John

Over the past 10 years the manufacturing sector in Ontario has lost something like 300,000 jobs. Is the manufacturing sector effectively dead in this province or can we bring it back? Is it worth trying to bring back in the face of lower cost/regulation & higher subsidizing regions? What can be done to get people back to work? My own view is that we can't compete with southern markets in traditional manufacturing. Wages, regulations, subsidies ,energy rates...they have us beat on any of these, either individually or in combination. I think we need to have: -massive income tax cuts to return spending power to the people -massive cutting of red tape to let businesses do what they need to do grow production for domestic and international markets -massive privitization...despite how unpopular it would be politically. This doesn't mean selling the LCBO or Hydro to one purchaser to hold a monopoly over all of us. It means breaking them up and letting large and small firms come in/spring up to meet demand -a slowdown to public sector growth. 50% of our budget is wages. These are just some ideas. I'm sure you all might have more. I'd love to hear them.

I agree that it's the size of debt matters more than the existence of a debt. A $10 billion interest payment on that debt is a pretty big deal. Over the past 10 years we've paid out something like $100 billion in interest. If we had the best healthcare in the western world...the best education...the best roads...the best "everything" I might be able to argue that it's justified...but I just can't.

I've been noticing this a lot lately and when I read about this new law in BC I was openly clapping and wishing someone would do more to enforce it in Ontario. Makes me mental to see it happening on the highways. I use the left lane for passing...or excceding the flow of traffic for extended periods of time. And if I see someone zooming up behind me I move out of their way as soon as is safe. I also hate to see this happening on regular city roads. Some dumbass in the left lane going the limit with people passing on the right, or if it's a 3-lane road...passing in the middle AND the right lane!!! It's almost rage-inducing...

I don't really see that much of a problem with it...and I'm a PC member. lol One mistake I think they made with it is including the Grade 3 same sex marriage explanation as part of a sex ed curriculum. Personally, I would define that as more of a Social Studies issue. Is the definition of traditional marriage taught in Sex Ed classes? Not sure if it is or not. It's not perfect legislation as far as I'm concerned on a personal level but I think it's prudent and covers issues that are relevant.

Let's say charges are laid...does the LG have the power to disband the gov't and call an election?

It makes me crazy when I see people defending Wynne by offering up robocalls and Duffy. But what they're really saying is that while Harper is trash...Wynne is no better. And it's only too true. She's acting, at best, on par. If she was a true leader she would do better than Harper. But she's not...

I'd say there are two reasons for that. 1) A very Liberal-friendly media. 2) I don't believe the opposition parties did a competent job of getting that message out to Ontarians.

I think she'll be tainted by Harris and Hudak because she was in both their cabinets. I've already seen people criticizing her for it. The Liberals never pass on a chance to slam Harris even though he's been gone forever. I can see them trotting out the spectre of Hudak as well simple...because they can!

Boooooooooooooooooooo... lol

I think Elliot will be tainted by Harris AND Hudak. She has more baggage than perhaps all of them. I don't know if any of the choices can be considered progressive.

So that leaves just Elliot and Brown as serious contenders...although I'm betting Elliot will win. I always felt the whole field was too Conservative...filled mainly with the big guns from Harris and Hudak. Where's the progressive with these people? I don't see a whole lot of it. I think they could do better by being more progressive on the social policy front while staying fiscally conservative.

My fear is that she coasted into her current seat on the coat tails of Flaherty and will ride them to the leadership. Whenever I've seen her speak in the Legislature or leadersbip debates I've been less than impressed. Is she the Olivia Chow of the right?

So...in light of Vic Fideli dropping out and endorsing Christine Elliot, I need to ask... Does anybody know what she stands for besides "building a Big Blue tent"?

I know tuition in the US are quite high...but I don't know if they came about because of free tuition to students. And since post secondary education here is public, couldn't the costs of programs be capped to a certain extent by the government?

Ultimately...under this arrangement...it would be the taxpayer.

And at the same time the government is also subsidizing students through the 30% Off Tuition Grant. Couldn't we stop the subsidization of the institutions themselves and just make post secondary education free by channeling those monies direction to qualifying students?

I have a question regarding post secondary education... According to the most recent Ontario Budget...the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities will have expenses of approx $7.8B for 2014-2015 {edit}. How is this money spent? Because it seems to me that, if all our colleges and universities are public, and paid for by taxes...then they should be free to anyone and everyone who qualifies. Can someone set me right on this...?

I especially like the part where she pointed out we spend more on debt servicing than on post-secondary education. The truly sad part is that most people who voted Liberal don't pay attention to the news and will never know...or they do know and just don't care.

Of course they have the right to exist. Why wouldn't they?

I'd like to ask you how you feel about the $10 billion in interest we pay every year on our debt.

Does anyone know how much the proposed Ontario Pension Plan is supposed to initially bring in? I'm not convinced that these pension plan contributions won't be used to bring down, or eliminate the deficit, for 2018.

That would be news to me. I recently heard he took $1B out of reserve so that he could claim that the deficit was lower than expected. I thought the reserve fund was for emergencies. I never knew it could be used for such political purposes...

Well, you're right about Hudak...a less than inspiring leader... Sousa: “we are looking at making sure every tender contract (has their taxes paid), we are going after the underground economy . . . we are going after contraband tobacco, recognizing that’s probably $1 billion more in revenue that is being lost to the province of Ontario." So if they are completely efficient and manage to recoup a billion dollars...the deficit comes down to $11.5B. Here`s another good one ``Sousa said the “tools” he is going to use to wring more money out of the system include reducing government spending and driving down public service wages`` My prediction is that means there are big cuts coming to the public service. Didn`t they campaign on not tearing Ontario down? And what if they do cut...that's more evidence of a hidden agenda since they could not seriously expect to slay the deficit without cutting and/or increasing taxes. These guys aren't stupid...they can do basic math and MUST have known what needs to be done. But what they're really good at is knowing how to lie to voters.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2014/11/18/charles_sousa_wont_rule_out_ontario_tax_hike.html So first the Liberals appoint Clark to squeeze more money out of public assets... Then Sousa announces he's going after the underground economy and contraband tobacco... And now...after being asked 5 times -- he finally admits that the possibility of increasing taxes are on the table. Was it their plan all along to come to this point? I can't see how it could NOT be! It seems to be a hallmark of the Left to cast the Conservatives as having a hidden agenda but Hudak's campaign seemed to be pretty blunt in it's forecast of how to deal with the fiscal situation. But the Liberals were all rosy and telling us that everything would be alright if they were elected again. It seems to me that it's the Liberals who really had the hidden agenda... What does everyone think of that statement?

"The very notion of values in education is troubling as it conjures up questions of whose values?" From the fourth last paragraph of the quoted article.