Mad_Michael

If someone is 'blackmailing' Quebec, all I can say is, that's a refreshing change. I'm sure it won't last and will return to normal soon enough.

1. Because Ontario taxpayers pay for them. 2. Because Ontario is home to the largest number of self-employed entrepreneurs that such programs are designed to give incentives to. The lack of such incentives going to the Atlantic provinces has NOTHING to do with politics and EVERYTHING to do with the complete lack of self-employed Atlantic region entrepeneurs applying for such funds. P.S. I'm still waiting for a data source for your assertions above.

This is the old formula that Ottawa and the Provinces just constantly renegged on. Politicians are always there for the announcement of the project. They become scarce when it comes time to fulfill their promises with actual dollars. Toronto has been actually funding 65-75% of the capital cost of the TTC for some twenty years now (under the formula you describe above). Promises aren't worth squat when the ones giving the promises reneg so often. No. This Spadina example is EXACTLY the worst thing. It is not what Toronto wants or needs for optimal public transit service in Toronto. This subway extension doesn't even make top-ten of any seriously minded Toronto transit wishlist. And this is precisely the problem with this kind of arrangement. The Feds only want big ticket projects that they can brag about - they don't care if the project is worthwhile, efficient or effective. Spending billions on a useless subway that that is expected to achieve 10-15% usage during prime time is a massive waste of money. The amount of tax subsidy that this subway will suck up over the next 20-30 years makes the original investment look like small change! And the Feds won't be paying a penny of the running costs of their white elephants. Indeed, Toronto transit is already in serous trouble paying for the Sheppard line (it is projected for 15-20% prime time usage) which isn't ever going to be able to pay for its own operation. Indeed, having some dude from Alberta, working in Ottawa, telling Toronto what subway line to build in Toronto is absurd and a recipe for the mess we've got.

No. This type of behaviour is made by choice. In many cases, it doesn't work at all - or backfires. Doesn't matter. The principal reason that attack ads are prevailent in Canada is due to the usage of US political consultant companies. That's their favourite game because it suits the US situation where the electorate is split solidly 45 vs 45 and the whole fight is over the 10% who are moved by attack ads. The same dynamic is not in play in Canada, which is why these negative ads don't work the same way up here. The politicians themselves are the one that are going to pay the price in disrespect. When a politician on a campaign approaches me and sticks his hand out to shake my hand, I just laugh in his face at his arrogance and dismiss him with contempt. For those of you with short memories, I remember the Conservative party attack ad on Chretien that made fun of his Ball Palsey. That should tell you everything you need to know about the moral standing of politicians and their attack ads.

No surprise the last thread was locked.

Do you have any kind of a source for this? According to Roman cultural/class principles, this would be very unlikely. No only that, but 'homosexuality' is a 'status' that was only named/defined in the 19th century. The ancients didn't think that way at all. Perhaps you are confusing ancient Rome with ancient Greece. There was such a unit in Thebes (Sacred Band).

Without a doubt, divorce is the cause.

Absolute position seems to be entirely irrelevant. Almost every study upon the topic suggests that humans are overwhelming affected by relative positions. Btw, given the value of your daughter's home, I suspect you don't live in Toronto or Vancouver.

Thread title is very misleading. NDP in Ontario may want a $10 minimum wage, but it isn't on the legislative agenda in Ontario.

Given that Ontario/Quebec represents 75% of the population of the country, that indicates that Western Canada and Atlantic Canada are over-subsidized. I'd like to see a data source for this one as it appears to be rather misleading or cherry-picked. Nova Scotia alone has more universities than half the freakin' country.

Not likely any time soon. Too much addicition to subsidies and old school approaches. I'd love to be wrong, but I've seen no sign of any changes there at all. Signs from Newfie about the oil suggests the opposite trend is still very strong. Have they stopped any of that outrageously subsidized coal mining and steel making silliness in Nova Scotia yet? Gotta walk before one can run.

It would be a long time since I've voted for any Conservative (Federally or Provincially), but John Tory will have my vote in November, absolutely. That is - only if he keeps a distance from Harper's federal party. If Harper campaigns with John Tory in Ontario, it will probably cost my vote (I'd spoil it rather than vote McGuinty or NDP).

Experience has taught me to be skeptical when people claim to know the absolute truth about a native land disputes. That being said, regardless of the merits of the case, it is an albatross that is going to drag McGuinty's government down in November for sheer incompetance (amongst a dozen other issues I'm sure, but this one issue screams incompetance on so many levels its hard to count). The only thing uglier than a native blockade is the desperate actions and vulgar words of those who oppose them. By pictures on the TV, I'd consider Caledonia to be one place I'd never want to live - those people make me embarrassed to be white.

Yes - some might argue they've been out of touch for a long time. One only has to look at the average PQ voter - white males getting old. Totally out of touch with the reality of Quebec today.

Btw, are you aware that the Hwy 401 through Toronto is the busiest highway on the planet? One in LA comes second, one in Atlanta comes 3rd in number of vehicles per hour that use it.

Should the federal government be involved? I say yes. It isn't something that the private sector has taken the initiative on. Mixed blessing. Yes, the Federal government owes it to the cities to help fund public transit. However, Federal government picking, choosing and paying for their own pet transit projects is not what anyone really needs. More photo-ops for Federal politicians is not a solution to anything. Indeed, Toronto is supposedly about to get a new York subway line (supported by the Feds and Ontario) and of course, just like the last new line added, it is projected to be a huge cost and a huge loss, likely 20-30 years before break even point. For those of you paying attention, that means the Toronto taxpayers have to pay to cover the operating loss on these lines for decades to come. With 'gifts' like these, I'd rather have none. Federal government will only join in on big ticket projects that get lots of publicity - even if those big projects are functionally useless. They seek publicity and votes, not improved transit policies. For example, Toronto has made dozens of serious studies of our subway system. A majority of the studies all conclude that the Sheppard Line and the York U line are not profitable, do not have sufficient demand to apy for themselves and are really only just a huge subsidy to private developers. Needless to say, Ontario and the Feds have already built the Sheppard Line and are now announcing the York U line. Both are white elephants. Neither project pays even the slightest attention to actual Toronto transit needs. Btw, just about every serious subway study in Toronto identifies the Keele-CNE-Pape feeder subway line as the one most in demand, the one that is most able to pay for itself with ridership, the one most able to relieve congestion. Needless to say, this line is still on the drawing table... In other words, Federal money with Federal decisions for spending it is no real benefit to transit users in Toronto. Indeed, they just make the problems worse since we have to pay the operating subsidies on the no-demand lines THEY choose to build. They only build lines for empty subway cars where no one lives because that's where they get the most publicity (and the biggest developer kickbacks). So unless the transit money is handed directly to the city to manage, we are better off without it. As it stands now, the Sheppard subway line (that no one uses, no one wanted) is already sucking the city's budget dry and will do so for some 30 years. Like I said, this kind of gift we can do without.

Fantino has an ugly history that goes all the way back to his London Police Chief days and his well hyped 'kiddie-porn' busts or 'hustler-sex-ring' busts that were pure fakes - designed for maximum media exposure over relatively minor cases that went nowhere in the courts. He's an 'old school' crony-style guy in the worst way - and always ambitious for the media spotlight.

Yes, I believe that a Canadian citizen has this right of free speech (or free expression) and this right of free speech (or free expression) ought not to be impinged for any reason - short of civil insurrection. Mr. Coren has the right to hate anyone he likes. He does not have the legal right to act upon that hatred. I have the right to hate Mr. Coren as the hatemonger he is. I do not have the right to shut him up, or cancel his television show or put him in jail, beat him up or even to harrass him in any way. If he tries to act up his hatred in any meaningful way, there are plenty of laws that can be used to lock him up. Until then, I could live next door to such a man (heck, I probably have already growing up in the suburbs). I would not taunt him, but I would not fear him. He has his right to his own opinions - and the right to freely share or distribute those opinions - and I will defend him or any like him - even though I most certainly am homosexual. Hate must be overcome, it cannot be defeated. P.S. I consider my politics to be 'classical liberal', since the issue seems to be topical.

One point about the drug 'debate' that I'd like to add is the importance of making a distinction between 'recreational' drugs and so-called 'narcotics' - not to mention various 'medicinal' drugs and 'pharmaceutical' drugs. There's a whole lot of different kinds of drugs going around out there. I might agree to the public policy of treating heroin, crack or meth addictions as a 'disease', but I'll fight strongly against any attempt to include pot or X in such a designation - and what about pharmaceutical tranquilizers? Without making this kind of distinction in drug policies, there's no way one can make any kind of meaningful change in Canadian drug laws. The layers of hypocritical definitions are laid on pretty thick.

I'm not sure if there is a real conflict of civilizations going on here or not. I am sure that there is a whole lot of people trying to create one.

The issue of a 'fiscal imbalance' is a fundamental or inherent function of the Canadian constitution. All of the strongest powers of taxation fall to the federal government, yet the vast majority of government or public services are actually provided/funded/operated by our local municipal or regional councils. As such, one of the biggest functions of the federal government is to transfer big blocks of this money back to the provinces according to negotiated formulas (and federal 'strings' attached). Of course, the provinces play the same game - sucking up property taxes from the local level and transfers from the federal government and then having to transfer big blocks of this money back to the local townships and municipalities that actually provide the schools, the road crews, the police, the court houses, fire departments, health clinics, public transit, etc. (all with provincial 'strings' attached). Thus, the local city hall provides most of the actual government services most people use, yet the majority of the money (and thus real authority) over the issue is vested at the highest and most distant levels of government in Ottawa. Unfortunately, the issue of 'fiscal imbalances' in Canada can never really be addressed. The reason is that there as so many of them, that it is a bit of a can of worms. Ontario and Alberta pay way more than their fair share of equalisation payments to the 'other provinces'. That's a 'fiscal imbalance'. Cities pay way more than their fair share in the proportion of taxes than rural areas do. That is another 'fiscal imbalance'. Opening up the municipal vs provincial vs federal lines of taxation and program authority would be a wonderful thing, but, pretty much impossible due to all the vested interests in the present system. Thus, we are stuck with this silly system where we all have to beg Ottawa to give us some of our own money back.

Your going to need us to support your economy very shortly. We're already preventing widespread social assistance demand in your province by providing jobs to those fleeing your failing economy. Not per capita. When you have 3x the population, you expect to have at least as many guns as the much smaller Alberta. Martin wasn't from Quebec.... he was born in Windsor, raised between there and Ottawa and went to university at St. Michael's and the U of T. At least get your facts right. Your kidding right? Do you know how many jobs Ontario lost last month... and the month before. Exporting oil is where the money and jobs are. Ontario is a fading star. It's industry was artifically sustained for too long, and now it's in collapse. You actually have a very weak economy right now. That's why head office migration is moving to the much more economically competitive Alberta. Correct. Let's cut them off and help ourselves out. Alberta and Ontario could be a good team, if they accepted their difference and lost their selfish pride. Wrong. Per capita Albertans pay so much more than Ontarians it's not even funny. 4 times as much. Doesn't look like the quality of the posting at this site has improved much since I was last here. Alberta chest-thumping is tolerable if it is honest. Making shit up to make yourself feel important is silly. I'll return to my regular forums for serious discussion of Canadian politics. Bye (again).

1. Hey, check out the data in that there gun registry... more guns in Ontario than anywhere else... 2. General direction of Government? You've got to be kidding.... lets see... present Prime Minister is from Alberta, last three from Quebec (not counting blips like Graham or Campbell), and before that it was another Quebecer and another Albertan. Toronto rules eh? Give me a break. 3. Wheat board? You're talking about less than 1% of our fucking GDP! Exporting automobiles is where the money and the jobs are, not farming. 4. The natural resources Ontario imports from other provinces is private sector activity. Just like the natural resources Ontario exports to other provinces. 5. The manufacturing base of Ontario is entirely 'private sector' (and 'British-American' in origin. It is private capital. You can't just order it around. And the Federal Government has very little control over this. Ontario has a strong manufacturing economy because a) we work hard for it and we are very well located to service the US market. Ontario is entirely dependent upon the US market for export of manufacturing and services (primarily, automobiles and financial services). 6. The Federal government has no power to compel private companies to move to other locations. Private corporations may situate themselves where they see fit. It is call a 'free market'. Our government is not a socialist planning state. 7. Toronto is a net contributor of about $10-12 billion a year to the 'Rest of Canada' - of which every Province, save Ontario & Alberta, is presently a net recipient of net Federal taxes and spending. 8. The Federal Government screws Toronto more often than any other region in Canada in the bias of their policies and programs. Fair enough, Toronto is rich and can afford to help pay for our provincial cousins. Do you hear me bitching? I pay those taxes.

Who's "some guy from the "Golden Horseshoe" you are talking about? And when it comes to Federal policy and Federal spending, Ontario has been paying out free money to the rest of Canada consistently and constantly going back to WW1. Of all Federal policy programs, I see Quebec and the Atlantic Provinces as the primary 'target' of a majority of Federal spending and policy programs going back to the 1960's. Ontario constantly pays billions of $$ for everyone else's schools and hospitals. Alberta has thankfully joined this most exclusive club in Canada - BC dropped out of the club about twenty-five years ago and has never looked back. Sure Toronto has economic power, but it is the power of the marketplace. Ottawa panders to politics and Toronto has always been politically weak in Ottawa. Toronto's mass transit system is the least subsidised public transit service in North America! And I don't recall seeing any Federal financed construction of ANYTHING in the Golden Horseshoe in the last twenty years...

Neither one was particularly impressive as Premier. Rae's NDP government was a bit of a fluke because Tory Miller and Liberal McLeod both ran the two most horrifically bad election campaigns in Ontario electoral history. Bob Rae himself was very impressive and so won the election. Bay Street immediately freaked out and went nuts in the media on Rae's government, and the unions expected to be treated as if they hit 'paydirt'. Rae was caught in the middle and faced one of those wonderfully large surprise deficits that Conservatives seem to be so fond of leaving the next crew here in Ontario. Rae inherited a massive deficit, Bay Street screamed for cutbacks, the Unions screamed for a spending spree and Rae stood firm. On the whole, Rae didn't do too bad. Not great, not bad. He didn't really address any serious problems, but he didn't really create new ones except with his own Union supporters (Rae Days). Harris's Conservative government rolled in immediately after Rae's one term government, again with no serious competition. His signature issue was the Provincial tax cut, which was mostly symbolic in that it was too tiny and was immediately offset by a previously established 'incremental' Federal increase six months later. In my paycheck, I didn't notice it at all (and I'm in one of the middle-upper brackets). More significantly, Harris's forced amalgamation of Toronto has been an unmitigated disaster. It was expensive to force the bureaucratic amalgamation and the combination is more expensive to run than the previous system (exactly as all the critics predicted in every study upon the topic that Harris ignored). Harris's reformation of the hospital sector was also an unmitigated disaster. He closed 18 hospitals across the province, though half of them continued on by amalgamating with other hospitals. Effectively doubling up administration costs and cutting back on emergency wards. Most of the chosen hospitals to get the axe were chosen according to regional politics, not demographics. Every penny cut by Harris in his first term was restored (and then some) in his second term. Harris's reformation/swapping of property taxes, provincial services and education funding managed to make both problems worse, harder to solve, and we're still fighting over the mess in municipalities across the Province. As a final note, I'd say Harris did a fair bit of damage, a bit of good and a whole lot of needless animosity and media bluster for nothing. On my ultimate scale of judgement (fiscal), Harris was a failure - he left the Provincial debt and the Provincial deficit larger when he left than what he started with. As a so-called Conservative, that is horrifically inept. And no, I don't like this Dalton character one bit. Thankfully, he isn't doing too much damage, but he isn't doing anything productive either (or fixing any of Harris's mess). He inherited a fat deficit from Harris's government and probably is going to leave one just as big for John Tory in 2008/09. Now there is a politician I like - John Tory. Looks like a good ole' Big Blue Machine type guy - exactly my kind of Ontario leadership I like to see.