News   Apr 19, 2024
45 and 61-Storey Towers Proposed near Oakville GO
 1.8K     1 
News   Apr 19, 2024
DRP Reviews Innovative Affordable Housing at Kennedy Station
 855     3 
News   Apr 19, 2024
Lifetime Helping Craft the Future of Toronto's Neighbourhoods
 1.3K     3 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.
MetroMan said:
Sadly, nothing we (the city, citizens) can do will get Rob Ford out of office before December 1, 2014. Short of Ford quitting himself, committing a crime that puts him in jail or an unfortunate case of one too many Timbits, we're stuck with him for 3 more years. All we can hope for is that councillors put him on a short leash and lessen the damage.

He can go through the biggest scandal in city history and still keep his job if he wants it. If it's not a criminal offence that will put him in jail, unable to full fill his duties, he can be stubborn and stay in office even with a 0% approval rating.
Click to expand...


In the last year of Rob Ford's regime, if the approval ratings are way down and any councillor want to keep their job after the next election, he will become a lame duck. Unless there are those councillors who worship his worship.
 
Well, now that we've all had our fun on the Ford-bashing front, what did y'all actually think about his budget? As Adam Vaughn said, despite all the bluster and bs, this was a budget with less restraint than some of Miller's. The priorities were more right-wing and/or populist, but (with the notable exception of the TTC service cutbacks, which I think are always nonsensical given higher and higher ridership) it was notable as not a bad plan. Most of the controversial crap is on the regulatory or pandering side (pissing on WT, painting out bike lanes) rather than actual meat & potatoes financial stuff.
 
Or....the voters of Toronto could simply use better judgment when electing it's municipal politicians in the future.
Click to expand...

Like Hall, Lastman, Miller? Why would they start now?
 
nfitz said:
Really, after the O'Keefe murder in 2007, how can you possibly say something like that?
Click to expand...

How could I say " I have real doubts that shooting ranges are used or connected to crime, and the legal purchase of guns is not the problem when it comes to gun crime."??? I could say it, because I have real doubts that the legal purchase is the problem when it comes to gun crime. Yes, it would appear O'Keefe was killed by a legally purchased gun. The reason I know that is because it was a big part of the story because it is such a rare occurance. I do not believe that allowing the controlled and legal sale of handguns within the city limits would change this.
 
Like Hall, Lastman, Miller? Why would they start now?
Click to expand...

Well, Hall & Miller were able to work with council, and put forward positive city-building policies within a fiscally challenged environment. Neither were thought of as brain-damaged buffoons by large sections of any political spectrum.

Lastman was the first "mega-mayor", and people outside of North York had a general perception that it was well-run, so I can see why the voters would give him a shot. I think most people were aware of his hucksterism thing, but didn't realize just what an embarrassment he would be. But while he was a buffoon, and not a very sound city-builder, he came by it honestly....he wasn't perceived as an angry man on a mission of destruction of the city.

Ford was a well know entity on city council for 10 years. His insanity was well known. And it became very well known during the campaign race. So there's no excuse for him being elected. As a man, he fails miserably...how could possibly admire this man as a human being? As far as his fiscal policies (if you could even call them that), they were so flawed, a moron should be able to see through it. Yet...he still got elected. Who else could you possibly blame but the temporarily (hopefully) lame-brained voting public?
 
Bruvyman said:
I could say it, because I have real doubts that the legal purchase is the problem when it comes to gun crime.
Click to expand...
fair enough, but you also initially said that "I fail to see how allowing people to buy firearms within the city or to allow shooting ranges to operate in the city will affect crime rates and I have real doubts that shooting ranges are used or connected to crime when in this example it's clear that it was all connected.
 
freshcutgrass said:
Well, Hall & Miller were able to work with council, and put forward positive city-building policies within a fiscally challenged environment. Neither were thought of as brain-damaged buffoons by large sections of any political spectrum.

Lastman was the first "mega-mayor", and people outside of North York had a general perception that it was well-run, so I can see why the voters would give him a shot. I think most people were aware of his hucksterism thing, but didn't realize just what an embarrassment he would be. But while he was a buffoon, and not a very sound city-builder, he came by it honestly....he wasn't perceived as an angry man on a mission of destruction of the city.

Ford was a well know entity on city council for 10 years. His insanity was well known. And it became very well known during the campaign race. So there's no excuse for him being elected. As a man, he fails miserably...how could possibly admire this man as a human being? As far as his fiscal policies (if you could even call them that), they were so flawed, a moron should be able to see through it. Yet...he still got elected. Who else could you possibly blame but the temporarily (hopefully) lame-brained voting public?
Click to expand...

+1. My perception exactly.
 
The problem with the Fords is that they reject everything said or done by David Miller and they are currently on a mission to do the complete opposite of him. It's like an 'Anti-Miller War' with a dummy as commander-in-chief
 
Last edited:
From The Star:

Fees proposed for swimming, Riverdale Farm, library DVDs

Right-leaning Toronto councillors want residents to start paying to swim in the city’s outdoor pools, visit Riverdale Farm, and borrow feature films from the public library.

All three activities are currently free, and charging for library borrowing is illegal under Ontario law.

Mayor Rob Ford’s budget chief, Councillor Mike Del Grande, proposed a $2 fee on Monday for outdoor leisure swimming and for visiting Riverdale Farm, which remains under threat of closure. A community group, the Riverdale Farm Coalition, has been given until the spring to develop a funding model to allow it to stay open.

Councillor Adam Vaughan argued that the proposals would hurt poor families. Del Grande, a staunch fiscal conservative, responded that council’s left-leaning faction refuses to endorse necessary fiscal fixes because of an excessive focus on the city’s “most vulnerable.â€

“If every argument always boils down to the most vulnerable — if every single argument, because everything you can do, the argument goes down to the most vulnerable — then we might as well not do absolutely anything,†Del Grande said after a budget committee meeting.

The city already charges for indoor swimming.

Councillor Michelle Berardinetti, another member of Ford’s executive committee, asked for a staff report on the feasibility of a fee for borrowing popular movies. Her proposal, which she framed as an alternative to cuts in hours, came a week after Del Grande wondered aloud whether libraries should continue stocking Hollywood hits.

The provincial government would have to amend the Public Libraries Act before Toronto could impose fees on circulating materials. The library board, not council, would make the final decision.

More than 180 residents have signed up to make speeches to the budget committee on Wednesday and Thursday. Residents can register by emailing buc@toronto.ca.

The budget committee has not yet voted on Del Grande’s and Berardinetti’s proposals.
Click to expand...

I guess children and stay-at-home parents are not taxpayers!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top