An Few Random Thoughts

It's been a few days since I last wrote anything - I've been a bit busy, and for the most part relatively little has been happening in the news. (Is that an election on the winds? Ralph's started to get quiet...hmmm)

Provincially, I see the governing Conservatives are starting to talk about issuing Bonds to finance major infrastructure projects. All I can say is "well, Duh!". Sometime back in the 1980's, the notion of government bonds became a 'bad word', and everything had to be financed out of General Revenues. (or so it seemed) I can only imagine that was a result of Don Getty's complete inability to understand the difference between infrastructure and day to day operations.

For the last 15 years, Ralph's bunch has been hammering away at deficit, and then at debt. Trying to wipe out both, claiming that the existence of either constitutes bad governance. While I agree that using long term debt to finance day to day operations of the government isn't the wisest path, I have never seen a problem with doing so to finance roads, hospitals and other infrastructure. I have to finance my house in order to afford it (like I, or anyone else can just write a cheque for $200,000+ dollars to purchase property!). The same thing applies to roads and other long term projects.

To hear this coming out of Ralph's people now is a combination of sad and funny at the same time. Floating bonds in the early 1990s to pay for desperately needed schools, hospitals and roads would have done wonders for our province's infrastructure. Instead, they have presided over the steady decline of our province's infrastructure while the government racks up huge amounts of money in "budgetary surpluses".

Okay, I have to give them some credit - at least they seem to be starting to consider how to deal with long term financing requirements as different from how they deal with operational financing. Does this make the current bunch in Edmonton ready to govern for another four years? No. I'm too skeptical of them to believe that this speaks to a real change in their thinking. We still need to send back a serious opposition to hold the next government to account. Ralph and his people aren't statesmen, and the current tussle with Ottawa over Health Care continues to demonstrate an emotional immaturity that I find profoundly disturbing.

In Iraq, I see the US/British "coalition" forces are busy trying to stabilize the situation in preparation for elections scheduled for early 2005. Meanwhile, casualties on all sides continue to mount at a rate that seems to exceed those incurred during the initial invasion. Kidnappings of foreigners in Iraq are happening at a pace that is truly disturbing; various militant forces seem to be rather successfully carrying out bomb attacks of one sort or another.

Is this a country ready to undertake open elections? I doubt it. I can't imagine how you could consider any vote valid in a country where signifcant regions of it are embroiled in violence, and various militias are continuing to press for their own agendas - mostly through military force. Any government elected under such conditions will not be seen as legitimate by the various factions, and will only stand as long as foreign military presence continues to be able to overwhelm the various militias.