… because it doesn’t “benefit Canada?” So we all work for the state? Our investment decisions should be contingent upon whether or not there is a “net benefit” — not for us and our families but for the state? And we should be prepared to suffer a devaluation of our investment as long as it has a “net benefit for the state?” I did not know that.
Now they should contact Hugo Chavez about how to make their next moves in managing Canadian businesses and shareholders and our economy and what we are allowed to do and not do.
Any hints on what won’t be restricted by state intervention and government control like this? According to far-left progressives like the Liberals’ Michael Ignatieff and the socialist party of Jack Layton, anything that is deemed — by them and their appointed bureaucrats — to be “strategic” — is under government control now.
Remember that to progressives and all socialists, all private companies are “strategic” inasmuch as they may or may not want to nationalize them — or control them in one way or another. Like this, for example.
As I said yesterday, I will do whatever I can to avoid any investment in any Canadian company, ever again. I can’t risk it.
I sometimes end my comments by saying “I’m not sure whose side they’re on, but I’m on Canada’s.”
I’m not sure I want to say that anymore.
PTBC was founded by Mr. Johannesen in 2000.
Contact Mr. Johannesen about this article using this form. Please refer to article's title.
FOLLOW @JoelJohannesen ON X!
- Wow what a shock: a Big Government project’s cost estimate has DOUBLED — in only a few months - Tuesday April 30, 2024 at 4:50 pm
- UPDATED: State-Funding of Sports Boondoggles Need To Be Sent To The Penalty Box - Wednesday March 13, 2024 at 4:44 pm
- I’m from the government and I’m here to help you become barely mediocre like us. - Tuesday March 5, 2024 at 11:53 am
