Just wondering any good politicians left in canada... jack layton was the last closest when it came to public interest.. was perfect but better than the rest..... someone who wont drag us to war .. or help lower the standard of living for the masses
|
|
|
Any good politiciqns left?
- Thread starter shahfaisal
- Start date
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
Are you drunk Shah?
Jack Layton is your example of the best?!... like when him and Olivia lived in subsidized housing despite earning more than $100k/year?
Anyway, to answer your question, no there are no good politicians left.
Douglas Adams said it best:
I didnt say he was the best but as close as it gets... you need to understand something about subsidized housing.. not all are subsidized... I live in a subsidized housing complex.. but I pay market rate cause I rented off the street.. not part of the subsidy... usually third of the tenants are not subsidized...
do you know for a fact if he was getting rent-to- earnings subsidy.. or simply lived in the complex????
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
They lived there from 1985 paying the subsidized rate. Only in 1990 just before the story broke did they start paying extra. Sounds like they were sucking from the government teat to me... just like I wouldn't be surprised any left wing socialist to do.
From wikipedia:
Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990, Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a housing cooperative subsidized by the federal government, despite their high income.[SUP][36][/SUP] Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op's Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so.
From wikipedia:
Layton and Chow were also the subject of some dispute when a June 14, 1990, Toronto Star article by Tom Kerr accused them of unfairly living in a housing cooperative subsidized by the federal government, despite their high income.[SUP][36][/SUP] Layton and Chow had both lived in the Hazelburn co-op since 1985, and lived together in an $800 per month three-bedroom apartment after their marriage in 1988. By 1990, their combined annual income was $120,000, and in March of that year they began voluntarily paying an additional $325 per month to offset their share of the co-op's Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsidy, the only members of the co-op to do so.
They were paying market rent. The extra amount they volunteered to pay was to cover the subsidy that was going to other tenants, the ones who needed it. The amount was probably a function of their unit size in proportion to the whole complex.
$800 a month in 1990 is fair and the market rate... please check your facts before you post them.. remember rent in 1990.. not now... anybody can rent the market portion of the public housing as long as they have MININUM required income.. plus they paid more volunterily what more do u want?
Its funny how you proved my point he was BETTER then all politicians of his time
Last edited:
Will look in to elizabeth may.. election due next year I believe. . Need to do my research
Last edited:
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
Elizabeth May? The same one who thinks wifi is a health issue -- what's next, is she an anti-vaxxer too?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elizabeth-may-wages-war-against-wifi/article617404/
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/elizabeth-may-wages-war-against-wifi/article617404/
Well having wifi is distracting for studies.... students should read from trxtbooks not facebook/twitter messages from their laptops in class
Seems foolish at first glance but plenty of EMFs are harmful, like x-ray, microwave, UV. I don't know the state of science on the subject of WiFi frequencies' effect on health, but if there is none then we have reason to be concerned.
Whether it's justified to avoid WiFi and its associated benefits would then be a personal judgement call. Based on the article, she's calling for stricter controls and better research, while personally avoiding exposure to WiFi as much as possible. Seems pretty sensible to me.
And no, she's not anti-vaccine.
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
She was not talking about distracting students, she said Wifi is a carcinogen and suggested it as a possible reason for the disappearance of pollinating insects.
In other words, she doesn't have a clue and I would give her the same advice that I would give Harper: listen to the scientists who actually study these sort of things, don't fall for wooo.
She said a potential carcinogen. It's a massive difference. Don't fall for the wooo.
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
Sent through fastar's wifi connection, no doubt.
I'd never heard of the issue before, but as I said it's a personal call so even if I decided Wifi was harmful I might still decide to use it in the balance of things because of the benefits I derive from it. You know, cost/benefit, like every decision we make in life? Am I being too sensible? Not enough wooo?
I totally agree... if all she is doing is asking for more research then great ..
Personally I would want it out of the schools regardless.. its alot simpler to restrict school computers to educational sites only.... then an open wifi connection
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
I disagree... to me she sounds like a ban now, ask questions later type of politician.
She has no clue if wifi decimates the pollinating bee population, but she believes so. If she were in power she'd be likely to ban wifi before the science is in.
Sorry... but I prefer politicians that don't make knee-jerk reactions (very few and far between). She is only asking for more research now because she is not in power. If she were ever in power she'd likely knee-jerk like the rest of them.
Sorry, I just cannot trust any person who chooses politics as a vocation.
We chose representative to make safer proper decisions for us.. wifi is relatively new.. before it is released to the public it should be tested to see its FULL effects.. not just to see its short term effects... would you say release GMO food and ban if it kill ppl later.. will be sorta late dont u think... microwave ovens were banned in the USSR because they possed a long term nutritional hazard.. so the banned it.. they didnt wait for ppl to die. ..
Sorry for the typos using phone
Sorry for the typos using phone
Motorcycle Mike
Well-known member
So you are anti-microwaves? Is that what I am responding to here?
No, I don't choose representatives to make decisions for me. I don't want anyone to make decisions for me. I am an adult, and I am educated. Leave me the **** alone and do what needs to be done with my country/province/city with the highest degree of efficiency as possible, and otherwise stay out of my life -- obviously that is not directed at you, but to the politicians who seek to rule my life.
Mm then we cry why didnt we ban a dangerous item... remember asbestos
|
|
|
|
|