I would like to see a protest against .....

[dre]

Don't confuse style with substance....I am not Canadian, remember, and do not speak for even a single other American either. Getting you agitated works like a charm, and yields more comedy in the spirit of Voltaire and splendid mockery.

Youre confusing agitated with bemused.

[bush_cheney2004]

Youre confusing agitated with bemused.

I will take either....as you expend amusing energy either way. If you have ever wrestled with a pig in mud, soon you realize that the pig likes it!

[capricorn]

An example from Ontario. Some may remember the cutbacks to everything by Mike Harris. One of the things cut back/off was supposed to be the support for parents/caregivers of severely/profoundly handicapped dependent children (who may be adults, but infirm. They constitute a very small percentage of the population, way less than half a percent, but consume a lot of resources. During legislative debate, one opposition MP read a letter from a parent of a profoundly handicapped adult child, outlining the medical procedures, equipment, such as lifts for bath and bed, special transportation, and 24 hour care required. Ernie Eves was Premier by then, stuck with trying to justify Harris' 'laws' that cut off such support. Ernie wasn't a bad man like Harris, just duped in the same way many conservatives dupe themselves . Ernie's heartfelt response in the legislature was "Of course where there are REALLY UNIQUE and special cases like that, we can work out an exception for them".

WELL! ... His office, and all MPP offices were quickly was INUNDATED with requests for "exceptions" for their severely/profoundly. handicapped dependents: WHY? Because half a percent may seem small, like something easily dismissed and defunded, but it's still 6000 people, about 55 such cases in EVERY Ontario riding, and each handicapped person has many family members, family friends, support programs and staff and doctors and nurses ... etc etc, advocating on their behalf and on behalf of the parents who struggle with the extreme physical, emotional and financials costs of caring for them ...

And that's A LOT of people ringing phones and doorbells of MPP's.

While you revel in railing against a government that hasn't been in power for 8 years, you conveniently forget that since their election in 2003, the McGuinty Liberals have themselves dabbled in welfare reform.

Single parents with two children are up by just $10 a month in Ontario, thanks to the McGuinty government's Budget on March 25. This was their response to Dalton McGuinty's re-election campaign promise to reduce poverty in the province -- the raising of social assistance rates by 1 per cent.

The Ontario government also announced it will cancel the Special Diet Allowance it provides to people on Ontario Works (OW) or Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). This social assistance provision, used by 20 per cent of welfare and disability recipients, provided people with up to $250 extra a month to help buy fresh fruits and vegetables and other medically necessary dietary items.

Doing the math on poverty reduction, increasing welfare and disability support payment rates by 1 per cent does not compensate for the loss of up to $250, making this the deepest support payment cutback since Mike Harris slashed welfare rates in 1995.

The Ontario Coalition Against Poverty calculates that the, "elimination of the Special Diet Benefit will result in a 3 per cent cut to the income of poor people on social assistance. This is only the third time in Ontario history that a government has slashed income to the poor -- Hepburn did it in '38, Harris in '95, and McGuinty in the 2010 Budget."

The Special Diet Allowance feeds 160,000 people across Ontario, people who will have to find a new way to balance paying the rent and feeding the kids.

The Liberal government will phase out the allowance over the next few months to give people time to adjust. There have been rumours that a new medical supplement plan may be developed by the Ministry of Health.

With the Ontario government facing a $21.3 billion deficit, Premier McGuinty and Finance Minister Dwight Duncan made cuts by asking others to make sacrifices.

---

There are currently over 162,000 people in Ontario who will now lose the extra money the Special Diet Allowance provided.

The success of the program, by raising awareness that the program existed among poor and marginalized communities and by increasing the access to health professionals, caused the cost of the program to soar from $6 million in 2003 to $200 million in 2008.

The government saw this success as a problem, just as it did in 2005 when it first tightened the eligibility rules. In both cases, the specter of potential fraud was raised.

http://rabble.ca/news/2010/05/mcguintys

McGuinty was set to cancel the special diet allowance completely because his government believed the program cost too much and they had no clue how to curb any resulting fraud. Rather than acting on compassionate grounds and recognizing the dietary needs of the truly deserving, McGuinty was forced by an order by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to maintain the special diet allowance.

In a case dating just 2 weeks before the October elections, Madeleine Meilleur, the then Minister of Community and Social Services, bowed to public and political pressure and reversed the decision to suddenly cut off the allowance to a 21 year old MD sufferer. Lucky for the kid and his parents that an election was right around the corner, otherwise they would have had to drag Liberal butts back before the Ontario Human Rights Commission. And they would have had plenty of public support.

[jacee]

While you revel in railing against a government that hasn't been in power for 8 years, you conveniently forget that since their election in 2003, the McGuinty Liberals have themselves dabbled in welfare reform.

http://rabble.ca/news/2010/05/mcguintys

McGuinty was set to cancel the special diet allowance completely because his government believed the program cost too much and they had no clue how to curb any resulting fraud. Rather than acting on compassionate grounds and recognizing the dietary needs of the truly deserving, McGuinty was forced by an order by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario to maintain the special diet allowance.

In a case dating just 2 weeks before the October elections, Madeleine Meilleur, the then Minister of Community and Social Services, bowed to public and political pressure and reversed the decision to suddenly cut off the allowance to a 21 year old MD sufferer. Lucky for the kid and his parents that an election was right around the corner, otherwise they would have had to drag Liberal butts back before the Ontario Human Rights Commission. And they would have had plenty of public support.

Did I ever say I trusted any politicians?

No.

Specifically the opposite: Anyone who aspires to the system as it is, has a stake in the status quo.

Neo-libs are everywhere.

They're all on th G20 ordered 'austerity' bus.

Edited October 24, 2011 by jacee

[capricorn]

Did I ever say I trusted any politicians?

No.

I must have missed that. Of course, that doesn't explain your anti-Conservative rant which went something like this:

My point about the conservative mindset is this: They like to live in a fantasy mindworld where everybody starts out with equal opportunity and everyone's success and misfortunes are their own doing, and thus the rest of the population bears NO COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY to help them. If someone's circumstances are especially DESERVING, they'll help them out of a sense of charity, largesse, virtuosity ... but don't let anyone tell them who's DESERVING and not, and don't take their money (via taxes) and let someone else decide who DESERVES their 'charity', because THEY KNOW IT'S JUST A COMMIE/LEFTY PLOT TO STEAL THEIR MONEY AND ALL THOSE SO-CALLED 'LESS FORTUNATE' ARE JUST CON ARTISTS AND FRAUDSTERS!!

Have I got it right? I think so.

Conservatives on both sides of the border have a hugely inflated sense of their own superiority which leads to a paranoid sense that everyone else is out to steal from them what is 'theirs', a lack of human faith and regard for all other human beings, who are surely not as virtuous or 'deserving' as themselves.

You distrust all politicians but you aimed your venom directly toward Conservative parties and their supporters. Now you want me to believe you’re non-partisan. That is laughable.

[BubberMiley]

While you revel in railing against a government that hasn't been in power for 8 years, ...

Does this mean you aren't going to talk about Jean Chretien's Liberals anymore?

[jacee]

I must have missed that. Of course, that doesn't explain your anti-Conservative rant which went something like this:

You distrust all politicians but you aimed your venom directly toward Conservative parties and their supporters. Now you want me to believe you’re non-partisan. That is laughable.

I see I erred and put one capital C where I was talking about the small c conservative mindset, above and below the border, which exists among neo-libs everywhere, and their 'charity' model of their own entitlement to bestow largesse on the deserving among the 'starving unwashed masses'.

Lib v. Con aren't the only political choices, and clearly the 99%'rs are accomplishing much more by not limiting themselves to a party platform.

As a political slut, I can work with anyone who will get something done. That's how it should work and how it does at best,

And that's why we all have a health card.

[GostHacked]

I mean seriously, not 2-5 times a day!!

Speaking for myself, I'm interested in other nations - and what other nations are saying/thinking about us.

Oh this is pretty damn funny. Because when people do, like us Canadians, you turn around and say you don't care what others think. Who you trying to fool here?

[capricorn]

Does this mean you aren't going to talk about Jean Chretien's Liberals anymore?

Absolutely not! As most on here know I'm presently a Conservative supporter, I'm partisan and never denied it.

[Guest American Woman]

Oh this is pretty damn funny. Because when people do, like us Canadians, you turn around and say you don't care what others think. Who you trying to fool here?

Ummmm. Care to point out where I've said I don't care what Canadians think? Thanks. I have said that I don't care what people think about me, but that's a different story. But for the record, wanting to know what y'all are thinking so I'm knowledgeable doesn't mean I have to care what you think.

Edited October 24, 2011 by American Woman

[Guest American Woman]

To clarify, I do care what some think - while I most definitely do not care what others think - same as any other country, including my own.

Edited October 24, 2011 by American Woman

[August1991]

Some on welfare are financially weak. There may be a few who commit fraud, but I think that is way, way overblown as an issue. The amount of financial damage that Wallstreeters have done far, far exceeds the few able-bodied welfare recipients out there.

Unless you clarify your viewpoint Bubbler, we in the rich west are the 1% - and the rest of the world is the 99%.

IOW, an Occupy Wall Street movement should be an Occupy The West movement. And what would that accomplish?

You really believe the looting of pension funds to provide CEOs with massive bonuses is as morally wrong as someone "having baby after baby on the public's dime?"

Two wrongs don't make a right but taxes are involuntary. Private pension plans are a choice.

"Nickle-and-diming" the system adds up. It's a drain on our system, our budget, our economy. Saying we should be concerned with both equally is hardly laughable to anyone who is really concerned with fraud - and not just concerned with going after the rich.

When the government takes about 40% of GDP, there's alot of manna available. Some of it is in welfare fraud, and other in $250,000 civil servant trips abroad. Edited October 24, 2011 by August1991

[August1991]

Your "Canadian board" is hosted in the United States of America (not too far from George Bush's ranch), uses an American forum engine, and many of the topics invariably invoke America, otherwise I wouldn't be here.

BC, you're being ingenuous. Who cares where the forum is hosted.

It's a forum largely about Canadian politics in English, from an English-Canadian perspective. Unfortunately, even if 5 of 10000 of Americans take an interest in this forum while 50 of every 1000 English Canadians do (change the numbers as you wish), then it still means that the English Canadians will be outnumbered - and the forum will soon discuss American politics, or world politics from an American perspective.

---

Curiously, this problem does not arise on my Quebec politics forum. The few Français de France posters are more polite.

Edited October 24, 2011 by August1991

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I mean seriously, not 2-5 times a day!!

Posted Today, 02:06 AM

Posted Today, 09:29 AM

Posted Today, 02:56 PM

Posted Today, 03:12 PM

Yep. Definately not.

[bush_cheney2004]

BC, you're being ingenuous. Who cares where the forum is hosted.

Don't you mean "disingenuous"?

No matter....I care...technically this forum is nowhere near Canada, and any moron who tells me I'm a guest in Canada doesn't understand that. The forum engine is American, French Canadian language isn't even permitted, and it's just a fun reminder and metaphor for just how much those bastard Americans impact your life. Hell, a lot of "Canadian" topics usually drift towards the "U.S." or "America", if only because some members can't find any Canadian references/data!

It's a forum largely about Canadian politics in English, from an English-Canadian perspective. Unfortunately, even if 5 of 10000 of Americans take an interest in this forum while 50 of every 1000 English Canadians do (change the numbers as you wish), then it still means that the English Canadians will be outnumbered - and the forum will soon discuss American politics, or world politics from an American perspective.

Why is that....forget about the damn Americans...if you can.

BTW, does your forum language setting also say "English(USA)"?

Curiously, this problem does not arise on my Quebec politics forum. The few Français de France posters are more polite.

I'm sure....another reason why this forum is not "Canadien"! If you look real carefully at the HTML source for some pages, you will find the lyrics to God Bless America.

Edited October 25, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

Now here is something interesting from Urban Dictionary:

3. mapleleafweb

a once-popular Canadian political discussion forum associated with the University of Lethbridge in the bible-belt of the province of Alberta. At first Mapleleafweb strove for intelligent discussion carried out under objective rules. In recent years the rules and tone have been changed to give greater advantage for those promoting rightwing views.

Many people who used to post at mapleleafweb.com have been driven away by the increasing favoritism given to rightwing participants.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=University%20of%20Lethbridge

Has anyone here been "driven away" for anything beyond violating forum rules?

Edited October 25, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[MiddleClassCentrist]

Now here is something interesting from Urban Dictionary:

3. mapleleafweb

a once-popular Canadian political discussion forum associated with the University of Lethbridge in the bible-belt of the province of Alberta. At first Mapleleafweb strove for intelligent discussion carried out under objective rules. In recent years the rules and tone have been changed to give greater advantage for those promoting rightwing views.

Many people who used to post at mapleleafweb.com have been driven away by the increasing favoritism given to rightwing participants.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=University%20of%20Lethbridge

Has anyone here been "driven away" for anything beyond violating forum rules?

Right wing forum posters like their internet discussion like they do their biased media outlets.

Nonsensical berating of opponents at all costs to win, rather than actually discussing topics rationally.

I could see how more rational people would be driven away. You can only talk to a wall for so long

[bush_cheney2004]

Right wing forum posters like their internet discussion like they do their biased media outlets.

As do the Lefty Loos.

Nonsensical berating of opponents at all costs to win, rather than actually discussing topics rationally.

Yep, a common tactic from all sides.

I could see how more rational people would be driven away. You can only talk to a wall for so long

Play the ball...not the wall.

[eyeball]

The left has nothing to give but its hollow pity and calls for the "redistribution" of the wealth of others.

Don't forget those of us who are far more interested in the redistribution of power, which is even more important than wealth.

[cybercoma]

The way our society is organized now, wealth is power. That's the problem.

[olp1fan]

Id like to see a protest against fat people

[Guest American Woman]

Now here is something interesting from Urban Dictionary:

3. mapleleafweb

a once-popular Canadian political discussion forum associated with the University of Lethbridge in the bible-belt of the province of Alberta. At first Mapleleafweb strove for intelligent discussion carried out under objective rules. In recent years the rules and tone have been changed to give greater advantage for those promoting rightwing views.

Many people who used to post at mapleleafweb.com have been driven away by the increasing favoritism given to rightwing participants.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=University%20of%20Lethbridge

Has anyone here been "driven away" for anything beyond violating forum rules?

Interesting to note: the definition was posted by by Figleaf23 - and it just so happens that Mapleleafweb had a member going by Figleaf. I say "had" because he was banned. Coincidence? I doubt it.

[BubberMiley]

Interesting to note: the definition was posted by by Figleaf23 - and it just so happens that Mapleleafweb had a member going by Figleaf. I say "had" because he was banned. Coincidence? I doubt it.

I guess that proves he was right.

[jacee]

-________

Edited November 3, 2011 by jacee