|
wheres the moron who was arguing in the other thread that prominent gay politicians don't have a responsibility to come out of the closet
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:They don't. you're wrong
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:My apartment building in the middle of downtown Toronto has door to door delivery. those buildings are the absolute worst. seriosuly think about walking through a 14 story building and putting letters in 300 mail slots at below waist level
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Still nobody's business how our leaders gently caress. Having a sexuality doesn't make you a mascot. *completely ignores all politics involved in the gay rights movement in the past 30 years&
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
no guys really, being a gay politician has nothing to do with politics at all
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
baird is 100x worse than the log cabin republicans. at least they actually advocate for themselves
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
remember when john baird was going to drug test all welfare recipients in ontario
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
also he was going to personally administer a literacy test to each and every one and deny welfare to anyone that couldn't read
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:He has lovely politics so what dislike him all you want for that. its funny taht you don't think sexuality is political
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
like your defense of john baird is literally, he's a politician who doesn't care about gay rights so who are we to criticize him for it i mean, i realize it's pretty loving hard to defend a human piece of poo poo, but this is a real stretch
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
they should all move toronto, we would have torn down the viaducts and then rebuilt them to be bigger and better at triple the cost
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
The unions needs to and should have a real strike, there's no question. All these shenanigans from Wynne are because they've shown they're unwilling to do it. Work to rule isn't enough. They should have done it the first week of back in September.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Problem is teachers unions have lost the war over optics when it comes to striking. Back when they were fighting Harris et al there were a significant number of people on their side, but nowadays the government has been so good at painting them as entitled overpaid spoiled brats who are harming the children when they strike that teachers know if they strike, they lose. And when that happens it gives the government license to make cuts in their next contract since they won. The importance of optics are overblown. The worst that could happen is they get legislated back to work and go to arbitration. A position eminently preferable to trying to negotiate with someone that is unwilling to negotiate fairly and also already undermining your cause every day.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
Coolwhoami posted:Right, except you can't have unity without, you know, unity. If there are major differences in bargaining positions between the different unions (such as the class size issue mentioned above) that one group might be willing to sacrifice for other things but another doesn't, some group within is going to be unhappy about whatever choice is made and made the outward projection of solidarity weaker, which entirely defeats the purpose of doing that to begin with. It's the unions responsibility to build solidarity between them and I doubt it's difficult to do. Everyone knows the province is playing a divide and conquor game already.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Duck Rodgers posted:The power of a union is its ability to withhold labour. Strikes aren't a PR campaign. A strike is about putting economic pressure on the employer. Good optics is beneficial because it adds political pressure to the employer and it increases morale of the strikers, but optics isn't the goal of a strike or where the power of a strike comes from. Unions have always been demonized and hated. Ironically a teacher's strike won't necessarily cost the province money. It will save them money in the short term.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
ontario doctors apparently believe they are entitled by the charter of rights to make boatloads of money lmao http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/10/29/ontario-doctors-launch-charter-challenge-over-fee-cuts.html
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:What a bunch of babies, whining that they're entitled to binding arbitration like doctors in 8 other provinces are. They should just take whatever scraps the province throws them, times are tough, they're lazy and easily replaceable. i agree completely
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
open up med schools and recidencies to what the market can bear imo. stop protecting privileged doctors by artificially limiting the supply then they'll really start whining
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
wahhh can't get by on my 250k a year.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
Isentropy posted:Agreed, highly skilled professionals are the problem and we should all be busted down to the lowest common denominator. The general practicioner from Toronto working out in $insular_town for 110k or the permanently on-call 30-something EM grads who can't have families or their own lives are living fat off the hog and we need to put them in their place. is there an actual argument in here. are you saying you are against a 6% pay cut for doctors fees and think its a good idea that a fake professional union is suing the government under the charter of rights for cutting their fees
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:Haha yeah let me do a minimum of 10 years of tough post secondary so I can make 125k a year working my rear end off because apparently I'm retarded. The acceptance rate for med school is like 6%. There's no shortage of people who want to "endure" ten years of school for a guarantee of a large income and untouchable job security. And professionals don't have the right to strike. That's part of the deal for their high pay. Just like management isn't part of a union. It's retarded to be offended when privileged professionals get a small pay cut.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:A tad low? I can make 90k as an OPP officer with no post secondary after 3 years on the job or 95k as a school teacher with a bachelor degree in lesbian basket weaving and 2 year B.Ed and I'm only working 8 hours a day, 9 months a year. The system we have now is already capitalist medicine. It's just the government paying entrepreneurs who happen to have guaranteed wages and jobs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Isentropy posted:yeah I think it's bullshit that paid professionals are being told that austerity has to fall on them when most of the increase in healthcare costs is likely due to the rapid increase in the size of administration, and the government has to have a better reason to take away the charter rights to collective bargaining other than "sorry we need to save money that we can spend on subways to nowhere or whatever political pet project holds the day". professional associations like the OMA don't have the right to collectively bargain. They're self employed physicians. Doctors are not working class.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Baudin posted:What the hell does self employed or professional associations have to do with collective bargaining? You realize there are other professional associations in Canada like APEGA right? The employer-employee relationship is the most basic thing required for the right to collectively bargain.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Baudin posted:With the state? Why should I keep answering your stupid loving questions?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:It's not often that you see an entire post that is wrong but here we are. The dividends don't make a huge difference, here's an example. Yeah, they can dividend out to family members but so can any small corporation and you still need to pay corp tax on that at a minimum. I don't think it's the huge tax loophole you're making it out to be. If you split that with your spouse it's effectively income splitting and saves a lot of money. That's not the scenario shown in that graphic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
lol I found the source you used for that and you purposely used the only graphic that potentially proves your point while intentionally leaving out the one that doesn't:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Dallan Invictus posted:"Professional corporations paying dividends to doctors and their family are a huge tax dodge and all doctors should go against the wall!" jesus christ you are a very confused individual
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Falloutboy posted:http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/whats-an-unemployed-politician-to-do/ oh my god lol. The post-Parliament bittersweetness extends to other aspects of his personal life, as Harris now has time for his hobbies. “I’m a member of Canada Kicks rear end Gaming Clan,” he says, anticipating a new Star Wars first-person-shooter video game. “At least with things like MMOs (massively multiplayer online games), the universe doesn’t change that much, so I can pick up where I left off.” He is also spellbound by model trains and Lego. He once built a Star Wars battleship during a 24-hour voting marathon in the House of Commons,
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
experience is basically irrelevant unless you have a specific agenda you want to push looking forward to 8 years of rule by deputy ministers with actual expertise instead of religious clowns from alberta ruling the bureaucracy
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
then again, the new finance minister's wife is literally a mccain foods billionaire and im sure is going to fight for real change for the middle class
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:We are in a downturn, or were the last time I checked. And arguing that deficit spending will boost job growth like Trudeau did is a Keynesian argument, regardless of the amount, and I doubt the deficit will actually stay at 10 billion. No, that's incorrect. Keynesian economics specifically requires extremely large amounts of stimulus to work. That's part of the model. Running small deficits is not Keynesian economics.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Sedge and Bee posted:No, Keynesian economics is a government focus on boosting aggregate demand when this doesn't equal aggregate supply. It doesn't have to be a massive spending increase to be a Keynesian argument. The rhetoric and arguments Trudeau used were explicitly Keynesian, his claims were that spending would boost job growth and by extension government revenue in the long-term. There's no way that's neoliberal, that's a market distortion to neoliberalism and anathema as an argument to make. But even beyond that, arguing that supporting a trans-border pipeline is somehow "neoliberal" rather than capitalist is extremely dumb. If anybody is expecting any mainstream economists to come make passionate defences of the need to focus on things other than economic growth, like the environment, they're going to be disappointed. Capitalism still remains the main problem in the way of preventing environmental damage when a profit motive exist, and a return to earlier forms of it won't change that. That's a very shallow understanding of what it is and not true at all. You can argue all you want about Trudeau's "rhetoric" but he is not proposing Keynesian stimulus. However I do feel this is the perfect example of how effectively he's been able to frame himself as progressive while actually having meaningless centrist policies. Want to claim you'll raise taxes on the rich? Doesn't matter if it's .5% or 50%. Any raise allows you to claim that. Is that range in any way comparable? Nope. Want to claim you're going to provide Keynesian stimulus? Does it matter if it's a 10 billion or 100 billion deficit? Nope, clearly not. Are they effectively the same thing? Not in any way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
you assume wrong, most provinces have no such thing
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
all of our labour laws are comically weak ontario doesnt even have a 40 hour work week. its 44 hours
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
fill up tanker trucks with the sewage and drive it down to windsor imo
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
the airport not expanding doesnt change any of what you just said
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Well I mean except the part about not being able to fly to even further places without it. it's 19 dollars with presto but w/e. Not going to argue in earnest with Mr. Luxury Yacht about the convenience of flying
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
thats a dumb argument because canada can actually have a huge impact on global warming as we control a huge amount of the worlds fossile fuels
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 8, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
seriously still lolling at the dude trying to equate stopping global warming with bombing isis. like what lol
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2015 23:36
|
|