News   Feb 20, 2024
 34     0 
News   Feb 20, 2024
 1.6K     2 
News   Feb 20, 2024
 580     0 

Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

@BurlOak, at least you make sense. (Where did my buddy go? I miss the @LMVDR comedy hour)

I don't know if the federal debt and provincial debt are completely comparable. You would have to look at the fiscal responsibilities and tax income for each jurisdiction and make some sort of weighted comparison.

The rate of increase does stand out though, I'll give you that.

One of the things that would be interesting to look at is the amount spent by each level of government on infrastructure. Compare the amount each spent as a ratio of their income, for example.
 
I can't look up everything, but recall how federal transfers to provinces went. They were drastically cut in the 1990's by the Liberals to balance the budget. They were increased by Harper as he got back to balance.

In terms of transit, I think no federal government provided any money for transit until Paul Martin - he gave $40M (IIRC) for design of Spadina Extension.
Harper gave $700M for Spadina extension, $300M for SELRT and $700M for the SSE. There's also $2.5B for SmartTrack - but it don't really count since it was late in his term.

fed%20t%20chart.jpg
 
In terms of transit, I think no federal government provided any money for transit until Paul Martin - he gave $40M (IIRC) for design of Spadina Extension.

Do you really want to imply that Con governments are better on transit?

The feds have given money to the TTC dating back as far as the first half of the 20th century, under different parties. And Trudeau has committed to far more than all previous Conservative governments combined (even adjusted for 2018 dollars).

And it should be pointed out that the conservatives under Harris almost drove the TTC to bankruptcy. A 20-year+ commitment for funding was tossed to the side so that people could get a small tax cut, and effectively put the TTC into a situation where they’re beholden to higher governments for just about all capital spending. We have no DRL right now precisely because of Harris’ warped idea of what common sense means.
 
To me, $312B is a number that needs to be put into context.
  • When Liberals were elected, it was $139B - that's up 125%.
To put in into to more context, lets look at the period 2005 to 2015, where Conservative Harper can be compared to Liberal McGuinty/Wynne.

Jurisdiction / 2005/06 ___ / 2015/16 ___ / increase
Canada ____ / $ 481.5B*__ / $612.3B* *__ /27%
Ontario ____ / $140.9B ___ / $295.4B ___ / 110%
* - excludes first 2 months under Harper.
**- includes 5 months of Trudeau when he quickly added $5B debt to erase surplus. Thus, Harper numbers actually look better than what's presented.

Put another way -
  • If McGuinty/Wynne were in charge of Canada, our debt would be $397B more.
  • If Harper was in charge of Ontario, our debt would be $116B less.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_government_debt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_public_debt
https://www.fin.gc.ca/afr-rfa/2006/afr2006_1-eng.asp

If you're going to do this comparison, you should do it between provinces. The federal and provincial governments have such different set of responsibilities that this comparison is worthless. The provincial governments across Canada have far more responsibilities than the federal government. Provincial spending outnumbers federal spending by more than 2-to-1 , and the provincial governments are exposed to a lot more financial risk due to their broader range of responsibility.
 
If elected Premier of Ontario, Doug's primary use of his megaphone will not be to support sex-ed crazies or fiddle with abortion regulations or bring business to Ontario (chuckle). It will be to start positioning himself as the next prime minister of Canada. Remember the family chats round Diane's dining room table? "It's Robbie's turn to be mayor", etc and so on. The Fords don't govern, they go camping.

Although I shudder at the prospect of Doug as premier - I remember only too well the dreadful years under Mike Harris - at least we could get some laffs from Doug v Scheer and Doug v Kenney.
 
I also think Doug's not looking too well. Not to disparage anyone's appearance, but he's packed on a lot of weight in a short period of time and his face has the sort of florid look that you see in people with heart conditions*.

(*Zero days in medical school.)
 
I also think Doug's not looking too well. Not to disparage anyone's appearance, but he's packed on a lot of weight in a short period of time and his face has the sort of florid look that you see in people with heart conditions*.

(*Zero days in medical school.)
That's from all his non-drinking and vegetarianism.
 
This whole show is really politically interesting, too bad we are all caught in it! We have the worst possible PC leadership candidate going up against the most disliked Premier in maybe Ontario history, and an NDP leader that is highly disliked by the party base!

Politically, Ford is kind of an interesting candidate because he has his negatives (almost everyone hates him, his personality etc.) but he has a real chance at delivering a chunk of seats in the City of Toronto to the PC party. If he holds PC land and delivers City of Toronto seats a PC majority government is a certainty. I just don't get why PC party members would want to go this high stakes, high gamble route when a majority government under Elliott would be a certainty without the risk?

Attacking Ford's personality and foibles is a great strategy for the Liberals but the problem is they have a leader in Wynne that is more hated than even Ford is.

I don't think the Liberals are doing themselves any policy favours at the moment either. The two recent announcements I recall of the top of my head are: Going 8 billion in debt next year, Gender Equity Legislation. I don't get that strategy. All Ford has to say is: I may be a big wannabe gangster jerk head but I will not go 8 billion in debt next year and I will cancel any plans for Gender Equity Legislation... instant Majority Government.
 
This whole show is really politically interesting, too bad we are all caught in it! We have the worst possible PC leadership candidate going up against the most disliked Premier in maybe Ontario history, and an NDP leader that is highly disliked by the party base!

Politically, Ford is kind of an interesting candidate because he has his negatives (almost everyone hates him, his personality etc.) but he has a real chance at delivering a chunk of seats in the City of Toronto to the PC party. If he holds PC land and delivers City of Toronto seats a PC majority government is a certainty. I just don't get why PC party members would want to go this high stakes, high gamble route when a majority government under Elliott would be a certainty without the risk?

Attacking Ford's personality and foibles is a great strategy for the Liberals but the problem is they have a leader in Wynne that is more hated than even Ford is.

I don't think the Liberals are doing themselves any policy favours at the moment either. The two recent announcements I recall of the top of my head are: Going 8 billion in debt next year, Gender Equity Legislation. I don't get that strategy. All Ford has to say is: I may be a big wannabe gangster jerk head but I will not go 8 billion in debt next year and I will cancel any plans for Gender Equity Legislation... instant Majority Government.
You don't fight him on his personal "quirks or his drug dealing past.

You fight him as an incompetent blowhard about to get put in charge of a $130B budget and a $600B economy. Do you want him in charge of your pension? How about teacher negotiations? Where will he cut?
 
No doubt much worse and thanks for the education but that is the direction we're headed under Wynne.

I'll say it three times:

$312,000,000,000 and climbing.

Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.
Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.
Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.

You exquisitely represent the ill-informed and reactionary hyperbole of Ford. Good job! Keep it up. Some don't yet realize the idiocy of the man.

Since you use the term "sub-sovereign" in a way you won't be able to explain in cogent terms, let alone in context, allow me to post the list of largest *sovereign* debtors in the world:
upload_2018-3-12_10-40-37.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

Ontario's debt is something to be concerned about, without doubt. All the more reason to not have a buffoon with a past in crime sitting on top of it.

If, by "sub-sovereign" you mean a geographical political region within a nation, Ontario doesn't even come close to many US states when *measured on the same criteria*.

Go ahead, make my day, have another shot....
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-3-12_10-40-37.png
    upload_2018-3-12_10-40-37.png
    154.9 KB · Views: 397
Once again you confuse the individual named Doug Ford (no criminal activity) with the late individual named Rob Ford. Shall we continue to judge all politicians then by the behavior of their siblings (Justin Trudeau's drug addict brother, Obama's Trump supporting half brother?) parents (Justin Trudeau's mentally ill mother) and spouses (Hillary Clinton's impeached womanizing husband)? So Wynne's deputy minister of education was convicted of possession of child porn, yet Doug Ford is the politician who associates with criminals?

It really is fascinating observing all the inconsistencies, goalpost moving, blatant lying and unfair comparisons that constitutes "reasoning" on the far right. It's not unlike like watching turds rising in an overflowing toilet bowl.

So, no, dum dum, sorry to disappoint, but no confusion here. Just for the record, it's sleazy as hell (and unfair to boot) to equate two completely unrelated situations and pronounce them to be exactly the same. Like, say, roping a politician to the actions - or illnesses, as you bizarrely do here - of his non-politician family members as if that's synonymous with 2 politicians from the same family who have the same goals, use the same tactics and act as a team. The Clintons are actually not a bad comparison in this instance, though certainly not in the way that you think. Of course one can hardly blame Hillary for her scumbag hubby's philandering (and worse), but one can blame her for covering for him by demonizing and slut shaming the women he harassed who had the temerity to publicly complain about him. As she did.

The Clintons have always been a team: They support the same neoliberal economics (the rich get everything) and neoconservative foreign policy (endless bombings of the enemy-du-jour); during the last presidential election, Hillary tried to take credit for many of her husband's "accomplishments," just as Ford did during the leadership race, acting at times as if he had been the one-term Tabloid Mayor and not his dullard baby bro. Slob and Thug were another political team, though it was less a partnership of equals - as in the case of the Clintons - than that of a would-be puppet master and his pawn. Ah, but we're talking about the Fords' more blatant criminal side, aren't we? Well, somebody gave the orders for all the ugly, violent shit that happened during the Great Crack Tape Controversy of 2013, and Thug was the more obviously dominant one of the pair. Let's be blunt, shall we? Slob was not exactly the manipulative mastermind type. Neither is Thug, but that's more due to ability than intent, and he clearly fancies himself a "fixer." I think he was the far more likely of the pair to arrange for inconvenient obstacles to be harshly dealt with, and it's hardly coincidental that all the people who received smack-downs during the period under discussion got in the Fords' way.

One might also add that of the all the people mentioned on your idiotic laundry list, Thug was the only actual criminal thanks to his past as a drug dealer. Oh, yeah, "youthful indiscretion," right? While you simultaneously screech that the liberals are terrorists, Wynne is a "demon (!)," and you attack Trudeau's mother for being mentally ill and his brother for a drug addict. Oh, and you try to paint Wynne with the child porn brush, your classiest move yet. My goodness, you're stupid.
 
To me, $312B is a number that needs to be put into context.
  • When Liberals were elected, it was $139B - that's up 125%.
To put in into to more context, lets look at the period 2005 to 2015, where Conservative Harper can be compared to Liberal McGuinty/Wynne.

Jurisdiction / 2005/06 ___ / 2015/16 ___ / increase
Canada ____ / $ 481.5B*__ / $612.3B* *__ /27%
Ontario ____ / $140.9B ___ / $295.4B ___ / 110%
* - excludes first 2 months under Harper.
**- includes 5 months of Trudeau when he quickly added $5B debt to erase surplus. Thus, Harper numbers actually look better than what's presented.

Put another way -
  • If McGuinty/Wynne were in charge of Canada, our debt would be $397B more.
  • If Harper was in charge of Ontario, our debt would be $116B less.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_government_debt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_public_debt
https://www.fin.gc.ca/afr-rfa/2006/afr2006_1-eng.asp
I'm guessing that if we had an extra $116B, building the DRL would be closer to being done.
 
No doubt much worse and thanks for the education but that is the direction we're headed under Wynne.

I'll say it three times:

$312,000,000,000 and climbing.

Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.
Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.
Ontario is the largest sub sovereign debtor on earth.
Is that like saying Beetlejuice or Bloody Mary three times... just because you say something three times doesn't mean it becomes the "truth", or gospel, and cannot be challenged or put into context.
 

Top