News   Nov 07, 2024
Neighbouring Condos Rising on Parliament Beside Distillery District
 799     0 
News   Nov 07, 2024
Unlocking UTPro: The Ultimate Real Estate Data Tool for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
 304     0 
News   Nov 07, 2024
Data Centre, Hyatt Hotels Planned at SteelesTech Campus at Highway 404
 858     2 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    46.1 KB · Views: 428
Actually, the idea of how "oriental" people are excepted but their products are not can be linked to Ford making the statement that the "orientals work like dogs".

sno man said:
yea I guess melamine in the dog food or infant formula is just propaganda.
Click to expand...

North American companies have created a market based on out sourcing of production and labor to countries that have no "unions" and thus lower production costs, and disposable workers. (The companies are also guilty of not putting proper quality controls in place.) Such an enviroment existed in the later part of the 19th century in North America which led to the gaining ground of the unions in the 20th century. Now, you might ask what this has to do with Ford in this century? Social protections and controls came out of greater workers rights from unions and work programs during the depression formally initiated by FDR in the states. This really curtailed the conservitive mindset of selling product at all cost, which leads us to the companies using the same conservative mindset of best profits through lax worker protections in Asia. Ford has the same mindset of these companies and the idea that Toronto is a company and is willing to outsource and cut programs from why cities exist, workers. This is course the difference between people distinguishing themselves as those who work for a living, and those who are taxpayers.

Or something like that... :p
 
Last edited:
JWBF said:
North American companies have created a market based on out sourcing of production and labor to countries that have no "unions" and thus lower production costs, and disposable workers. (The companies are also guilty of not putting proper quality controls in place.) Such an enviroment existed in the later part of the 19th century in North America which led to the gaining ground of the unions in the 20th century. Now, you might ask what this has to do with Ford in this century? Social protections and controls came out of greater workers rights from unions and work programs during the depression formally initiated by FDR in the states. This really curtailed the conservitive mindset of selling product at all cost, which leads us to the companies using the same conservative mindset of best profits through lax worker protections in Asia. Ford has the same mindset of these companies and the idea that Toronto is a company and is willing to outsource and cut programs from why cities exist, workers. This is course the difference between people distinguishing themselves as those who work for a living, and those who are taxpayers.

Or something like that... :p
Click to expand...

Close enough but my inner history nerd went bonkers at the FDR mention. FDR didn't initiate worker protections etcetera. In fact he was fairly late to do so. His actions were a part - not even the biggest part - of a worldwide movement (industrialized world) that included labour activists, socialists and yes! even communists (though they did NOT have in mind what the Soviet Union eventually became). Other countries had already passed new labour laws and created social programs well before FDR bit the bullet. A great resource to learn about all this is rdwolff.com

OK, got that off my chest.

Bringing this back to Ford, you are right on the money that he has that neoliberal mentality that the market should be as "free" as possible, which means government should do very little other than protect the interests of capital & business (and with that the market is no longer free, but neoliberals never let intellectual inconsistency bog them down). Government should never do anything to get a better deal for workers or communities because they need to be kept desperate, so they'll take whatever scraps they get and - very important - believe that this is the ONLY way to organize society. E.g. Thatcher's famous line "There is no alternative."
 
The credit for getting out of the great depression belongs to Mariner Eccles. It was his in deniable logic in front of the Senate Committee that enticed FDR to make him chairman of the federal reserve.

"As mass production has to be accompanied by mass consumption, mass consumption, in turn, implies a distribution of wealth ... to provide men with buying power. ... Instead of achieving that kind of distribution, a giant suction pump had by 1929-30 drawn into a few hands an increasing portion of currently produced wealth. ... The other fellows could stay in the game only by borrowing. When their credit ran out, the game stopped."[3]

His testimony.....http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/meltzer/ecctes33.pdf
 
How does outsourcing garbage equate to neoliberalism?
GFL is a Canadian company and employs Torontonians just as the city did.
Only difference is better service(except for chows mom) and no outrageous salaries and strikes.

City is not in the business of being an employer. Cities job is to provide services at the lowest cost to its citizens. This can mean that if a particular service is cheaper and better performed by private companies that is the best choice for taxpayers not unions.
 
TOperson said:
Close enough but my inner history nerd went bonkers at the FDR mention. FDR didn't initiate worker protections etcetera. In fact he was fairly late to do so. His actions were a part - not even the biggest part - of a worldwide movement (industrialized world) that included labour activists, socialists and yes! even communists (though they did NOT have in mind what the Soviet Union eventually became). Other countries had already passed new labour laws and created social programs well before FDR bit the bullet. A great resource to learn about all this is rdwolff.com
Click to expand...

Sorry, brain fart.

jusbokeh said:
How does outsourcing garbage equate to neoliberalism?
GFL is a Canadian company and employs Torontonians just as the city did.
Only difference is better service(except for chows mom) and no outrageous salaries and strikes.
Click to expand...

All the numbers on this experiment are in? GFL is indeed a Canadian company, with GTA workers; however, it is the common practice of a company to out source contracts to simply move one cost from one ledger to an other. A good example is shifting costs for a resident from in inclusive tax to paying a “user fee”.

City is not in the business of being an employer. Cities job is to provide services at the lowest cost to its citizens. This can mean that if a particular service is cheaper and better performed by private companies that is the best choice for taxpayers not unions.
Click to expand...

I think this part has been dealt with already.
 
Last edited:
How does outsourcing garbage equate to neoliberalism?
Click to expand...

Finding the cheapest labour possible is a major part of neoliberalism. If they could somehow outsource garbage collection to slave labour, they would do it.
 
jusbokeh said:
How does outsourcing garbage equate to neoliberalism?
GFL is a Canadian company and employs Torontonians just as the city did.
Only difference is better service(except for chows mom) and no outrageous salaries and strikes.

City is not in the business of being an employer. Cities job is to provide services at the lowest cost to its citizens. This can mean that if a particular service is cheaper and better performed by private companies that is the best choice for taxpayers not unions.
Click to expand...


as mentioned above, the drive for low wage labour (which lessens the income tax base, increases the need for more social services and effectively stalls growth/upward mobility - a living wage? outrageous!) is the neoliberal concept.
and, I believe GFL isn't even headquartered in Toronto - thus, more of an erosion of the tax base.
now, wait a couple years for when GFL, which is already buying up the competition, has a monopoly on the service and cranks up the rates - leaving the city without a choice. heck, they are already suing the city right now for a pan-am contract that they couldn't do on budget.


and, btw, I'd say the service is very much inferior with GFL. Their poor route planning/management and lack of hustle in my neighbourhood clog up traffic every garbage day.

a personal experience: I've been trying to get them to stop driving the wrong way down my one way street every week for over a year. Weekly calls to the city and personal contact with Denzil Minnan-Wong has resulted in absolutely no change to this dangerous and illegal driving - did I mention that I live on a one way street with a pre-school and daycare on it that has these trucks barrelling the wrong way down it during the hours that the kids are walking to school?!
lets just say that those with interests in GFL looking good are turning a blind eye to the many problems and complaints about their service.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top