CBC Lockout

[mirror]

Finally, mayor gets transit bucks

To all the folks that pay taxes, the GTA public transit riders give you all a big appreciation, for helping to reduce traffic conjestion, polution, and global warming.

Thanks boys and girls, and thank you also to the Layton New Democrats who brokered the deal to keep the government afloat last Spring.

I feel better already, and so should all of you.

[Renegade]

Dear Renegade,

Let me give you an example of why Canadians like taxes and why they will like them even more if we ever had a natural disaster like what happened in NO.

What if for example we have a massive earthquake and the City of Richmond, BC is under water. Who do you think is going to cover the costs of trying to save the people and rebuild the place if the decision is made to do that. Do you really think the corporate suits, who were born with Fraser Institute memberships, are going to come in and bail us out. Of course not. It will be through our taxes that our governments will provide the assistance. and Canadians will be rejoicing that fact.

The corporations own the media, and are the media's most important clients as well. And every day, day in, and day out, they pound away on their no taxes mantra. But even with that constant propaganda noise they still can't convince a lot of us to believe them. They even want to control our schools because their brainwashing techniques in the media aren't enough.

Try a little experiment.

Go do a survey of Canadians like Ipsos-Reid did and ask them if they want the government to get involved to help the people of Richmond in the above scenario.

Then ask them if they would be pleased to see that their taxes are at work helping with the rescue efforts.

I think you can figure out the answers for yourself.

Cheers,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

mirror, your scenario does not provide much support for your contention that most people enjoy paying taxes.

1. People would agree to pay taxes if they saw fair benefit for themselves for the taxes they pay. In the situation you describe it is very much like insurance, where people would agree to pay becaue they thought that the benefit may also apply to them if the event occured. But what if there was more context around the scenario. Suppose only Richmond and its surrounding community were in the earthquake zone, and the taxes for relief were only restricted to earthquake relief.

Do you think the rest of the country would be as ready to be taxed to support a fund for which they woudl see no benefit?

2. Your original statement was that most people enjoy paying taxes. You have painted a scenario which only depicts one benefit for the tax they pay. Even if people agree that they would contribute to the tax because they would like to enjoy the disaster relief benefit, it doesn't mean the enjoy paying all the other taxes which fund programs for which they may see no or very little benefit (eg CBC)

3. The scenario you describe doesn't include costs. If I asked someone "Would you agree to have 90% of your income taxed so that you may be provided with disaster relief in case of an earthquake?" He/she is more than likely to say "I'll take my chances with the earthquake".

My point is that in a cost/benefit analysis which most taxpayers do in their head, they have concluded that overall, they don't get the benefit for which they pay, as evidenced by the results of the survey I posted.

[Renegade]

Dear renegade

Here is an article you may enjoy reading about how important it is for us to have very good taxation system.

As New Orleans reels, editorials demonize tax-funded government.

And here is a letter written in response. Perhaps you could reflect on the comments of a successful corporate guru Warren Buffet:

Michael raises an interesting item about the relationship between taxes and the common good. In early May of this year I happened to be watching Lou Dobbs interview with Warren Buffet, who is arguably one of the wealthiest men in America. Mr. Dobbs asked Mr. Buffet if wealthy americans and corporations are paying enough in taxes. Mr. Buffet without missing a beat said that US Corporations and wealthy Americans were UNDERTAXED substantially.

For those of us who occassionally listen to the musings of the Fraser Institute, the Canadian Taxpayers Foundation and their handmaiden, Michael Campbell this must be a shocking revelation. They have for years said Canadians are overtaxed and that our tax system/rates should mirror the US.

I have to wonder if more likely the scenario is that we are taxed at or near the right levels and perhaps the US needs to look to Canada for guidance on what their taxes should be. While I would certainly agree there is room for some reductions in taxes but not the massive levels the aforementioned individuals and associations would like to see.

Clearly the Feds in Canada have figured out that if you reduce your overall debt load, you can increase your programme spending and reduce tax loads over time. Of course, governments are indeed loathe to reduce taxes unless forced to.

Cheers,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

mirror, you orginally stated that most people enjoyed paying taxes, now your statement and post indiate that taxes are necessary. I never disputed that taxes are necessary, only disputed that people enjoy paying them. For most people auto insurance is necessary, but no one I know enjoys paying them. When the cost of auto insurance goes beyond the percieved value is of that insurance, then people are very resentful of the insurance company, despite the fact that the continue to buy insurance. The situation is the same with taxes. People do it because they are forced to. Most would concede that taxation is necessary. Most would say that they are taxed too highly for the benefits they get.

Warren Buffet is entitled to his opinion, and his reputation is as an investor not as a philosopher on social issues. If Buffet feels strongly that corporations and the wealthy are undertaxed, why is he not acting as a role model for his beliefs and making the corporations he controls, or himself individually, voluntarily paying more tax?

I'll tell you why, because the investors who support his company, would abandon him in droves. He may feel tlhat way personally, but I highly doubt he is representative of the investors who fuel his corporation.

[Renegade]

Clearly the Feds in Canada have figured out that if you reduce your overall debt load, you can increase your programme spending and reduce tax loads over time. Of course, governments are indeed loathe to reduce taxes unless forced to.

It is always interesting how much of the political left points to reduced debt loads as a beneficial thing, when they fought tooth and nail against paying down the debt and to increase social spending. They were also very much responsible for the social spending mentality which was prevalent in the 60's, 70's, and 80's which led to the debt in the first place.

[Montgomery Burns]

Mirror:

Yes actually I, and most of the rest of the planet, who had access to TV, saw the Mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, stay and try and save his people, and basically get no assistance from the Bush administration...

You mean no assistance from Governor Blanco - who was sitting safely in Baton Rouge. You do realize that the feds can't run in until they are asked by the state. And Mayor Nagin had a chance to help his people by implementing city rules and getting those hundreds of buses in use to evacuate the poor. Instead he did nothing but Blame Bush!

FYI, over the 5 years of the Bush Administration, Louisiana has received far more money for Corps Civil Works Projects than any other state; about $1.9 billion. California is a distant second at about $1.4 billion.

until Nagin shamed them on national TV into cutting their vacations short, and stopping to go to ball games and shopping for $1,000. shoes.

Shamed them into cutting their vacations short? Who's "them" who were on vacation?

And since when did the Secretary of State's duties become disaster relief?

Strange you missed that part of the disaster. What's that called again? Oh yea, Selective Memory Syndrome.

Selective Memory Syndrome, indeed.

And concerning the state government bizarre, you missed the following message as well which says Canadians were there helping 5 days before the US Army arrived.

Good for Canada. However a search and rescue team reached one city 5 days before the US Army did. But the Louisiana Senator is a politician on a mission to discredit the federal govt's response and stick up for Louisiana’s response.

Btw, the US Army is not the first responders in any emergency, nor is FEMA. It is the local police and the LA National Guard (which Blanco dithered over), which is under the control of the (Democratic Party) state Governor.

I forgot, Secretary of Defence Rumsfiled was in San Diego at a ball game. That explains it. Perhaps you had better go get that Selective Memory Syndrome checked out.

The Secretary of Defense is in charge of disaster relief?

[mirror]

Dear Renegade

Those blanket statements you use to try and tar this group or that group are useless and without substance.

Unless one is an historian, quite frankly who cares how badly the right winger Mulroney screwed up, who had the biggest debts of all btw, or what Tuudeau did, or what a mess Mike Harris, whose policies just got trashed by the business community, made in Ontario.

At one time all parties use to run deficits, now that is no longer de rigueur.

Let's live in today's world.

The federal government has had surpluses for the past now more than 10 years, isn't it, and the debt is slowly being reduced. Financially what more could one wish for? Unless we see signs of an inpending recession I'm sure that Goodale will be offering some kind of a minor tax break just before we go to the polls in March, 2006.

But if you don't want to pay taxes you had better leave Canada because they are here to stay.

Cheers,

[Montgomery Burns]

Lockout blogs written by CBC employees reveals their true colors

1) Name:J.T.

Location:Toronto, Canada

Writer and producer living in Parkdale (Toronto)

Saturday, September 03, 2005

Kayne For President

You've probably heard about his by now. If not, check out the footage of Kayne West and actor Mike Myers during a Red Cross telethon for Hurricane Katrina victims. Pay close attention to Myers as he tries to remain composed during Kayne's political freestyling.

While he struggles to make his point, you have to give Kayne credit for standing up and saying what the media and many politicans have been saying all this week: "George Bush does not care about black people."

posted by J.T. at 5:07 PM http://parkdalepictures.blogspot.com/2005/...-president.html

The unedited video of West telling the truth that the workers at CBC have been gagged from telling.

2) CBC radio reporter Jennifer Quesnel from Regina:

My gold star today goes to Bill Doskoch , for a wonderful round-up and news story excerpts . They detail the way Hurricane Katrina proved the U.S. federal government lies . And, the way reporters have finally found the guts to expose those lies.  Read Doskoch's blog and bookmark it. It kicks butt.

Who's Bill Doskoch?

At his site he has "News sites i can't live without" which included the hard-left:

Rabble.ca http://www.rabble.ca

Global Beat http://www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/

Democracy Now! http://www.democracynow.org/

Common Dreams http://www.commondreams.org/

Truthout http://www.truthout.org/index.htm

3) Tania in Toronto actually led off her blog with a link to propagandist and icon of the loony fringe of the left in the U.S., Michael Moore.

4) Mark, a researcher in Halifax, linked to a Hurricane Katrina Bush-bashing article by columnist and cartoonist Ted Rall. Not familiar with Ted Rall? You must have missed his cartoon where Condoleezza Rice proclaims herself Bush's "HOUSE NIGGA." A black man demands that Rice "HAND OVER HER HAIR STRAIGHTENER." The man's t-shirt reads "YOU'RE NOT WHITE, STUPID." The caption reads "SENT TO INNER-CITY RACIAL RE-EDUCATION CAMP." It was a real knee-slapper among the Michael Moore crowd.

After Ronald Reagan's death, Rall wrote that Reagan was in hell ""turning crispy brown right about now." He also called the war in Afghanistan "genocide" perpetrated to build an imaginary oil pipeline.

Music to a true CBC'ers ears.

5) John, a contract producer in Vancouver, had this to say about health care:

It pisses me off no end to hear people who would see us shift over to an American-style system. Pardon me for being blunt, but are they fucking nuts? I can only imagine what it would be like to be one of the millions of Americans without benefits.

If our healthcare system needs fixing, here is the solution: let's all pay a bit more in taxes.

I know the usual assholes, http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/, will whine about what a pain in the ass that is, but when they get sick, they can take comfort in the fact that it was money well spent.

6) And CBC DRONE from Toronto had this to say:

... we tell them it's a story about how a group of fanatical managers hijacked a national institution, and wasted hundreds of millions of dollars trying to impose a bizarre neo-con cult of management on their employees...

Now, let's see:

Anti-American/President Bush? Check

Anti-business? Check

Anti-Conservative/Rightwing? Check

Would you expect fair and balanced reporting from this bunch?

Yet, on cbcunlocked.com, we see this statement at the top of the page:

Canadian news and information from the people you know and trust.

This news, information and entertainment site is a free public service for Canadians, developed by locked-out employees of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. These talented journalists and performers continue to be guided by the principles of honest journalism, intelligent entertainment and public responsibility. The news on this site will not be updated on weekends.

Honest journalism?

There's more at the link I posted. It's a fascinating look at the mindset of the CBC. Check out their hiliarious take on the Globe and Mail poll asking if Canada needs the CBC. They refer to the people who voted no as Conservative Party members and encouraged their readers to "Vote yes for public broadcasting!!!!!!" (6 exclamation marks means it's very important)

Is it any wonder that Canadian conservatives resent being forced to pay for this state-run Soviet-style propaganda machine?

[cybercoma]

Finally, mayor gets transit bucks

To all the folks that pay taxes, the GTA public transit riders give you all a big appreciation, for helping to reduce traffic conjestion, polution, and global warming.

Thanks boys and girls, and thank you also to the Layton New Democrats who brokered the deal to keep the government afloat last Spring.

I feel better already, and so should all of you. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm glad NATIONAL taxes went to pay for a specific city's transit system.

Meanwhile, Windsor can't get a damn thing to improve the border which handles 27% of our trade with the US.

[cybercoma]

Clearly the Feds in Canada have figured out that if you reduce your overall debt load, you can increase your programme spending and reduce tax loads over time. Of course, governments are indeed loathe to reduce taxes unless forced to.

It is always interesting how much of the political left points to reduced debt loads as a beneficial thing, when they fought tooth and nail against paying down the debt and to increase social spending. They were also very much responsible for the social spending mentality which was prevalent in the 60's, 70's, and 80's which led to the debt in the first place.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paying down the debt is just an excuse to increase taxes. If I make $2.75 million per year and I buy a $500,000 house and take out a mortgage, it's not nearly as bad as buying a $500,000 home on a $20,000 per year income. Debt, sometimes, is a necessity.

[apollo19]

I'm glad NATIONAL taxes went to pay for a specific city's transit system.

Meanwhile, Windsor can't get a damn thing to improve the border which handles 27% of our trade with the US.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its all just political point scoring -- spend the money where the votes are, and screw the rest.

[rbacon]

Hopefully the CBC is shutdown and saves the overtaxed workers of Canada 1.4B a year in tax dollars. I think those that like CBC should fund it directly themselves by private subscription.

[mirror]

Don't worry the CBC will be back up and running shortly. The Liberals need it as part of their marketing strategy.

[B. Max]

The cbc should be sold off. Period.

[Montgomery Burns]

Tory senator hopes for long CBC lockout

Ottawa — A high-profile Tory senator says she hopes thousands of CBC workers remain locked out for months because she doesn’t want them covering the next federal election.  Marjory LeBreton — a former top aide to Brian Mulroney who still occasionally acts as a spokeswoman for the ex-prime minister — said the CBC is biased in favour of the Liberals and New Democrats.

Congratulations to Marjory LeBreton for winning today's No Shit Sherlock™ award.

In a letter to an Ottawa newspaper, she cited poll numbers that suggested NDP and Liberal supporters missed regular CBC coverage the most.

“The lockout has deprived them of their biggest cheerleaders on the national scene,” Ms. LeBreton wrote in a letter published in the Sept. 12 edition of the Hill Times newspaper.

In other news, researchers have concluded that the Artic is cold.

“As far as I am concerned, I hope it takes months to settle the CBC lockout.

Don't be so nice, Marjory. I hope it takes years.

“The thought of going through a national election campaign inconveniencing those Liberal and NDP supporters who rely on the CBC is truly something to look forward to.”

RIGHTWING FAUX NEWS-LOVING HATEMONGER!!!!

[Renegade]

Dear Renegade

Those blanket statements you use to try and tar this group or that group are useless and without substance.

Unless one is an historian, quite frankly who cares how badly the right winger Mulroney screwed up, who had the biggest debts of all btw, or what Tuudeau did, or what a mess Mike Harris, whose policies just got trashed by the business community, made in Ontario.

At one time all parties use to run deficits, now that is no longer de rigueur.

Let's live in today's world.

The federal government has had surpluses for the past now more than 10 years, isn't it, and the debt is slowly being reduced. Financially what more could one wish for? Unless we see signs of an inpending recession I'm sure that Goodale will be offering some kind of a minor tax break just before we go to the polls in March, 2006.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

mirror you would do well to heed the words of George Santayana "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Excessive spending policies by governments of mulitple parties got the country into massive debt for which we paid, and continue to pay a huge price. Let's not make the same mistakes again.

But if you don't want to pay taxes you had better leave Canada because they are here to stay.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What I don't like is excessive taxation. I'm fine with taxes I consider fair. How about instead of abandoning ship, I just stay here and try to change the system.

[Renegade]

Paying down the debt is just an excuse to increase taxes.  If I make $2.75 million per year and I buy a $500,000 house and take out a mortgage, it's not nearly as bad as buying a $500,000 home on a $20,000 per year income.  Debt, sometimes, is a necessity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

cybercoma, for most of us, we did not have the choice to go into debt or to choose the level of our debt. We inherited the debt our predecessors foolishly incurred. So now that we have the debt, even if we only earn $20,000, we would be wise to continue to pay it down. What is the alternative, wait indefinately until we earn more and continue to pay interest on the debt?

We are in a fortunate situation today that interest payments are relatively low, the economy has been expanding and we have made some headway in paying down the debt. Interest rates and the economy won't always be this favourable to paying down the debt.

[Riverwind]

Hopefully the CBC is shutdown and saves the overtaxed workers of Canada 1.4B a year in tax dollars. I think those that like CBC should fund it directly themselves by private subscription.

I would say the same for people how donate money to a church. Why should my tax money finance social clubs for other people. While we are at, I would like to see the cost of policing the prohibition on Marijuana paid entirely by people who believe that the drug should be illegal.

The gov't pays for many things that do not directly benefit every taxpayer so it is absurd to use that logic to call for an end to services the you do not personally use.

[Argus]

Hopefully the CBC is shutdown and saves the overtaxed workers of Canada 1.4B a year in tax dollars. I think those that like CBC should fund it directly themselves by private subscription.

I would say the same for people how donate money to a church. Why should my tax money finance social clubs for other people.

Not the same thing. You're talking direct funding on the one hand vs tax exemption on the other. How much do you think you'd get off a church, anyway? We only tax profits. If there are no profits, then church's would pay no taxes. As for the writeoffs for contributors to a church, we write those off for the same reason we do any other charity, in the presumption that money will be used for good works. And by and large, more of that money IS used for good works with churches than other charities, which often spend from 50%-90% of their money on fund drives. You don't want churches to run food kitchens or take in the homeless?

The gov't pays for many things that do not directly benefit every taxpayer so it is absurd to use that logic to call for an end to services the you do not personally use.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Government should pay only for what is necessary. A broadcaster which caters largely to an elitist audience anyway is not necessary. There are means available now where you can subscribe to the CBC and voluntarily pay for the entertainment you receive - which is what it is, after all, entertainment. I pay quite a bit for the cable channels I get. I don't suggest anyone else should fund them for me.

[Riverwind]

Government should pay only for what is necessary. A broadcaster which caters largely to an elitist audience anyway is not necessary. There are means available now where you can subscribe to the CBC and voluntarily pay for the entertainment you receive - which is what it is, after all, entertainment. I pay quite a bit for the cable channels I get. I don't suggest anyone else should fund them for me.

CBC is the only media available in many rural communities (My relatives in Manitoba have limited access to TV news because of the CBC strike). CBC is also the only radio station in Vancouver that has decent news coverage (the other news channel just rehashes headlines between advertisements).

The biggest weakness in your argument is the fact that PBS, NPR and the BBC are all public networks paid for by taxpayers - therefore it is rediculous to think that a non-commercial broadcaster could survive in a small market like Canada if similar broadcasters in much larger markets rely on gov't cash.

[Canuck E Stan]

"CBC is the only media available in many rural communities (My relatives in Manitoba have limited access to TV news because of the CBC strike). CBC is also the only radio station in Vancouver that has decent news coverage (the other news channel just rehashes headlines between advertisements)."

There are more choices today for TV and radio than ever before.You and your relatives just like CBC and that has nothing to do with the availability of news on TV or radio for you to watch or listen to.

[Riverwind]

There are more choices today for TV and radio than ever before.You and your relatives just like CBC and that has nothing to do with the availability of news on TV or radio for you to watch or listen to.

I have choices since I spend more of my day on a computer connected to the internet. That is not the case for many people in rural areas. In any case, I would not be adverse to paying money for access to CBC radio, however, the service cannot exist without gov't subsidies just like NPR and PBS cannot exist in the states without gov't subsidies.

[Canuck E Stan]

Spar,

For your interest, I am not a fan of pay cable or satellite TV. I refuse to pay for trash in my home. A couple of months back I read about FTA(free to air) and as luck would have it a co-worker has the system and is going to set me up with a similar receiver. This not piracy of air waves or costly(except for the receiver and the dish).Cost is about $250. and allows you to receive free to air stations from a satellite and lots of them. Your rural relatives would probably enjoy the quality reception to boot.

How much of a subsidy does NPR or PBS get if they have to make pledge drives 3 or 4 times a year.I for one would rather this than handing over a billion dollars to Mother Corp.

[mirror]

I think a lot of the underlying reason that some folks are not supportive of the CBC is because of their slant covering political news. And I think they have a valid criticism, as from my observations the CBC political news area seems to be wedded to the Liberals. I think they need to do some improvements in that area. The CBC does though have a mandate. At one time I believe national unity was part of that mandate, but I am not sure if it is any longer the case. Also the Hinterlands as kimmy would say, and that Sparhawk mentioned, need a connection to our Canadian mosiac. As Toro had as his signature for a while, "Canada is a country, not a sector", so you cannot always treat it like a balance sheet item.

But I am sure if you ask a lot of the people who say they do not like the CBC, they will tell you they enjoy "Hockey Nite in Canada" with Don Cherry.

[Riverwind]

How much of a subsidy does NPR or PBS get if they have to  make pledge drives 3 or 4 times a year.I for one would rather this than handing over a billion dollars to Mother Corp.

http://www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/aboutpbs_corp.html

PBS' operating revenue in fiscal year 2004 was $333 million. Leading sources of revenue included: station assessments (47%); CPB and federal grants (24%); royalties, license fees, satellite services and investment income (14%) and educational product sales (12%).

The NPR budget appears to be similar (~$300 million) with about 20% comming from gov't grants. However, they don't make it as clear exactly what percentage comes from the gov't.

You can contrast these numbers with CBC which has a total budget of 1.3 billion of which only 67% comes from the government (875 million). With a population only 1/10 th of the US you would expect that CBC could only get 1/10th of the money from private donations but have to pay the same costs to produce the same quality of programming. Which I why I think it is not reasonable to expect that CBC could survive solely on private donations.

[August1991]

We inherited the debt our predecessors foolishly incurred. So now that we have the debt, even if we only earn $20,000, we would be wise to continue to pay it down. What is the alternative, wait indefinately until we earn more and continue to pay interest on the debt?

Wait and second here, Renegade. Your predecessors got the benefit of borrowing. If your predecessors didn't leave anything to you, don't blame cybercoma for that. And by the way, the world as a whole is a heck of a lot richer now than it was even 30 years ago. So if you personally feel burdened by debt, then it must be that others of your generation have got even more than you. You should have picked your parents better.

I would say the same for people how donate money to a church. Why should my tax money finance social clubs for other people. While we are at, I would like to see the cost of policing the prohibition on Marijuana paid entirely by people who believe that the drug should be illegal.

The gov't pays for many things that do not directly benefit every taxpayer so it is absurd to use that logic to call for an end to services the you do not personally use.

A very, very, very good point Sparhawk. Governments are typically involved in things that each of us values differently - I could even argue that this is the problem of government..

For your interest, I am not a fan of pay cable or satellite TV. I refuse to pay for trash in my home....   How much of a subsidy does NPR or PBS get if they have to make pledge drives 3 or 4 times a year.I for one would rather this than handing over a billion dollars to Mother Corp.

Would you agree to public subsidies based on audited audience share? (And how is that different from paying a monthly subscription fee for channels you like?)

I think a lot of the underlying reason that some folks are not supportive of the CBC is because of their slant covering political news. And I think they have a valid criticism, as from my observations the CBC political news area seems to be wedded to the Liberals.

Mirror, I think you have touched the main point. The principle of state-financed TV or radio is not the problem - it is the quality of the product people dislike. (Hugo would argue that State-financing leads inevitably to bad quality but I disagree.)

But I disagree, Mirror, that the CBC is too Liberal. The CBC's problem is that it is too NDP. I am beginning to wonder if the Liberals want this lock-out to last because it helps them in their effort to attract the soft NDP voters.