How quickly we forget:Wow, really? Tell us more or at least give us some background support for this. I know, it's a secret.
Very true. Canada will simply follow the other countries in implementing what others are doing. In all likelihood, it will be some kind of budget sequestration.he IS the false prophet of the present...the sky is falling...as he sneaks in laughing on his way to the bank....
canada might actually be in trouble but I see much more countries hit rock bottom before Canada starts falling and by then there hopefully will be solutions....
???The police enforce the law, not ensure it. Nothing ensures law and order unless you're proposing we create a police state like North Korea where there's tight control over everything? Even then, the people will revolt eventually.
How do you get I am proposing a police state?
A lot of people are comparing teachers and police comp
I simply pointed out that a police presence ensures we have law and order and it would be survival of the strongest if we did not have a police force
Somehow you think I am proposing a police state from that?
Wrong again
I said replace themWhich means there are 0 good teachers in the entire country?! Your blanket statement just doesn't make sense not to mention hugely insulting to any good teacher out there. News flash: every person that gets paid is putting their financial interests above another person. Nobody truly works for free in any society: capitalist, socialist, dictatorship, etc. not even volunteers.
That does not imply 0 teachers
I never said teachers should work for free
I am advocating a compensation which is manageable for the province and driven more by the laws of supply and demand than union tactics
WrongLet's pretend that we fire all teachers like you say. Now we have a whole lot of people that can't find replacement private sector jobs since they don't have any in-demand skills like you said earlier. So now we have a huge number of people collecting EI and eventually welfare.
They are replaced (at a more realistic compensation), so the net+/- to the workforce is 0
Do have a difficult time distinguishing between eliminate and replace?
How is this ?The whole board isn't appropriate and never will be and you're complaining about me? As if I'm the first person to tell you to buzz off?! A little sensitive are we?
I will not tell you to leave your home province
I will tell you to drop dead
OK, can I count on your support?If this tax situation drives you so crazy, run for public office and fix it. Since it's such an easy problem to fix, you should have no problem doing it right?
What a pinhead!
That justifies the teachers actions in your world?Are you not aware of police putting police board members that are deemed “anti-police” under “surveillance”? Any dirt they find can be used to help the mmber “see the light”.
So the single mother of 4, who maxes out her "credit card" gets a tax increase vs. the rich couple with only one child ?The concept is simple. In a nutshell we are operating our social welfare system like a credit card. If there are only 100 people in the country/province, each is responsible for 1/100 of it. It matters not who is doing the spending.
I propose each of us be given a “different” credit card, and be responsible for our spending only. At tax time, we settle the difference so those underused their card would get a refund and those overspend would have additional tax to pay. By giving people incentive to save, we hope we can roll back our social spending.
Good for youWell, I did calculus in Grade 13…
Faulty premise ?No, your whole analysis is based on a faulty premise. The Canadian society and economy are not linear systems. It is like listening to an amateur unaware of the existence of the laws of thermodynamics talking about his new theory of gravitation.
No respect, none at allWith all due respect, your poor reading comprehension, superficial understanding of economics, lack of familiarity with concepts I introduced, inability to synthesize data, and short time horizon thinking make me feel you are out of your league in this discussion.
Academic?There are so many academic holes to fill that I don’t even know where to begin. In short, you don’t even know what you don’t know.
B.Sc., MBA, and a designationYou claimed to have graduate degrees…can you at least tell me what standardized tests you have taken, and your scores on them? If you do, I will promise to give you mine. Then it will be obvious to both of us if the discussion is fruitful.
I process quite well thank youIt has to do with the lack of processing power on your part.
I read the first page of that bullshit and got a headache
Police do not and cannot ensure or guarantee law and order. In some cases, too much police inflames a situation like the G20 protests. I am not saying that there should be zero police, but an appropriate number. Unfortunately, 25% more police does not reduce crime be 25%. It just doesn't work like that. It takes a whole lot of people including teachers and police to have law and order in society.How do you get I am proposing a police state?
A lot of people are comparing teachers and police comp
I simply pointed out that a police presence ensures we have law and order and it would be survival of the strongest if we did not have a police force
Somehow you think I am proposing a police state from that?
Wrong again
Actually you said: "As a group they should all be replaced." Not sure where you come from, but all means 100%. If 100% or all teachers should be replaced, that leaves 0 good or bad teachers. That just does not make sense. Different story if you said some teachers should be replaced, but you didn't.I said replace them
That does not imply 0 teachers
I didn't say they should work for free either. I was suggesting that there should be a pay for performance incentive for public workers. In other words, higher test scores, grades, whatever other metrics we want to grade them on should be rewarded with higher pay even if it is $83K. You didn't like that, so what would your solution be given that you want to reduce pay and they can't leave to the private sector since there skills are not in demand.I never said teachers should work for free
And do you realize that replacing a worker with one doing the same job for less pay is called constructive dismissal? So all those teachers that are being replaced would be entitled to severance and EI, maybe more with a good lawyer. If they are 'eliminated' or 'replaced', you would have a lot of unemployed teachers with skills that are not in demand in the private sector as you said. That would be a negative to the workforce until they can be retrained, which costs money too.Wrong
They are replaced (at a more realistic compensation), so the net+/- to the workforce is 0
Do have a difficult time distinguishing between eliminate and replace?
There's been a lot more inappropriate things said on Terb and I'm sure you've heard much worse told to your face.How is this ?
I will not tell you to leave your home province
I will tell you to drop dead
One thing that you've failed to grasp so far is that there are employment laws that cover teachers too. Since those laws will be in the way of how you want to do things, you'll have to run for public office and change them. Good luck with that!OK, can I count on your support?
What a pinhead!
Might as well privatize all public social services (education, health care, etc.) if we are responsible for our own spending only.The concept is simple. In a nutshell we are operating our social welfare system like a credit card. If there are only 100 people in the country/province, each is responsible for 1/100 of it. It matters not who is doing the spending.
I propose each of us be given a “different” credit card, and be responsible for our spending only. At tax time, we settle the difference so those underused their card would get a refund and those overspend would have additional tax to pay. By giving people incentive to save, we hope we can roll back our social spending.l
State govts perform very different functions then Provincial govts and also have a much smaller share of the tax base then provincial govts. They are not directly comparable.I have been pounding the table about this for over a year, yet all the lefties here just think the provincial govt is a bottomless money pit
I am not trying to stain the police, but to show how you violate the principle of justice known as impartiality.Trot out as many unsavoury stories about police as you want, it will not wipe the stain off the teachers actions
I am sure any government agency that has a pulse can see that the funding has to rest with the children. Please give them more credit than that.So the single mother of 4, who maxes out her "credit card" gets a tax increase vs. the rich couple with only one child ?
No. These are not faulty. Your solution is.Growing deficts and debt loads and pay increases for the public sector that exceed inflation. Those are all faulity?
You appear to be a self proclaimed genius, what's your solution
Can you not appreciate self-deprecating humour?Good for you
I did a whole lot more than that and believe me it does not qualify you to formulate policy there teach
There is only one intelligence, the so called “g” factor. You must be reading Gardiner’s multiple intelligence nonsense. No authority in psychometrics buys that stuff and I am not either.There are many types of intelligence, academic being one of them
That is very true. That is why the problem is so intractable.This plan has a snowballs chance in hell of getting anywhere near a policy paper, let alone a subject for debate in the ministry
We don't have to agree, but we don't have to be disagreeable.Your response, however has ensured your voucher idea was dismissed and continued animosity, you self-congratulating prick
No. This is the kind of stuff an educated person is expected to know. You claim to have graduate degrees, so I assume you would know.You quote names, assuming the audience knows exactly who you are referring to
Your anti-intellectualism is heart-felt, I am sure. You sure you don’t have a reading problem? I skimmed it with ease. No headache. It is no more than college freshmen level, I would say.I read the first page of that bullshit and got a headache
No, you do have a reading problem. Your comment was “I thought the education system existed for the benefit of students”. The good professors are saying the system exists to perpetuate the status quo through credentialism:Besides the paper was about post secondary education
The issue (in case you missed it) was public school
I really enjoy talking to people who can add 2 and 2 together. You are right. Taken to its logical conclusion we have to privatize all social spending in order to fulfill the neocons’ nirvana of zero deficits. What else can we do if people don’t want to pay more taxes?Might as well privatize all public social services (education, health care, etc.) if we are responsible for our own spending only.
The same ones who are paying a grade two teacher $83K or spending $400 M to cancel a contractI am sure any government agency that has a pulse can see that the funding has to rest with the children. Please give them more credit than that.
Happens all the time for a multitude of reasons, deadbeat dada for startersWhat is she doing with 4 children and no husband btw?
Much simpler to restrain teachers insatiable appetite for entitlementsNo. These are not faulty. Your solution is.
My solution is to restraint the voters insatiable appetite for entitlements.
Keep pumping up your tires.There is only one intelligence, the so called “g” factor. You must be reading Gardiner’s multiple intelligence nonsense. No authority in psychometrics buys that stuff and I am not either.
I suspect there is another word besides intractable which might add clairity for the reader.That is very true. That is why the problem is so intractable.
Just to be clear. I do not like you and what ever respect you may have captured earlier is gone, due to arroganceWe don't have to agree, but we don't have to be disagreeable.
I judge an idea on its own merit and without preconception. You start with your preconception and justify it with “evidence”. Whether we like each other is irrelevant.
You assumed wrongNo. This is the kind of stuff an educated person is expected to know. You claim to have graduate degrees, so I assume you would know.
Your lack of street smarts and your constant referral to academia as absolute is disturbingYour lack of a liberal education grounding is disturbing. Without a "global" perspective to frame your solution, it is often worse than the problem. This is a perfect case in point.
Your arrogance is sickeningYour anti-intellectualism is heart-felt, I am sure. You sure you don’t have a reading problem? I skimmed it with ease. No headache. It is no more than college freshmen level, I would say.
No as described earlier you have a writing problemNo, you do have a reading problem. Your comment was “I thought the education system existed for the benefit of students”. The good professors are saying the system exists to perpetuate the status quo through credentialism:
Collins’ book…………..cited historic precedent and the theories of Max Weber to argue that the spiral of credential requirements for white-collar work in America has been driven by the natural desire of an educated elite to preserve the best occupations in society for their offspring.
I thought you might enjoy a good read. I could have offered you this instead:
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123782&page=1
No I do not know who Robert Hare is, you name dropping arrogant assholeSame idea, at a pre-school level. No wonder Robert Hare (don't tell me you don't know who he is) said the VSX would be his second choice if he can not use the prison population for his studies. You finance people are a real piece of work.
Good for you, now go kiss you mirrorI wrote the GRE in the early 80s. My v+Q was 1260.
A promise made, and a promise kept.
Agree with you here CTS. Social services have to come from somewhere and we have to pay for them somehow: either pre-paying them through taxes or post-paying them with user fees. My argument is that social services should be paid for with a blend of the two. It's not a foreign concept.I really enjoy talking to people who can add 2 and 2 together. You are right. Taken to its logical conclusion we have to privatize all social spending in order to fulfill the neocons’ nirvana of zero deficits. What else can we do if people don’t want to pay more taxes?
Sounds like you are talking from experience, but is it my responsibility to pay for it?Happens all the time for a multitude of reasons, deadbeat dada for starters
You are putting a bandage on cancer. I operate to remove the cancer. Big difference.Much simpler to restrain teachers insatiable appetite for entitlements
Considering that it comes from a finance person, it is a compliment.Just to be clear. I do not like you and what ever respect you may have captured earlier is gone, due to arrogance
I grew up in rooming houses, remember? You do have a reading problem.Your lack of street smarts and your constant referral to academia as absolute is disturbing
Without a well grounded perspective, you have your head up your ass
There is a difference between general knowledge and highly specialized learning...Perhaps I can find some passages from the Tax Act to run by you and then question you intelligence if you do not gobble it up with enthusiasm
I can live with a blend approach for social harmony alone. Unfortunately social harmony is something many of us do not appreciate until we lose it.My argument is that social services should be paid for with a blend of the two. It's not a foreign concept.
Personally self-interest. Like the people in finance, most of us want to privatize our gains and socialize our losses. Reality of course does not work like that.I can't understand why there is an uproar to pay for social services in the same way: we all contribute something to a pool to acquire resources like medical equipment, staff, etc. and the people that directly use those resources pay a nominal fee.
Firing, replacing, displacing, outsourcing, (whatever words are in style) a bunch of people might seem simple, but has to be done lawfully. Unions or not, if an employer significantly changes the employment contract including reducing salary, it can be viewed as a constructive dismissal. Constructive dismissal usually allows the employee to make a claim against the employer.Btw, I have never heard of constructive dismissal before. Always good to learn something new.
That is a low blow. I am not a dead beat dad. Was yours?Sounds like you are talking from experience, but is it my responsibility to pay for it?
I believe every child has a right to an education
I do not believe in the nanny state for adults, but kids should not be deprived of the opportunity to make something of themselves, just because Mom and Dad were fuck ups
I am very hard boiled and very right wing, however, I guess you take the cake
some patients do not survive an operationYou are putting a bandage on cancer. I operate to remove the cancer. Big difference.
Had much experience operating on $24 B organizations?
I guess with your ego, that does not phase you
What is yours?Tell me, what is your motive for coming to TERB to peddle your snake oil?
Are they an easy target to boost your ego?Are you thinking the blue-collar type will be easy target for your politics of resentment?
Prevent my hard earned tax dollars from being wastedHave you finance boys not done enough damage to the world financial system, and before that, Russia and Chile? What kind of windfall you expect from trashing the Ontario education system?
No, just stating a fact, asswipeArrogance? Surely you are projecting.
Once again your arrogance is on full display, as you assume (incorrectly) that everyone reads and remembers everything you postI grew up in rooming houses, remember? You do have a reading problem.
Growing up in rooming house does not guarantee you are well grounded or that you do not have your head up your ass
General knowledge, such as recognizing the objective of communicating is to be understood and not to pump up you ego?There is a difference between general knowledge and highly specialized learning
Let us know when you acquire some of this knowledge
Until then, I think I will just ignore you
Then why do you want to downgrade their educational system that is among the best in the world to keep the nearly dead alive a few hours longer?I believe every child has a right to an education
Do you have very strong psychopathic tendencies as well? Many works in finance do.I am very hard boiled and very right wing
Very true. But your solution ensures nobody survives.some patients do not survive an operation
To expose the belief that you can have the same quality of education by cutting the quality of teachers. As is, the benefit cost ratio has been moving away from teaching since the 70s. Your suggestion will expedite the process of Americanization of our public school system.What is yours?
You and I will do just fine of course. We can send our progeny to private schools. Keep the great unwashed minimally educated is good for business and ensure our own have a leg up in the job market. What not to like, right? As I said before, you finance boys are a real piece of work.
So how much are they paying you for peddling this nonsense?
Me too. Since I am so frugal with social spending, I expect a good portion to be refunded.Prevent my hard earned tax dollars from being wasted
I think the word you are looking for is wisdom, not education. While education is a pre-requisite for wisdom, wisdom does not necessarily follow education.General knowledge, such as recognizing the objective of communicating is to be understood and not to pump up you ego?
Let us know when you acquire some of this knowledge
You sure you are not the one that can't write?
You have no idea how much it pains me.Until then, I think I will just ignore you
A moderate and well reasoned position. I can live with it.Just a couple of thoughts.
Talking only about government debt is simplistic political posing. A beginners accounting course teaches that debt is a liability, one half of the balance sheet. The other half is assets, which is never mentioned in any of the discussions about government debt. To put it simply, if you buy a house for $400,000.00 and take out a mortgage for $300,000.00 then you have debt of 300K. Disaster, it'll take you 25 years to pay it off. Take it up a notch and you could be $750k in debt. If no one mentions that your house is worth 1.2 mill then you are about to be destitute. So, what does the goverment have in assets? Add these up - federal buildings, crown land, roads, water treatment plants, sewage plants, hospitals, parks, airports, ships, airplanes, etc, etc. What's important is the relationship between liabilities and assets. What's not good is a $500k mortgage on a 300k house. Canadian goverment assets far exceed its debt. It is popular to talk about how much each citizen is in governmental debt, but never seems to mention each citizen's share of our national assets. Calm down, we live in a nice house with a small mortgage.
Now to taxes. We require a package of services to live, some provided by goverment, some by private enterprise. Government provides roads, medical care, law enforcement, education, protection from other countries, snowplowing, infrastructure maintenance, etc, etc. Private enterprise provides cell service, internet, banking,etc. Personally, I have less problem with what the government supplies, and more problems with private enterprise. Granted, government could be more efficient, but don't hold up Bell, Rogers, General Motors, etc, etc as the models of efficiency that will benefit taxpayers. With the government I can vote out the ones that screw up. With private enterprise, I am the one that gets screwed.
Just my two cents worth.
