mikedavid00 Posted December 19, 2006 Report Posted December 19, 2006 Made some news here in Toronto. Here's your tax dollars hard at work: "Mike Arbour, spokesman for Finance Minister Greg Sorbara, said the former NDP government loaned the then-Corel Centre $26.8 million in 1994 for infrastructure improvements. When the arena was sold in 2003, the Tories forgave part of the loan. The Sens, in exchange, promised to stay in Ottawa. The provincial government has since been writing off $2.1 million annually. " Wow it's nice to see already rich elites getting more of our tax dollars when families can barely survive and live paycheck to paycheck. All to give free money to elites. http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2006...876659-sun.html Hey guys, you are the ones against free voting propositions and democracy. We have no say in these matters so the gov't does as it pleases. Quote ---- Charles Anthony banned me for 30 days on April 28 for 'obnoxious libel' when I suggested Jack Layton took part in illegal activities in a message parlor. Claiming a politician took part in illegal activity is not rightful cause for banning and is what is discussed here almost daily in one capacity or another. This was really a brownshirt style censorship from a moderator on mapleleafweb http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1oGB-BKdZg---
guyser Posted December 19, 2006 Report Posted December 19, 2006 And the government collects far more than that from taxes paid . Name a business that doesnt get a break from the feds. Tempest in a teacup. Quote
mikedavid00 Posted December 19, 2006 Author Report Posted December 19, 2006 And the government collects far more than that from taxes paid . While that argument sounds good, it's a self defeating idealism. Name a business that doesnt get a break from the feds. This was a provincial thing we're talking about. And I can say that the majority of businesses don't get money given to them for free. How about we just don't tax Canadian businesses or corperations at all so we can avoid this. Quote ---- Charles Anthony banned me for 30 days on April 28 for 'obnoxious libel' when I suggested Jack Layton took part in illegal activities in a message parlor. Claiming a politician took part in illegal activity is not rightful cause for banning and is what is discussed here almost daily in one capacity or another. This was really a brownshirt style censorship from a moderator on mapleleafweb http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1oGB-BKdZg---
Michael Hardner Posted December 19, 2006 Report Posted December 19, 2006 MikeDavid, you have hit it on the head - glad handing like this has to stop. Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
Higgly Posted December 19, 2006 Report Posted December 19, 2006 "Mike Arbour, spokesman for Finance Minister Greg Sorbara... What more needs to be said? I can't help but compare this with the drama over the Penguins. At least there we have the private sector duking it out. The Sens need to start paying their own freight. How long has this been going on? Can you say Rod Briden? Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
Riverwind Posted December 19, 2006 Report Posted December 19, 2006 I can't help but compare this with the drama over the Penguins. At least there we have the private sector duking it out.Private sector? The deal fell though because Balsillie could not get assurances from the local gov't that he would be allowed to install slot machines (i.e. he was insisting on a back door subsidy). Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
Who's Doing What? Posted December 20, 2006 Report Posted December 20, 2006 Private sector? The deal fell though because Balsillie could not get assurances from the local gov't that he would be allowed to install slot machines (i.e. he was insisting on a back door subsidy). I would just love to see your source for that. Quote Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html "You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)
Riverwind Posted December 20, 2006 Report Posted December 20, 2006 Private sector? The deal fell though because Balsillie could not get assurances from the local gov't that he would be allowed to install slot machines (i.e. he was insisting on a back door subsidy).I would just love to see your source for that. Balsillie left open the possibility of moving the Penguins if a company he backed to build a new arena did not win a state licence to operate slot machines. http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/R...ory/GlobeSports Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
Who's Doing What? Posted December 20, 2006 Report Posted December 20, 2006 Private sector? The deal fell though because Balsillie could not get assurances from the local gov't that he would be allowed to install slot machines (i.e. he was insisting on a back door subsidy).I would just love to see your source for that. Balsillie left open the possibility of moving the Penguins if a company he backed to build a new arena did not win a state licence to operate slot machines. http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/R...ory/GlobeSports That is a far cry from "assurances from local govt. that he would be allowed to install slot machines" The fact is he would have nothing to do with the slot machines. The company interested in the slot machines says it will build a new arena in Pittsburg if awarded the slot machine contract. The slots have nothing to do with Balsillie or the Penguins directly. Even after a new arena was built, terms of a lease would still have to be negotiated. Apparently the opening paragraph has a different idea aswell. Canadian billionaire and hockey fanatic Jim Balsillie pulled a deal to buy the Pittsburgh Penguins Friday night after the National Hockey League imposed severe restrictions on his ability to control the team's future, sources said. The article goes even further from your statement with the folowing. Until Friday, Balsillie had planned to negotiate an arena deal with state officials if Isle of Capri was not chosen for the licence. Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell proposed what he called Plan B, under which the state would build a hockey venue with financing coming from government and the Penguins. Under that plan, the club would have paid $8.5-million immediately and around $4-million in rent for 30 years. The plan also called for the state to issue bonds to finance construction, but it was not clear how much that would raise. I don't see anything of Balsillie backing out based on gettting any slot machines. Quote Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html "You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)
Argus Posted December 21, 2006 Report Posted December 21, 2006 "Mike Arbour, spokesman for Finance Minister Greg Sorbara... What more needs to be said? I can't help but compare this with the drama over the Penguins. At least there we have the private sector duking it out. The Sens need to start paying their own freight. How long has this been going on? Can you say Rod Briden? How much did the Leafs pay for the downtown land under their new arena again? A dollar, wasn't it? Who would sell that much prime downtown space for a dollar? Whyyy, the provincial government, that's who. The problem with Canadian professional hockey teams is that all American hockey teams are hugely subsidised by their local and state governments, making it very hard for Canadian teams to compete. That's one of the reasons we've lost a number of them. When the Senators started up they not only had to build their own arena, they had to build the freeway interchange near it, and then pay taxes on them. American teams don't build their own arenas, generally pay little or no rent, collect all the concesson fees, and pay no real taxes. That's why they can outbid Canadian teams for prime talent, and, even with smaller ticket sales, turn a profit. I believe I read once that the Montreal Canadiens pay more taxes than all the American NHL franchises combined. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted December 21, 2006 Report Posted December 21, 2006 Argus you are right on the Mtl CDN's paying as mucha s the rest of the US teams, but the US teams are not subsidized to any great extent. They do not pay near the level of taxes as the Canuck temas do so thats is where the saving s are. As for the Sens, they could have built it nearer the city but they thought that a whole community would rise up around it. Taken a while but it is happening out there. Quote
Argus Posted December 22, 2006 Report Posted December 22, 2006 Argus you are right on the Mtl CDN's paying as mucha s the rest of the US teams, but the US teams are not subsidized to any great extent. They do not pay near the level of taxes as the Canuck temas do so thats is where the saving s are.As for the Sens, they could have built it nearer the city but they thought that a whole community would rise up around it. Taken a while but it is happening out there. I'm sorry but when the city and state build an arena and let a team play there for little or no rent that IS a subsidy. And that is the situation with most American teams (possibly ALL of them). The Senators pay millions of dollars a year on the debt they took on to build their arena and the highway interchange outside it. Then they pay taxes on the land (which American teams don't pay because the city owns the arena). All of this puts every American team many millions ahead of any Canadian team - without even taking into consideration the stronger American dollar - which is what all players are paid in. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
guyser Posted December 23, 2006 Report Posted December 23, 2006 I'm sorry but when the city and state build an arena and let a team play there for little or no rent that IS a subsidy. And that is the situation with most American teams (possibly ALL of them). The Senators pay millions of dollars a year on the debt they took on to build their arena and the highway interchange outside it. Then they pay taxes on the land (which American teams don't pay because the city owns the arena). All of this puts every American team many millions ahead of any Canadian team - without even taking into consideration the stronger American dollar - which is what all players are paid in. Not all the teams have arenas owned by the city. Most dont, as they have purchased and sold many times after completion. Perhaps the money that built them came from the city (or province) at the time. Skydome or Rogers Centre is one. Pepsi cntre in Colorado is another, Pitt, BUff, Philly ..... The property taxes are the ones killing teams. I understand you about subsidies, but do you consider a very low minimum wage to be a subsidy? Quote
jdobbin Posted December 23, 2006 Report Posted December 23, 2006 Argus you are right on the Mtl CDN's paying as mucha s the rest of the US teams, but the US teams are not subsidized to any great extent. They do not pay near the level of taxes as the Canuck temas do so thats is where the saving s are.As for the Sens, they could have built it nearer the city but they thought that a whole community would rise up around it. Taken a while but it is happening out there. Pretty much all U.S. sports facilities are subsidized. http://www.reason.com/news/show/32180.html Quote
guyser Posted December 23, 2006 Report Posted December 23, 2006 Pretty much all U.S. sports facilities are subsidized....when they are built. Quote
geoffrey Posted December 23, 2006 Report Posted December 23, 2006 I understand you about subsidies, but do you consider a very low minimum wage to be a subsidy? To the worker, yes. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
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.