CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 40 minutes ago, eyeball said: How? Put the PMO in charge of the CBC's programming apparently. LMAO! It is the corporation's board of directors that determines how the funding it receives is spent. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-defund-cbc-change-law-1.6810434 "I'm not sure politicians really want to go down the [road of] ... 'We are going to give francophones better service with public money than we're going to give anglophones,"' he said. Menzies added that while he believes changes should be made to the CBC, "it's a lot more complicated than people think." "Preferring one piece of it over another piece, particularly linguistically, I think that opens a door you probably don't really want to open." Ummmm - you realize that's not a polievre quote right? So you're quoting someone who's not pierre to support your position on pierre that he never took? Well - as shakespeare was once quoted as saying - "oohhhhkkaaayyyyyyy...." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 (edited) 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: Ummmm - you realize that's not a polievre quote right? Yes that's right, it's a former vice-chair of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission explaining that PP is misinformed because he doesn't know what he's talking about. BTW did you know that Quebec gets 40% of CBC's funding? I didn't know that. I bet PP knew. Edited March 14 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 3 minutes ago, eyeball said: Yes that's right, it's a former vice-chair of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission explaining that PP is misinformed because he doesn't know what he's talking about. Ahhh - so the guys that PP wants to defund are of the opinion that they shouldn't be defunded. Shocking. What a whistle blower. And this is your 'smoking gun' is it. Well. I think we can all see why you didn't go into law as a career. But thanks for playing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 (edited) 20 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Ahhh - so the guys that PP wants to defund are of the opinion that they shouldn't be defunded. No they're of the opinion PP will have to change the law so he can produce news programming for Quebec but not the ROC. The current law allows him to cut funding to the CBC but it will have to be changed so he can do what you said - run a little news service that's exclusive to Quebec. Sort of the way you say Trudeau can change a law and do whatever he feels like. Seems like common sense. I'm sure his base will get it. Edited March 14 by eyeball 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaétan Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 (edited) Poilievre is against a ceasefire in Gaza so we see he's a bad person despite of what he looks like Edited March 14 by Gaétan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 9 hours ago, eyeball said: No they're of the opinion PP will have to change the law so he can produce news programming for Quebec but not the ROC. Well they're wrong entirely and that should be quite obvious, prime ministers provide special funding for specific provinces all the time ESPECIALLY quebec -but as a prime minister do you think he would have the power to change laws if he needed to? Hmmm? Quote The current law allows him to cut funding to the CBC but it will have to be changed so he can do what you said - run a little news service that's exclusive to Quebec. Nope - transfer that show's ownership to quebec and let them run it and just give cash. But - regardless he CAN actually change the law if he has to so what's the issue. Your entire argument: "AS PRIME MINISTER HE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE A LAW AND NO PRIME MINISTER HAS THE POWER TO CHANGE LAWS"! LOL - you're an 1diot. He won't have to change a law, and if he does he can. So not an issue. Quote Sort of the way you say Trudeau can change a law and do whatever he feels like. And in fact did. In fact - that's pretty much what gov'ts do - pass laws and acts. And his base will just be happy to see the end of the cbc, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 47 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Well they're wrong entirely and that should be quite obvious Entirely wrong? It should be obvious why a CRTC vice chairman's assessment of the situation carries a lot more weight than yours. 56 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Nope - transfer that show's ownership to quebec and let them run it and just give cash. But - regardless he CAN actually change the law if he has to so what's the issue. His base of support. By rights they should be demanding PP sell the Francophone portion of the CBC to Quebec if they want it and leave it to them provide their own funding. 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: Your entire argument: "AS PRIME MINISTER HE WOULD HAVE TO CHANGE A LAW AND NO PRIME MINISTER HAS THE POWER TO CHANGE LAWS"! LOL - you're an 1diot. No it's isn't, it's perfectly clear that PP can do what you're suggesting. The issue is will his base and Quebec put up with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: The issue is will his base and Quebec put up with it. If a "base" doesn't buy in to objectivity, I don't see what the problem is. $400 million a year new money to Quebec to run their version of the CBC while you get to crow to English Canada that you saved $1B. Seems like a great deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 7 minutes ago, eyeball said: Entirely wrong? It should be obvious why a CRTC vice chairman's assessment of the situation carries a lot more weight than yours. Sure - no bias there at all LOL - hey, why don't we go ask trump if he's guilty of any crimes, an ex president should know right? Quote His base of support. By rights they should be demanding PP sell the Francophone portion of the CBC to Quebec if they want it and leave it to them provide their own funding. Why. Frankly unlike the liberals we're not stupid. If we get to cut the funding by 99 percent and we pay for one show for quebec and that's what's needed to make this fly and get rid of trudeau that's a workable solution. We can always look at that 1 percent later. Quote No it's isn't, it's perfectly clear that PP can do what you're suggesting. The issue is will his base and Quebec put up with it. Of course they will. The cbc will be effectively gone unless the left wing supporters fund it from their own pockets - which we both know they will not. The vast majority of the wasteful funding will be toast, Remember - the show he's talking about keeping is 'radio canada' quebec. So - it's a low cost lower budget production. It doesn't cost much money at all. And they still bring in their ad revenue, it's not like he has to pay for the whole thing. So - 1.4 billion saved, maybe a million or two spent? It's a good deal. Why would anyone have a problem with it? To be honest - cbc radio canada (english) is proably the only part of hte cbc which is potentially commercially viable and may survive without funding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 The CBC will survive less government funding by having to produce more product that people want. Oh wait, that sounds like every business I know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 Just now, Zeitgeist said: The CBC will survive less government funding by having to produce more product that people want. Oh wait, that sounds like every business I know. That's racist. To be more specific they'll need to produce content that people want and are willing to PAY for. The left wants the content now as long as someone ELSE is paying. And that's where they're going to run into trouble - they cannot produce their content at a price people will pay for and still have those big fat bonuses for the execs, the big office spaces, ete etc. But - CBC Radio might be able to survive as an entity. It's fairly popular, it's pretty cheap to produce, it's very cheap to get the content out there compared to tv especially with the internet. Advertisers will still pay to advertise on it and there's not a lot of 'google ads' stealing the revenues, and they can do public fundraising once in a while and get some donations. That's probably the only part that will survive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 (edited) 14 minutes ago, CdnFox said: That's racist. To be more specific they'll need to produce content that people want and are willing to PAY for. The left wants the content now as long as someone ELSE is paying. And that's where they're going to run into trouble - they cannot produce their content at a price people will pay for and still have those big fat bonuses for the execs, the big office spaces, ete etc. But - CBC Radio might be able to survive as an entity. It's fairly popular, it's pretty cheap to produce, it's very cheap to get the content out there compared to tv especially with the internet. Advertisers will still pay to advertise on it and there's not a lot of 'google ads' stealing the revenues, and they can do public fundraising once in a while and get some donations. That's probably the only part that will survive. Hockey Night in Canada generated good revenue. They should bring back Don Cherry before he dies. Once they fired him I stopped watching the CBC, including all HNIC except Leafs playoff games. I do NOT watch intermission commentary. Edited March 14 by Zeitgeist 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Seems like a great deal. Sure if PP just gives it to them plus funding plus...plus plus. Of course he'll probably blame Trudeau for forcing this conclusion on him and the Conservative base will shrug, backpeddle, change the channel etc etc. It's hilarious. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: It's hilarious. I'm laughing already. All of our Chud friends will likely stop posting though. Too bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 3 minutes ago, eyeball said: It's hilarious. Your delusional imaginings trying to find any possible excuse to call this a bad idea? Agreed 1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said: I'm laughing already. All of our Chud friends will likely stop posting though. Too bad. Oh i'm sure you woketards will find other things to lie about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 14 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Your delusional imaginings trying to find any possible excuse to call this a bad idea? No, the willingness of you chuds to cheer PP's suckholing to Quebec. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 6 minutes ago, eyeball said: No, the willingness of you chuds to cheer PP's suckholing to Quebec. It's bad form to call someone a chud. I definitely avoid that behaviour. The chuds don't shrink away from calling you a liar for violating their self images though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 4 minutes ago, eyeball said: No, the willingness of you chuds to cheer PP's suckholing to Quebec. Who did that? You were the one who got excited about it, All I said is that if we only get rid of 99 percent of the cbc right now that's still pretty damn good. And it is. Sounds like we're back to your delusional imaginings again It was probably just the voices in your head. Just now, Michael Hardner said: It's bad form to call someone a chud. I definitely avoid that behaviour. The chuds don't shrink away from calling you a liar for violating their self images though... I suspect all kinds of people don't shrink away from calling you a liar mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 15 minutes ago, CdnFox said: All I said is that if we only get rid of 99 percent of the cbc right now that's still pretty damn good. And it is. You seem pretty keen on retaining funding for Quebec. Will you be as keen about Quebec telling the CBC what it's allowed to report as you are terrified when Ottawa tells them what to report? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 17 minutes ago, eyeball said: You seem pretty keen on retaining funding for Quebec. AHhh - i keep forgetting your problems with comprehension. Being happy about 99 percent of a problem being solved is not the same as being happy that the 1 percent is not solved. if you had 100 dollars stolen from you and the police recovered 99 dollars - you might still want the 1 dollar but you'd be very happy you got the 99 back. Taxpayers and conservatives will be very happy they've gotten their 99 dollars back, and if there's still that one dollar out there we can worry about that another day. Do you see how that works now? It's how human beings think, this may be new to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 11 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Do you see how that works now? Yes, 100% - 60% equals 1. Your application of arithmetic skills are legendary around here. You must work for the government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 Just now, eyeball said: Yes, 100% - 60% equals 1. Ahhh yes - cbc radio quebec = 40 percent of the entire cbcs funding You and moonbat's hilarious attempts to do math with figures that simply arent' true are what's legend around here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 1 minute ago, CdnFox said: Ahhh yes - cbc radio quebec = 40 percent of the entire cbcs funding You figure Quebec will settle for getting 1 40th of the funding they're accustomed to getting? Especially if they push the issue? Let us know how that works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 14 Report Share Posted March 14 5 minutes ago, eyeball said: Yes, 100% - 60% equals 1. A broken clock tells the right time twice a day. A clock that's 15 minutes behind tells the right time zero times a day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted March 14 Author Report Share Posted March 14 Just now, Michael Hardner said: A broken clock tells the right time twice a day. A clock that's 15 minutes behind tells the right time zero times a day. A loser who got caught lying on another thread and is butthurt about it talks about clocks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.