Locutus

This is really interesting I know that Newfoundland and much of Atlantic Canada faced a similar migration which really had an impact on their economy when the fisheries collapsed, and many young Newfoundlanders who could no longer work left on mass using labour mobility provisions under the constitution. This phenomenon is not restricted only to small towns, even large cities such as Detroit, Michigan have faced the exact same challenge, (see link)http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/18/detroit-prepares-bankruptcy-filing-friday/2552819/ and have filed for bankruptcy as industries have collapsed and the population has taken advantage of labour mobility and moved elsewhere leaving their liabilities behind (elderly requiring social assistance, city/state debt servicing costs, infrastructure etc.). It's really interesting the extreme effects of this phenomenon - check out the Detroit Ghost towns - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjCObHJlkiU they can't even afford to decommission some of the roads or even their police now only respond to high priority crimes. http://nl.communityaccounts.ca

Equalization is based on a complex calculation which includes a variety of factors including resources. Similar schemes to equalization are seen all around the world for example in Europe the "Structural and Cohesion Funds" - there is no shame in giving or receiving equalization in any form. You also have to consider Quebec's economy before hitting on them, they have a large paper and pulp industry which has really been hard hit with the collapse/sluggish housing sector, and the overall decline in the pulp industry with changes in technology. All provinces are dealing with aging populations and inter-provincial migration, believe it or not the prosperity of the west along with labour mobility has left most of the young unemployed leaving their provinces and migrating towards the more wealthy provinces taking the future tax base (which otherwise would have paid for social assistance, provincial daycare programs, healthcare and other entitlements and even infrastructure) with them. In terms of "biased" contract award decisions, those familiar with internal and international trade rules on government procurement would tell you that language is a legitimate form of discrimination on any tender document for government contracts. All governments discriminate and support their own states/provinces be it in Quebec, the United States or even the European Union - simply because the public investment dollars are funded from provincial coffers. On the issue with the 17 year old - our Charter of Rights and Freedoms gives Quebec or any province the right to override portions of it - including the language law. If the kid had a name that sounded too English, perhaps he should have chosen a more French name? When in Rome - you follow the rules.

No. We don't need more intoxicated doped up paranoid people driving around on the roads. Studies have shown that Marijuana increases your chances of lung cancer almost to the same degree as tobacco. (see link below) http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/08/01/heavy-marijuana-smoking-may-double-risk-of-lung-cancer-canadian-study-finds/ As long as our health system is public - and my tax dollars are paying for it there is no way I would support it being legalized.

Good thing he didn`t succeed - otherwise BC would have been a Green Energy Superpower to rival Ontario

It's also worth noting that Canada recieved an exemption only from one section within the American Reconstruction and Reinvestment Act. If you look at the act more closely you`ll see a number of other `made in america` provisions which we did not get exempt from. Also the act only exempted Canada from seven programs - and if you look at their website, they money was already spent by the time the agreement was signed. For example - clean water funding was already spent by the deadline and the United States openly admited it on their websites. http://water.epa.gov/aboutow/eparecovery/upload/US-Canada_Agreement_and_BA.pdf

Actually my friend you are incorrect - Harper and Dalton worked together to buy $10 billion into GM - see link below http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2009/06/01/harper-mcguimty-gm.html

Probably also better than spending $1 billion on Security for a weekend event at the G20 Summit.

If you want a seat at the table - you should have at least one seat in Parliament.

I think this is a sensitive issue - However it is important to recognize that European emmigration has diminished mainly due to to increasing economic prosperity within the Europe, high health/social benefits, and the relative peacetime within the continent over the last 60 years. European settlers like most immigrants, emmigrated to North America to avoid religious persicution, war etc. These reasons are no longer there, so its unlikely that you'd see an influx of Europeans like you did back in the day. N

Probably would be a better idea to just create a regulation to limit maximum speeds to vehicles. I guess the problem would be that the government would lose revenue from speeding tickets, and insurance companies would lose out also.

Nicky I think your approach is very narrow - it focuses on statistics obtained from a single news article. I would be more interested in analyzing how the statistics are presented. For example - like most media statistics are based on half truths. The statistics provided focus purely on "property taxes" paid by home owners, not commercial or industrial taxes that the city also collects. The reason why Toronto's homeowners prpoerty taxes appear lower comparatively is because we have strong commercial and industrial taxes which offset lower property taxes. I think if you factor in commercial and industrial property taxes you'll see that Torontonian's actually pay higher overall taxes. The debt numbers you presented also do not reflect total public debt interest of all agencies which are not captured in the municipal budget. Right now Public Debt Interest (PDI) will be lower, because interest rates are low - painting a rosy picture. Rob Ford is a smart business man - he understands if you lift the land transfer tax the property values for home owners in Toronto. In turn, this will result in more tax revenue for the city. It is unlikely that he will cut the hefty 4% property tax increases from the Miller/Pantalone regime, therefore it is likely that these cuts will likely add greater value to the cities tax base, making it more competiative with neighbouring municipalities. Lastly, I'm not sure why we are comparing ourselves to New York etc. Is Toronto losing more business to New York or Mississauga?