subsidized housing

[FatOne]

No there shouldn't be a time limit on how long one lives in subsidized housing. Some people just have a low earning potential and no amount of time is going to improve it. So for some people that's the best they can and will do.

Those with the will, skills and potential to leave subsidized housing will. No need to try and push out people like that they will leave on their own accord. For the rest that can't or won't leave. What good does kicking them out do?

As with any system designed for a society there will be individuals who will abuse it or not be able to do with out it.

Sometimes people need a little shove. I know examples from real life. There are others who are are truly unable to function and never will.
There are plenty of people on disability who are not actually disabled. Hell I even know one person who works at the exact same place he did before he got on disability for social anxiety with a different boss who is extremely abusive but pays him under the table. I know another who gives the most laughable excuses for quitting jobs that he does find and has been on the dole for most of his adult life. Another on disability who works like a demon on various social activism and justice causes but told me he was too good for McDonald. I also knew one who could be employable but was just really hard to place due to his disability. Had a job for a while and just quit it [impulsiveness was part of the package] I'd suspect if he didn't have a check waiting for him he would have stayed. Sad thing of the 4 he was the only one I would consider actually disabled and the only one with an actual desire to get off the dole. Never mind the Army guy I know who admits to faking a post traumatic stress syndrome for the early pension.
I also happen to know people who are almost as fucked up as Stephen Hawkings but without the brilliant mind.

Yes these are personal examples, but anyone who suggests it isn't a problem is either trying not to pay attention or is being dishonest.

It would seem that based on the numbers of people who are on disability internationally and over time, you can have just as many people who are unable to work as a government is willing to pay for. There are real cases, yes, but there are a lot of abusers out there and something needs to be done as it rots the system. However nobody seems to give a shit, it isn't their money they are passing out. It takes a bit of drive to get on, but once you do, you are set for life, even if your disability is the sort of thing that can reverse. My own mother narced on a relative and "they" did nothing. When you see someone who has worked like a dog since his teen years move to Newfoundland and come to figure that he has been a sucker all his life, that ain't right. Then you get these people who raise kids on the system and it becomes an intergenerational thing like in Britain.

I am not on the dole, but I do believe that there are two types of people, parasites and suckers. I sure as hell don't want to be a sucker.

 

[Rockslinger]

WRONG,...individuals who work for a company,...DO NOT have the same rights as the owner of a company,..

Does that also mean tenants do not have the same rights as landlords?

 

[FAST]

Define

Does that also mean tenants do not have the same rights as landlords?

You will have to be a little more specific...

FAST

 

[Celticman]

Many of the folks in "non-profits" and unions make a pretty good coin. Have you ever seen the salaries of people who work for charitable foundations? Not bad, eh?

Was not questioning their earnings at all. Why more young folk do not get into the trades is beyond me. I was talking about the the full appreciation of having to deliver profits. I have a friend who owns his own little plumbing business. He understands the need for profit. His understanding is different to the unionised plumbers that work in one of our Ontario factories.

I only contribute to charitable orgs if I know that 90% of the money goes to the charity. And I check.

 

[Toke]

You need to understand that an employers first priority is not to maintain employment or provide a certain standard of living to employees.
The first priority is to generate a return on investment for the business owners capital invested in the business
The second priority is to meet or exceed their customers needs.(Many will say if this is the number one objective the ROI will follow)

If a business ran with a employees first model, both the customers and the investment capital would soon find other opportunities which meet their needs . i.e the business would not be responsive or price competitive, orders will slow , profits would decrease and investors would seek other more lucrative options, so the business is starved for capital for new products or even maintenance. Competitors sense problems and target your customers, the banks sense more risk and turn off the lending

The need to compete is such a simple, logical and straightforward (and correct) view of business, that lefties can not seem to grasp or just prefer to ignore it.

The driving force is each person seeks to maximize the value of their stake in the business
customers, suppliers, managers (on behalf of the investors), managers personal stake and employees.

It is a a undeniable trait of human nature, yet lefties seem to think everyone should be content with what lefties feel/determine is a fair slice of the pie. IT JUST SIMPLY WILL NOT WORK UNLESS YOU GET BUY IN FROM EVERYONE and centralized control across an industry and that is communism.

Perhaps you should consider why a business exists before you determining how it should operate

You are only justify the 'broken parts' of the economic system. It is reality, but it only works for few.

 

[Toke]

WRONG,...individuals who work for a company,...DO NOT have the same rights as the owner of a company,...other than getting a pay cheque.

Your thought process is totally unbelievable,...and I don't even need use communist explanation !!!

FAST

They don't deserve the same human rights? (Not legally, but morally speaking)

 

[Toke]

I know someone who lives on about 600 bucks a month on the dole. You can't live on 20K and rent a 1 bedroom in down town Toronto perhaps but I know someone who lives in a 1 bedroom in Hamilton and has done so on minimum wage for over 20 years. No car, no cigs, no booze but she is doing fine. If you are willing to split a 2 bedroom it gets even cheaper. My situation is a bit odd to figure out [no details] but I figure if I rented a 2 bedroom by myself in my small burg where the dole buddy lives I could do fine on about 1250 a month with car.

And your story makes it right? Are you advocating for pay reductions across the board?

 

[Toke]

Actually,...our so called "education system" is responsible for the "push, and train people to get white collar jobs", simply because the people running the show know nothing else, and you correctly stating,...'beneath them'.

There is a lot of people in "blue collar" jobs that are laughing all the way to the bank at these low paid suits.

Lots of unfilled, high paying get your hands dirty jobs out there.

FAST

I don't really agree. Believe it or not, for the most part, the education system mirrors the values of society at large.

 

[Toke]

everyone looks down on blue collar but without us the world stops moving. love it or hate it but it's the truth.

I guess, but every part is equally needed. My point is that they are nowhere near equally compensated. Not even fairly.

 

[Googled]

went to take our kid over to visit gramma and the lights were off, she said that the hydro was off cuz she forgot to pay one month. hydro don't get turned off for forgetting 1 month, especially when 1 of her bills was 15$. then her phone was off for the same thing and instead of cancelling the cable she just let that bill pile up as well, no hydro to turn the t.v on so no reason to pay that bill either lol. her rent was 250$ and she got evicted for not paying, with her welfare and other money she gets for having kids she was making 3,000$ a month and getting all her food from the food bank and christmas presents at the salvation army. she was debt free and basically expense free making 3 grand a month and still managed to fuck it all up.

What city is this?

I'm all too familiar with these cases as a landlord in a small city outside the GTA. Somehow it's always my fault people are getting evicted, of course because i'm "The Man". An eviction takes 2-3 months from the date you're supposed to pay and if you pay anytime with in that 2-3 month process you legally cannot be kicked out and can stay!!!

It's very much a generation problem, your wife is lucky to break free of the cycle, chances are one of her siblings will be on welfare in the future. Welfare parents will teach their kids how to maximize their welfare cheque and how to get to the welfare retirement plan.....Ontario Disability Support Program ODSP, the holy grail for life long welfare recipients. For many people they are content with having no savings, their bills taken care of for them in exchange for not having to work, as long as they can buy a case of Lucky Lager a week.

You know these people their last 5 bosses we all jerks that had it in for them so they got fired,quit,fired,quit etc, and their last 7 landlords were assholes who didn't fix things so they stopped paying.

The problem is that you need say $1000 to stay alive in toronto, but give someone in a small town $1000 where rent is much cheaper and they can more than survive, and their expectations and goals have been adjusted to a lower level thanks to their parents. I believe welfare should be adjusted to the cost of living in your area. Overall welfare rates should be lowered however less should be clawed back on welfare cheques to make it worthwhile to seek employment. Just as an example a welfare recipient makes $5 take one off his or her cheque.

 

[Googled]

Does that also mean tenants do not have the same rights as landlords?

Tenants have more rights than landlords, in Ontario anyways.

 

[Nate1]

WRONG,...individuals who work for a company,...DO NOT have the same rights as the owner of a company,...other than getting a pay cheque.

Your thought process is totally unbelievable,...and I don't even need use communist explanation !!!

FAST

In a free market economy they do retain there right to withdraw their labour (unless you are advocating for the re-establishment of slavery or some other market controls).

Go ahead and give me the communist argument (topic deflecting, mud sling).

 

[Petzel]

For the record Insurance companies are not making record profits. Low interest rates are not good for them
Oil companies & banks, well they appear to have their investors best interest as a priority
As it should be.

Well according to Liberty Mutual's statements they did!

 

[simon482]

What city is this?

I'm all too familiar with these cases as a landlord in a small city outside the GTA. Somehow it's always my fault people are getting evicted, of course because i'm "The Man". An eviction takes 2-3 months from the date you're supposed to pay and if you pay anytime with in that 2-3 month process you legally cannot be kicked out and can stay!!!

It's very much a generation problem, your wife is lucky to break free of the cycle, chances are one of her siblings will be on welfare in the future. Welfare parents will teach their kids how to maximize their welfare cheque and how to get to the welfare retirement plan.....Ontario Disability Support Program ODSP, the holy grail for life long welfare recipients. For many people they are content with having no savings, their bills taken care of for them in exchange for not having to work, as long as they can buy a case of Lucky Lager a week.

You know these people their last 5 bosses we all jerks that had it in for them so they got fired,quit,fired,quit etc, and their last 7 landlords were assholes who didn't fix things so they stopped paying.

The problem is that you need say $1000 to stay alive in toronto, but give someone in a small town $1000 where rent is much cheaper and they can more than survive, and their expectations and goals have been adjusted to a lower level thanks to their parents. I believe welfare should be adjusted to the cost of living in your area. Overall welfare rates should be lowered however less should be clawed back on welfare cheques to make it worthwhile to seek employment. Just as an example a welfare recipient makes $5 take one off his or her cheque.

my ex did not break free of it and i am glad she is my ex.

 

[Petzel]

What city is this?

I'm all too familiar with these cases as a landlord in a small city outside the GTA. Somehow it's always my fault people are getting evicted, of course because i'm "The Man". An eviction takes 2-3 months from the date you're supposed to pay and if you pay anytime with in that 2-3 month process you legally cannot be kicked out and can stay!!!

It's very much a generation problem, your wife is lucky to break free of the cycle, chances are one of her siblings will be on welfare in the future. Welfare parents will teach their kids how to maximize their welfare cheque and how to get to the welfare retirement plan.....Ontario Disability Support Program ODSP, the holy grail for life long welfare recipients. For many people they are content with having no savings, their bills taken care of for them in exchange for not having to work, as long as they can buy a case of Lucky Lager a week.

You know these people their last 5 bosses we all jerks that had it in for them so they got fired,quit,fired,quit etc, and their last 7 landlords were assholes who didn't fix things so they stopped paying.

The problem is that you need say $1000 to stay alive in toronto, but give someone in a small town $1000 where rent is much cheaper and they can more than survive, and their expectations and goals have been adjusted to a lower level thanks to their parents. I believe welfare should be adjusted to the cost of living in your area. Overall welfare rates should be lowered however less should be clawed back on welfare cheques to make it worthwhile to seek employment. Just as an example a welfare recipient makes $5 take one off his or her cheque.

A single person is entitled to a monthly rate from Canada Works of $500 and change! How on earth do you expect anyone to live on that???

 

[Nate1]

JohnL, I agree with you. It is very hard for some folk to have a feeling for this. I have never been able to properly explain it to friends in non profit pursuits or unions. And I do not say that to disrespect anyone. I work for a multinational and find that many of our employees do not fully grasp this. If they were responsible for several groups with budgets and cost objectives they might have a different perspective. If sales and profit objectives are not met, jobs could be at stake, investor confidence would diminish and the value of shares would drop. These are truly fundamental issues in western society.

CM thank you for your respectful take, I do however have to disagree. In my case it is not that I dont understand, but more that I think the focus on profit to the exclusion of other considerations is actually detrimental to capitalism over the long term. I truly am a capitalist at my core. My company is owned by a large US private equity group and I function very well within that environment.

This forum is difficult for us to explain these complex thoughts, but simply stated I believe our society needs more millionaires and less billionaires. I worry that capital in its drive for immediate profit is sowing the seeds of its own demise. Marx was wrong about a lot of things, but may have been correct when he comments that each economic system eventually causes its own demise. History is littered with examples. An example from business is discounting in one quarter only to pull sales out of a future quarter.

I do believe in capital controls, we acknowledge the needs for regulation in so many aspects of life: from traffic laws to accredited medical services. So why should the environment with the largest possibility for self interested abuse be un regulated.

I also see the argument that if company X is not maximizing profit then company Y will eat X's lunch as specious. This is the same argument little children give for their inappropriate behavior. "But Johnny was doing it" doesn't work for 7 year olds and doesn't work in this instance.

Yes capital is free to move jurisdictions, but society is equally free to make that un-profitable.

We need a true balance between capital and labour, and today we are a little too far on the side of capital. Changes can only happen incremently and with moderation.

 

[simon482]

A single person is entitled to a monthly rate from Canada Works of $500 and change! How on earth do you expect anyone to live on that???

ontario works says you can live with a family member and that amount is more than enough to survive on. however you can only get that much if you can prove you are paying rent, you don't just automatically get that 500$.

 

[Nate1]

They are free to move thier assets (skill and labour) with two weeks notice & minimumn risk
A business owners assets are no where near as liquid and carry a variety of risks (to a point of total loss)

Yes, along with potential total loss is the upside of rich deserved profit.
Equating these two types assets (skills and labour) with investment capital displays a lack of understanding of the risk / return trade off and the incentive to risk capital at all
Labour is risking more when--all eggs in the capital basket--potential loss of home and family stress



They are free to sell their skills and labor to the highest bidder

Agreed

Calling someone a lefty, or a communist is really missing the point that we are all humans and all have equal rights to maximize our assets be it capital or labour.

I never said we all do not have the rights to maximize our assets.
Labor should seek out the highest bidder for their skills

However, that bid should be determined by the market(ie demand for that skill), not by the cost of affordable housing or someones expectation of a certain standard of living and certainly not by a unions threat to shut the business down

Agree completely.

When a lefties tells a business ownwer he /she must divide the economic profits of that business as the leftie sees fit, then leftie is refusing the owners right to maximize thier assets and ignoring the required return for a given level of risk

Not sure this happens much or that I like the your use of the word "lefty" as a pejorative.

 

[red]

They are free to move thier assets (skill and labour) with two weeks notice & minimumn risk
A business owners assets are no where near as liquid and carry a variety of risks (to a point of total loss)

Equating these two types assets (skills and labour) with investment capital displays a lack of understanding of the risk / return trade off and the incentive to risk capital at all




They are free to sell their skills and labor to the highest bidder

Calling someone a lefty, or a communist is really missing the point that we are all humans and all have equal rights to maximize our assets be it capital or labour.

I never said we all do not have the rights to maximize our assets.
Labor should seek out the highest bidder for their skills

However, that bid should be determined by the market(ie demand for that skill), not by the cost of affordable housing or someones expectation of a certain standard of living and certainly not by a unions threat to shut the business down

When a lefties tells a business ownwer he /she must divide the economic profits of that business as the leftie sees fit, then leftie is refusing the owners right to maximize thier assets and ignoring the required return for a given level of risk

employees are not required to give any notice

 

[Rockslinger]

I think there are now more billionaires in Asia than in North America or Europe. Why? Because they are smarter and willing to work harder.

With economic wealth, human rights and respect for the environment will follow. BTW: The PRC is no longer a true communist state (it is getting closer to the "Singapore and Hong Kong model.)