Whats the point of not having bank failures when you earn less? Or another way to put it: whats the point of not loosing money if you don't have any to begin with.
A more extreme example: During the 1930s, there was one notable country which did not experience an economic depression. That country was the USSR. As it had a command economy, the planners decided against a depression and that was it. However, they could not allocate agricultural resources effectively and had a famine instead. So, back then, it was very easy to say the the USSR is great as it has no depression but whats the point when they have no food.
You're right, Canada's GDP growth in 2008 was 0.7% less than the US GDP growth. However in 2007, Canada's GDP grew by 2.7% vs. the US 2.2%; and the IMF predicts that in 2009 the US GDP will fall by 1.6% while Canada's GDP will only fall by 1.2%.
These numbers fluctuate from year to year, but if you look at the long term trend, you won't see any significant difference between Canadian and US GDP growth.
US 2008 real GDP growth rate: 1.4%*
Whats the point of not having bank failures when you earn less? Or another way to put it: whats the point of not loosing money if you don't have any to begin with.
A more extreme example: During the 1930s, there was one notable country which did not experience an economic depression. That country was the USSR. As it had a command economy, the planners decided against a depression and that was it. However, they could not allocate agricultural resources effectively and had a famine instead. So, back then, it was very easy to say the the USSR is great as it has no depression but whats the point when they have no food.
* Source: CIA world factbook (search google).