Ontario

[silver72]

Is there an election coming very soon? If so, who do you think would do a better job looking after the debt, but also the people of Ontario. Hudak, seems to want to be a Harper-like politician, coming down hard on unions, freezing pay cheque of provincial workers, which I hope includes , himself It feels like a re-born of the Harris government He also, wants to stop all wind turbines, but if the contracts are signed that penalty on those could reach 500 million, just like the gas-hydro plants.On the other side, the NDP. The NDP leader seems to know what Ontarian want or need, that being tax credit to businesses who hire, reduce hydro rates, car insurance. etc. As far as the Liberals, I don't think they stand chance but anything can happen in an election. So what's the Pro and the Cons of the parties, in your view?

[Patton74]

Somebody once said "Choosing who to vote for is like going into a sex shop and trying to figure out which dildo will hurt the least"

Enough has been said about the Liberals. They are tired and incompetent.

The NDP will do all these wonderful things and raise taxes on anybody they feel can afford it and that is everybody NOT on welfare.

I disagree with the wind turbine contract issue because I live in a town in the middle of anti wind turbine movement and they have a really good argument against it. Truth be told if this was not a government project it would have been shut down with all the arguments of animal rights and health complaints.

I do not like Hudak and he needs replaced as much as the Liberals do but I fear he is the less of the evils and that is a terriable state of affairs for the people of this province.

We deserve better

[NikoD]

I agree that the Liberals are tired, they need to be reborn. If an election was held, though most polls have them close to Hudak; they won't win. I believe the parties are just playing hardball to act like they want an election, but costing the tax payers 90 million for an election isn't fiscally responsible.

Tim Hudak is planing on bringing back the "Harris Revolution"; downloading costs to the municipalities, slashing costs and other blunders of the former Conservative government. They may help the economy, but the consequences that come with their plan is quite large.

Andrea Horwath and the NDP should just agree with the budget. They get all they want and more. It would be fiscally responsible, and if they want to listen to Ontarians, they should agree to the budget. With the NDP, our deficit will grow larger, and they will spend more than they receive. They may do what Ontarians want, but it comes at a price.

[The_Squid]

Choosing who to vote for is like going into a sex shop and trying to figure out which dildo will hurt the least

Maybe you should try size small. ??

[Guest Kenneth]

An election would solve nothing - the Province has been effectively destroyed. I wouldn't be surprised if Ibbitson's next book is titled "Ontario No More". The "people" of the province - like most parts of the country - are hopelessly brainwashed into supporting/voting one of the three main parties. It would be great if Ontarians would wake up and vote for a real alternative, do something "radical" to really wake up the main parties. But Ontarians are overly concerned with maintaining the "status quo" and for that they are now paying quite dearly.

[Boges]

As said in another thread, I think, the issue that'll define the Ontario Liberals will be how they choose to ding the population for additional transit funding.

If they NDP still chooses to prop up the government if they choose to add to the Gas Tax, HST or tolling the 401 they'd be branded as hypocrites. How can a party demand a reduction in Auto Insurance but allow the population to be dinged with some of these revenue tools.

Edited May 6, 2013 by Boges

[scribblet]

Hudak won't support the budget because of the major scandals, e-health, Ornge and the gas plant fiasco, of which Wynne was involved in at least one (gas plant). The Liberals have caved to the NDP demands so there's no reason for the NDP to not approve the budget.

The budget is big on spending adding billions to the deficit, and short on details of the 'reviews' on cuts and tax increases, after the budget is passed of course.

How can the gov't force insurance companies to reduce their rates, and if they do, what is to stop them from simply reducing benefits ?

Edited May 6, 2013 by scribblet

[Boges]

Hudak won't support the budget because of the major scandals, e-health,

How can the gov't force insurance companies to reduce their rates, and if they do, what is to stop them from simply reducing benefits ?

That's what they did a few years ago. Benefits were slashed because the companies said the couldn't hold the line on rates at the previous levels of minimum coverage.

There's a percentage of profit built into auto insurance. The government is saying companies simply have to take less of it. In theory of course.

[guyser]

How can the gov't force insurance companies to reduce their rates, and if they do, what is to stop them from simply reducing benefits ?

The govt has to approve all increases in rates.

Rates are filed to FISCO and approved or denied.

[guyser]

That's what they did a few years ago. Benefits were slashed because the companies said the couldn't hold the line on rates at the previous levels of minimum coverage.

There's a percentage of profit built into auto insurance. The government is saying companies simply have to take less of it. In theory of course.

The previous levels were ripe for abuse, took the lawyers and re-had house about 5 years to find the flaws. The reduction to capped rates for soft tissue injury were taken to alleviate the raping by the injury specialists.

The pendulum swung too far back, soon to meet in the middle.

There is virtually no profit for auto, although the new lower levels for AB claims will help that.

Auto profit comes through investment, and typically claims comes in at the hundred % to 103% . Thats a loss.

[margrace]

We got our hydro bill the other day, before the liberals took over we were paying $700 a month to a private company that we had not signed for. The liberals forced that company to turn our hydro over to hydro 1, now and for the last few years our winter months never go over $250

Mr. Ford wants the NDP to force an election, orders from his boss in Ottawa I guess

[Boges]

We got our hydro bill the other day, before the liberals took over we were paying $700 a month to a private company that we had not signed for. The liberals forced that company to turn our hydro over to hydro 1, now and for the last few years our winter months never go over $250

Mr. Ford wants the NDP to force an election, orders from his boss in Ottawa I guess

Well private energy providers are definitely looking to scam you. Sign up with them, you'll certainly see your bill rise.

But the Liberals Green Energy Policy has steadily raised the price of electricity in this province, almost to a point of making Ontario less competitive with other areas of North America.

I'm not all that upset with Smart Meters but the Green Energy policy has been shown to be an utter scam that just makes us feel better.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Boges

[Keepitsimple]

Andrea Horwath had the perfect opportunity to go on the offensive- but she hasn't. She should be screaming to high heaven about the moral dillemna she faces - if she chooses a reasonable BUDGET for Ontarians - one that she can claim she inspired.....then she puts back into power a tired, corrupt government who has continually lied to Ontarians. If she does that, she can have it both ways.... if she supports the budget she can go on record as saying she did it to avoid the cost of the election and try to get Ontario moving - while at the same time voicing her utter disdain for the government, promising to hold them to account and keep their promises - and promising that the Liberals will be on a very short leash. If she votes against it, she can claim that in spite of what the Liberals have agreed to, its become clear that Ontarians want an end to the lying and corruption - and the fact that the Liberals have broken so many promises - they simply cannot be trusted - regardless of what they've agreed to. Start shouting Andrea.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Keepitsimple

[PIK]

Don't blame harris ,blame the idiot libs and NDP who force the harris's on us. If tyhey did their jobs , the we would not need the harris's to clean up. Whodat actually has a plan this time.

[NikoD]

Voting for Hudak is voting for an Harris government. Privatizing energy, schools, hospitals, downloading costs to municipalities which raises our property taxes. Make the rich, richer and the poor, poorer. Hudak's plan was taken right from Mike Harris.

[margrace]

Yep that's what we need another Harris gov't to put our local taxes through the roof

[Boges]

Anyone have a cite for that? Hudak hasn't said he'll download services. Actually to the contrary, he's said he wants GO to take over regional transit operations.

[Fletch 27]

That's a heck of a lot better and wiser than "MetroLinx"!

Anyone have a cite for that? Hudak hasn't said he'll download services. Actually to the contrary, he's said he wants GO to take over regional transit operations.

[scribblet]

Anyone have a cite for that? Hudak hasn't said he'll download services. Actually to the contrary, he's said he wants GO to take over regional transit operations.

I don't think there is one, I haven't read anywhere that Hudak will do that, One thing he talks about is introducing income splitting which is a good move IMO. He has also said that he will scale scale back the push toward green energy, while lowering homeowners' hydro bills. We do need to look at green energy but there needs to be a moratorium on wind turbines until the gov't health report comes out.

It's the Liberals not the previous Harris gov't who've been responsible for rising costs and green energy scams. We can thank McGuinty for the excessive hydro bills, not just from the new meters but from his Green Energy Act which takes away the rights of municipalities, for one thing. He also extended the debt retirement charge for 6 years which was supposed to be paid off last year. His choice to move to the HST also raised hydro bills, that and other tax increases are raping our wallets.

[CliffStir]

So they force green energy on us. increasing the cost of hydro.

They drive businesses out of the province, reducing the need for the more expensive hydro.

resulting in an excess of hydro.

So we sell it at a loss to the USA.

Proof that governments cannot get anything right at all.

Google the word clusterf*ck and it takes you to the Liberal Party's website.

They get raises in the thousands and we all get to pay the tab.

It's got to end!

[Patton74]

I would love a Harris light.

Shock the system and scare the hell out of the unions.

It was a Chretien that cut the transfer to the provinces but history has left that out.

[Argus]

Voting for Hudak is voting for an Harris government. Privatizing energy, schools, hospitals, downloading costs to municipalities which raises our property taxes. Make the rich, richer and the poor, poorer. Hudak's plan was taken right from Mike Harris.

Someone has to make hard decisions. It really all boils down to that. We can't keep borrowing money. So far, the liberals have shown themselves capable only of spending more money. The NDP of course, are even worse. I also don't like Hudak, but someone has to cut back, and yes, cutting back means hurting some people. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has never been able to distinguish between 'want' and 'need'.

[HurtinOntario]

Someone has to make hard decisions. It really all boils down to that. We can't keep borrowing money. So far, the liberals have shown themselves capable only of spending more money. The NDP of course, are even worse. I also don't like Hudak, but someone has to cut back, and yes, cutting back means hurting some people. Unfortunately, the Liberal government has never been able to distinguish between 'want' and 'need'.

Unfortunately the Liberals and PCs want to hurt the poor. That someone who gets hurt are the poor and disabled in this province. They both are planning to cut back on what the disabled poor get per month in disability allowance. They want to do this so more money can flow upward to the richest people.

The richest people would like nothing more than to have the disabled poor people go away and die so they wouldn't have to pay them anymore monthly benefits. Its a terrible situation.

[Argus]

Unfortunately the Liberals and PCs want to hurt the poor. That someone who gets hurt are the poor and disabled in this province. They both are planning to cut back on what the disabled poor get per month in disability allowance. They want to do this so more money can flow upward to the richest people.

The richest people would like nothing more than to have the disabled poor people go away and die so they wouldn't have to pay them anymore monthly benefits. Its a terrible situation.

Aside from basic services like the police, highways, etc., almost everything the province spends money on is designed to help people, generally poorer people and sick/disabled people. That means any cutbacks are going to hurt the vulnerable. But there aren't a lot of alternatives. The province's taxes are already higher than in most other provinces, and there isn't any way to cut the fat pay raises given over the years to medical, educational and public service workers. Nor can we get back the billions spent on green energy, and the more billions we will be spending in coming years. What does that leave but cutting programs?

Edited May 19, 2013 by Argus

[jacee]

Aside from basic services like the police, highways, etc., almost everything the province spends money on is designed to help people, generally poorer people and sick/disabled people. That means any cutbacks are going to hurt the vulnerable. But there aren't a lot of alternatives. The province's taxes are already higher than in most other provinces, and there isn't any way to cut the fat pay raises given over the years to medical, educational and public service workers. Nor can we get back the billions spent on green energy, and the more billions we will be spending in coming years.

What does that leave but cutting programs?

That's 'oldthink': We know now that cutting spending causes recessions and interferes with recovery.

Squeezed to death: Why austerity may be wrecking the recovery

These days, Gross warns that the biggest problem facing Western economies isnt the spectre of rising government debt, but that the sweeping budget cuts countries are using to try to repair their balance sheets are killing investor confidence. Governments have erred in terms of believing that austerity, fiscal austerity in the short-term, is the way to produce real growth, Gross told the Financial Times last month. It is not. Youve got to spend money.

Gross is part of a growing chorus of opposition to the fiscal straitjacket being imposed on many European countries in the aftermath of the financial crisis. When they were first embraced, such policies seemed like a logical solution to the reckless spending that drove half of Europe to the brink of collapse, a necessary dose of tough medicine to clear the way for future growth. But critics argue that years of tax hikes and spending cuts have instead left countries awash in unemployment, stagnant growth and mounting debt.

...

Recessions can hurt, they write,

but austerity kills.

Think about it:

If we cut back on education, under-educated youth require social supports and don't become taxpayers, perpetuating budget deficits.

That's only one example. There are many undesirable economic outcomes from failing to provide sufficient input to develop and support our human resources.

Edited May 19, 2013 by jacee