Torstar/The Star - Hypocrits Beyond Compare

[Shwa]

The whole point was that the star continually gloats with their articles making fun of Rob Ford every time he did something, including LAYING UNION MEMBERS OFF. Now it's happening to them. That's called what goes around comes around.

So the Star shouldn't report news then?

[wyly]

I know of a lot of people that quit the star for the ugly exagerated, fear mongering things that they kept printing in the paper before during and after the Toronto election. Who wants to pay good money to keep reading that garbage every day.

What goes around comes around star!

quit their jobs?.... highly doubtful, more likely laid off or fired...but quit sounds better for unhappy ex employes

[Archanfel]

So the Star shouldn't report news then?

It should as long as it's profitable for them. The readers, on the other hand, should take their words with a grain of salt. I would actually recommend that to readers of any news agency or commentators.

[Bob]

Do you know how an economy works?

I think you know what the answer to that question is when you're asking someone like cybercoma. He views government force as some sort of benevolent Robin Hood tool. If the government can raise as much money as it wants, whenever it wants, why not tax everyone at a rate of 100%? After all, it's a not-for-profit organization that can do as it pleases, right?

[Bob]

I wasn't aware the Toronto Star was a non-profit corporation that can raise as much money as it wants, whenever it wants by taxing people.

It's comments like these that perpetuate your reputation as one of the most painfully ignorant MLW members when it comes to elementary-level (basically the academic levels taught in most high-schools) economics. It's really sad.

[Bob]

I know enough that comparing a municipality to a private corporation is like comparing apples and oranges. Sure they're both fruit, but the similarities stop there.

Economic fundamentals apply equally to both private and public organizations. We are comparing apples and apples. Both must stand on a viable economic foundation.

[Bob]

So? The OP criticizes The Star for cutting staff by comparing it to staff cuts in the government. What do Southern municpalities going broke have to do with anything? For that matter what does staff cuts in government have to do with anything?

Your bewilderment at the hypocrisy from the Toronto Star clearly illustrated by Keepitsimple's post demonstrates why he is a respected poster and you are more of a court jester on MLW. Keepitsimple's point is clear and to the point, yet you can't grasp it.

[Bob]

So the Star shouldn't report news then?

Treehugger obviously didn't suggest anything remotely close to that. Perhaps you should revert back to making posts composed entirely of emoticons.

[regroup]

Tor Star has every right to take any position they wish on subjects like the performance of Rob Ford. They are under no obligation to be fair or unbiased. The Tor Star is better known as the 'Red' Star in some circles so it should come as no surprise that they would take a Left Wing position. The only control or limitation on their editorial stance is the tolerance of their readers and advertisers.

The Star editorial policy may be the product of idiots but, in this country, everyone has a constitutional right to be an idiot.

[cybercoma]

So everyone on the Left is an idiot? Is that what I'm to take from this?

[Evening Star]

It's definitely hyperbole to say that a government can raise as much money as it wants at any time by taxing people. Still, there is a significant difference between a government that taxes citizens in order to provide public services (usually as a monopoly) and a corporation that provides services for a price in order to turn a profit or go under (usually with other competitors who provide similar services). I don't think it's unreasonable to apply different standards in this area.

Ultimately, post 22 seems like the most relevant:

It is not hypocritical of op/eds to criticize job cuts when the company that the authors work for cuts jobs.

Try not to confuse the company with the columnists who work for the company.

--

Edited for grammar

Edited December 28, 2011 by Evening Star

[cybercoma]

Obviously it was hyperbole. The Laffer Curve is a basic economic concept. Bob seems to think I don't know this. He doesn't seem to understand the difference between exaggeration and idiocy. Of course, he also doesn't seem to acknowledge that The Laffer Curve has been heavily criticized by econmists for years as not actually capturing any sort of empirical reality.

Edited December 28, 2011 by cybercoma

[August1991]

I wasn't aware the Toronto Star was a non-profit corporation that can raise as much money as it wants, whenever it wants by taxing people.

I agree. The Toronto Star must answer to shareholders. But when the Toronto Star advocates that governments should spend taxpayer money to care for the poor (for example), the story is different.

There is a fundamental reason governments tax people but corporations rely on voluntary payments.

----

We can debate the merits of the Toronto Star's editorial opinion of Rob Ford, Stephen Harper or welfare but it is not hypocritical if it lays off workers while arguing that governments should offer better benefits to poor people.

[August1991]

Edited to add that ES, you made essentially the same point before me.

It's definitely hyperbole to say that a government can raise as much money as it wants at any time by taxing people.

Here though, I disagree ES. Canadian (and US) governments are far, far from any limit of taxing people. Why do I say this? Because in North America, if you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail. Buyers of NA goverment bonds know this and hence, NA governments borrow at remarkably low interest rates.

Economic fundamentals apply equally to both private and public organizations. We are comparing apples and apples. Both must stand on a viable economic foundation.

No Bob, different economic fundamentals apply. Why? The government is a fundamentally different institution from you, me, Bill Gates, GM, Intel and The Toronto Star. It's more like a typical marriage.

IOW, if I had to pick a comparison from ordinary life (and to be sexist), the government is like an ex-wife with access to both your credit and debit cards.

The Toronto Star is free to print all kinds of nonsense but, like Intel or Bill Gates, it does not have access to your bank account. Stephen Harper, OTOH, does. And Bob, so does your ex-wife.

Edited December 28, 2011 by August1991

[regroup]

So everyone on the Left is an idiot? Is that what I'm to take from this?

Not everyone on the Left is an idiot. It's just that they know so much that isn't true.

On a more serious note, yes!

[regroup]

It's comments like these that perpetuate your reputation as one of the most painfully ignorant MLW members when it comes to elementary-level (basically the academic levels taught in most high-schools) economics. It's really sad.

Your personal attack is worse. Your post contributes zero to the discussion topic.

[Jack Weber]

Tor Star has every right to take any position they wish on subjects like the performance of Rob Ford. They are under no obligation to be fair or unbiased. The Tor Star is better known as the 'Red' Star in some circles so it should come as no surprise that they would take a Left Wing position. The only control or limitation on their editorial stance is the tolerance of their readers and advertisers.

The Star editorial policy may be the product of idiots but, in this country, everyone has a constitutional right to be an idiot.

I suppose it's time to Call Sun Media the "Black Sun" because of it's right wing bias???

Product of idiots,and all....

[regroup]

I suppose it's time to Call Sun Media the "Black Sun" because of it's right wing bias???

Product of idiots,and all....

You can call them anything you wish - regardless of how misguided.

The Sun also has the right to be as biased as they wish, limited only by the tolerance of their readers and advertisers.