HST... whos for it?

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by misteranswer

Your ignorance as to what a Nash Equilibrium is is not a problem that requires a solution.

Your ignorance of the discussion is. I'm not the one who brought it up. Picard did... you called his use of it incorrect. So... correct it. Or STFU.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

As soon as they announced the HST, my greatest concern was that this would open up the possibility for the NDP to win an election. And based on all the people freaking out, it looks like that could happen. Hopefully by the time the election comes around, cooler heads will have prevailed. I think it's time for Gordon Campbell to step down as leader though, his non-popularity could screw the Liberals over.

Everyone who thinks Vander Zalm has only the best interest of the people of BC at heart with his Anti-HST campaign, raise your hands? No-one? Hmm...

That's the biggest tragedy, I think: you just KNOW the Zalm has something up his sleeve to advance his own agenda, be it a return to politics or whatever... and he's done a great job of hitching his wagon to what was initially just a public reaction, and whipping it up into a full-fledged revolt. Whether the petition succeeds or not, he's now seen as the Champion of the Little Guy, and he's gonna ride that right into whatever he's got in mind and leave the little guy behind.

The most unfortunate outcome would be if he actually managed to get the HST blocked or repealed, and his little publicity stunt took the province down the drain with it.

[misteranswer]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Your ignorance of the discussion is. I'm not the one who brought it up. Picard did... you called his use of it incorrect. So... correct it. Or STFU.

http://tinyurl.com/32gm773

[Tapioca]

There is some finally great discussion in this thread courtesy of Soundy, Amaru, and Lomac.

I completely understand that the HST is a strong long-term revenue generator based on what I've read before and what Amaru has posted here, but the one thing that has me disliking the tax is, again, the fact that the tax was simply dumped in the people's laps without ANY notification. I also thought that Gordo didn't have the HST on his election platform, but would up implementing it on the end.

What I've read here has leaned me away from anti-HST quite a bit, but I'm still on the fence about it.

To be honest with you, I'm glad that the politicians decided to make a tough decision that may end up costing them politically. Most of the public is fairly ignorant of things that have a long-term impact and judging from the first few pages of this discussion, (and various other public forums) saying that is not far off base.

[Soundy]

Saw an interesting letter in today's Province... another point I've not seen or heard brought up this far: just what is Vander Zalm's little stunt costing the taxpayers? Consider that at the end of the day the petition is completely non-binding and can be utterly ignored by the Liberals, and even if they do go to referendum based on the petition, that too would be non-binding...

According to the letter-writer, JUST the bill for Elections BC to count and confirm all the signatures are valid, will run around $650,000... and that, dear taxpayer, comes straight out of your pocket.

[CP.AR]

Originally Posted by misteranswer

The movie explanation of a Nash Equilibrium is incorrect.

I never said I got it from the movie (I assume you are referring to "A Beautiful Mind"), you still however, cannot say the explanation in the movie is completely wrong, as it describes a very specific case of a collaborative game which leads to a nash equilibrium (at the point of efficiency).

Here is the current definition of Nash Equilibrium I currently work off of - directly from one of my textbooks (Microeconomics: Theory and Applications with Calculus, Jeffery M. Perloff) My apologies ahead of time that I understand that I am still an undergrad student, and that I haven't seen all there is to economics yet.

Nash Equilibrium: a set of strategies such that, when all other players use these strategies, no player can obtain a higher payoff by choosing a different strategy.

page D-4

Futher more, to clarify my previous post - consumers will ultimately lose out in terms of "out of pocket" expenses for the consumption of goods, but as a member of society, we will gain in terms of additional government spending (if they do spend it), improved public goods, and increased productivity to name a few.

If you are to say I am incorrect, at least tell everyone your opinion and/or suggestions for amendment, not throw in a LMGTFY link