Boges

Cogeco allows you to monitor usage on its website. I just got Netflix and have a 30 gb limit. So I'm definitely going to watch my web usage. BTW online gaming doesn't take very much bandwidth at all.

Who here other than perhaps Zachery is saying the CBC is the mouthpiece of the government?

BM are you claiming that the CBC has no agenda and is truly an unbiased news source? I'd sorta need evidence to support that theory. Being 100% unbiased is next to impossible. Again I doubt many here really object to the political slant the CBC takes. Take into account who watch the several. It's very difficult to provide satisfactory evidence to prove a Liberal bias. Anyone can give examples of how they believe the CBC display their Liberal bias. - I point to them not naming the war criminals that the government of Canada wants to find and deport. - The election widget that more times than not recommended you vote Liberal. - CBC Radio in Toronto's treatment of Mayor Rob Ford. - The fact Strombo still has a show. Unless you think he's "dreamy" why would you watch that show? - Wall to wall coverage of Jack Layton's death. (I know other network covered the issue but not to the extent as the CBC) They actually had a pundit call Ezra Levant disgusting for wondering why the CBC covered the death so much. - After the Olso bombing/shooting they ran a story asking why right-wing extremism is making a comeback in Europe. (Really because of one guy? Where are all the stories about how Islam is taking over Europe?) Now I'm sure you'll try to multi-quote me refuting each of those points. Again those are just examples why I believe there is a deep Liberal bias. I've seen Micheal Coren talk about the CBC and say that there are just some issues that are never discussed at the CBC, I've heard him say that people get blackballed on the CBC for their political views. I can't prove it these are just anecdotes. I'm just a messageboarder I really don't want to do research to prove my thesis here. Unless I perhaps get given a gumint grant. But again the CBC's political bias isn't the main issue. Many people have said they just don't like the fact that 1.1 billion is given to this organization and they refuse to open their books.

How can the government control it if it can't even force them to release the figured on how they spend their money? Apparently this whole WhateverCommonwealthNation-BC works well in the UK but it's pretty much the only game in town unless you get Satellite ditto with Jamaica. Which system would you prefer? As a side, Don't you guise find it hilarious that every episode of Marketplace always ends the same way. After they reveal the scam someone is running and they spend all this money to track them down either to be lied to or ignored in those always hilarious "don't point the camera at me" moments. They always go to the government. Almost without fail. "Minister X why aren't you protecting Citizen Y from Scam Z." Erica Johnson is pretty cute but I want to punch her square in the face every time I see her act all indignant to some government (Usually from the CPC) official. Marketplace is pretty good evidence that the CBC is in favour of more government control of our lives not less. If the CBC was a real Government Organization, Minister X would be able to say. "Shut that effing camera off or we're cutting your funding tomorrow"

Yeah but Strombo is cool and represents all Canadians man! BTW the government doesn't have control over the CBC. That's the point. So it's not really a state broadcaster in the typical sense of the word. It's more of a freeloading organization that takes government money, is accountable to no one and doesn't have to prove that money is going towards fulfilling its mandate (at least yet).

I'm pretty sure that's what they already are. Like any government organization they have to spend every red cent of that 1.1 billion or they may never see it again. Why else would they be crying poor in regards to switching from analog to digital. Something every other private broadcaster has already done. BTW why is it that something really important like a hospital or the military is forced to show their books to the public but the CBC isn't. I'm entitled to know what the CEO of Hydro One or what the Prime Minister makes but not Peter Mansbridge? They both get their pay from the same taxpayer.

The perceived bias of any news outlet is subjective on one's opinions. I bet there are people who think the Toronto Star is a fair and biased newspaper. And it's constant attacks on Mayor Rob Ford are just fair comment. I actually think the CBC goes to great length to appear to be unbiased and by doing so they display a sort of political correctness that many on the right, myself included, find somewhat objectionable. A good example of this is their unwillingness to publish the names and pictures of the "war criminals" that were meant to be deported by the Canadian government.

See being fat is a choice so it's cool. Gay jokes for Smitherman or going after him for his drug problems. Totally offside.

I don't think it's all that extreme to be opposed to the fact that the CBC gets a $1.1 billion head start on the private broadcasters it competes with. What also galls a lot of people, and it's been mentioned several times in this thread, is that if the CBC is a "Crown Corporation" yet refuses to release it's numbers to the public.

I never said it was bad. I would be peeved if my municipality tacked on $60 to my annual birthday walk of shame to the Service Ontario Kiosk though. But as someone who thinks drivers should pay more you probably think it should be $300+ eh?

You could blame that on David Miller too BTW. He could have brought taxes in-line with the rest of the GTA during his term, don't bet on Rob Ford doing it. I guess instead he did things like the $60 license fee and the land transfer tax. But when a single bedroom house next to a railway goes for $229,000 the burden of the average Toronto resident is still pretty high regardless of the actual rate. So the comparison isn't terribly fair. http://www.moneyville.ca/article/1052635--second-cheapest-house-in-toronto-has-everything-but-a-buyer

Ford's already said he's willing to hike taxes about 3%. If you believe there really is a 700gr deficit then 3% or even 5% won't cover it.

Do you know what's also funny? How everything conservative is now labeled Tea Party by the Left. Conservatives in Canada have little to do with the Tea Party.

I do believe at McDonalds the calorie count is on the box and on the back of the place mat, I think that's satisfactory. Do you really want it to be in big bold type on the board?

I'd venture to say if you could be poor 50 years ago and poor today, you'd rather be poor today.

^^^^^ criminal

I venture to say most people who go to McDonalds throughout the day are working. Go there at 1pm and it's packed. I doubt those are lazy people that spend the rest of the day sitting at home playing their xbox. Now perhaps they should be a cheapo like me and make a sandwich every night before work. But sometimes I don't feel like it and would prefer not to drop $11+ on something "healthy" even though it's been shown some salads you get at fast food establishments have as many calories as the burgers. And a lot of times it's mom's who let their kids eat a happy meal and work it off in the jungle gym they have there, so they can get some peace. Sue them! I don't think anyone who orders a burger thinks it's healthy. But there are plenty worse things to eat. Usually it's around 1,200 - 1,500 calories. Now some will say that's too much but who are you to say? It is if you eat it every day but who really eats McDonald's everyday? And if they do I venture to say they are fat. But is that the vast majority of McDonald's patrons? If it was just fat lazy people that went there I doubt they'd be so successful.

Well this is the paradox he finds himself in. The truth is, during election campaigns people don't want to hear the honest truth. I suppose Kim Campbell was right about something. But I'm sure "Ford Nation" would be much more eager to forgive him if he cut services than if he raised taxes. People who are screaming right now likely didn't vote for him in the first place.

I'm sure they will but by how much? 10-20%? Rob Ford can't do that, not what he was elected to do.

I'm fully aware of the arguments about health and food and sustainability of what we eat and how our portion sizes are too large. But to say business decisions by McDonald's is a large contributing factors to the problems we may face is totally wrong-headed. It's an anti-capitalist column veiled as a pro-health column.

What sucks about this whole scene from my perspective is that Ford ran on the platform that he wouldn't cut services. This is obviously a promise he can't keep. I suppose people were naive for believing him. If there really is a $700,000 shortfall, no amount of "trimming" will make this problem go away. Deep cuts have to be made. It would be interesting to see how David Miller would have handled this situation. How much of a tax hike would he have proposed. I see a similar problem in Tim Hudak's campaign. If you're going to elect him you would have to believe that the provincial government is too large and cuts need to be made. But he says no major cuts would need to be made, then he proposes tax cuts. Things don't ad up.

Or any restaurant. Like that Indie Pub you like to go to on Friday nights that serves those bitching potato skins, nachos and local beer. That's what fast food is. McDonalds is just the best at it because it mastered the idea of consistency in its food, no matter where you are. I can find many ways to eat unhealthy food cheaper though. Would you say the same about Canadian outlets like Hero Burger or Harvey's? Is it a turd because of the food or the ambiance? Perhaps there should be a law that states all unhealthy food should be sold in a place that is uncomfortable to be in. You charge for food based on several circumstances usually related to supply and demand. A tax on the food based on an arbitrary analysis of its nutritional value is much different. Funny in one argument you say McDonalds is evil for selling "cheap" food even thought it isn't all that cheap because it targets the poor. Then you say that taxing that unhealthy food is fine. If McDonalds charged $20 a combo would you see it the same way? So why don't you just say you're opposed to ground red meat? It would make this debate a whole lot easier to conduct.

Perhaps someone should do a study to find out the physical make up of the people that go to McDonalds. Then again it may not take into account the part of the population that have such high metabolisms they can eat whatever they want, or those who have such active lifestyles that they burn through the calories and then some from a fast food meal.

Just google Soda Tax. Or Snack Food tax. Nothing has come from any of it because such a thing is anti-freedom and would target low-income people. So it would never fly in North America. Doesn't mean many on the left don't think it's a good idea. BTW a Big Mac is a Hamburger. Would you tax the components of a Hamburger? Would you tax beef, eggs, cheese, bread, and the vegetables? Or would you just tax the idea of someone making it for you and charging you a premium for it. I googled it. http://www.examiner.com/extreme-weight-loss-in-national/fast-food-investigation-what-are-the-real-ingredients-of-a-big-mac According to this story if you take away the bun and the sauce most of what makes up a is pretty high quality. So if they made the bun out a Multi-Grain bread and mayonnaise you probably wouldn't have as much of a problem with it. Then again the reason people like the Big Mac is because of the sauce.

As opposed to what? the grocery store? Any number of restaurants that sell the exact same thing as McDonalds in larger portions? It's not like McDonald's is exactly cheap or anything. You can get a meal cheaper at, say, Subway. You can also buy 8 frozen 1/3 lb burgers at any grocery store for less than $10. If you're low income and you're eating at McDonald's everyday, perhaps that's the reason you're low income. You probably haven't set foot in a McDonald's recently but they are definitely trying to go after Tim Horton's and Starbuck's market share. There's a selection of high-end coffees, the ambiance is different, you get free Wifi. There are things on the menu that don't scream greasy spoon. They are upscaling the place. Probably so they can charge more for the food. Not exactly going after low-income familes like you said. If you want to make the argument that eating out is bad, then make that argument. But this column is an anti-capitalist rant not a pro-health one. I'd have respected it more if it stated that the vegan lifestyle is the only moral one.