Big Blue Machine Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 He got people off welfare that shoudn't have been on welfare. He and Ernie Eves brought the massive deficits down to balanced budgets. He did a revolution in his first two years in office. The Common Sense Revolution to the exact. He and the government won the teachers strike of 1996. And he won a second majority in 1999. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hjalmar Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 This happens every time you have an NDP government. They leave the finances in such a sorry state that the new government has no choice but to make the required corrections. This happened in Ontario where it cost the taxpayers of the province $12 billion to educate Bob Rae. Then it happened in BC after 2 terms of NDP government. All the NDP is capable of doing is to disrupt the government finances to the point where it takes a generation or more to straighten out the books. And who becomes the "bad guy"? You said it -- the premiers that replace them such as Mike Harris and Gordon Campbell .. Go figure!!! The death of the NDP forever would be the best thing that could happen for Canada. They survive only by catering to special interest groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idealisttotheend Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Mr. Harris and Mr. Eves left Ontario with a massive deficit in the middle of historically low interest rates and a long period without serious stuctural recession (Sept 11 excepted). It was quite an impressive feat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgarrett Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 get a brain! here in bc, gordon campbell started out by borrowing more money than any bc governement in history! to pay for tax cuts to the rich(20 percent alone went to the richest 1 percent)! then he gave bc rail ($1.6 billion profitable asset) to one of his biggest party contributers (a directed sale)! a lease for a thousand years which works out to be about $60 a year! then he put bc hydro under the direction of accenture (an off shore company) who said that tea can be cheap in china but power will not be cheap in bc and its going to be controled by the american power grid! and gave a 60 year contract to administer bc ferries (where was i when they were handing this one out)! the list goes on and after three years of this our economy is the worst performing in canada! even business leaders are having a tough time making excuses for it... wake up hjalmar! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamcanadian Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 At least Mike Harris did what he promised in his election campaigns. Unlike our current premier, who of course sticks his foot in his mouth everytime he opens it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Mr. Harris and Mr. Eves left Ontario with a massive deficit in the middle of historically low interest rates and a long period without serious stuctural recession (Sept 11 excepted).It was quite an impressive feat. Actually, Harris had a balanced buget. Only in the final year, a year with Sars, Mad Cow, the great Blackout, etc. did Ernie Eves run a deficit. Nor was that deficit nearly as big as the Liberals are making out. If the Tories had gotten releelected it probably would have been no more than 1 billion or so, and if they increased taxes anywhere near what the Liberals have they'd have had a surplus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Machine Posted June 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 If Mike Harris didn't retird, would he have won a third striaght majority against Dalton McGuinty? It could have happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Gordon Campbell in BC has done nothing for our deficit. Despite selling off BC owned resources/companies/ jobs such as BC Hydro, Ferries, and BC rail; raising medical premiums; cutting seniors assistance for prescriptions; breaking contracts with nurses; contracting out hospital workers jobs to the lowest bidder; He has made the deficit grow. We need Health Care in a acceptable time NOW; we need schools NOW. Campbell and co are spending our money on the dubious idea of bringing the Olympics to Vancouver in 6 years. Lots of money to spend on highways to a ski resort; they are still trying to spend money on an expensive mercedes benz type transit sytem to the airport with lots of tunnelling that could send prices spiralling over the 1.7 billion planned for. Gordon Campbell will be gone next election; back to the NDP. Meanwhile, those of us who are middle income get the shaft either way. Campbell helps the rich; NDP helps the poor. In both cases; we middle income workers pay the bills and get to pay pay pay. However, I would rather help the poor than make the rich richer. Especially since many of these rich companies are not BC companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeanumber Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 He got people off welfare that shoudn't have been on welfare. He and Ernie Eves brought the massive deficits down to balanced budgets. He did a revolution in his first two years in office. The Common Sense Revolution to the exact. He and the government won the teachers strike of 1996. And he won a second majority in 1999. Pure fiction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Machine Posted June 26, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 Pure ficton, you say? It's fact! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takeanumber Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 If it's a fact, you should have no problem prooving it. Well, go on. You said it was a fact, now prove it. (And make the proof so that I can't find a single counter-example, because if I can find a counter-example, your proof becomes invalid.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 26, 2004 Report Share Posted June 26, 2004 If Mike Harris didn't retird, would he have won a third striaght majority against Dalton McGuinty? It could have happened.Why did Harris retire? I'm sorry, I haven't followed Ontario politics closely, but it seems to me that Harris suddenly decided to retire. Why?Harris struck me as a ski-instructor who decided, some 20 years later, to pretend to be Margaret Thatcher facing striking coal miners (in the guise of Ontario teachers). The coal miners were on the losing end of new technology. Teachers will be with us always. Harris should have co-opted the teachers, not fought them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Machine Posted June 27, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Media people that didn't know Harris said that he was" a pro-golfer" alot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Blair Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Media people that didn't know Harris said that he was" a pro-golfer" alot. I've called him a lot of things, most worse than "pro-golfer" and none of which I can type into a family board. You might try picking up a book called, "One Dead Indian" Big Blue. It's about Dudley George, a native man who was killed because of the policies of Mike Harris. You might want to have a long hard look at what happened at Walkerton too. While your at it you should think about why the homeless were demonstrating against Harris' policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Blue Machine Posted June 27, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Mike Harris wanted to outlaw homelessness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idealisttotheend Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 "Outlaw homelessness" Hmmmmmmm. At risk of being overly glib, when someone wants to "outlaw" homelessness you know for once and all that they were a pretty faced golf caddy and not in some useful occupation for a reason. Maybe Harris hated teachers so much because he had a bad case of envy for their intelligence. Look how well we've done at outlawing drugs or prostitution. And you can actually argue that those things are morally wrong and unnecessary to the maintance of human life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Analyst Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 If Harris Did Nothing Wrong-Why Was He The Most Hated Premier in Ontario History-And He Had To Have A Body Guard 24/7.........think about it.....no other Premier Ever Had Too!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 To my knowledge, Ontario teachers "absolutely and totally hated" Michael Harris. Ontario civil servants "really disliked" Michael Harris. Ontario teachers and Ontario civil servants with inherited boomer money send their children to private schools. Central Canada (meaning the English CBC, the Toronto Star and the Globe & Mail) is supremely hypocritical. Where do Quebec children study? Who pays? L'hypocrisie me fait honte. Personne n'en parle. (Immigrants! Wake Up! Go USA! - You all know this anyway - that's where your kids go.) Les Invasions Barbares, on ne l'a pas vu? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Blair Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Teachers and civil servants with money, August? Where do you find these mythical beings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Teachers and civil servants with money, August? Where do you find these mythical beings?What planet are you living on? Do you know about their pensions? Double dipping?I have absolutely no complaint to Ontario teacher or Ontario civil servant rights to pensions, nor spouses survivor benefits. But bear in mind the consequence. A fat, ugly single (divorced) 55 year old retired Ontario teacher or civil servant will go abroad and, with a pension promise, seduce an attractive 19 year old male or female in a poor country. The survivor benefit will be for life. This is the world the Left has created for all of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Why must that person be fat or ugly?????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Blair Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 How come none of the teachers and civil servants, even the fat ugly ones, I know do that? Come to think of it I've belonged to pension plans in corporations that would have allowed the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caesar Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Of course, there are private companies that do the same. My husband is 16 years my senior; I have every right to collect his pension. I didn't come from a poor country; I came from Canada but so what; would you rather that the foreigner spouse was on the welfare roles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Caesar, Blair. What are "survivor benefits"? How do the insured protect their children, or dependants? What is a contract? Enforceable? The Clueless Left. "The State will protect us," as in, Soviet think. These people don't understand Soviet pensions, the Berlin Wall or August 1991. History is my witness. Only fools blindly trust the State. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 27, 2004 Report Share Posted June 27, 2004 Teachers and civil servants with money, August? Where do you find these mythical beings? Teachers salaries top out at about $65k, right? So presumign they're married you're looking at a family income of over $100k. Not rich, but not exactly poor. And their jobs have terrific benefits and pension plans Civil servants of course, can earn more. Your basic clerk is looking at about $35k, more senior clerks up to $45-50k. Salaries of $60k, $70k are not unusual even for non management staff. Managers/supervisors/executives, of course, are considerably higher. And they too have great benefits and pensions. Teachers and civil servants are doing pretty goddam good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.