madmax

Much of the Middle and Lower Middle Class have , and its not worked out so good for them or the local Economy. But its too late... for them. yet there are some who want blood. Spread that pain around. Meanwhile incompetent and semi corrupt governments seem to be spending money on connected friends and large bonuses remain the order of the day.

unlikely. About as damaging to the NDP as to the CPC... As the Federal Government will be stickhandling, I don't really see the Federal NDP in the equation. However, I also expect the NDP to attempt to form a Provincial Quebec Wing and displace the Corrupt and scandal ridden Liberals to provide an alternative to the PQ. Interesting.

Looks like you have a sweetheart deal as well.

Of course teachers stances have a point. Its McGuintys duplicity that is the issue.

That does not have to be the case, there are many ways to avoid OT. Contract, Salary or if the operation has applied and received the 60 hour work week. Others, like Truck Drivers are often on 60 hour week straight time. Cab drivers as well. On top of that regular employees are often subject to hour shifting, such as working 50 hours one week and if in the next 4 weeks they work say 36, there is no OT pay. On top of that, parttime temp agency workers working over 44 hours often get their hours shifted held back, or swung to a different "employer". if you say so

You are asking me to interpret "Earning a Zero", that was used by another teacher. However my understanding of some of the behaviour is like this. Student shows up for test.... makes sure cell phone "rings" annoys classroom for bit, gets up leaves, hangs out in hallway, then outside for a smoke on the sidewalk. Stir and repeat. So on a mark out of 100...10 or 50.... what does she deserve? Oh yes, I also forgot, on the days she doesn't show up, which is over 30 days during the semester, she cannot get a failing mark on the missed tests and assignments. Its simply No Mark, and doesn't count in the semester. Unfortuneately there appears to be many apples such as this, (not to be confused with good apples as I hear good stories as well)

Agreed, Bloody heck, not with Argus... the horror the horrot, the horror

Agreed.

I guess you misunderstand. I do not support the actions of the McGuinty Government. Mainly because its real politik vs necessity. They had no problem giving out $81,000 in a 1st quarter bonus to a poorly run, organization involved in a billion dollar boondoggle.... of course then there is Orng. and virutally ever other Liberal Failure in their privatization quest. However, I like many others are not going to have any sympathy for people who do their jobs. We all have to go to work and I am sure many here have worked a 55 hour week, let alone an 85 hour week with split shifts mixed in with regular rotating shifts, on weekends nad throughout the year and often for near minimum wage. And after 20 years, you still have no holidays beyond your 4% pay given. If the teachers goal is to win over hearts and minds with " Gosh this is a tough job" .... good luck with that. Labour Economics is my background. I do not believe in driving everyones wages down, as I do not find that helps the economy. Knowing that OSTF and ETFO had already back in April took on the position of accepting a wage freeze.... This clearly isn't about money to McGuinty. This is more a scam much like the Gas Furnace in oakville. That cost us $180million in contractual disputes res. I have no idea if the teacher challenge in teh courts will win or fail. But if it succeeds, it would likely erase all "projected" savings. And that is a risk McGuinty is taking in order to attempt to secure another seat. Ironically people are once again Believing the McGuinty Government. I am sure whatever savings they squeeze, they will blow on something else

I also see nothing wrong with this part of the comment presented.

Perhaps some students should not be forced to stay in school. While I agree the poster does sound like a blowhard know it all... On the other side of the fence, teaching was compared to mining... I always believe that the teacher representatives and the school board and trustees should be calling the shots. However, how did we get in this position where kids are allowed to keep and use their cellphones while in the classroom? I know of teachers who cannot confiscate them during the class and return them... Board policy???

I think that goes without saying, same for being absent on test days. Obviously there can be extenuating circumstances, and that is altogether different. But I don't believe that is what we are speaking of. I was talking to a teacher last night, and he said, some childern EARN a ZERO, but he cannot give them one. It seems like the policy is really about gerrymandering the results for the schools vs doing what is best for the students.

Thats the 2nd piece I have seen today of Liberals attacking the NDP in Kitchener. The first piece I had thought was a PC attack on the NDP, a smear of sorts actually, but I had since traced it to a Liberal activist. I am not certain if the Liberals know something no one else does, or , if they are slipping into 3rd place trying to save face. Interesting enough, it seems tha McGuinty's recent attack on Teachers is hurting him in KW, but it might help overall Liberal Polling numbers. Really not certain whats going on... Should be an intersting week. I believe the reason I haven't seen anything one way or the other from the PCs is it would seem they are running a tradional front runner campaign. Meanwhile as I type this I see an Eric Davis liberal ad on TV. I see the Paper which supported the McGuinty Libeals last election has put out an editoral basically suggesting an ABL, or NOT Liberal vote.

Short Memories.... I have good friends , bricklayers from Alberta, moved to Ontario many decades back during a downturn, made a good living, swung back West for the next boom. I am surprised they are not all busted up after all these years in the trades. Things slow down, they come back to Ontario.....home of half the family. Alberta the home of the other half. Its been back and forth for as long as I have known them.

That is the Irony of it all. It would be like saying, I pay taxes and any Federal Monies sent to a region to far away for me to directly benefit is a ripoff to me and I want to opt out.

Nice, I thought we were talking General Tuitions Well the nice thing is you can go to Monction for $4,900 but yes Alberta is $9,900 for Law school. Having paid more then one persons way through law school and with another now in the household, well, not as of today lol..... Regardless, First you go to Regular University before law School. I would HOPE TO HIGH HEAVEN you haven't been paying $12000 like you posted only to be paying less for Law School? Mind you Law School is more expensive in the big T.O and even Windsor. I'd be broke broke broke if those first 3 years had been the CRAZY tuitions you speak of for a BA. Again you could send your children to McGill for $7,564.70 that might save you a bit of dough.

$12,000 is NOT common.... https://osap.gov.on.ca/OSAPPortal/en/PostsecondaryEducation/OSAP/FinancialPlanning/TuitionandLivingCosts/index.htm According to OSAP!!! Tuition Fees You will pay tuition fees to go to a postsecondary school in Ontario. These fees will be listed in the school’s course calendar or program guide. You do not usually need to pay the whole fee at one time. In most cases, you will find that: Fees for some specialized college or university programs will be higher than fees for general programs. Colleges and universities have different tuition fees for international students. Fees for college programs are generally lower than fees for university programs. On average, fees for two terms of college in a general program are about $1,900. Fees for a general university program are about $4,200.

This is where i am confused in what I have read. My original understanding was what you have just said. However, I believe that the challenge was that the monies for adverstising regardless if fair market or not, are now considered a donation (thus illegal). I say this because I read it somewhere (and of course I can't find it now) regarding the Conservative challenge. I would prefer if the rules are interpreted the way you have described. Fair Market. Vs a Ban on Corporate and Union advertising at events.... If you read below, the Conservatives complaint was regarding the Union Logo Prescence, so I believe its beyond advertising and fair market value, I believe its a complete "ban". or as Naomi Klien says NO LOGO. ------------------------- The Conservative party had filed a complaint with Elections Canada about union logos appearing at NDP events last year after a Montreal newspaper reported that unions spent at least $85,000 at the party’s June 2011 convention in Vancouver. Earlier this summer, Elections Canada announced that the NDP would have to pay back the money it had received from unions who sponsored some events, but a full figure was never revealed. The full amount reported by the Toronto Star — more than $340,000 —includes $40,860 at the 2006 convention in Quebec City, $102,500 from the 2009 convention in Halifax and $201,108 at the Vancouver convention last year. ------------------------------------ Read more: http://www.canada.com/business/forced+repay+donations/7147640/story.html#ixzz25EIM38UV PS I couold ban viagara right now lol

Cool its not another spam about viagara... As I understand it from what I have read . 2003 Election Rules changed. NDP asks for clarification/guidance from EC regarding Sponsorship/adverstising etc. Are told that adverstising is acceptable as long as it priced at fair market values. IE what would an add for a brochure that went to 10,000 people at a conference be worth, or a large banner that was going to be seen in the arena, stadium and or on TV. NDP receives Corporate and Union advertising at their conventions 2006 Conservatives challenge that the adverstising is tantamount to corportate and Union donations. All convention revenues from 2006 to 2011 data is sent to EC. 3rd Pariies were hired prior to verify that adds were "fair Market" 2012 EC rules in favour of conservatives and NDP return adverstising monies from Union and corporations for the previous conventions back to 2006. NDP had the right to challenge (Who knows outcome could be the same, the change in ruling as far as I know is that instead of fair market is a complete ban), but accepted the decision and sent the monies back. So, obviously if you are against the NDP you get to have fun with this, and why not. The biggest difference is the openeness of the situation vs the In and Out scheme was trying to hide this from EC, while sticking it to the taxpayers. One party returned the monies. The other party was convicted.

Just getting to teh Senate is Pretty Sweet Pork... And here is what it costs us..... Funny comparison to a Cash for LIfe Scratch "winner" vs Scratching a Politician. http://taxpayer.com/blog/29-01-2010/%E2%80%9Ccash-life%E2%80%9D-vs-retirement-senate If we stand back and look at the big picture, the numbers are mind numbing. If George and a Senate appointee both “won” their windfalls on their 30th birthdays, and lived as long as the average Canadian (80 years), the senator would win by a country mile. According to CTF calculations, while George would bring in a not so insignificant sum of just over $2 million during his lifetime, the senate appointee would end up with a grand total of over $16 million.

Thats's correct, which is why Senate Reform to change it to a Popular Representation formula merely turns it into an Elitist House of Commons.

I knew I was in the wrong business. You lawyers close the door and then, flip a coin.... I gues the real difficult ones are determined by a 3 out of 5 :P No 2 headed coins needed. That said, I am sure it got lost quickly, but it reads to me like you are merely stating your frustration, which given the timeline and the circumstances are shared by many, in order to get to a resolution.

as is the case with likely 90% of NDP candidates they often need to run many times in order to get the name recognition that the larger parties can buy through adverstising. then there is also the optics, the strength and messaging of the party and the strenght of the incumbent. One would consider the former PC Witmer to be the linchpin more then anything else. She broke in as a PC during the NDP sweeps of the 1990 election, so one might suggest this was a strong Witmer street 1st and a PC seat 2nd. So Witmer would have been a very formidable incumbent to defeat, regardless of the talent of any challenger. With Witmer out of the race, its the strength of the PC brand that is keeping their candidate in the race. Like I said at the beginning of the thread, I didn;t think the NDP had a shot here, they are proving me wrong. I'd guess its still leaning PC based on the most recent published poll. But you just don;t know in a bi election. ABL for me....(Twist on ABC) then I would put Ndp Just to shake things up. then I would settle for PC just to keep the Libs from a Majority.

12k in tuiton... thats whats wrong...

Its a good gig.. Its solid pay. If you don't like teaching then by all means go to the coal mines. My relatives did that but in reverse... Nickle mines to teaching. However my east coast friends perished at Westray mines are are still buried under the ground since early 1990s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westray_Mine Yes, dare you compare clean air and safe working conditions with that of a mine, however I know you didn't mean it literally you were trying to make a joke. No matter how stressful or difficult, monotonous or boring it may be teaching... Work at Toyota starts at $21 and try that for 30 years.... Work at Tim Hortons starts at the lower minimun wage, try that for 30 years. Then come back and talk to me. Its a good gig, My brother loves teaching, and I don't envy him.