If you listen to the liberals and what they are saying about the F-35 fighter jet contract.
"The Liberals say that if they form the next government, they will put on hold a much-rumoured $16-billion sole-sourced fighter jet contract..."
This sounds familiar, to all of us. It was when in 1993 Prime Minister Elect Jean Chretien cancelled the EH101 helicopter contract, costing us taxpayers $500 million, just to cancel the job. Over the next several years the Chretien government cut back on healthcare (remember the '95 budget when Paul Martin cut $25 billion) and Defense. What happens next is there would be a terrorist attack (9-11) and Canada would be asked to send 1,000 troops into Afghanistan. But there was a problem. We couldn't move them. Not the troops or any equipment. It could be embarrassing. There we excuses by Chretien himself who said that most countries don't do their own deployment that they usually ask other
countries to do it. He said the U.S. and Britain are the only exceptions. But to myself I would ask, even if that were true, why wouldn't we do our own deployment anywhere, including our own Country. We have a small population, but Canada is still very wealthy, very rich in resources. It is a very huge land mass. to cover, and protect. And these liberals want to leave it unprotected by taking apart it's Defense. Again.
It's easier to take something apart then to build it.
What's more, it costs more. The liberals have always been against the Armed forces. So who are they to criticize this Government over it's acquisition of fighter jets? It may cost more, even more then what people wish for or expect. The latest figure I've heard is $35 billion. But ask this: Would you spend the money to feel protected and even to feel a little bit of pride knowing that our Country is protected from foreign enemy? The same fighter jet (F-35) that costs maybe $35 million today will cost $40 million in another year or two. The liberal way is just cancel the thing and it costs nothing.
But let's go back to that penalty for cancelling that EH-101 helicopter program. $500 million dollars. Did it make a difference? Did taxes go up? Well, I think the liberals would have done what they were going to do, with or without that contract. But the difference is that we did without that helicopter and instead we were stuck with those Sea King Helicopters which we knew, could not do the job. It could not do search and rescue missions, it could not deploy any troops anywhere, not from one city like toronto to halifax. It costs so many more millions just to just to keep them afloat. For years, the Conservatives told them to spend more money on Defense. Prime Minister Stephen Harper when in Opposition promised he would build the armed forces back to it's respectable image it once had.
I'm not going to pretend I know everything about this subject but I do know that liberals have never supported the armed forces. They cancel current military contracts, they cut their budget, there are soldiers' who waited for years for compensation for being injured in the line of duty, which during the 1990's was mostly peacekeeping missions. There was no new equipment, no recruitment, just an excuse from Jean Chretien said we don't need a Defense. We don't need a new tank.
If there were going to be a layoff in the Chretien Government, Art Eggleton (Minister of Defense) would have been the first to go.
One other thing, the '95 budget the liberals cut $25 billion dollars in Healthcare spending. That's a lot of money. That will make a big difference in how our healthcare is delivered. What if there was no Doctor or Ex-ray technician. What if we waited for hours to see a Doctor?
Can the liberals honestly say that they wouldn't cut what Canadians call our most sacred social program in the Country? The answer is Yes they would, they already have. They will do it again. I'm not
saying there should not be a private system. If it would cost less. A lot less. It's not the end of the world.
We'll be okay. Jean Chretien said in '93 he would get rid of the GST. I'd like to see what liberals will say when Healthcare is gone. Here is the latest:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2010/07/15/liberals-fighter-jets.html
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Star's Stories are foolish.
Hello everyone and I hope you're having a nice time and a good day. I'd like to comment on the Toronto Star which is liberal and is why you hear very little about McGuinty's resignation and the people like Gerard Kennedy who want the Premier's chair and office. The Star does take shots at the Conservatives and their mideast policy and why they say it only isolates Canada from the rest of the world. There's a couple of topics I'd like to cover which are both on the same page of the newspaper.
I'm glad that this Conservative government has chosen to take a side, which is to support Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The other subject is about legalizing marijuana. And it comes from someone who smokes the stuff.
The first subject the columnist (Haroon Siddiqui) says Canada, once an honored place in the world has supported Israel. But in doing so it has turned it's back on the Palestinian Authority. That is how it is suppose to work because they are enemies of Israel. We cannot support Palestinians because Canada is allies with the Nation Israel. That's not a bad thing. But the UN vote over the recognizing of the Palestinian State, was favored 138-9 with 41 who abstained from the vote. I believe Australia was one of those abstaining. But again, is it such a bad thing to vote against even though most people favored? Yes! It is is okay to stand alone. Because if you're right, if you're honest, you will, maybe eventually, become favored among the people. Dare to be a Daniel. If you're interested in reading the Bible look up Zechariah 2:8. You will find that anyone who hurts Israel will offend God. That's serious. But this writer and probably that newspaper doesn't look at that or believe in it really so they do things according to their own policy, which is foolish. They are a liberal supporting newspaper.
Which brings me to my next point.
Who here has smoke pot? most people have. But I haven't since 1988. Okay so I have but according to
Michael Ashby, the Director of the National Pardon Centre, well, he still does smoke the stuff. When no one's around. His argument, "Legalizing marijuana is not about good vs. bad or right vs. wrong." He in fact says it's about a person's ability to make the decision not to do so, or maybe that we'll do so responsibly. But that being said, let's legalize anyway. I immediately think of verses in the Bible where "God gave them over to a depraved mind to do what ought not to be done." (Romans 1: 28). They did not retain the knowledge of God. The knowledge of God is in the Bible. "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools." Romans 1:22.
It could be said that legalizing it will save from the courts who impose sentences for people who do. Or that legalizing could mean revenue from taxes, and even though the writer says forget about that stuff, I know he still supports it. What I think this writer needs to look at is this.
MARIJUANA IS BAD!
It makes people do bad things because their mind in directly influenced by a controlled substance. It makes people do foolish things like drive a car, fall off a building. Climb to the top. They are not in control. It makes them happy. Until they do something foolish. The foolish thing could get them dead. It can hurt someone else. And that is why I wonder why he supports this and why the Star allows this in it's edition. Most of us have never been the victim in a crime. Thankfully. But if there are people who are victims, an example being a lost love one from a vehicle driven by someone intoxicated, it can also happen by someone under the influence of the controlled substance. The person under the influence can also die in an accident. There is a reason why we have laws in place to protect us from ourselves, which reading down to the 3rd paragraph, Ashby says we don't need that. I guarantee you this.
There will be more people kept alive if this drug stays illegal then not.
And again, about the Tories support of Israel. They have the right to defend their land from foreign enemies. I would be proud to support them.
Take care,
Have a nice day.
The latest:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/1296228--stephen-harper-is-not-doing-israel-any-favours-siddiqui
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1296456--canadians-don-t-need-to-be-protected-from-marijuana#comments
I'm glad that this Conservative government has chosen to take a side, which is to support Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The other subject is about legalizing marijuana. And it comes from someone who smokes the stuff.
The first subject the columnist (Haroon Siddiqui) says Canada, once an honored place in the world has supported Israel. But in doing so it has turned it's back on the Palestinian Authority. That is how it is suppose to work because they are enemies of Israel. We cannot support Palestinians because Canada is allies with the Nation Israel. That's not a bad thing. But the UN vote over the recognizing of the Palestinian State, was favored 138-9 with 41 who abstained from the vote. I believe Australia was one of those abstaining. But again, is it such a bad thing to vote against even though most people favored? Yes! It is is okay to stand alone. Because if you're right, if you're honest, you will, maybe eventually, become favored among the people. Dare to be a Daniel. If you're interested in reading the Bible look up Zechariah 2:8. You will find that anyone who hurts Israel will offend God. That's serious. But this writer and probably that newspaper doesn't look at that or believe in it really so they do things according to their own policy, which is foolish. They are a liberal supporting newspaper.
Which brings me to my next point.
Who here has smoke pot? most people have. But I haven't since 1988. Okay so I have but according to
Michael Ashby, the Director of the National Pardon Centre, well, he still does smoke the stuff. When no one's around. His argument, "Legalizing marijuana is not about good vs. bad or right vs. wrong." He in fact says it's about a person's ability to make the decision not to do so, or maybe that we'll do so responsibly. But that being said, let's legalize anyway. I immediately think of verses in the Bible where "God gave them over to a depraved mind to do what ought not to be done." (Romans 1: 28). They did not retain the knowledge of God. The knowledge of God is in the Bible. "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools." Romans 1:22.
It could be said that legalizing it will save from the courts who impose sentences for people who do. Or that legalizing could mean revenue from taxes, and even though the writer says forget about that stuff, I know he still supports it. What I think this writer needs to look at is this.
MARIJUANA IS BAD!
It makes people do bad things because their mind in directly influenced by a controlled substance. It makes people do foolish things like drive a car, fall off a building. Climb to the top. They are not in control. It makes them happy. Until they do something foolish. The foolish thing could get them dead. It can hurt someone else. And that is why I wonder why he supports this and why the Star allows this in it's edition. Most of us have never been the victim in a crime. Thankfully. But if there are people who are victims, an example being a lost love one from a vehicle driven by someone intoxicated, it can also happen by someone under the influence of the controlled substance. The person under the influence can also die in an accident. There is a reason why we have laws in place to protect us from ourselves, which reading down to the 3rd paragraph, Ashby says we don't need that. I guarantee you this.
There will be more people kept alive if this drug stays illegal then not.
And again, about the Tories support of Israel. They have the right to defend their land from foreign enemies. I would be proud to support them.
Take care,
Have a nice day.
The latest:
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/article/1296228--stephen-harper-is-not-doing-israel-any-favours-siddiqui
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/1296456--canadians-don-t-need-to-be-protected-from-marijuana#comments
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Toronto Star & PIA
This is not a political topic but I feel compelled to talk about this. This from someone who actually works at Pearson International Airport and sees first hand what goes on inside the restricted area of the Airport. It's a great job. According to the Toronto Star and most recently the Toronto Sun and National Post, they have said that SkyTrax, A UK based airline and Airport consulting firm ranks Pearson as the worst Airport in Canada. I disagree with this. Pearson is not the worst Airport in Canada or in the World. Everybody including myself who work for different airlines and different Companies at Pearson work very hard to insure that passengers get to their destinations along with their luggage. While the survey by SkyTrax talks about Trudeau Airport in Montreal (YUL) being the best in Canada, it should be noted that Pearson has more passengers connecting from more flights and more Airlines to more destinations around North America and around the World. Montreal is a small Airport compared to Toronto. Fewer connecting flights.
In the Star excerpt by staff reporter Vanessa Lu and Stephanie Findlay,
They say if you're a foreign visitor you will likely not have the correct change for what they say is for the baggage trolley.
My solution to that is this. People travelling to other Cities, different Countries, and other Continents do not travel without cash, or without other things like traveller cheques, credit cards etc. If you can't afford a phone call, you shouldn't be travelling. Also, there are plenty of places where a person can get the coins required like a $1 or $2 coins for long distance phone calls back to their homeland. There is also places in both Terminals that will exchange your currency into Canadian Currency. as well, there are plenty of stores, gift shops in both T1 and T3 that will accept your money and change it into Canadian money. such as A&W which is at Terminal One and Tim Hortons which is at both Terminals. There is also places in the food court at T3 such as Pizza Pizza, Upper Crust and Panopolis which is nearby. There is also ATM's from RBC. So maybe you're a foreign visitor like the Star excerpt says but there are plenty of places to get change.
The excerpt talks about a man who after landing there, called his daughter on a pay phone and got a very large bill credit card bill of over $12. That is regrettable but I don't blame the Airport or GTAA for this phone call, the phones belong to Bell Canada. It mentions that slow security, bad service (by who I wonder), and lack of dining options are the reasons for this. At Terminal 3 once you go up to the elevator or escalator where you will see plenty of phone booths and where you will see the check-in counter, you will see two gifts shops both competing for your dollars, if you turn to the right there is Tim Hortons, turn the left you will see Panopolis. Go into the food court and see Swiss Chalet, as a place to
to dine, there are actually two dining places in the food court which are not hard to find. Trust me it's a food court, of course they're easy to find. Once you pass through security and into the restricted area, you will find places like Fionn McCool's, two more Timmies B-22 & 26. and if your flight is too the U.S. you will go to the U.S. gates like A-10 or B-19 and will find a place called Front Street. There is also a food court on the restricted side.
Any ideas of there not being enough places to eat in both the restricted and unrestricted areas is sadly mistaken. In other words, there is NO lack of dining options at the Airport. The excerpt says the Airport in Fort Worth, Texas has over 50 restaurants, I say so what. There is no lack of dining options at Pearson. That, as the excerpt says is for all 33 million people who passed through Pearson last year. 50 Restaurants.
Are there any Timmies?
It also mentions a play area for kids. If there are, I don't know where, but generally parents will keep their children with them and usually they will behave. It may not be necessary to have an area for kids can play. What you have to remember is that the few of you are taking a flight. You're not going to be there long. Two hours. Maybe longer. It may not be necessary to have a play area for kids. So any suggestions of copying the Airport in Frankfurt (I would assume that's Germany) is not necessary. We don't need to copy anybody. Pearson is not the worst Airport in Canada.
As a suggestion, it says that parking at Pearson can be a problem. I have two suggestions.
First. Have someone drive you to the Airport, and pick you up again when you return. No cost.
Second. Take Public Transit. The TTC 192 bus coming out of Kipling Station will take you there. Also
the 58A bus from Lawrence West Station will take you to Pearson as well as the 300A blue night bus and all surrounding transit systems like Mississauga Transit and Brampton Transit. There is a Airport Train that will take you between T-1 and T-3 and additional parking if you have a 7am Departure. You maybe there to pick someone up coming off a flight. You can park right in front the the entrance and wait for your guest to arrive or you can even wait inside, and still park in front. No charge.
It again says as a suggestion that we can copy the example of the Johannesburg Airport and it's innovative system, where green and red lights were installed to signal if there was any open parking spots. But as the picture below says there is plenty of parking for anyone leaving, going, or picking up a passenger.
I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it works then sure. But how much does it costs? Do we need it. No.
But try to look at it this way. The Star is trying to argue that this is the worst Airport. Have they been to every Airport they've mentioned in this excerpt and seen for themselves? Have they counted every eating place in Dallas, Fort Worth, Texas? Did they look at the three play areas at Pearson? Again, I don't know where they are and I've been there for 2.5 years.
One more thing, The Star is offering five suggestions because Pearson was named 2 years in a row as the worst Airport in Canada. But one need only go to Terminal 3 over by Gate B-22 (you'll find a timmies there too) and see that according to International Air Transport Association (IATA), Pearson was named the most improved Airport of the year in 2010. Look and see below.
Big Question: How do you go from most improved to the worst in the Country?
In conclusion I say this. The Star may be the biggest Newspaper chain, but I don't buy their newspaper. Never really did. This is why. Their liberal slant, Police bashing and bad journalism is enough to make a person buy something of better quality, like the National Post. Just for their superior journalism.
I think the Star justs look for things like this too fill up it's newspaper. Without doing research. The only thing they're good at is diggng up the past. Especially Stephen Harper and the Police. Just recently, I posted the Star's take on the R.C.M.P and everything they did in the past. Things that although they were awful, they were no longer relevant, and certainly not on people's minds. They're still not. lol. It's good to have a sense of humor. The Lord God does. They know how to dig up the past. But do little to find research. Eventually, people will stop buying this newspaper. They will get tired of it's usual tirade. People will find something else to read. There are options. The National Post is one. The NP is a better quality Newspaper.
Here is the latest:
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1229738--toronto-pearson-international-s-most-irritating-traveller-traps
Have a nice day.
In the Star excerpt by staff reporter Vanessa Lu and Stephanie Findlay,
They say if you're a foreign visitor you will likely not have the correct change for what they say is for the baggage trolley.
My solution to that is this. People travelling to other Cities, different Countries, and other Continents do not travel without cash, or without other things like traveller cheques, credit cards etc. If you can't afford a phone call, you shouldn't be travelling. Also, there are plenty of places where a person can get the coins required like a $1 or $2 coins for long distance phone calls back to their homeland. There is also places in both Terminals that will exchange your currency into Canadian Currency. as well, there are plenty of stores, gift shops in both T1 and T3 that will accept your money and change it into Canadian money. such as A&W which is at Terminal One and Tim Hortons which is at both Terminals. There is also places in the food court at T3 such as Pizza Pizza, Upper Crust and Panopolis which is nearby. There is also ATM's from RBC. So maybe you're a foreign visitor like the Star excerpt says but there are plenty of places to get change.
The excerpt talks about a man who after landing there, called his daughter on a pay phone and got a very large bill credit card bill of over $12. That is regrettable but I don't blame the Airport or GTAA for this phone call, the phones belong to Bell Canada. It mentions that slow security, bad service (by who I wonder), and lack of dining options are the reasons for this. At Terminal 3 once you go up to the elevator or escalator where you will see plenty of phone booths and where you will see the check-in counter, you will see two gifts shops both competing for your dollars, if you turn to the right there is Tim Hortons, turn the left you will see Panopolis. Go into the food court and see Swiss Chalet, as a place to
to dine, there are actually two dining places in the food court which are not hard to find. Trust me it's a food court, of course they're easy to find. Once you pass through security and into the restricted area, you will find places like Fionn McCool's, two more Timmies B-22 & 26. and if your flight is too the U.S. you will go to the U.S. gates like A-10 or B-19 and will find a place called Front Street. There is also a food court on the restricted side.
Any ideas of there not being enough places to eat in both the restricted and unrestricted areas is sadly mistaken. In other words, there is NO lack of dining options at the Airport. The excerpt says the Airport in Fort Worth, Texas has over 50 restaurants, I say so what. There is no lack of dining options at Pearson. That, as the excerpt says is for all 33 million people who passed through Pearson last year. 50 Restaurants.
Are there any Timmies?
It also mentions a play area for kids. If there are, I don't know where, but generally parents will keep their children with them and usually they will behave. It may not be necessary to have an area for kids can play. What you have to remember is that the few of you are taking a flight. You're not going to be there long. Two hours. Maybe longer. It may not be necessary to have a play area for kids. So any suggestions of copying the Airport in Frankfurt (I would assume that's Germany) is not necessary. We don't need to copy anybody. Pearson is not the worst Airport in Canada.
As a suggestion, it says that parking at Pearson can be a problem. I have two suggestions.
First. Have someone drive you to the Airport, and pick you up again when you return. No cost.
Second. Take Public Transit. The TTC 192 bus coming out of Kipling Station will take you there. Also
the 58A bus from Lawrence West Station will take you to Pearson as well as the 300A blue night bus and all surrounding transit systems like Mississauga Transit and Brampton Transit. There is a Airport Train that will take you between T-1 and T-3 and additional parking if you have a 7am Departure. You maybe there to pick someone up coming off a flight. You can park right in front the the entrance and wait for your guest to arrive or you can even wait inside, and still park in front. No charge.
It again says as a suggestion that we can copy the example of the Johannesburg Airport and it's innovative system, where green and red lights were installed to signal if there was any open parking spots. But as the picture below says there is plenty of parking for anyone leaving, going, or picking up a passenger.
I'm not sure if it's a good idea. If it works then sure. But how much does it costs? Do we need it. No.
But try to look at it this way. The Star is trying to argue that this is the worst Airport. Have they been to every Airport they've mentioned in this excerpt and seen for themselves? Have they counted every eating place in Dallas, Fort Worth, Texas? Did they look at the three play areas at Pearson? Again, I don't know where they are and I've been there for 2.5 years.
One more thing, The Star is offering five suggestions because Pearson was named 2 years in a row as the worst Airport in Canada. But one need only go to Terminal 3 over by Gate B-22 (you'll find a timmies there too) and see that according to International Air Transport Association (IATA), Pearson was named the most improved Airport of the year in 2010. Look and see below.
Big Question: How do you go from most improved to the worst in the Country?
In conclusion I say this. The Star may be the biggest Newspaper chain, but I don't buy their newspaper. Never really did. This is why. Their liberal slant, Police bashing and bad journalism is enough to make a person buy something of better quality, like the National Post. Just for their superior journalism.
I think the Star justs look for things like this too fill up it's newspaper. Without doing research. The only thing they're good at is diggng up the past. Especially Stephen Harper and the Police. Just recently, I posted the Star's take on the R.C.M.P and everything they did in the past. Things that although they were awful, they were no longer relevant, and certainly not on people's minds. They're still not. lol. It's good to have a sense of humor. The Lord God does. They know how to dig up the past. But do little to find research. Eventually, people will stop buying this newspaper. They will get tired of it's usual tirade. People will find something else to read. There are options. The National Post is one. The NP is a better quality Newspaper.
Here is the latest:
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1229738--toronto-pearson-international-s-most-irritating-traveller-traps
Have a nice day.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
Covering up liberal cutbacks
“In Scarborough, we’ve been spoiled — we have big playgrounds and park areas attached to our schools,” said the trustee for Scarborough East, who is a former principal. “When you compare them to some of the schools in the former Toronto board, what a difference.”
Please, who in their right mind thinks we're being spoiled by the Government. They're trying to sell school property so they can generate cash. The Provincial Government is cutting $110 million in Education.
Here is the latest on this:
For more liberal bias just read the about the improvements the R.C.M.P. is making. According to the Star, they're off to a good start. How's this for a comment:
Canadians have been shocked by RCMP indiscipline, bungling and wrongdoing. In 2006 then-commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli left under a cloud, a morale-shattering low for the force. Brown then issued his damning report. Four officers faced perjury charges in the 2007 Taser-related death of Robert Dziekanski. And the force has been battered for bungling the Air India bombing investigation, for mishandling Maher Arar who was tortured in Syria, for abuse of authority and for sexual harassment and assault.
Let's be honest: Maybe the Star is shocked by this but are we really. Does anyone remember Guiliano Zaccardelli the Chief of the RCMP? A story of perjury. The Polish man who died after being tasered is awful but I don't think anyone blamed the Police. What was the the Police connection to the Air India bombing which happened in 1985, how did they bungle that? What's awful is that many people died in a Canadian terrorist attack.
The other thing that happened was that (the liberals did this), one of those terrorist was given just a 5 year sentence so he could testify against the other terrorists and they could go away for a long time. But here's the kicker, even with this guy's testimony, they still got off. And he still only got 5 years.
How awful. What's awful is that the Toronto Star fails to mention, and covers up the FACT that liberal soft on crime is the real problem. Not the Police.
Let's ask the question of who here has seen Police corruption? I don't think it doesn't happen. But well, the police are generally a trustworthy orginisation. There not one law abiding citizen who says I don't want the police to be here. Or that they're corrupt.
I'm reading a book by Gen. Rick Hillier who mentions that the Police, RCMP have not been perfect, but the TRUST (I want to emphasize this) between the Police and the Public is there. I will in the near future, use this book for one of these posts. I'm sure the Toronto Star will continue to be bias about this, and other things. LOL.
More of the latest: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/article/1216201--rcmp-reform-is-off-to-a-good-start
Have a nice day.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
prorogue The Legislature? Good idea.
Michael Warren of the Toronto Star is suggesting that Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty prorogue the Ontario Legislature which I think is a good idea, if you want to lose the next election. In this case it would be over a budget, which the minority liberals can't seem to pass. Tim Hudak and the Progressive Conservatives have never supported the budget and Andrea Horwath and the NDP are listening, but are making big demands. For example, the NDP want a new tax on people earning half a million a year in income a year. Huh? I'm not sure what to say to that. Should I be glad that I don't make that much? Maybe Andrea Horwath doesn't.
Anyways, I think it may be important to look at the polls here. It shows the PC's at 35.4, NDP (29.9) liberals (28%).
"Emboldened by recent polls that show the liberals trailing both the Tories and the NDP, Horwath has made a new, costly, last-minute demand. She will reduce the number of budget provisions the NDP currently opposes in committee..."
So if I put forth a budget and you were opposed to let's say 20 of the ideas proposed by the budget, you
would only oppose 10? Again, huh? That kind of says that these proposals don't mean much too them. They're not doing this for the people I don't think. The Conservatives are doing the good thing by opposing the budget from the beginning and it may prove to be the smart move. I'm not sure what the polls were at the time of the budget which was presented back in March, but they may be doing the right thing.
The Star makes has no problem with the Ontario Budget being 327 pages long. But it opposes the federal Conservatives Omnibus budget bill being 425 pages. It may be the issue of the Opposition not having enough time to go over the budget with a fine tooth comb. The federal Conservatives have a majority, McGuinty doesn't. There's a few reasons. The Star supports these liberals.
Among the sticking points that the liberals need the NDP to support is the arbitration process to Ontario Public Service. That's not just government employees they are dealing with, that's unions. And we all know that NDP is pro union. These unions in their members actually send a big chunk of their donations to the NDP. Federally and Provincial.
In the column it says: Emergency Services Steering Committee representing large urban mayors, regional chairs and Police Service Boards (I guess when you talk large urban mayors you also mean places like Toronto), it says Ontario public service employees' wages rose a staggering 40-70 percent higher than the consumer price index between 2005 and 2010. Maybe they mean inflation. Either way it's a lot. But the column mentions 14.8% when it comes employees wages. If you were the NDP, you might oppose the fact that it isn't 15% and should be higher. The heck with the rest of the Province, they can pay it.
The question is: Will Andrea Horwath and her members support this budget proposal? Doubt it.
So again, proroguing Parliament. Is it a good idea? Here are his reasons:
1. It allows the liberals to sell their budget during the summer to the public.
I say it's a bad idea but especially during the summer when we're all taking vacations, watching baseball and sports and going up to the cottage on long weekends. Politics, politicians and elections are the last thing on people's minds, and the last thing people want to hear about.
2. I gives the liberals a chance to negotiate with the Opposition on their Budget proposals.
Better idea I say, but do politicians really want to meet in the middle of summer to go over this budget? If I was the Leader of one of those political parties I'd send in one of my colleagues and ask him/her to just phone the details.
There is a third reason which is not very significant.
Overall, I say this: Proroguing Parliament is a bad idea. The only people who will lose by doing this is the liberals who will feel the wrath from the Opposition for doing it. There will apparantly be a bi-election in the riding of Kitchener/Waterloo which will come in September, I think the liberals will feel the wrath of the people in that bi-election. If it is called.
Here is the Latest:
file:///Users/useruse/Desktop/Ontario%20budget%20battle:%20McGuinty’s%20best%20option%20would%20be%20to%20prorogue%20the%20legislature%20-%20thestar.com.webarchive
Anyways, I think it may be important to look at the polls here. It shows the PC's at 35.4, NDP (29.9) liberals (28%).
"Emboldened by recent polls that show the liberals trailing both the Tories and the NDP, Horwath has made a new, costly, last-minute demand. She will reduce the number of budget provisions the NDP currently opposes in committee..."
So if I put forth a budget and you were opposed to let's say 20 of the ideas proposed by the budget, you
would only oppose 10? Again, huh? That kind of says that these proposals don't mean much too them. They're not doing this for the people I don't think. The Conservatives are doing the good thing by opposing the budget from the beginning and it may prove to be the smart move. I'm not sure what the polls were at the time of the budget which was presented back in March, but they may be doing the right thing.
The Star makes has no problem with the Ontario Budget being 327 pages long. But it opposes the federal Conservatives Omnibus budget bill being 425 pages. It may be the issue of the Opposition not having enough time to go over the budget with a fine tooth comb. The federal Conservatives have a majority, McGuinty doesn't. There's a few reasons. The Star supports these liberals.
Among the sticking points that the liberals need the NDP to support is the arbitration process to Ontario Public Service. That's not just government employees they are dealing with, that's unions. And we all know that NDP is pro union. These unions in their members actually send a big chunk of their donations to the NDP. Federally and Provincial.
In the column it says: Emergency Services Steering Committee representing large urban mayors, regional chairs and Police Service Boards (I guess when you talk large urban mayors you also mean places like Toronto), it says Ontario public service employees' wages rose a staggering 40-70 percent higher than the consumer price index between 2005 and 2010. Maybe they mean inflation. Either way it's a lot. But the column mentions 14.8% when it comes employees wages. If you were the NDP, you might oppose the fact that it isn't 15% and should be higher. The heck with the rest of the Province, they can pay it.
The question is: Will Andrea Horwath and her members support this budget proposal? Doubt it.
So again, proroguing Parliament. Is it a good idea? Here are his reasons:
1. It allows the liberals to sell their budget during the summer to the public.
I say it's a bad idea but especially during the summer when we're all taking vacations, watching baseball and sports and going up to the cottage on long weekends. Politics, politicians and elections are the last thing on people's minds, and the last thing people want to hear about.
2. I gives the liberals a chance to negotiate with the Opposition on their Budget proposals.
Better idea I say, but do politicians really want to meet in the middle of summer to go over this budget? If I was the Leader of one of those political parties I'd send in one of my colleagues and ask him/her to just phone the details.
There is a third reason which is not very significant.
Overall, I say this: Proroguing Parliament is a bad idea. The only people who will lose by doing this is the liberals who will feel the wrath from the Opposition for doing it. There will apparantly be a bi-election in the riding of Kitchener/Waterloo which will come in September, I think the liberals will feel the wrath of the people in that bi-election. If it is called.
Here is the Latest:
file:///Users/useruse/Desktop/Ontario%20budget%20battle:%20McGuinty’s%20best%20option%20would%20be%20to%20prorogue%20the%20legislature%20-%20thestar.com.webarchive
Monday, April 2, 2012
Fairly New Attack ad
Hi, I would like to bring your attention to the new Tory attack ad on Bob Rae, Leader of the Opposition. The ad refers to him when he was Premier of Ontario. So what's his record? If you're from Ontario you already know, and you're still paying. lol
1. High Taxes (we're gonna buy our way out of this recession)
2. Job Losses. Ontario lost so many jobs because of Government policies that discouraged business from coming into the Province. They went to other Provinces like Manitoba, who had no objection to new business coming here. There was a Government employee who quit her job because of already high taxes, taxes going higher, and the social contract that penalized government employees from statuatory holidays. She was already paying higher taxes overall, but was now, with the rest of Ontarians, forced to pay with a smaller income. She quit her job that I think paid her over $50,000/yearly to go on welfare. I personally don't think it was the right thing to do, but well, the media ate it up and the Premier had to give an explanation for it.
Another thing that happened that embarassed the Government was that it put out ads for Job Positions. In these ads, it posted the job position, salary, what to do, where to apply. Also in the ad it had a notice that said: "white men need not apply." How awful. Imagine that federally.
3. Social Assistance: In Ontario there were 1.2 million on welfare.
4. Deficit: Ontario had the biggest deficit which was over $7.1 billion. OUCH!
In the ad Boob Rae (that was his nickname) says, that he is in fact Proud of his record as Premier of Ontario.
There is another way of looking at this which is, Bob will not likely make it to become Prime Minister, because of his record. His record does speak for itself and it's not good, even if he's switches political stripes from NDP to Liberal. So there will have to be eventually a new liberal leader, Bob Rae is only there to fill the gap. In Ontario there are about 108 federal ridings which if you want to win a federal election, you have to win in Ontario. Not Bob Rae. Personally I think if you lived in Ontario at the time, or not, you will base your decision on the leader, and on his record. And it's not good.
Another thing is that the Tories are in fairly decent shape. They have a Majority, they are managing the key issues right now like lower taxes, the deficit which they need to deal with, the economy as well as job creation. I have never felt it more personal that a person will never blame any Government or any policy they make then the job that they work at. People want to work. But if they lose it, if even you are unable to find a new job, you will blame the government. If not now (if you're currently looking for employment) eventually you will. Job creation is important.
Under Bob Rae and the NDP 1991-95, it was estimated that only 6-7,000 jobs were created. They had some really dum policies which really hurt the Province in job creation.
Overall, people are pleased with this Tory Government and it's policies. Maybe possibly, they can will another mandate. Here is the latest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXlNVvAHfxE
Have a nice day.
1. High Taxes (we're gonna buy our way out of this recession)
2. Job Losses. Ontario lost so many jobs because of Government policies that discouraged business from coming into the Province. They went to other Provinces like Manitoba, who had no objection to new business coming here. There was a Government employee who quit her job because of already high taxes, taxes going higher, and the social contract that penalized government employees from statuatory holidays. She was already paying higher taxes overall, but was now, with the rest of Ontarians, forced to pay with a smaller income. She quit her job that I think paid her over $50,000/yearly to go on welfare. I personally don't think it was the right thing to do, but well, the media ate it up and the Premier had to give an explanation for it.
Another thing that happened that embarassed the Government was that it put out ads for Job Positions. In these ads, it posted the job position, salary, what to do, where to apply. Also in the ad it had a notice that said: "white men need not apply." How awful. Imagine that federally.
3. Social Assistance: In Ontario there were 1.2 million on welfare.
4. Deficit: Ontario had the biggest deficit which was over $7.1 billion. OUCH!
In the ad Boob Rae (that was his nickname) says, that he is in fact Proud of his record as Premier of Ontario.
There is another way of looking at this which is, Bob will not likely make it to become Prime Minister, because of his record. His record does speak for itself and it's not good, even if he's switches political stripes from NDP to Liberal. So there will have to be eventually a new liberal leader, Bob Rae is only there to fill the gap. In Ontario there are about 108 federal ridings which if you want to win a federal election, you have to win in Ontario. Not Bob Rae. Personally I think if you lived in Ontario at the time, or not, you will base your decision on the leader, and on his record. And it's not good.
Another thing is that the Tories are in fairly decent shape. They have a Majority, they are managing the key issues right now like lower taxes, the deficit which they need to deal with, the economy as well as job creation. I have never felt it more personal that a person will never blame any Government or any policy they make then the job that they work at. People want to work. But if they lose it, if even you are unable to find a new job, you will blame the government. If not now (if you're currently looking for employment) eventually you will. Job creation is important.
Under Bob Rae and the NDP 1991-95, it was estimated that only 6-7,000 jobs were created. They had some really dum policies which really hurt the Province in job creation.
Overall, people are pleased with this Tory Government and it's policies. Maybe possibly, they can will another mandate. Here is the latest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXlNVvAHfxE
Have a nice day.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Fiscally speaking, The liberals don't compare to us Tories
Hi again, I'd just like to point out what Ottawa is doing fiscally and what the spend thrift liberals are up too. PMSH as you probably already know visited China recently on a trade mission which is good news because if you ever lose revenue on things like the softwood lumber dispute, you can do whatever you can too settle the issue and still generate revenue from other sources. It also helps to keep taxes lower for us Canadians.
The liberals will tax no matter what. In this excerpt of the National Post (NP), it says we are cutting spending while the Ontario liberals (hopefully you don't live in this Province), have created a $16 billion deficit. If I remember correctly, these liberals after just it's second budget had a surplus. Not a big surplus, but at least a little extra for the next year. But today, it's a big deficit. $16 billion dollars. To me it means taxes are too high, but to most liberals would be enough. Taxes would still go up. But now, this deficit when it is finally dealt with, it will be the responsibility of the new government, the succceding government, too take care of it. These liberals won't deal with it. How irresponsible.
When the liberals came to power in 1993, they complained about a $5.6 billion deficit left by the previous government. Trust me, it was on every liberal newspaper in Toronto the day after. Now it's $15 billion. So how much media coverage will it get? not much I imagine.
Here we go with the latest:
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Living+fiscal+dreamland/6213990/story.html
Have a nice day.
May God bless you.
The liberals will tax no matter what. In this excerpt of the National Post (NP), it says we are cutting spending while the Ontario liberals (hopefully you don't live in this Province), have created a $16 billion deficit. If I remember correctly, these liberals after just it's second budget had a surplus. Not a big surplus, but at least a little extra for the next year. But today, it's a big deficit. $16 billion dollars. To me it means taxes are too high, but to most liberals would be enough. Taxes would still go up. But now, this deficit when it is finally dealt with, it will be the responsibility of the new government, the succceding government, too take care of it. These liberals won't deal with it. How irresponsible.
When the liberals came to power in 1993, they complained about a $5.6 billion deficit left by the previous government. Trust me, it was on every liberal newspaper in Toronto the day after. Now it's $15 billion. So how much media coverage will it get? not much I imagine.
Here we go with the latest:
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/Living+fiscal+dreamland/6213990/story.html
Have a nice day.
May God bless you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
