Population and GDP play (huge) factors in Olympic performance, but so does sport preference of particular countries ...

Some countries participate heavily in sports where there are multiple medal opportunities, while other countries particpate mostly in sports where there is one (or no) medal opportunities.

When it comes to the summer olympics, Canada demonstrates all three of these disadvantages. Compared to the dominant nations we are a country with a small population, small economy, and most of the sports our citizens participate in are winter olympic sports. This means our goal as a country is to break into the top 10 medal winning countries.

In contrast, when it comes to the Winter Olympics we can be highly competitive in many sports and we can place in the top 5; and at the 2010 we had the most gold medals.

For every dollar paid in welfare $0.40 may return in fluidity, but how much fluidity was lost from every dollar paid in taxes?

Ford, the company that didn't get bailed out, is the #1 automaker while GM, the company that did get bailed out, has continued to make poor (money losing) decisions ...

While you still haven't answered how green energy subsidies help anyone being that they act as gigantic slush funds used to repay campaign contributions, increase energy costs for everyone, and raise taxes (or national debt) on everyone? In otherwords, how is the rampant corruption and cronyism that is prevalent in the government good for the average person?

No kasz it isnt a nonrelated factor it is a factor that happy refuses to acknowledge, and now you as well.
I said the government helps business by employing people and he called it a thief.
That fact of the matter is that they can both be considered employees who provide for the business, get paid by the business, and spend at the business.

It is the unwillingness to see that point that hinders our discussion.
Both republicans and democrats say that the jan 1 cuts would severly hurt the economy.
Now tell me again that it is my failire in comprehension again, and not the truth of the matter that government is instrumental in job creation.

Surprisingly enough, 67.0 cents per gallon is not even close to the maximum.  Great Britian has equivalent of about $3 per gallon in gas taxes PLUS they charge their VAT of 20% on gasoline.

No both the reps and dems agreed that for every dollar they spend on welfare the economy sees a dollar forty, not forty cents.

Ford accepted over 10 billion in loans and aid shortly before the stimulus era. They received a low rate low of nearly 6 billion and accepted aid from the energy department prgogram to fund energy efficient car development.
Get your facts straight or at least stop referring to the companies by using keywords. Bailouts were all basically loans, ford received loans and taxpayer money through energy department. There is no question there.

We need to stay viable for the future. The future demands green energy. Just because people think its too expensive and companies think its unnecessary doesnt mean it is. In ten-twenty years time green is going to be absolutely astronomical industry and we need to be a part of it.

Funny you say that, because I'm honestly going to say it will be Badge.  I've noticed a very consistent trend with the US government.  For every dollar they take in, they spend more than a dollar.  Find a new source to bring in $1 billion, and they will manage to find a way to spend $1.5 billion.  Find another new source of $2 billion, and they will manage to increase spending by $3 billion.

Did you ever think people call it theft not because they have to pay, but because the amount they have to pay in the United States for care is absolutely ridiculous?  Go to the hospital once, and see how much one pain pill will run you (It will be ~$10 by the way...for something I could go buy 200 in the store for a couple dollars...yes, we are talking generic pain pills that they charge this much for), how about a simple little bandage that they will charge you like $20 for, or how about an ambulence ride that will run you $1,000-$2,000 (Yes, they honestly charged that much for the ambulence ride for my dad.  To explain the situation further, the doctor at a clinic thought my dad may have been having a heart attack.  They would not let me take my dad to the hospital.  Instead, we had to wait approximately 1-2 miles away at the clinic for the ambulence, and I had to drive separately to the hospital.  1 hour later (yes, it HONESTLY took this long for the hospital to finally get my dad into the ER), my dad was finally in the ER receiving the care that he needed.  Don't worry though, that 3-4 mile round trip, coupled with a 1 hour wait only cost like $1,500.  Too bad they wouldn't let me bring my dad over there myself, granted it probably would have cost more than $1,500.  Oh wait, it would have cost about $1).  Lets continue on the ambulence part further.  So lets assume we have an ambulence that costs $5/mile to operate (for comparison a pickup costs between 50 and 75 cents per mile)  So if it was 4 miles round trip, we are up to $20.  Now, lets assume there are some costs for the equipment used on the ride.  Lets just say $100.  Ok, so we are up to $120.  So we have $1,380 remaining for...paying the 2 drivers and medical person that is inside the ambulence?  And this is a Catholic hospital, so they are not for profit, so you shouldn't have to figure in profit to that ride.

Did you ever think this is why people say it is theft when they have to use services such as an emergency room?

The trust fund for social security is literally nothing.  No, this isn't a conspiracy theory.  The government literally has $2.7 trillion in "IOU's" to the trust fund.  One problem with that.  Our government doesn't have $2.7 trillion.

You don't seem to understand the difference between a productive job and a non-productive job ...

If you tax me to pay for someone to dig ditches and fill them in I don't spend that money buying goods and services, the job to produce those goods and services is not created, and we are worse off because I don't get the good or service and you don't get the productive job.

If you start smashing windows to stimulate glass manufacturers we end up with the same number of windows but we ended up paying twice as much for them; and that money is not used to buy other goods and services creating other jobs within the economy.

People on welfare, bureaucrats, and politically connected rent seeking parasitic corporations do not produce anything of value we get no benefit from their "job"; they don't pay for anything that wouldn't otherwise be bought, but they "steal" from you what you would have otherwise had the opportunity to buy.

Not all government spending is on non-productive jobs, but most of the growth in spending since the 1950s has been on non-productive jobs.

Your post here seems pretty incoherent.  I can't understand what your actually saying... but i'm going to take a stab at it.  (Not an insult.  Really can't understand the first part.)

Are you suggesting that people on welfare should be considered as working for the buisness?

That's just silly.

And yeah, Jan 1 cuts would severly hurt the economy.... and those cuts will hurt whenever they have to be made... because they will have to be made.

That's the advantage of deficit spending.

You get extra economic boosts in the short term.  Of course, that spending has to eventually stop or there is a crash.

Or you have to raise taxes... and there is a crash.

Either way, in the end there is a bigger crash then there was benefit.

The point of countercycle economics... was that you make things easier when things are worse.... then take a big hit when you get back to prospeirty.

Or at least that USED to be the point of it before it got politisized... and in general the main issue is... it pretty much never works.