Return of Ford Nation | Page 8 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Return of Ford Nation

OHIP expensive, maybe mismanaged? maybe but compared to what? spend the cost of being a cancer patient anywhere else but Ontario and check that bar tab.

What should a hospital administrator make ? Public sector CA averages 170k plus or minus, CFO 200+ . You want dummies running hospitals? you have to pay them, its a job not a "calling to serve".
OK with your argument if it was $170-200K. Were talking $500-700k, 2x what they would make in a US hospital where the administrators are responsible for both sides of the business - revenue and cost. Considering they only manage one side of a business (cost) they are paid quite well.

If the cap for a hospital exec was $300K per year, do you think they would all stay at home?

There is a lot of fat in health care. Do hospitals really need PR managers that make $170K per year? Or telephone receptionists that make $70K/year? That money could be better spent on things that are directly related to care.
 
Gays represent a reasonable number of people so should have access to political leaders. While Rob didn't have to participate in the parade he could have arranged a meeting or series of meetings with gay community leaders to find ways of dealing with issues. He could have better handled the situation by showing an interest in the problems faced by the community instead of appearing homophobic.

Doug has the same problem in that he will have to defend or retract some statements he made in the past. If he wants to be successful he will have to be proactive and open minded. Success doesn't mean getting elected but getting elected and being successful as a leader. Having to deal with Wynne's trash field will make it doubly hard.

The biggest problem facing us is getting people to think and that is a national problem. Most of us have the mentality of garbage dump bears, taking the path of least resistance. Everyone wants their rights but no one wants responsibility.

How will Ford or anyone else make us feel good about ourselves for doing the right thing when doing the right thing means considering others?

People have largely lost confidence in governments to do the right thing so every man for himself. "Canada is going down the tubes so I'm going to grab everything I can so I will survive when the crash comes" being a common attitude.
What if he's religious, does he have rights? Oh wait, christians don't get rights, only minority religions. He might be religious & it's against his religious beliefs.

I don't get it, why should we go out of our way to cater to less than 5% of the population?


Gas plant scandal anyone?
Don't forget eHealth

They probably have spend more then that on consulting and doing studies as the idea bounces back and forth year after year, and nothing actually gets done.

I think removing most of the streetcars is a good idea and putting in subways is excellent. This will free up surface routes and lanes so things can get moving. It's kinda stupid to have a entire lane blocked in traffic. Even more stupid to have both lanes blocked when the other lane is full of parked cars, (dundas west or gerrard east etc.). Even a bus would handle this much better and can flow with the traffic instead of working against it. I am no civil engineer or remotely close to it, but I get it, and most of it seems like commonsense, but Toronto has some serious lack of civil planning and implementing infrastructure.
I'm no urban planner but blocking up 2 lanes to unload passengers doesn't make sense to me. For an expanding city, subway is the way. Sooner or later it will be used.
 
1 blower = about 1000+ suckers in $$$ back to the economy I guess. I though conservatives were all about economics? It’s always easier to focus on those in society less able to protect themselves though.
You're confusing defenseless with freeloaders. Understand the rich don't need social services, the defenseless do -- so every time a freeloader takes a suck at the teat, they deplete our social resources. Freeloaders hurt our defenseless more than our rich.
 
And this is why we never get anywhere and never make any compromise.

Social and fiscal policy have nothing to do with each other and yet in politics they’re ironclad to each other.

The result is that people like me can’t in good conscience vote for any party. None of them represent what i really want and all of them have policies (fiscal or social) that I strongly disagree with.

Everything costs money. Do you see the connection now?
 
The result is that people like me can’t in good conscience vote for any party. None of them represent what i really want and all of them have policies (fiscal or social) that I strongly disagree
with.

I've always thought a party that had fiscal conservatism and social liberalism would be something very appealing to a sizeable segment of the population. The Liberal party, particularly the Paul Martin finance minister years, were an example of that.
 
I'm no urban planner but blocking up 2 lanes to unload passengers doesn't make sense to me. For an expanding city, subway is the way. Sooner or later it will be used.

Your intuition is correct if your only goal is the movement of more cars. But the objective is actually to move more people, and secondly to offer as many transportation options as possible. Car dependency is wrong on both counts, but cars will always be an essential part of the mix.
 
Last edited:
I've always thought a party that had fiscal conservatism and social liberalism would be something very appealing to a sizeable segment of the population. The Liberal party, particularly the Paul Martin finance minister years, were an example of that.
That was actually a conservative government wearing Liberal uniforms. Martin was pretty conservative, Steven Harper defeated Martin by on a platform that was left of Martin's - I don't think we will ever see that again!
 
You're confusing defenseless with freeloaders. Understand the rich don't need social services, the defenseless do -- so every time a freeloader takes a suck at the teat, they deplete our social resources. Freeloaders hurt our defenseless more than our rich.
You sir, are a scholar!
 
You're confusing defenseless with freeloaders. Understand the rich don't need social services, the defenseless do -- so every time a freeloader takes a suck at the teat, they deplete our social resources. Freeloaders hurt our defenseless more than our rich.

You are absolutely wrong. The rich that game the system do it many magnitudes more than the freeloaders claiming social security etc. What’s more they are avoiding paying fair taxes leaving you and me to pick up the bill.

Welfare dodgers = little league. Filthy rich ********** = major league.
 
I read today that he plans on cancelling the sex-ed curriculum.

Wow. If this isn't pandering to a tiny sliver of the (not surprisingly, Toronto) population, I don't know what is, and it can only lead me to believe that he's yet another one of those crying about it without actually having read it.

I guess kids will just have to go back to learning about sex the "Old fashioned" way - via the internet and schoolyard conversations. Both are clearly known options for then getting valid factual information, after all. :rolleyes:

One more reason for me to not vote for him. I hope someone with some sensibility gets to him on this topic and has a grown up conversation about it.
 
I read today that he plans on cancelling the sex-ed curriculum.

Wow. If this isn't pandering to a tiny sliver of the (not surprisingly, Toronto) population, I don't know what is, and it can only lead me to believe that he's yet another one of those crying about it without actually having read it.

I guess kids will just have to go back to learning about sex the "Old fashioned" way - via the internet and schoolyard conversations. Both are clearly known options for then getting valid factual information, after all. :rolleyes:

One more reason for me to not vote for him. I hope someone with some sensibility gets to him on this topic and has a grown up conversation about it.

I've read three Star articles, all anti Ford, but can't seem to find the one you're discussing.
Having three kids in that curriculum, it's long due for an overhaul, which I expect over a cancellation.
Hopefully though, he has some experts look into the Math curriculum first.
Jumping onto another controversial topic, I hope that there is some sort of abortion education, included,
nothing that would attempt to discourage women from ever having one, but something that would encourage the use of birth control beforehand.
I believe that abortions are intrusive, and more costly than preventative methods, and while it should always be an available option, it shouldn't become a de-facto and common method of birth control.
 
Oh, just saw it on CBC. I'll see if I can have a chat with him about it.
The kids need sex ed, but they need better than they're now getting.
 
abortion education, included,
nothing that would attempt to discourage women from ever having one, but something that would encourage the use of birth control beforehand.

Ummmmm, the existing curriculum covers contraception.

The kids need sex ed, but they need better than they're now getting.

Based on my response above, I’m left wondering..have you actually read the curriculum?

Edit: Clarified contraception vs abortion. Doesn’t seem the latter is indeed discussed, but considering the flip out from some of the backwards and religious crazies about contraception even being mentioned (blasphemy!) good luck getting abortion added...
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You are absolutely wrong. The rich that game the system do it many magnitudes more than the freeloaders claiming social security etc. What’s more they are avoiding paying fair taxes leaving you and me to pick up the bill.

Welfare dodgers = little league. Filthy rich ********** = major league.
I'm not wrong. You are correct that there are cheats at each end of the system, but there is no evidence the tax system suffers meaningful 'gaming' at the hands of the 'filthy rich'. Don't forget the top 1% of Canadians has pays more than 20% of the tax burden. They are easy targets for Revenue Canada, it's pretty hard for them to cheat the taxman.
 
Ummmmm, the existing curriculum covers contraception.



Based on my response above, I’m left wondering..have you actually read the curriculum?

Edit: Clarified contraception vs abortion. Doesn’t seem the latter is indeed discussed, but considering the flip out from some of the backwards and religious crazies about contraception even being mentioned (blasphemy!) good luck getting abortion added...

Oh, some of them would be all over it, and wanting to provide detailed graphical images, "for educational purposes".
 

Back
Top Bottom