|
Maybe someone will ask Rob Anders about Nelson Mandela today.
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
Yes, I think Thatcher was an awful woman, but I also know she also was a transformational figure in conservative politics. It's entirely normal that modern day conservatives might admire the effectiveness with which she shifted the discourse in Britain and in the West generally without subscribing wholesale to her worst beliefs. In any case, attacking our conservatives for some crime Thatcher did only plays in a small, hyper-aware left-wing audience. Attacking them for what they've actually done in Canada is a lot more like what we have to do.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
In other news: Alberta attempts to outlaw/break all Unions once and for all.quote:If there’s a hint of a work stoppage, just a puff of smoke from a shop floor, the union will have to forfeit $1 million a day, unless it can convince the court it didn’t encourage the strike talk from locals or random militants.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:31
|
|
|
I think it's a safe bet Harper was pro-regime too, given the circles he ran in at the time, so let's just keep that in mind when he's speechifying about the inspiring struggles and universal message of a certain figure.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
This is pretty scary. So Unions are going to be bankrupted. Super villain evil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
It's important to keep in mind that bills 45 and 46 are specifically targeted towards the public sector unions (which are the largest ones in the province), but yes, this is some really horrendously hosed-up poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:True, but we can bring them back. Ideally I would just charge any vehicle that's registered outside the city, white not charging people in Calgary-proper, who would pay through the taxation system. I agree completely. I think this should also apply to all other city-provided parking, including on-street parking and all city parkades. We might also consider a congestion charge to alleviate traffic in the downtown area and/or increase income. quote:And don't you still have to pay some fee for reserved parking? You sure do, and at the moment there's a waiting list at most stations, I believe. There's still a waiting list for spots in the Centennial Parkade downtown and those run something like $600/month. The average person cannot afford to drive downtown on a regular basis, yet there's still a chronic shortage of parking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
brucio posted:Maybe someone will ask Rob Anders about Nelson Mandela today. Maybe someone will run up to Rob Anders and kick him square in the nuts; I think that would be even better. Even his constituents and the local riding association want to toss him, but not quite badly enough to vote for a not-Conservative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I agree completely. I think this should also apply to all other city-provided parking, including on-street parking and all city parkades. We might also consider a congestion charge to alleviate traffic in the downtown area and/or increase income. I definitely don't think we want to be doing this though. The whole idea is to try and stop people from driving into downtown during peak hours, which is a pretty decent objective I think. Thus downtown parking should be expensive no matter where you're from. Congestion charge I could be on board with, though how many places in North America even have one?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:01
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:I definitely don't think we want to be doing this though. The whole idea is to try and stop people from driving into downtown during peak hours, which is a pretty decent objective I think. Thus downtown parking should be expensive no matter where you're from. I agree; I don't think parking should be "cheap" for residents of the city, except perhaps on-street parking during non-peak times (with a 2-hour max, people can't park there all day anyway), I'm just saying I think people with plates registered outside the city should pay a little bit extra. However: quote:Congestion charge I could be on board with, though how many places in North America even have one? I think a congestion charge would be a better way of accomplishing this. According to Wikipedia, no North American cities currently do this, but toll roads are common in the US and are used on at least one bridge going into Vancouver, possibly more. Ideally, I think a good system would be to have three price zones: 1 for those who live in the zone itself (I believe London offers a 90% discount over the standard charge), another for those who live in the city, and a third for those who live outside the city.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
Hey so after a false start, the NDP is rolling ahead with a beta test for a new database system. Let's check in and see how it's going! quote:All tests are to be performed in Internet Explorer 9. If your system is using IE 10 you can switch to IE 9 compatibility mode by pressing F12 and then changing “Browser Mode” to “IE 9 Compatibility View. H E L P
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:19
|
|
|
It sounds unfinished if they don't feel confident to test it with different web browsers already.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:This is pretty scary. So Unions are going to be bankrupted. Super villain evil. It's managed to produce one of the weirdest alliances in modern politics: the AEPU and the Wildrose Party.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 01:59
|
|
|
Vermain posted:It's managed to produce one of the weirdest alliances in modern politics: the AEPU and the Wildrose Party. quote:EDMONTON, AB (December 2, 2013): Wildrose House Leader and Finance Critic Rob Anderson has issued the following statement on the government’s controversial Bills 45 and 46: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 02:12
|
|
|
Vermain posted:It's managed to produce one of the weirdest alliances in modern politics: the AEPU and the Wildrose Party. I think you mean the AUPE, and it makes sense considering that Wild Rose are mostly American-style libertarians and not Tories.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Vermain posted:It's managed to produce one of the weirdest alliances in modern politics: the AEPU and the Wildrose Party. My reaction too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
When even Wildrose thinks you've gone too far, you should probably just retire with all the bribe money you've clearly been raking in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 02:37
|
|
|
I can't imagine this would hold up (at least not in this form) under SCC scrutiny. I know our freedom of speech isn't as broad as it is down south but I don't think they can make it illegal to TALK about a strike, especially since (correct me if I'm wrong here) it seems like it's on the union to prove they weren't planning a strike, not the other way around. edit: It's also interesting watching this happen in Alberta when Christy is going the opposite way in BC, offering 5.5% over five years plus a bonus based on economic growth to try and pull the unions into another long-term deal. So far the HSA and the BCGEU have bit, and their contracts won't be up again until well after the next election. I don't know if I like the deal but I admit it's a smart move. MikeSevigny fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Dec 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
Pertaining to that, the premier is a little tone deaf on the matter:quote:Speaking to reporters Tuesday, Redford called it a “difficult situation,” but said public servants appreciate the efforts. I advised her to go on strike over the matter and wound up breaking the law! Whoops! PT6A posted:Would anyone like to explain to me why a city tax would be better than the same tax administered and collected by the province? *Example: Edmonton's LRT expansion keeps slipping due to a lack of funding from the feds and the province. The initial plan (in 2009) was for the entire west-to-southeast line to open in 2017. As it stands, the earliest that the east half of the line will open is in 2020... but since there's no firm commitment from other levels of government for enough funding to start construction, there's still no start date for the project. The west half doesn't have any dates, and I'll be lucky if it's open in time for my pending kid to attend university using it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:*Example: Edmonton's LRT expansion keeps slipping due to a lack of funding from the feds and the province. The initial plan (in 2009) was for the entire west-to-southeast line to open in 2017. As it stands, the earliest that the east half of the line will open is in 2020... but since there's no firm commitment from other levels of government for enough funding to start construction, there's still no start date for the project. The west half doesn't have any dates, and I'll be lucky if it's open in time for my pending kid to attend university using it. We're in the exact same boat here in Calgary too. A SE leg of our LRT has been on the planning board for 20 years; the city owns all the land it needs, but has no funding to actually build anything*. The current estimate for completion is apparently 2039. But I'm sure it won't be done then either. Meanwhile there's growing clamour for a new Centre-North line too. I won't say they don't need it, but I will bet they'll never get it. *Except for a west leg of the LRT to where all the richest people live I guess. That definitely got built.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 05:34
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:We're in the exact same boat here in Calgary too. A SE leg of our LRT has been on the planning board for 20 years; the city owns all the land it needs, but has no funding to actually build anything*. The current estimate for completion is apparently 2039. But I'm sure it won't be done then either. Pretty sure that line got build because Bronco owned all that land and got a pretty penny from the city. That line is always empty. Even at peak times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
Demon_Corsair posted:Pretty sure that line got build because Bronco owned all that land and got a pretty penny from the city. That line is always empty. Even at peak times. I know people who use it (they live in Westgate), and in the early afternoon (before rush hour capacity is added) it always seems pretty full when it stops at Downtown-Kerby eastbound. I think it could've been routed better, and I think the routing was due to Bronco's corruption, which is total bullshit, and it should've been run down to MRU, but I don't think it's useless or bad. And is it really necessary that a train be packed like sardines for a line to be considered well-utilized? Really, we should strive to offer a level of service that won't result in physical discomfort on a regular basis, on both train and bus routes. Also, busses and trains shouldn't be so full on a regular basis that they have to pass stops entirely. PT6A fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Dec 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:Pertaining to that, the premier is a little tone deaf on the matter: If modern unions are legislated into a 'strike-or-die' situation, does it matter if striking is actually made illegal? "They can't arrest all of us!" has pretty much always been the underlying theory of unionization. The tories are jumping the gun. The best strategy has proven to be extremely gradual erosion via global competition and increased automation, until unions eventually dissolve. They'll get what they want in the end because worldwide labor can't really organize whereas capital is globally mobile, the conditions for an inevitable victory. Trying to force the issue would just breath life into the labor rights movement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 09:08
|
|
|
Did anyone see the interview with Ford's brother where he rejected the idea that he was a politician and then denounced politicians as being liars, cheats, and thieves?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 12:38
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Yes, I think Thatcher was an awful woman, but I also know she also was a transformational figure in conservative politics. It's entirely normal that modern day conservatives might admire the effectiveness with which she shifted the discourse in Britain and in the West generally without subscribing wholesale to her worst beliefs. Has anyone really gone after Harper for being against universal health care? I don't seem to recall anyone doing it. Or maybe Ignatieff did it in a terrible way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
Dolash posted:If modern unions are legislated into a 'strike-or-die' situation, does it matter if striking is actually made illegal? "They can't arrest all of us!" has pretty much always been the underlying theory of unionization. Just look at Britain or the United States. The advent of neoliberalism involved very vicious strikebreaking, most famously with the Air Traffic Controllers in the USA and the Miners strike in Britain. There was also a huge wave of labour unrest in the 1970s that involved a lot of illegal firings for union organization, and throughout North America places like Wal Mart use extremely hard ball tactics to prevent their stores from being unionized. It simply isn't true that the erosion caused by 'globalization' has been gradual. There is a gradual component, sure, but its punctuated by incredibly contentious and brutal conflicts including lockouts, mass firings and hiring scabs. What the Albertan government is contemplating here would very much be par for the course. Not knowing enough about the specifics of the situation I can't say whether or not Redford is overextending herself but I can definitely tell you that you're misreading the situation if you think the decline of unions was due to 'gradual erosion'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:07
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Has anyone really gone after Harper for being against universal health care? I don't seem to recall anyone doing it. Or maybe Ignatieff did it in a terrible way. Problem is Harper and the Conservatives haven't made an actual move against Universal Health Care. It's true Harper had expressed anti-public health care views in the past and a good portion of the Conservative Party would like to do it, however it's clear that the Progressive faction of the Conservative Party would revolt and split things back into two parties. Even then, it's hard to say how far Harper would go even if he had backing from the Progressives. Odds are he'd simply devolve more of Health Care to the provinces and give them permission to stay public or go private, something he's been doing a bit in office anyways. Really the claim about the Conservatives going to kill Health Care is pure fear mongering... and besides there are plenty of very real and horrible things the Conservatives have actually been doing, like gutting foriegn policy, people should care about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
Shadoer posted:Really the claim about the Conservatives going to kill Health Care is pure fear mongering... and besides there are plenty of very real and horrible things the Conservatives have actually been doing, like gutting foriegn policy, people should care about. ...but they don't. I think it's a much more effective smear to spend money saying the Conservatives are going to take away your grandma's healthcare. The left never plays dirty. They should.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Has anyone really gone after Harper for being against universal health care? I don't seem to recall anyone doing it. Or maybe Ignatieff did it in a terrible way. The Liberals may have done it once or twice. Every election. In increasingly desperate ways. In 2004, Stephen Harper was going to "sacrifice Canadian-style health care for US style tax cuts", and "when he's through with Canada, you won't recognise it" over an image of a dissolving Canadian flag. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qqtCxLq5JU In 2006, they warned of Harper's plan to privatise healthcare as part of their "scary black and white photo of Harper with war drums and a scary narrator" series. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMsqEph7a8I Imagine that ad but the voiceover says "Stephen Harper's stand on public health care? '... Provinces have allowed private health care services in the past. Why should I care? Why should the Federal government care how they're managed?' Seriously, that's what he said. Well, Paul Martin cares very much, Mr. Harper. And so do Canadians." In 2008 they took the election off, out of some combination of being broke, Dion not wanting to go neg, and the party not authorising an ad blitz in the last week. (True story: Dion asked the party to spend a couple million on ads in the last week of the campaign, and the party said "nah we'll keep the money good luck".) In 2011 they took a more subtle tack, saying Stephen Harper was demanding ABSOLUTE POWER and saying he would cut health care over the sound of a flat line. Because Harper wants to kill your family. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP1qHX7qOeg Now that Harper's had a majority government and, um, hasn't destroyed health care, I'm not sure it's going to work any better next time than it did the last three.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:30
|
|
|
I always figured that a lot of the cuts to healthcare funds the federal government transfers to the provinces was part of a long term agenda to put the provinces in a position where they had no choice but to incorporate private elements into health care? I was under the impression this was a foregone conclusion so someone let me know if i'm worng. TIA
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
So the Liberals tried and did it terribly. Now that I think about it, I think I recall the flatline video. Thanks Pinterest Mom.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Harper has cut the rate of growth in healthcare spending which and wants to tie future transfer payments on healthcare to the rate of economic growth, which will quite likely remain tepid for the foreseeable future. That isn't quite the same as actually cutting health care (and given the Liberal record in 90s under Chretien its pretty laughable when Liberals try to spook people about how the scary mean conservatives will cut your healthcare) but it should be kept in mind during a discussion like this one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
lowly abject turd posted:I always figured that a lot of the cuts to healthcare funds the federal government transfers to the provinces was part of a long term agenda to put the provinces in a position where they had no choice but to incorporate private elements into health care? I was under the impression this was a foregone conclusion so someone let me know if i'm worng. TIA The feds aren't cutting health care transfer funds, they're slowing the growth from 6%/yr to 3%/yr or GDP growth, whichever is higher. You'll note that perpetual increases of 6%/yr would have eaten up ever-increasing portions of the federal budget in an unsustainable way. Over the 2000-2010 decade, growth in provincial health care spending was about 7%/yr, but it's actually been <3% for the last two years (and the 3% only comes into effect in 2017, so the provinces came out ahead these past two years).
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Hey so after a false start, the NDP is rolling ahead with a beta test for a new database system. I guess the NDP can't afford to hire a proper web developer? I volunteered to help at my riding office and nothing ever came of it, though they said that they could use someone with my skills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
 This could be smart and also fun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
Probably just idle speculation, but Stevie does has a habit of hitting the reset button when the heat starts building up. As you say, could be interesting. Also interesting listening to Harper's words in the House concerning Nelson Mendela. Mendela held a nation together when it should have dissolved into a bloodbath. I wonder what Harper's epitaph will be?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 17:59
|
|
|
Albino Squirrel posted:
Probably a translation problem. "Appreciate" might actually mean "are fully aware of the scam you're trying to pull here". Similar to when the Secretary of State announced to the press during negotiations to free the American embassy hostages in Iran that he was seeking a compromise. Turns out the Persian translation of "comprise" has a negative connotation along the lines of "compromising your virtue". Cue the riots. Years ago when I did my teaching certificate the way the mishandling of the labour situation in Alberta had crippled the education system was a case study for my education administration class. Might as well try again. Maybe this time the results will be different?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:
I can't wait to hear the talking points about an expensive election nobody wants. How exactly could the Conservatives spin this positively? I mean I don't doubt they'll find a way and probably already have one if they're seriously thinking about it, but to me the optics of calling an election in the early-mid stages of a serious corruption scandal in a majority government are just not good. Opportunistic at best and almost certainly cynical.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
Seriously, an election less than 3 years into a 4.5 year mandate would be hard to spin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
It's always fairly easy to come up with a plausible reason for an election. Here are two: -It's time to abolish the Senate, and I need a mandate from the Canadian people to do so -It's time to clear the air, let the RCMP do its job, and get on with the business of governing. brucio posted:Seriously, an election less than 3 years into a 4.5 year mandate would be hard to spin. Calling an election 3 years into his mandate worked for Chrétien twice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2013 18:40
|
|