News   Jul 16, 2024
 81     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 459     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
 565     2 

2014 Municipal Election: Toronto Mayoral Race

How/Why is no one taking this to task?

Why should we not concentrate on those less fortunate, and only those who have all the skills to take care of themselves, BurlOak?

I guess BurlOak grows their own food, can build their own home, and can hunt rabbit like it's going out of style.

Oh, who am I kidding?
 
How/Why is no one taking this to task?

Why should we not concentrate on those less fortunate, and only those who have all the skills to take care of themselves, BurlOak?

Guess he dislikes what the Pope has to say about sharing wealth with the poor. See link:

Pope: Share wealth to poor

Manila Bulletin – Sun, May 11, 2014 8:06 AM PHT

Vatican City – Pope Francis called Friday for governments to redistribute wealth and benefits to the poor in a new spirit of generosity to help curb the “economy of exclusion†that is taking hold today.

He likewise urged the United Nations (UN) to promote development goals that attack the root causes of poverty and hunger, protect the environment, and ensure dignified labor for all.

Pope Francis made the appeal in a speech to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and the heads of major UN agencies who met in Rome this week.

Latin America’s first Pope has frequently lashed out at the injustices of capitalism and the global economic system. On Friday, Francis called for the UN to promote a “worldwide ethical mobilization†of solidarity with the poor.

He said a more equal form of economic progress can be had through “the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state, as well as indispensable cooperation between the private sector and civil society.â€

Friday’s audience came just days after the Holy See was battered in a second round of grilling by a UN committee over its record of handling priestly sex abuse. Neither the Pope nor Ban spoke of the issue. Francis did refer to another topic at the UN hearings: the church’s opposition to abortion, which UN committee members have criticized as an impediment to women’s access to reproductive health care.
 
I'm guessing BurlOak means he or she has a job. Just another person that thinks having the artificial construct that is money makes you a better person than everyone else and makes you capable of "taking care of yourself" by throwing money at others.

Interesting theory, BurlOak.
 
Not for regular parks, but I'd gladly pay a nominal fee to have some gated, urban, 100% dog-free, ornate parks. They have these in London, UK, and in Halifax http://www.halifaxpublicgardens.ca/

The gated parks in London are members only, those members being residents around the square where the park is. You can't pay a fee to get in. After all, the whole point of the gates and fences is to keep the "wrong sort of people" (i.e. filthy proles) out. However, fences around private gardens *can* be scaled, especially in the dead of night. Or so I have heard …
 
I kind of respect that. Instead of giving an answer with little value or one that you're not 100% sold on, you should give an educated answer. If he first consults with his advisors and formulates an educated and developed answer/proposal to an issue it's a lot better than flip flopping on your decision, or giving a punchline answer with little meaning (a la Stintz and Chow, respectively).

We're talking about LRTs here!!! This isn't exactly something that was sprung on him out of nowhere. If he entered the mayoral campaign without being "educated" on LRTs, or without having developed an "answer/proposal" for public transportation, then he does not deserve to be mayor plain and simple. For all their missteps, Stintz and Chow did enter the mayoral campaign with a clear transit plan which is why they have no problem taking a position against Hudak's anti-Toronto, pro-car campaign.
 
We're talking about LRTs here!!! This isn't exactly something that was sprung on him out of nowhere. If he entered the mayoral campaign without being "educated" on LRTs, or without having developed an "answer/proposal" for public transportation, then he does not deserve to be mayor plain and simple. For all their missteps, Stintz and Chow did enter the mayoral campaign with a clear transit plan which is why they have no problem taking a position against Hudak's anti-Toronto, pro-car campaign.

+100!! Please refer to Pink Lucy's earlier post. This is not an isolated incident or due to a particular subject matter. Tory has been like this all these years. No surprises here.
 
Mayoral candidate David Soknacki wants to remove roadblocks that delay building new bike lanes in the city.

Soknacki, the first prominent mayoral hopeful to roll out a bike plan, said environmental assessments take too long.

He vowed that if elected mayor Oct. 27, he will lobby the provincial government to okay faster assessments of bike lanes “where environmental benefits are obvious.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2014/05/23/soknacki_vows_to_speed_up_bike_lane_expansion.html
 
Not this year, but maybe next election:

ivortossell 5:53pm via Twitter for iPhone

Whoa. @meslin: This is huge. @Kathleen_Wynne just committed to giving all cities the option of using ranked ballots!!

It will be huge if it ever gets passed. This is the party that delivered a provincial Financial Accountability Office ... then didn't give it a budget or staff. This is the party that boldly promised a revised sex-ed curriculum, to hell with the bigots ... only to abandon it when those same bigots promised to destroy the Liberals at election time. This is the same party who was fully on board with LRT for Scarborough, until it was thought to be more politically expedient to drop everything and choose a subway.

Colour me more than slightly skeptical when it comes to the Liberals and talk of "promises" and "commitments'.
 
Soknacki is a great candidate.

Chow, especially with her 'vision zero' stuff is also very good.

Tory and Ford are like having to choose between two terrible diseases.

To paraphrase a certain well-known Canadian politician, having to choose between Ford and Tory is akin to having to choose whether to be shot or hung.
 
To paraphrase a certain well-known Canadian politician, having to choose between Ford and Tory is akin to having to choose whether to be shot or hung.

So the 'Chow is worse than Ford' dementia has now affected Tory haters? Make no mistake, I'm not a fan of some of his policies (particulary on transit), but he has been a responsible manager of a very large corporation, and HE DOESN'T SMOKE CRACK IN DRUNKEN STUPORS.

There is NO equivalent amongst the leading and respectable fringe candidates to Ford. The only thing, THE ONLY THING, that 100% for certain has to happen in this election is that Ford must be defeated.

I have no issue with people being passionate for or against the other candidates. But you lose me every time you make a Godwin's Law reference to Ford -- Fordwin's Law?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top