[Simplicity]

Well that is a feature of equalization program, is that it's not based on expenditures, its based on revenues allowing the provinces to continue administering the programs they see fit. Every province has different industries, resources and is autonomous when it comes the the creation and management of crown corporations, just as they should be.

That sentence was nonsense. When revenues decline, expenditures will have to. I get that you don't understand that concept, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. When the other provinces begin to create lower transfers, we'll get less. See how that works? Then we won't have the money to pay to keep our services at the level we've become accustomed to. Or the ones that you have. You sound like you're on disability.


I disagree with the "inherently unproductive" part, and tend to hold a higher brighter view of the picture, but do agree that the growth rate has been negative there for far too long.

I didn't use 'inherently unproductive' as an editorial comment. We're 9th of 13 provinces when it comes to per capita GDP. Only Quebec and a couple Atlantic Provinces are propping us up. If you think that Manitoba suddenly has it figured out, I applaud your positive outlook, but it's one that has no basis in reality or fact. In fact, the latest economic data shows Winnipeg in big trouble where our employment is concerned. Moreover, Moody's downgraded us from 'stable' to 'negative' because of concerns that the government was going to take on more debt. So, yeah.

So your concern then isn't about the health of the public sector but the susceptibility of the private sector? Well that is the nice thing about the stability of the economy there, while you didn't get the full benefits of $107/barrel oil, you are at an advantage to tap into the benefits of $50/barrel oil - there is a solid base of private sector manufacturing and transportation industry there, as well as a solid financial and cultural base so MB will fare just fine while AB, NL and SK struggle forging new books. I think it is most important for you MB folks to remember that you are not dependent on the large public sector, you have chosen to utilize it that way, and I personally find that very prudent.

This is a dumb argument. This is tantamount to the argument that the person at 7-11 should be happy working for minimum wage because it's 'stable employment'. That person would take a high paying job for 5 years to generate resources in order to reinvest elsewhere. Education, small business, wherever. Welfare is also stable. Always near the bottom, but always stable. Conflating stability with quality is something socialists love to do. And you've said this before, but enough with this cultural base nonsense like somehow the economic standard of living has anything to do with whatever nebulous idea of culture you have that will invariably differ from somebody else's. This is nonsense. Stick to the topic.