News   Jul 22, 2024
 392     0 
News   Jul 22, 2024
 428     0 
News   Jul 22, 2024
 468     0 

Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

Well first of all they have Directors of Education, not CEO's.
Secondly, you can look at any budget as clearly see that the majority of it 70%+ goes to instruction (Teachers). Administrative costs are not even top 3 expenses.

We don't want to get too sidetracked down the education wormhole in this thread..........but...

To build on what Picard has said, here's the expenditure pie graph from TDSB for the 2020-2021 budget year:

1667919777691.png
 
Well first of all they have Directors of Education, not CEO's.
Secondly, you can look at any budget as clearly see that the majority of it 70%+ goes to instruction (Teachers). Administrative costs are not even top 3 expenses.

We don't want to get too sidetracked down the education wormhole in this thread..........but...

To build on what Picard has said, here's the expenditure pie graph from TDSB for the 2020-2021 budget year:

View attachment 437826
Thank you for clarification.
 
Oh yeah I agree with you, until you start to realize that your taxes are paying their wages, which I don't have an issue with as long as it isn't misused but then you have those CEOs and other MBAs hogging all the funds before it even gets to the teachers. But maybe I'm wrong and that's not how it works.
My taxes go to a lot of stuff that either doesn't benefit me or I disagree with. Such is the nature of living in a democracy. You have to take the good with the bad.
 
My apologies then. The post came across as a snarky, and I got defensive.


Oh yeah I agree with you, until you start to realize that your taxes are paying their wages, which I don't have an issue with as long as it isn't misused but then you have those CEOs and other MBAs hogging all the funds before it even gets to the teachers. But maybe I'm wrong and that's not how it works.
Yes my taxes go to wages and projects, everyone deserves a living wage, every municipality has projects, they build communities and transportations. Let's try improving the society we live in. CEO's and MBA's have always drawn higher salaries, deserving or not, whether it be under a right or left leaning government. So far the Ford govt. has not been a fair government, quick to blame the Feds and other Parties. Bold face lying, putting the lives of people in peril and cronyism not acceptable regardless of who is calling the shots at QP. Up next? He will have to deal with healthcare workers, whom he thinks he can bully and use as his slaves.
 
Email sent to CUPE members today. I figured that two tiered increase wasn't going to fly.

View attachment 438291
I just wonder, if CUPE informed Doug, that if he doesn’t recall the bill immediately, strike might be looming again. Ford is playing a game, we all know it. He’s probably hoping the union will accept his pitiful offer and leave the Bill in place.
 
Last edited:
Email sent to CUPE members today. I figured that two tiered increase wasn't going to fly.

View attachment 438291

I think the offer is inadequate, but I actually don't have a problem, in principle, with raising the wages of low-paid employees more, in percentage terms, than those of higher paid ones (not to a higher than rate, but a greater increase)

That actually has a very easy way around it, you offer the same fixed raise in dollars per hour (ie. $3 per hour raise) to every employee; this gives everyone the same raise in literal dollars and cents, but will obviously be a higher percentage increase for the lower paid staff, while maintaining the current literal gap between any jobs classes or levels of experience.
 
That should surprise no one.
It might be interesting to know WHEN these folks purchased the land (and when it was put in greenbelt). Did they buy greenbelt land (more cheaply as it was in the greenbelt) that they then lobbied to have removed from greenbelt or did they already own the land when it was declared 'greenbelt".
 
A land value tax would help reduce the incentive to gobble up new land for housing development.
 
It might be interesting to know WHEN these folks purchased the land (and when it was put in greenbelt). Did they buy greenbelt land (more cheaply as it was in the greenbelt) that they then lobbied to have removed from greenbelt or did they already own the land when it was declared 'greenbelt".

The chunk that was in the agricultural preserve in Pickering was bought back in the early 2000s apparently. The rest post-date the establishment of the greenbelt.

AoD
 
While the news does suck, I'd be more happy if they would add WAYYYY more land to the greenbelt as compensation. The chunk of land west of Erin is cool and all but thats it?

The added land in no way compensates for the loss of what they would remove.

They're removing high value sites, mostly close to the City, and offering to protect stuff that isn't under near-term threat.

The proposal nominally includes adding a bunch of already protected floodplain parkland to the Greenbelt, which is a marketing ploy since no one is building on the floodplain or municipal park.

*****

We should expand the Greenbelt to include all of the Paris and Galt Moraines, and all of rural Dufferin County up to near Barrie, and thicken the protection to include virtually all rural land between Guelph and K-W and between Brantford and Hamilton.

We should do that without removing protection from one existing acre of land.
 
It might be interesting to know WHEN these folks purchased the land (and when it was put in greenbelt). Did they buy greenbelt land (more cheaply as it was in the greenbelt) that they then lobbied to have removed from greenbelt or did they already own the land when it was declared 'greenbelt".
Some were purchased before Ford was elected, most after, so there was a tip off. Follow the money and how much is Ford going to profit from this?
 

Back
Top