic structures like the expanded convention centre or Olympic skating oval. For the first time in our history, our provincial government has aWood First policy that ensures B.C .government building projects first consider how best to use wood products and in that manner establish B.C. as a global showcase for the use of wood products.

In conclusion, our industry is in the midst of the worst crisis since the Great Depression. We are going to get through this and we believe there is a bright future for forestry in B.C. and for the tens of thousands of us who depend directly upon it. It will be a different industry with new products, new applications and new, growing markets. But realizing that future requires everyone working together and strong leadership.

Our entire industry and those who are employed within it have benefited from the leadership of Gordon Campbell and his team. We appreciate that leadership as being critically important to the future and sincerely hope that British Columbians will ensure it continues.

Duncan Davies
President & CEO Chair
Interfor

Hank Ketcham
President & CEO
West Fraser Timber

Jim Shepard
President & CEO
Canfor

"Our entire industry and those who are employed within it have benefited from the leadership of Gordon Campbell and his team."

And the THREE who are (still) EMPLOYED within it are:-

Duncan Davies
President & CEO Chair
Interfor

Hank Ketcham
President & CEO
West Fraser Timber

Jim Shepard
President & CEO
Canfor

Eatsbushes:- "According to Stats Can, BC added 17,000 jobs in April.

The NDP will destroy the livelyhood of most British Columbians."

Gordo and his "team" have already had eight years at doing just that. You focus on the job numbers as if they tell the whole story. They don't. Let's focus on the whole picture, which includes overall "incomes". Both un-adjusted and adjusted for the 'inflation' that the Campbell crowd have had a large hand in inducing these last eight years, under the guise of 'prosperity'.

Only a premier with a background as a land-pimp would see a continual rise in property and all other prices as being advantageous to anyone.

To those of us who have to make our living by more honest means, all the last eight years have wrought is a continual erosion in the purchasing power of our incomes. And a Province that is further in debt, collectively, both publicly and privately, than it previously was relative to what that debt was incurred to fund.

But lets make it simpler than that.

"Inflation = a rise in the 'standard of living', for most, accompanied by an even faster rise in the 'cost of living'.

"Prosperity" = a relative fall in the 'cost of living' accompanied, for ALL, by a rise in the 'standard of living.'

Those definitions seem to be lost on Campbell's crowd, and it remains to be seen if they register at all with the NDP. But so far I haven't heard Ms. James open any of her utterances, sensible or inane, with "Let me tell you..."

So Mercenary - if you'd have no trouble voting liberal if Gordon Campbell wasn't leader, --- does that them mean that you'd turn the Province over to "any" other party just because of that fact if you could ?

This kind of comment scares the begeebers out of me, because what democracy is supposed to be all about is to give a free society a process to elect their leaders for the good of "all" of the citizens in that Province, Country, State, etc.

If you're one of those who'd "cut off your nose to spite your face", we could be in deep trouble if there's lots of you out there, and by the sounds of some of the comments I read here and elsewhere there's no doubt there is.

"Throwing" your vote because you don't like a particular individual in a particular party, is way off the track in my opinion.

I suggest we all go to the poles with the best interest of the entire Province at heart, not just the priorities of your own special interest group, and vote accordingly, like the responsible adults that we are.

Our children expect this of us, look up to us and trust us to do the "right" thing for them and their future.

We must not let them down, for it is them that will pay the ultimate price.

This is certainly an interesting and lively debate!
I have a couple of questions:
Under whose watch was that $8 million housing project approved through BC Housing?
Whey does BC still have one of the highest child poverty rates in the country according to Stats Can?

Correction..."Why does BC still have one of the highest child poverty rates in the country according to Stats Can?"

Socredible.

You are mixing apples and oranges in your definitions.

"cost of living" is the expense side of a budget. If the "income for living" goes up more than the "cost of living", then prosperity increases. The unit of measure is money. The outcome is the level of prosperity which may rise or fall over time.

When our daily breadbasket in 2009 includes fruit from California in the middle of winter instead of preserves made from apples locally grown in the fall, and the cost in constant dollars rises, is that an increase in prosperity since mom no longer has to make preserves?

When part of the cost of living includes 3 trips per day to the other side of the city to visit friends, bring kids to special classes, go shopping, etc. instead of 3 trips a week with one family car instead of three to do those things, is that an increase in prosperity?

In real terms I would say it probably isn't. It is more likely an increase in stress.

here's your Canadian inflation calculator.

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/en/rates/inflation_calc.html

According to that the rate of inflation for 10 year periods was as follows:
Canada - USA

1998 - 2008 - 23.6% - 31.5%
1988 - 1998 - 29.4% - 36.7
1978 - 1988 - 97.2% - 81.7%
1968 - 1978 - 91.9% - 87.6%
1958 - 1968 - 23.1% - 20.3%
1948 - 1958 - 32.5% - 20.2%
1938 - 1948 - 46.1% - 80%
1928 - 1938 - -14.29% - -17.6%
1918 - 1928 - 5.8% - 0%

Which seems to tell us what we already know, the boom years were mid 1960s to mid 1980s. Since then we have "normalized"?

And??? those boomers are getting impatient. They are wondering why it cannot continue past middle age.

Erosion of purchasing power? No, back to reality.

No, gus, erosion of purchasing power IS the reality.

You make the all too common mistake of believing that the "unit of measure" ~ money ~ is a standard like the inch, or the meter. Something "fixed" as a "measure of value".

"Money" is neither "fixed" in value, nor a "measure" of anything, except itself. I.e. $1 = 4 quarters, or 10 dimes, or 20 nickels, or 100 pennies. It is "effective demand" for goods and services, and the only way it can "measure" anything relative to them is as a 'ratio'.

It takes us more money to buy the things we need and want now than it did when Gordon Campbell became our Premier. The question is whether Mr. Campbell is going to do anything about that, or does he really care? I personally believe he does NOT care, so long as the income he 'earns' and those who are financing him 'earn' is sufficient to maintain them in the type of lifestyle to which they've become accustomed. Which includes having the ability to exercise an "economic" oligopoly over the rest of us.

I believe Ms. James and her supporters DO care, but they are currently too woolly-headed and hide-bound in the traditional ideas of the "class-struggle" of socialism to properly recognize the real problem and the solution to it.

However, Ms. James, from what I've seen of her, does seem to realize why she was given two ears and only one mouth. She may, and I stress the word "may", just be smart enough to realize where the problems really lay if she becomes Premier. And the traditional "socialist" prescriptions will not do anything more towards solving it than privatizing everything in sight will if Campbell is returned to office.

From what I've seen of Gordo, the 'global groupie', unless someone like Al Gore mentions some new idea to him, or the people revolt like they did when he tried to peddle the Coquihalla, an original thought couldn't be inserted into his skull with anything less than a jackhammer!

Well, socredible, if Gordon Campbell is responsible for the fact that the things we want to buy or need are more expensive now than they were before Mr. Campbell took on responsibility of bringing us out of the ten- year recession we suffered through under Union management in the nineties, then maybe you should buy your goods and services over in Alberta instead.

(Oh yeah, they're no cheaper there are they, and they've got a lot of those awfull private businesses over there too)! Well then how about Saskatchewan, or Manitoba ? (nope, no cheaper there)! Well then maybe New Brunswick !! Surely Gordon Campbell's tenure couldn't have raised the price of a TV or a bundle of carrots waaay out there !! ( Nope - not much difference there either).

Well, I guess you'll just have to wait for Carol to roll back the price of all our BC goods and services then. ( Oh wait a minute -- how then can we unions go on strike for higher wages, when we can't claim we need the money due to having to pay higher prices for everything) ??

Oh my Gawd -- what mess that "Gordo" has created ! Now what are we gonna do !
( I know -- we'll all go on welfare -- and the GOVERNMENT can buy it all for us!)

By golly -- there's a solution to everything !!

palomino

Palomino, even I, a lifelong non-NDPer, but hardly any fan of Gordon Campbell's Liberals, either, wouldn't blame the ongoing decline in the purchasing power of our dollar SOLELY on him and his government. If I've created that impression, it is certainly not the point I was trying to make.

They have made it worse, however, in my humble opinion.

And I think that is an undeniable fact.

They've done so by blindly following the same kind of failed policy that previous governments have followed. Which has always resulted in 'inflation' being first mistaken for 'prosperity'. Until the other shoe falls, and an increasing number of people are crushed by it.

The only difference between then and now being that the large capital construction projects entered into by WAC Bennett's Social Credit government in the 1960's resulted in genuine 'assets' of inestimable future value to all British Columbians.

We did get an 'inflation' out of those projects, too, unfortunately. And Premier Bennett's then method of trying to deal with it was largely what caused his downfall in 1972.

We are still benefitting, (though under Campbell for how much longer is anybody's guess) from relatively low cost hydro-electric power and a network of highways and railway extensions made way back then.

Though at the time, we DID pay dearly for them through the rise in prices that occurred. What should have been learned from that experience is how to avoid that. It wasn't.

What has Mr. Campbell brought us for the similar rise in prices of everything during his eight years in power?

A steroid circus at Whistler for a couple of weeks, fraught throughout by cost over-runs and hasty decisions on locating roads and related infrastructure related to it. Of which, the ones we know about so far, that is, are already making the NDP's fast-cat ferry fiasco look like small change.

We expected better from Mr. Campbell when we first elected him, (I didn't ~ it was the first election in my entire life that I felt so disappointed with all who were running that I didn't even bother to go and vote ~ but most people did). But what did we get?

You say he ended the recession of the 1990's. It would be more accurate to say that a rebound in commodity prices did that. And you say, or at least infer, that Unions caused it.

I find that rather nonsensical. And before you put me down as another union loving believer in ever higher wages and generous government welfare programs funded through taxation when they're not available, "Let me tell you", to borrow your hero's favourite sentence opener, I've been on the EMPLOYER's side of the fence for most of my working life.

What people in Unions want are pretty much the same things I, or anybody else wants. A decent living for the work we do. One that buys us "more" as technological advancement continues to lower the true cost of production. Not one that buys us ever the "less", as prices continue to outpace incomes because of a twit at the top who's too much of a 'global groupie' to think outside the box. Or think at all.

Now the NDP has a solution, which in my opinion, is no solution at all. They'd raise thew minimum wage, and do other wonderous things. To them anyways. I'll not go into that here, save to say that at least it shows they CARE. Does Gordo?

Is breaking the back of every Union, and forcing wages down to the level paid in Third-World countries so we can 'compete' in 'global markets' going to increase our prosperity here? How? You tell me. But before you do, just think about it first.

With 17 years of experience working at the pulp mills under compulsory union management, socredible, I'm nobody's fool when it comes to knowing how unions think, operate, and manipulate their membership.

Thirty-odd years ago I left that phase of life behind me, and stepped out into the "real" world, started a small business, became an employer myself, and the rest is history. That early union experience has given me valueable insight into what is now the "other" side, to this day.

I might also remind you , socredible, that that "steriod circus" as you call it at Whistler, has created almost eight years of employment for many, many BRITISH COLUMBIANS, a lot of whom are UNION MEMBERS, who buy shoes and lunches for their kids, and send them to good schools, on safe roads, in safe busses, with licensed drivers, just like you and I do!!

I suggest there's thousands of hard working people out there, working on building that "circus" who'd take great exception to your trivializing their toil, and let's not ever forget, the money they earn gets mostly spent right here in BC, where you get to benefit from it too.

I'd be interested in what else you think "Gordo" should have done to make BC'er's richer, and bring those prices down, and especially what you'd have done if you were Premier?

palomino

He should have studied the original precepts of 'Social Credit', Palomino. Which would have illustrated to him some basic principles that could have been applied to create a genuine and lasting 'prosperity' for all British Columbians. Without an inflation that's robbing us all of the purchasing power of our earnings.

And with the size of the majority he had when first elected he would have had very little problem implementing those principles.

That was one of the problems faced by WAC Bennett. In spite of his twenty years of electoral success and all the great things his government was able to accomplish, the BC Social Credit League never did have a solid enough majority to move towards the financial reforms that would have ensured BC would have continued to prosper when the resource boom that attended much of Mr. Bennett's time in office finally ended, and the needed infrastructure had been built.

There's no denying the Olympics, like any other large capital project, has created jobs. Though what these people, who for the last eight years have been dependent on these jobs for an income are going to do when the Olympic construction is completed, is anybody's guess.

Perhaps Mr. Campbell, or his successor, if we should be so fortunate to see his political demise on Tuesday, will dream up some other wonder of the ages to re-employ them. No doubt that's what will happen, since in that respect BOTH the NDP and the BC Liberals are as one in 'policy'.

But you're a small businessman, as am I. And you've no doubt seen the same kind of perversions on the Big Union side as I'm sure you've witnessed on the Big Business side. Big Union wants 'more for 'less', Big Business the same, and it's the PUBLIC, of whom both are members as are we all, who end up trying to cover the costs. With incomes, or profits, that are perpetually going to be inadequate to do so.

Some do prosper. For awhile. But eventually even they begin to fall behind. Their money doesn't buy them what they thought it would, or too much of it is being taxed away from them. And in spite of that they witness overall debt levels, and service charges on those debts, continue to rise exponentially. And an economy that consistantly underperforms in delivering not only wanted, but also needed, goods and services.

Now to cut this short, since I still have to 'earn my daily bread' by putting in the usual small businessman's unlimited day, too, in a week or two the property tax notices will be arriving. It's unfortunate they don't arrive BEFORE the election date. Because in all likelihood they'll be up from last year's.

Ours has risen for our business property each of the last eight years Gordo was in office. (In contrast to what attended when WAC Bennett was Premier, when there was very little change, year to year, and one year, as I remember quite well, there was a decrease.) This year's bill will likely amount, for my business, to a sum that is twice what I originally paid for the property!

Some might say this is a sign of 'prosperity'. That the equity in my property has risen, and I shouldn't mind paying the taxes on its new-found value. But lets say I was to "cash-in", and sell my business. Would I be able to buy something similar, or better with the amount I'd receive? After taxes? Would I be able to "live long and prosper" by investing the proceeds in something I have no hand in running, and just putting my feet up? In a pig's eye I would! I would be witness to a continual escalating filching of the proceeds of my life's work by the likes of Mr. Campbell. Who WILL NOT LEARN and make the attempt to correct what is really wrong. Would Ms. James be any better?

Maybe not, but with her, or what comes after her, there's a chance. With Gordo, the die is cast, there'll be just more of the same. And that 'same' just isn't good enough for this old boy anymore.