Saipan Posted May 31, 2011 Report Posted May 31, 2011 Follow the man who seeks the truth; run from the man who has found it. -Vaclav Haval- His name is Havel. (pronounced Vaczlaf Havel) Quote
Wild Bill Posted May 31, 2011 Report Posted May 31, 2011 I don't see 'lefty' as a pejorative word. Also, I'm not a moderator, I'm a facilitator. That means I don't have the say as to discipline on here, I'm a poster like everyone else. The thing about MLW is that it tends to value good discourse over insults, but what that means can vary from person to person. There's no black-and-white rule that delineates feisty discussion to pointed discussion to heated discussion etc. I think it's great when posters on here point out that we need to pick up our game as DAVE_ON has. Whether or not I allow people to go after me is beside the point. I can be more lenient than others when it comes to insults against myself. In general, be better is my advice to everyone all the time. More simply, in the immortal words of Bill & Ted (Esquire): "Be excellent to each other!" Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Dave_ON Posted May 31, 2011 Author Report Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) Please tell me you're joking? Did I even address you at all in this thread? I don't know what ideologies you share but I assume you are generally left of centre on most issues, hence you are probably a "lefty". And isn't Michael Hardner a moderator? I was more rude to him than anyone else and he just gave it back like a man. Leave the moderation to the moderators. If you're so interested in censorship, you'd be better served chaining yourself on stage at a Christie Blatchford speech than whining that I called people who are left of centre "lefties". Why the indignation? At any rate I'm done with this discussion, if you want to take it personally, be my guest. Suffice it to say calling someone a "leftist" or a "right wingnut" are both equally inappropriate and doesn't end an argument. You can't simply dismiss someone simply because you perceive them to be a certain way. Address the issue, keep the insults down and stick to the facts plain and simple. You can disagree with someone and still show them common courtesy. Labels are dismissive and comes across as flippant. For the record it's not about sensorship my friend, it's about common courtesy. If you have to resort to being insulting to make your point, do you really have one to begin with? It's ok, I know that when you lefties are taking a break from smelling your own farts, you love to point out that any opinion that differs from yours is stupid and uneducated. This is a prime example of what I'm speaking of, I'm certain I could find more. Either way as mentioned I've made my point, I don't wish to harp upon the subject any more than I have. Don't be so quick to judge or make assumptions about people, just because someone disagrees with you on a specific topic, doesn't mean you can peg where they stand on the political spectrum. Edited May 31, 2011 by Dave_ON Quote Follow the man who seeks the truth; run from the man who has found it. -Vaclav Haval-
bjre Posted May 31, 2011 Report Posted May 31, 2011 CAS should be cut. Animal protecting service should be cut. Many laws should be cut so that criminals will be reduced significantly, and people will have more freedom, and jails will have more spaces, and less cops will need to bully innocent people according to those laws that completely used for interest groups such as medicine companies and banks and many others. Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
CPCFTW Posted May 31, 2011 Report Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) Why the indignation? At any rate I'm done with this discussion, if you want to take it personally, be my guest. Suffice it to say calling someone a "leftist" or a "right wingnut" are both equally inappropriate and doesn't end an argument. You can't simply dismiss someone simply because you perceive them to be a certain way. Address the issue, keep the insults down and stick to the facts plain and simple. You can disagree with someone and still show them common courtesy. Labels are dismissive and comes across as flippant. For the record it's not about sensorship my friend, it's about common courtesy. If you have to resort to being insulting to make your point, do you really have one to begin with? This is a prime example of what I'm speaking of, I'm certain I could find more. Either way as mentioned I've made my point, I don't wish to harp upon the subject any more than I have. Don't be so quick to judge or make assumptions about people, just because someone disagrees with you on a specific topic, doesn't mean you can peg where they stand on the political spectrum. How are "lefty" and "right wingnut" similar? "Lefty" is just a shortened way of saying "someone whose ideologies lie on the left of the political spectrum". Wingnut implies insanity and would be similar to pinko. Lefty = an acknowledgement of your political beliefs. Get over it. If you're so ashamed of being called a lefty, maybe you're on the wrong side. Edited May 31, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
Michael Hardner Posted May 31, 2011 Report Posted May 31, 2011 But, should we be paying to support them? They aren't essential to the well being of people like Education and Healthcare are. Cutting both CBC and Canada Council saves just over 6% of the federal deficit of $29.4 billion and does not affect the quality of life of Canadians. If people want art and entertainment, they pay for it. Moving on. We got sidetracked into a discussion of the arts, and I caught this response. The $1.7B would only save a fraction of the DEFICIT, not of the budget. I would argue that ending all arts programs would affect the quality of life in Canada. Aren't there other industries that are heavily subsidized as well ? Why single out the arts - they seem like a bargain to me in that they mediate our national dialogue and make Canada a place where civility thrives. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Dave_ON Posted May 31, 2011 Author Report Posted May 31, 2011 Moving on. We got sidetracked into a discussion of the arts, and I caught this response. The $1.7B would only save a fraction of the DEFICIT, not of the budget. I would argue that ending all arts programs would affect the quality of life in Canada. Aren't there other industries that are heavily subsidized as well ? Why single out the arts - they seem like a bargain to me in that they mediate our national dialogue and make Canada a place where civility thrives. I would tend to agree, the arts are low hanging fruit for politicians. I doubt Mr. Harper would go down that road again however, although it's not like he really has anything to lose in Quebec at present. I'd suggest cutting the size of cabinet, his personal security force and several other direct government expenses. These should get the axe far before any public services do. Quote Follow the man who seeks the truth; run from the man who has found it. -Vaclav Haval-
MiddleClassCentrist Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 The $1.7B would only save a fraction of the DEFICIT, not of the budget. I would argue that ending all arts programs would affect the quality of life in Canada. Aren't there other industries that are heavily subsidized as well? Why single out the arts - they seem like a bargain to me in that they mediate our national dialogue and make Canada a place where civility thrives. Absolutely! Oil and corporate farming are great places to start. Sure help out the family and small business farmers but, factory farms need no assistance. The 1.7B would save a fraction of the deficit. That's what we are looking to get rid of. 2/33rds down! only 94% to go! How exactly, does not funding extra art above and beyond what people make, reduce one's quality of life? How exactly, would defunding the CBC and letting it float as an independent business, reduce one's quality of life? There are tons of private exhibits, shows, entertainment. I'm hard pressed to find a reason that people need to be subsidized to create art. It is more of a hobby, than a career. My family has a long history of painting in their spare time. Pretty high quality too! Engineers, teachers, lawyers, etc. Quote Ideology does not make good policy. Good policy comes from an analysis of options, comparison of options and selection of one option that works best in the current situation. This option is often a compromise between ideologies.
Shwa Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 How exactly, does not funding extra art above and beyond what people make, reduce one's quality of life?How exactly, would defunding the CBC and letting it float as an independent business, reduce one's quality of life? Answering questions with more questions is cheap, but I need some clarification of your questions, so... I am not sure what you are asking in your first question, could you clarify please? And your second question, are you aware of the history of the CBC? Quote
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 We have let manufacturing and software go global, but not farming. Why is that ? University of Alberta Paper The latest data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development show that annual producer support for agriculture in Canada rose from $6.2 billion US in 1986-88 to $7.8 billion in 2009, an increase of 26 per cent. In Canada, grains, oilseeds and the red meats sector are the main beneficiaries of such subsidies. According to this Wiki on Agriculture in Canada Canadian farmers received a record $36.3 billion in 2001 from livestock, crop sales and program payments. Presumably the $7.8B is included in the figure above, meaning the industry makes $28.5B. Arts, Entertainment and Recreation was an $11.2B business in 2009. The arts, it seems to me, makes more money for our public investment than agriculture - especially when you take the CBC out of the picture. As for the CBC, it is a domestic product that could be ramped up to be more agile and competitive, to export more product and to capture more of the domestic market from imported programs. In the 2000s, we had some success with innovative Canadian products, especially from young people. Should we be looking to do more farming in the future, or making movies and video games ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
CPCFTW Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 (edited) What makes you think any of the gdp generated in the arts, entertainment, and recreation sector is related to subsidies? I would think a majority of that gdp comes from professional sports and corporate movie theatres and other forms of entertainment provided by the private sector. And to answer your first question, there are two reasons: Food is perishable and is a basic necessity of life. What if the world suddenly decided to impose trade embargoes on Canada or if they were unwilling to supply Canada with food because there was a global shortage? Or what if two or three countries became the only food producers due to comparative advantage and then formed a cartel to manipulate pricing on food? There are strong arguments for subsidizing certain strategic industries such as food or defense. Edited June 1, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote
bjre Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 More tax dollars are needed for court and cops because a raccoon was attacked. Oh, the laws, so many hard working people be robbed by tax just because the greedy service people want more money. http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/article/1000644--man-arrested-in-raccoon-attack?bn=1Man arrested in raccoon attack Published 1 hour 12 minutes ago Aleysha Haniff Staff Reporter A |man was arrested early Wednesday after police responded to a complaint that someone was injuring baby raccoons in a backyard with a shovel. Police arrived at a home on Rankin Cres., near Bloor St. W. and Lansdowne Ave. just after 5:50 a.m., where they located the hurt animals, said Const. Wendy Drummond. A man was taken into custody. It was unclear how many animals were injured, Drummond said, because the mother raccoon had managed to carry off some of her babies. However, at least one was severely hurt. A 53-year-old man has been charged with cruelty to animals and possessing a dangerous weapon. Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 What makes you think any of the gdp generated in the arts, entertainment, and recreation sector is related to subsidies? I would think a majority of that gdp comes from professional sports and corporate movie theatres and other forms of entertainment provided by the private sector. I'm not sure what the relationship is between subsidy and GDP. I guess it would be a good thing to have the government publicize that for all of their subsidies. It also might be a good thing to publicize the amount of money being made by those getting government handouts. Farmers are doing better than artists, if my memory serves correctly. And to answer your first question, there are two reasons: Food is perishable and is a basic necessity of life. What if the world suddenly decided to impose trade embargoes on Canada or if they were unwilling to supply Canada with food because there was a global shortage? Or what if two or three countries became the only food producers due to comparative advantage and then formed a cartel to manipulate pricing on food? There are strong arguments for subsidizing certain strategic industries such as food or defense. That would imply that there was some rational decision made in this regard. That somebody said - we can't forgo food security, however our software, manufacturing, arms manufacture can go elsewhere. I don't believe that these decisions are made in such a rational way, generally. It's more likely that political considerations come into it. What do you think ? Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 More tax dollars are needed for court and cops because a raccoon was attacked. Tiny anecdotes and jokes aren't really useful, except as a diversion from the serious discussion that we need to engage in. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
bjre Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 Tiny anecdotes and jokes aren't really useful, except as a diversion from the serious discussion that we need to engage in. Maybe you are the one who is willing to be arrested and go to court and pay for it with your tax dollars and think those are just tiny anecdotes and jokes. Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
Sir Bandelot Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 Tiny anecdotes and jokes aren't really useful, except as a diversion from the serious discussion that we need to engage in. As though dozens of such anecdotes and jokes, and much worse, are not posted each day in these forums? Why pick on this one? Because you can. Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 I'm not sure what the relationship is between subsidy and GDP. I guess it would be a good thing to have the government publicize that for all of their subsidies. It also might be a good thing to publicize the amount of money being made by those getting government handouts. Farmers are doing better than artists, if my memory serves correctly. That would imply that there was some rational decision made in this regard. That somebody said - we can't forgo food security, however our software, manufacturing, arms manufacture can go elsewhere. I don't believe that these decisions are made in such a rational way, generally. It's more likely that political considerations come into it. What do you think ? For such things as "food security" one has to think about the future. Not just the needs of the situation we're in at the present time. Like, what if a major war involving Canada were to break out. But agreed that all government spending of our money must be made fully accountable in detail, the information available to any citizen. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 Maybe you are the one who is willing to be arrested and go to court and pay for it with your tax dollars and think those are just tiny anecdotes and jokes. If we took the time to look into all of these tiny incidents, it would take forever. There are bigger fish to fry. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 As though dozens of such anecdotes and jokes, and much worse, are not posted each day in these forums? Why pick on this one? Because you can. I'm not sure. It may be because I expected more to come out of this thread. We raise things to a higher level of debate here on MLW, higher than many other forums. So, here we are with raccoon bites and arts funding. If we at MLW don't have anything important to say about this topic, then no wonder we're in this situation. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 For such things as "food security" one has to think about the future. Not just the needs of the situation we're in at the present time. Like, what if a major war involving Canada were to break out. But agreed that all government spending of our money must be made fully accountable in detail, the information available to any citizen. I don't think that anybody is thinking about the future in that way. Specifically, to your example - we don't have an independent defense, nor should we. The powers that be are binding the nations of the world together, much to the concern of many on the left- and right- fringe. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
bjre Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 If we took the time to look into all of these tiny incidents, it would take forever. There are bigger fish to fry. Don't know what is the bigger fish you mentioned. What I know is from the 2011 final residential property tax bill. It says: For a home with an assessed value of $427177 total city taxes would be $2400.40 excluding the education taxes. $609.06 Police Service & Board $348.80 TTC $273.33 Debt Charges (I believe it is for private banks that just records a digit in their computer and charge you tax dollars) $195.78 Shelter, Support & Housing Administration $49.56 Children's Services Those are $1475, or more than half of your property tax dollars that is enough make many seniors in Toronto lost their houses. http://www.thestar.com/business/article/972359--the-high-cost-of-rising-home-valuesDragica Donia bought her downtown Toronto row house more than two decades ago, figuring that it would suit her well during her retirement years. But now, at 76, she’s worried everything will have to change. High property taxes mean she might not be able to continue living in her modest residence near the popular Little Italy neighbourhood. “This is a very real concern to me,” said the 76-year-old senior, a retired administrative assistant. “I am going to have to sell my home and rent if taxes keep going up. The laws are actually tools for robbery wealth from most people and give it to the large interest groups. Quote "The more laws, the less freedom" -- bjre "There are so many laws that nearly everybody breaks some, even when you just stay at home do nothing, the only question left is how thugs can use laws to attack you" -- bjre "If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
Michael Hardner Posted June 1, 2011 Report Posted June 1, 2011 Don't know what is the bigger fish you mentioned. What I know is from the 2011 final residential property tax bill. It says: For a home with an assessed value of $427177 total city taxes would be $2400.40 excluding the education taxes. $609.06 Police Service & Board $348.80 TTC $273.33 Debt Charges (I believe it is for private banks that just records a digit in their computer and charge you tax dollars) $195.78 Shelter, Support & Housing Administration $49.56 Children's Services Those are $1475, or more than half of your property tax dollars that is enough make many seniors in Toronto lost their houses. You have FOUND the bigger fish. Thanks for posting this. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.