Sell the CBC?

[CPCFTW]

Only so they'll be at your level of intellect.

But you still choose to drive your car when you could - and should - take the publically funded bus.

On the other hand, there are alternatives to you choosing to drive your car. Why should I have to pay my "hard earned tax dollars" on the wear and tear on roads and all the pollution you cause for what boils down to a selfish choice on your behalf?

Dear god... what a ludicrous argument.

Edited October 17, 2011 by CPCFTW

[Shwa]

By Shwa's logic, calling into question where the government spends any of its money is like calling into question funding for roads or anything the government offers that people need to do their day to day activities.

Nope. By my "logic" the only thing I am calling into question is your astounding inability to source publically available information, like you are technologically illiterate or something. Where the government spends its money is, by and large, all there on the web. All you seem to do is unthinkingly parrot the usual neocon talking points without even bothering to back any of it up with something resembling evidence, which would take a little effort.

If you want to make your case Boges, put up or shut up.

[Shwa]

How about you go find them since you're the one defending them. I have a feeling you won't be able to though.

Naw, it's your argument son. If you are too lazy or stupid to find your way, that ain't my work.

[Shwa]

Who are you to tell people what they "should" do?

Why do you care?

[Boges]

Where the government spends its money is, by and large, all there on the web.

Well considering the CBC is in court for not releasing it's information. This is exactly the point I'm trying to make.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/conservatives-summon-sun-journalists-to-testify-in-cbc-fight/article2182010/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-demand-cbc-explain-its-lengthy-access-to-information-battle/article2180476/

The Conservatives are hauling the CBC onto the carpet this fall to explain why it is fighting the access-to-information law in the courts, part of increased scrutiny of the public broadcaster's spending and practices by the new majority government.

The move comes at the same time as the Conservative Party surveys its members on whether CBC funding is good value for the taxpayer.

People want answers to the questions I'm asking. The CBC isn't giving it up.

Edited October 17, 2011 by Boges

[segnosaur]

Yes it is my choice to drive a car. We're dealing with government-supplied infrastructure though. The roads exist, and are necessary whether they are traveled on by car or by bus, moving van or company delivery. Even if I were to vanish from all existence, the need for the road would not change as there is no alternative way for you to take your bus to work.

But you still choose to drive your car when you could - and should - take the publically funded bus.

But my choice makes absolutely no difference to the amount of tax you pay. None whatsoever.

Your argument was that "your taxes pay for the roads", but your 'taxes' would not change if I stopped driving because the roads are needed anyways. There are simply no alternatives for transportation of either communters or goods.

THE CBC IS DIFFERENT! If the government stopped funding the CBC you could still get news/entertainment elsewhere.

On the other hand, there are alternatives to you choosing to drive your car. Why should I have to pay my "hard earned tax dollars" on the wear and tear on roads...

Because your hard earned tax dollars were still needed to build the roads so you could take your bus to work!!!!!

[Shwa]

Well considering the CBC is in court for not releasing it's information. This is exactly the point I'm trying to make.

And, as has already been pointed out, the CBC has a legal obligation to respond to the request for information according to the law. Or did you miss that point?

People want answers to the questions I'm asking. The CBC isn't giving it up.

Maybe the CBC will prorogue parliament.

[Boges]

And, as has already been pointed out, the CBC has a legal obligation to respond to the request for information according to the law.

So the Law states that they don't have to release figures on their spending? Or it states they can throw up constant roadblocks so people can't see how government money is actually spent?

[Shwa]

But my choice makes absolutely no difference to the amount of tax you pay. None whatsoever.

Neither does my choice to watch the CBC or not affect the amount of tax you pay.

Your argument was that "your taxes pay for the roads", but your 'taxes' would not change if I stopped driving because the roads are needed anyways. There are simply no alternatives for transportation of either communters or goods.

THE CBC IS DIFFERENT! If the government stopped funding the CBC you could still get news/entertainment elsewhere.

And if you stopped driving your car, you could still get transportation elsewhere.

Because your hard earned tax dollars were still needed to build the roads so you could take your bus to work!

So your argument is primarily ideological then.

[Shwa]

So the Law states that they don't have to release figures on their spending? Or it states they can throw up constant roadblocks so people can't see how government money is actually spent?

Really, I'll give you a break just this once.

Access to Information and Privacy Act

[guyser]

Well you live in the Shwa, I don't pay for the roads in your town.

If you live in Ont , yes you do.

[Boges]

If you live in Ont , yes you do.

So all infrastructure projects in each municipality are paid for by the provincial government.

I swear the lane widening that's screwing up my commute to work is being done by the region, where I live.

[guyser]

So all infrastructure projects in each municipality are paid for by the provincial government.

I swear the lane widening that's screwing up my commute to work is being done by the region, where I live.

Not all roads are , but the majority . Gas tax, and other tax pays for them. Some local roads are funded through local taxes.

Edited October 17, 2011 by guyser

[PIK]

3.18 million dollars a day , I don't think so, time to sell her off. And don't blame harper, blame the people that allowed the CBC to become what it is today.

[guyser]

3.18 million dollars a day , I don't think so, time to sell her off. And don't blame harper, blame the people that allowed the CBC to become what it is today.

blame Harper , what for, increasing the funding this year?

[Boges]

blame Harper , what for, increasing the funding this year?

Sun News took them to task for that.

Now it appears the CBC is expected to cut their funding just like every other Federal department.

Why shouldn't they be forced to?

[guyser]

Sun News took them to task for that.

Now it appears the CBC is expected to cut their funding just like every other Federal department.

Why shouldn't they be forced to?

Are they a federal dept?

[Boges]

Are they a federal dept?

They get Federal money.

[guyser]

They get Federal money.

So do you.

[Boges]

So do you.

Really because when I look at my pay cheque it looks like I give Federal money, not get.

[blueblood]

Are they a federal dept?

Ah, but the CBC likes to use the access to information act in their reporting. They're finding out the hard way that it's a two way street.

BTW, your right on the ratings of cbc vs. tsn. However, I was referring to the scope/style of coverage of tsn vs. cbc. Which like taste in music is only opinion. I imagine if CTV got to carry games on Saturday night, they would get similar ratings, especially leafs/habs games.

As for comparing roads to the CBC, that's a non-starter. Roads directly improve the economy, and private industry could not set up a road because it can't be able to get people to pay for using the road without some ridiculous expensive security apparatus costing more than the road itself. And there is an option to pay for roads in the public system, you can choose to buy gas or not or buy a vehicle and pay for registration or don't drive. CBC is mandatory, yet private industry can and is an effective substitute.

I would rather see the 1.1 billion spent on roads than on the CBC, it's a much better investment.

[Rick]

I would rather see the 1.1 billion spent on roads than on the CBC, it's a much better investment.

The majority according to the poll here at least feel differently.

[guyser]

BTW, your right on the ratings of cbc vs. tsn. However, I was referring to the scope/style of coverage of tsn vs. cbc. Which like taste in music is only opinion. I imagine if CTV got to carry games on Saturday night, they would get similar ratings, especially leafs/habs games.

I had figured it was a an opinion, however it came across differently.

I wouldnt be so sure CTV would get the ratings CBC does in this case, the wealth of on air talent would far exceed what CTV could get in the short term. Maybe a few yearss later, once all the contracts have run out, but short term I doubt it.

As for comparing roads to the CBC, that's a non-starter. Roads directly improve the economy,

No they do not. What they do is perhaps make it easier to make money, but the roads themselves dont directly improve anything but the ride .

[blueblood]

I had figured it was a an opinion, however it came across differently.

I wouldnt be so sure CTV would get the ratings CBC does in this case, the wealth of on air talent would far exceed what CTV could get in the short term. Maybe a few yearss later, once all the contracts have run out, but short term I doubt it.

No they do not. What they do is perhaps make it easier to make money, but the roads themselves dont directly improve anything but the ride .

Isn't making it easier to make money improving the economy?

You should start watching Ice Road Truckers and you will get your answer.

[Shwa]

Really because when I look at my pay cheque it looks like I give Federal money, not get.

Really? So you don't benefit from anything that has Federal money involved?