jacee

It’s the risky “third rail” of Canadian politics. From Parliament Hill to Queen’s Park, politicians cringe at any talk of raising taxes, no matter how pressing the need or how good the cause. Most are paralyzed by the spectre of voter backlash. One touch, they seem to think, and you’re fried. backlash. One touch, they seem to think and you’re fried. Maybe not. A new survey flatly challenges that timid conventional wisdom. It turns out that Canadians are ahead of their political leaders on this issue. Fully 64 per cent, including a majority of Conservatives and wealthy people, say they are willing to shell out a bit more in taxes to protect social programs such as health care, pensions and access to higher education, all of which help reduce income inequality. Less surprisingly, there’s even more support — 83 per cent — for raising taxes on the wealthiest. These findings by Environics Research for the newly created, progressive Broadbent Institute confirm that the public is genuinely concerned about the growing rich/poor gap. They vindicate the Occupy Canada protesters who caught the nation’s attention last year. And they challenge our policy-makers. http://www.thestar.com/iphone/opinion/editorials/article/1159364--a-new-canadian-survey-on-the-rich-poor-gap-and-taxes-should-spark-debate It's a good thing Canadians have a mind of their own. And it's a good reminder to us all, I think, that we should never give up, never shrug our shoulders and say 'What can ya do!' and give up on our system. Because it can't work without our input and innovative ideas. Who'da thunk ... Thanks to the OCCUPY youth! Occupy your government.

Unh hunh ...? Forgot yer wheaties didja? Who ya plannin to blow up, vigilante? And that will help ... how?

You mistake me for someone who cares most about politics. I care most about what's best for us. "Political heroes" is an oxymoron. They are mutually exclusive, imo. I'm of similar mind that they all do some things poorly and ... well .... And I'll allow for a shared responsibility for the hwy sale. But more on point, clearly hwys aren't safer in private hands.

Signals.Cpl, I owe you an apology. When I wrote this post I mistakenly thought you were the author of the thread complaining about being called a bigot. You weren't. That was stopstaaron. My apologies. Carry on.

That interchange links the 403, QEW and 407, and it is a death trap. I notice also that highway construction quality seemed to deteriorate in the mid '90's, "A few years after Bob Rae's term as Premier", which of course would be during Mike Harris' term as Premier, Bill. Why not just say that? In fact, the 407 highway opened in 1997, two years into Harris' term, to immediate concerns that the planned finishing touches hadn't been done, things like protective barriers around overpass supports. The finishes were done on the cheap - plastic barrels of sand instead of the usual engineered guardrails. Then Harris sold it in 1999: Toronto - Rob Sampson, Minister without Portfolio with Responsibility for Privatization today announced the sale of Highway 407 for dlrs 3.1 billion, making it the largest dlrs 3.1 billion, making it the largest privatization in Canadian history. Highway 407 will be sold to a consortium of Grupo Ferrovial and its subsidiary Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, SNC-Lavalin, and Capital d'Amerique CDPQ, a subsidiary of the Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec. The consortium will purchase from the province the right to own and operate Highway 407, along with the obligation to finance, design and build west and east-partial extensions to the highway. Highway 407, along with the obligation to finance, design and build west and east-partial extensions to the highway". http://www2.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=54540 So the extensions, including interchanges, were built by the private consortium, not government. And ... Owned by Cintra, it is not officially considered part of the King's Highway Highway system. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/400-series_highways#section_5 Now, I'm not exactly sure what "not officially" means, but I suspect it might have something to do with the construction standards. Here's a key fact: The 1990s reconstruction of the Freeman Interchange (QEW-403-407) from its original semi- directional T configuration to incorporate the extension of Highway 407 ... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hill_Valley_Parkway#section_4 In other words, the original design of the interchange was 'adjusted' to accommodate the 407 with the result that it is a weird and dangerous place. I think it would be fair to say that the privatisation era has not had positive effects on highway safety.

Yes they were. This time, the cops were out of line Sunday, June 27 2010

So has he.

Yes, the law/courts. They can't detain without reason. And they can't, as Signals.Cpl suggested, detain and search several hundred people because they think there 'might' be a 'rioter' among them. So ... Just letting our naive and ill informed friend Signals.Cpl know that illegal actions of police/government need not be defended or excused. Since I was responding to Cpl's posts, you missed some of the context.

The law/the courts determine the limits of police discretion, not the government. Police discretion is within the law, and they wouldn't appreciate you referring to it as "bending the rules". Just to remind you, I and others here are not anti-police in general: Quite the opposite: I support the vast majority of police WHO DO THEIR JOBS WELL. It's the ILLEGAL ACTIONS OF POLICE that we must constantly guard against, including EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCE, BAD ORDERS FROM SENIOR OFFICERS, COVER UPS, AND POLITICAL INTERFERENCE FROM GOVERNMENTS. They'd better be! Precisely. And that's how they are judged by the courts."Within the law" is what we expect. Unfortunately for this discussion, your knowledge of the law is very poor, and thus your arguments support actions of the police that clearly are not within the law. For example, you defended the police corraling innocent protesters for hours because 'It would take the police some time TO SEARCH THEM ALL. Police cannot search innocent people! They have to have reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing THAT WILL STAND UP IN COURT. That is one of our most basic legal rights ... the right to go about our legal activities, including exercising our freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, without harassment, intimidation and unlawful search, seizure or detention by police. So ... if you want to defend the police, I suggest you first educate yourself about the laws they are required to work within. Otherwise, you are not defending good cops, but excusing the bad ones, and that's not helpful to the vast majority of them who do their job well. And btw ... the corralling of protesters will be the subject of a large class action lawsuit against police, and part of a public inquiry where the focus will be on WHO GAVE THE ILLEGAL ORDERS. The senior officer(s) will be held accountable. So will any officers who illegally searched or assaulted people, or threatened to. Are these the cops you defend ... the ones who acted illegally? Another point you need to be aware of: EVERY police officer, including senior officers, has the responsibility to refuse an illegal order. The government 'cannot direct the actions of police'. Otherwise, government politicians could simply order police to arrest (or shoot) anyone who opposes them. (EG, Like Syria, Libya, etc.) For a Canadian example, see Ipperwash Inquiry. Do you understand now why we have constitutional rights against 'illegal search, seisure and detention'? Do you understand now that when we protest illegal actions of police/government we are defending our democracy and our freedoms? Do you understand that is is the responsibility of EVERY Canadian to do so? And do you understand that much of what you defend and excuse will be found to be illegal by the courts, and we taxpayers will be on the hook for million$ to pay damages for the illegal orders and actions of police? And do you understand that if any illegal orders came from the Prime Minister, he'll be sweating on the Inquiry stand just like Mike Harris did. One might wonder, and I'll certainly be paying close attention to this, whether the principal witnesses who can testify to the PM's actions, will mysteriously start dying before they can testify, as three people did before the Ipperwash Inquiry. And finally, do you understand that when good citizens hide in their houses in fear of police if they protest illegal actions and state control ... then we are already living under tyranny.

Previously you said a recent CBC article was correct and a Postmedia story was wrong, and now you say this past CBC story is wrong.. Tell me smallc ... where are you getting such reliable information that you are so certain what is and is not correct? You must be the only Canadian with such information. Share your sources please. You can't just expect us to believe what you say with no data. And I'm curious ... why do you think Harper refuses to clarify the information to the public? It would seem politic for him to do so, and he's not a stupid man. Perhaps it's true the Tories are imploding? I know I'm certainly looking forward to the time when his MP's start deserting his sinking ship. Hubris might allow you to skim on the surface for a short time, but it's not a good personal flotation device. I do believe there are some Tory MP's with integrity who will soon turn their backs on Harper, and others who will run from the bad PR. I can't imagine being a Tory MP and not demanding a full and clear explanation of these costs for your constituents. I can imagine Harper continuing to play games, thinking he's 'getting the better of the opposition and the media: He seems to think that only such strategy games matter. He has no sense of himself as a 'leader' of all Canadians whatsoever. I think the truth is that Stephen Harper is only in it for the competitive strategy games. He has no clue how to lead a country, and only contempt for most citizens.

And that's precisely why Harper's Tories were found to be in contempt of Parliament (and Canadians): Because they refused to provide the documentation to clarify what was included in their estimates. And they still have not provided that information to the public, but instead continue to play 'word games'. The contempt continues ...

Having a 'socialism VS capitalism' debate is kinda like having a 'vitamins VS minerals' debate ... ie, it's ridiculous because obviously we need both. If we don't have capitalist opportunities, where does the money come from for necessary social programs to support those who are temporarily or permanently unable to progress financially? If we don't have socialist programs, how do we ensure that we all have opportunities to progress? It's a non-issue.

Gee, just like you did in the thread about the G20. Imagine that! Just sayin' ...

Cpl, perhaps if YOU backed off on the personal insults/attacks, you wouldn't receive them, eh? Cos dishing them out but complaining when you get them back just might be a kinda bigoted thing to do, eh? Just sayin' ...

"Every other NATO country?We don't have the population (taxpayers) to support a military like that of the US, UK, France and other big players.

I'll grant your point on Tories not directly lying IF the differences in estimates result from differences in what's included. However you're wrong about the documents asked for and witheld from parliament: What was requested was the background documentation on what WAS included - ie, precisely the information now in play. We now know that that documentation existed and was in government hands at the time the Tories were refusing to produce it. Did they lie? In court, withholding information under oath - failing to tell the WHOLE truth - is perjury, just like telling a bald-faced lie. Business and politics, unfortunately, seem to thrive in an environment of half-truths. They were in contempt of parliament and the people for not producing the documentation to support their estimate, and caused the current kerfuffle. It's still not clear to me why Harper is doing this to himself ... unless it is pure contempt of Canadians - He thinks he gets to make any decisions he wants and it's none of our business? Isn't "full of crap" just another way of saying "They lied." Frankly, debating whether politicians 'lied' or not is just a distraction from the real issuesthat you've identified of accountability to Canadians, and transparency about how our money's being spent and why.

You made the point earlier and I think it bears repeating, that there's an important difference between calling a comment bigoted and calling a person a bigot. The latter is namecalling. Namecalling does occur on mlw, but doesn't seem excessive to me. It's a good distinction for all of us to remember.

That's just silly August. Our health care system is not as troubled as you think. We do face significant challenges as the aging of the baby boomers puts more demand on the system, but it is also true that the system has had the benefit of our wage earning/taxpaying years to prepare for this entirely predictable demographic challenge. The difficulty in getting a family doctor is perhaps a new phenomenon, though I'm not entirely convinced of that either. I think there was always a sizable group of Canadians who relied on emergency room medical services, and we're simply hearing more about them lately as hospitals are trying to clear the decks to cope with the aging demographic challenges. There are some challenges due to constraints put on doctors' pay, but in my opinion that's a good thing: I find modern doctors much more driven by altruistic motives these days than the ARROGANT SOB DOCTORS of past decades who were in it for the money and prestige. The explosion in numbers of women doctors is having an effect in clearing out the a$$holes too, I think. Emergency rooms have always had wait times. That hasn't changed much. Your other complaints are unsubstantiated, and don't indicate any systemic issues.

I don't get your focus on teachers and doctors. Canadians have chosen to provide education and health care collectively, so that everyone gets good care and education. You are free to choose your doctor, within the limits of availability, and free to purchase any specialized services you wish available anywhere in the world that you can afford. Likewise education, you choose your school by where you choose to live, or you purchase private education. I really don't see a serious limitation in choice, and our universal public services are excellent quality. What is it you want that you can't currently get? What I think you really mean is that you don't want to contribute taxes to anyone else's education or healthcare. So just say that, instead of trying to wrap it up as some political issue. I get it ... you're an 'Every man for himself' libertarian kinda guy. Unfortunately, you live in Canada where we concern ourselves with the overall health and wellbeing of our society because we recognize that an educated and healthy work force benefits the whole economy and makes it possible for us to also care for those unable to provide for themselves. We recognize that no one becomes successful all on their own, but because of the services and supports that provide opportunities for every individual to thrive and progress. Of course, if one wishes to live in a more libertarian regime where basic health care is the privilege of the monied classes, one only has to drive a couple of hours south.

Referendums are a pretty poor form of direct democracy.Discussion and consensus-building provide better quality decisions.

I can assure you protesters are better informed than you are. "ethical oil". We see now who you are schilling for. Tell me ... do they pay you out of the $40m federal TAXPAYERS' MONEY that is fraudulently being used to promote Alberta oil rather than its intended purpose of researching alternative technologies? Is Bruce Carson your buddy? Are you him? What a joke! Not for Canadians. Gotta stop somewhere! You did your duty. We're not buying. Go pick up your I'm-a-schill-for-the-oilboys paycheque. And a thank you to the taxpayers who were defrauded of that money would be nice.

Your point of view is disgusting. I was going to say 'welcome to mlw', but instead I'm inclined to say 'don't let the door hit you on the way out. You belong on stormfront.org with the rest of the white supremacists/neonazis. I'm putting you on ignore.

I second that, kimmy.

When were these 'golden decades' Manny? It couldn't have been very long, because after WWII Canada was still intent on staying a 'white' country - non-whites not welcome. Do you mean the Trudeau era? Mulroney? Good grief! We "even" allowed "them" to vote? It's hard to take this seriously ... His most famous (and controversial) work, Alone, argues that the United States has undergone an unprecedented collapse in civic, social associational, and political life ( social capital) since the 1960s, with serious negative consequences. ... Some critics argued that Putnam was ignoring new organizations and forms of social capital; others argued that many of the included organizations were responsible for the suppression of civil rights movements and the reinforcement of anti- egalitarian social norms. Over the last decade and a half, the United States had seen an increase in bowlers but a decrease in bowling leagues. ... Critics such as sociologist Claude Fischer argue that(a) Putnam concentrates on organizational forms of social capital, and pays much less attention to networks of interpersonal social capital; ( neglects the emergence of new forms of supportive organizations on and off the Internet; and © the 1960s are a misleading baseline because the era had an unusually high number of traditional organizations. I lived through these eras, and to me Putnam's work is just more of the whining of the keep-America-white crowd who revelled in 'social' clubs that wouldn't allow Jews or 'coloreds' to join. They revere the Ozzie-and-Harriet '50's and never got over the '60's 'civil rights' era, and they don't acknowledge the emergence of new forms of social networking. The comment above that the 1960's era is not a valid baseline because of the "unusually high" number of "traditional" (ie, white) organizations is right on: The post-war era was all about white suburban family life where Mom baked pies for the (white) church and Dad belonged to the (white) Masons/Rotary/Kinsmen/etc club. The post-war era was a natural reaction to the horror and family disruption of the war years, a unique and utopian blip in (white) history when the suburban dream was for whites only and protected by whites-only club rules and immigration rules. I understand how that era came about, but how long could that contrived and racist house of cards really be expected to last? Case in point: The Legion was a huge social club for the WW generations, but has stagnated and has little relevance for the new generations of veterans of VietNam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Obediently doing one's duty just doesn't wash when it's obvious that wars are being staged by governments for the benefit of their greedy corporatist 'handlers' Putnam's work is using the information to improve social cohesion in modern communities, not to pine for the old days. From my perspective, the WW and postWW eras were marked by compliance to authority, conformity to a social expectation, social and religious 'duty' and unquestioning obedience to authority. The baby boomers of the civil rights and VietNam eras blew all of that out of the water. Because it became apparent that neither governments, religions or corporate America could be trusted. Blind obedience wasn't social cohesion at all: It was just fear of reprisal, social shunning, employment/government blacklisting, the wrath of god. So who's really the healthier society? One that hides in obedience and conformity in fear of reprisal? Or one that accepts its own diversity and non-conformity and examines itself? I know where I stand on that. It's appropriate for me to say, this Easter weekend, that you can stuff the Easter bonnets and gloves and demanding social conformity of the 50's where the sun don't shine. Never again. To steal a phrase ... The (blind conformist) unexamined society isn't worth living in. The data used was disputed – and there were a number of commentators who argued that what was being seen was change rather than necessarily decline. I agree. And when anyone spends all their time looking backwards pining for a utopian past that never existed ... well ... to those of us moving forward, all we ever see is an occasional glimpse of retreating asses. Having the courage to move forward is the real challenge of today's society. IMO, of course, whining and pining for a fairytale past that never really existed is for pathetic losers at best, and a sign of psychosis at worst ... the kind of psychosis that leads some to pick up a gun and start shooting innocent people because 'the world is bad'. The Occupy movement that directly targets the military and industrial complex that rules us by controlling jobs and the flow of money (into their own pockets) is the healthiest social movement yet seen.

I provided links about court outcomes the first time you asked. I guess you didn't want that information clouding your misperceptions. Police CANNOT search everyone. They have to have reasonable grounds that a judge will uphold. You're making up the law to fit the 'story' you tell yourself: 'Police good, protester bad.' Police actions were excessive. I don't think anyone (but you) disputes that. Grandmothers forced to sit in the street and pee (etc) in their pants for hours ... afraid to even speak (eg, Officer, I have to poo!) because everyone who spoke got roughed up and hauled off to jail. That picture kinda stuck with most Canadians. We taxpayers paid $89m for the police to make asses of themselves, and we'll pay millions more in damages for their excessive 'response'. And eventually, heads will roll, hopefully way high up the chain of command ... CSIS/RCMP and PMO. Now do some reading and actually learn about what you talk about at such length as if you already know the facts. Signal this, Cpl: "I'm not repeating this message AGAIN!!"