April 5, 2012

Belated instruction for Obama on GM

The Canadian government this week made an announcement that might have been much more useful and instructive for the Obama White House had it preceded the GM auto bailout (emphasis added).
The Canadian government won’t step in to block a sale of RIM, if it comes, despite its significance not only to research and development in the area of networking, consumer electronics and the enterprise, but also to the city of Waterloo and its many thousands of resident employees. 
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said that the company “will be the masters of their own destiny,” but that he and his government would prefer them to stay Canadian, and successful. Right now, analysts say, RIM is ripe for a takeover, with a dwindling market share in key markets like North America, and a product line up that does not compete with its rivals in Apple and Google.
Implicit in those words is also the notion that there would be no bailout.  Tough love from the conservative Canadian government  to the effect of 'we will support an environment that supports your success, but you will stand or fall on your own merit'.  That may seem quaint or novel from the perspective of president Obama and his union supporters, but Canada is heading in the right direction and president Obama's United States is clearly not.  How can you tell?  Look at the debt to GDP ratios of the two nations.  Look at the unemployment rates.

The views of the White House occupant will not change, despite evidence of the need to do so.  That means that the occupant of the White House needs to change.  Of course you already knew that.  Unfortunately, in both countries - the United States and Canada, that simple, common sense is not adequately pervasive and that explains how Obama got elected and why there are cries of outrage from the far left (again in either country) every time conservatives attempt to make a difference.  The Saul Alinsky playbook is a reflexive response even for those who on the left who may not even be aware of Alinsky's rules for radicals.  Therein lies the true danger and threat to liberty.


  1. From LCR:

    Never in my life would I have thought that my neighbor to the north (a beautiful country with gracious people, btw) would school America on free markets and how to successfully manage a market economy. In the 60's Americans moved to Canada to flee the draft; I wonder if we might see something similar (on a greater scale) as America slides further into the socialist abyss and Americans flee this place for opportunity elsewhere?

    1. I think it would be better for Americans to fight for their liberty, their well-being than too flee. If anyone can stand up for liberty it's a nation that has a state with a motto "Live Free or Die".

      Then again if you can live free somewhere else and not need to die for it, it would be tempting. Nevertheless, America has understood liberty and justice better, and longer than any other nation and that flame should not be allowed to burn out, even though far too many seem not to care these days.


Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This