You need to first understand one's believe. Ford believes in helping those people who are really trying to make a life here in Toronto by working hard and establish themseleves in here.I'm surprised he went ahead with reducing (though not eliminating) the land transfer tax while axing or contracting out thousands of good jobs (not gravy) and cutting city services.
Not all people who drive are rich. Sometimes, people drive because they have no choice. For instance, when I pay for the vehicle registration tax, there was an old coupon crying there when they know they need to pay for the $60 per year. They do not drive much, but they do need to drive sometimes to get to places. I feel sorry for them.To not consider reinstating the vehicle registration tax or replace it with some sort of highway tolling/congestion tax is madness.
Jesus Christ, dude.Rich people as a matter of fact are usually generous. They donate quite a lot of money back to the community. How about the poor? They take drugs and tent in a public place and leave the city with the burden to clean up after them. Do you think they are responsible to what they did?
If they are, then at least they would clean up when they leave.
And here I thought it was netflicks, torrents and blockbusters crappy selection of movies.... the whole time it was the Liberry!!! DAMN YOU MARGRET ATWOOD!!YFor instance library, DVD and video tapes "borrowing" actually contribute to the closure of blockbuster.
That's the problem, Governments rarely 'earmark' any taxes for specific projects - they might get more buy in from residents if they did. THe Car registration tax only brings in about 64 million dollars a year, not enough to really make a dent in Transporation, but perhaps enough to support the Urban Forestry and may be Parks and Rec/public pools of the city....but it must go towards transportation issues and not just general revenues. The Land Transfer Tax should stay and perhaps be used for things such as building affordable housing or rebuilding low-income neighbourhoods.
Events of the past few years may indicate that people with financial and accounting degrees have no certain grasp on the way the world turns. I see that he also has a recent Masters degree in Theology, which might inform the Budget Chief's special brand of sanctimony....and the scary thing is the Budget Chief has a Bachelors in Finance and is actually a Chartered Accountant [/url]
I don't know where to even start here.You need to first understand one's believe. Ford believes in helping those people who are really trying to make a life here in Toronto by working hard and establish themseleves in here.
Land transfer tax and high property tax is bad for the city because it will shift the income by moving those people who want to buy south of steeles to buy north of steeles. The property tax will go to markham instead of toronto. If I am a investor, why should I buy in toronto if I can make more money in Markham? If I am a landlord and renting out my house, I would like to have positive cash flow by having lower property tax. Look at all the shopping malls in toronto vs markham. We are paying 3.36% vs around 2% commercial property tax. Some landlords are losing money here in toronto because of the mill rate and the practice of how MPAC assess properties.
I agree with him that the city has a big spending problem. Outsourcing the city job is a good step because most city workers are protected by unions and union is stopping our society from progressing.
There is a big difference between private corp and government.
In private corp, people get rewarded by spending less and being more producive. People need to account for how they spend the money.
In government, people get rewarded by spending more money and being less productive. (If you save money this year, you will get less budget next year. So you have to spend more to keep your budget.) The top management in ORANGE for instance do not need to disclose their salaries which is estiamated to be more than 300k per year! Do you still think we should not outsource?
City servies are being abused. For instance library, DVD and video tapes "borrowing" actually contribute to the closure of blockbuster.
The city services are good if we have it, but it is ok to not have it too.
It is just like the land transfer tax. People hate it when it was introduced, but after a while, we get used to it. Same idea.
Not all people who drive are rich. Sometimes, people drive because they have no choice. For instance, when I pay for the vehicle registration tax, there was an old coupon crying there when they know they need to pay for the $60 per year. They do not drive much, but they do need to drive sometimes to get to places. I feel sorry for them.
Think about this. When you are young, you can choose to save money; do some investment and prepare for your retirement. You can also choose to spend all the money and leave yourself with no money for retirement. You will then need all the money from government (tax payers) to support you when you get old and will start complaining how government give tax breaks to those who work hard when they are young and forget about how you enjoy your life instead of working hard when you were younger. People have really selective memory. So which kind of people deserve a break?
We should learn to be responsible for ourselves. Other people are not responsible for your life, but ourselves.
I remember I read this on the cover of the magazine.
"The reason problem are not the rich, but the poor." Rich people as a matter of fact are usually generous. They donate quite a lot of money back to the community. How about the poor? They take drugs and tent in a public place and leave the city with the burden to clean up after them. Do you think they are responsible to what they did?
If they are, then at least they would clean up when they leave.
Why? It collected, what, about $50 million? In the 2011 budget Transportation Services drew $173 million from general revenues and TTC drew $520 million. That's about $700 million (about 10 times what was collected) before even thinking about how much policing the roads costs....but it must go towards transportation issues and not just general revenues.
I think it's offensive that you would presume to tell someone how to talk about Jesus. And the fact that it is nearing Christ's birthday, and yet you would deny a person the opportunity to exclaim His name in praise...shocking. I warn you, your anti-Christian sentiments are bordering on a hate crime. If you hate Christians and the Prince of Peace so much, maybe you should move to a less-righteous country!Watch your mouth.
Ha, what a farce.I think it's offensive that you would presume to tell someone how to talk about Jesus. And the fact that it is nearing Christ's birthday, and yet you would deny a person the opportunity to exclaim His name in praise...shocking. I warn you, your anti-Christian sentiments are bordering on a hate crime. If you hate Christians and the Prince of Peace so much, maybe you should move to a less-righteous country!
Choose your choice as the best and worst mayors, during your lifetime.Nineteenth century
Appointed by City Council
1. 1834 William Lyon Mackenzie, First Mayor
2. 1835 Robert Baldwin Sullivan
3. 1836 Thomas David Morrison
4. 1837 George Gurnett
5. 1838 - 1840 John Powell
6. 1841 George Monro
7. 1842 - 1844 Henry Sherwood
8. 1845 - 1847 William H. Boulton
-. 1848 - 1850 George Gurnett (2nd incumbency)
9. 1851 - 1853 John George Bowes
10. 1854 Joshua George Beard
11. 1855 George William Allan
12. 1856 John Beverley Robinson
13. 1857 John Hutchison (resigned)
-. 1858 William H. Boulton (2nd incumbency—resigned November 8)
14. 1858 David Breakenridge Read * (November 11 - December 31)
Elected directly by the public
15. 1859 - 1860 Sir Adam Wilson
-. 1861 - 1863 John George Bowes (2nd incumbency)
16. 1864 - 1866 Francis Henry Medcalf
Appointed by City Council
17. 1867 - 1868 James Edward Smith
18. 1869 - 1870 Samuel Bickerton Harman
19. 1871 - 1872 Joseph Sheard
20. 1873 Alexander Manning
Elected directly by the public
-. 1874 - 1875 Francis Henry Medcalf (2nd incumbency)
21. 1876 - 1878 Angus Morrison
22. 1879 - 1880 James Beaty
23. 1881 - 1882 William Barclay McMurrich
24. 1883 - 1884 Arthur Radcliffe Boswell
-. 1885 Alexander Manning (2nd incumbency)
25. 1886 - 1887 William Holmes Howland
26. 1888 - 1891 Edward Frederick Clarke
27. 1892 - 1893 Robert John Fleming
28. 1894 - 1895 Warring Kennedy
-. 1896 - 1897 Robert John Fleming (2nd incumbency—resigned August 5, 1897)
29. 1897 - 1899 John Shaw (from August 6, 1897)
30. 1900 Ernest A. Macdonald
31. 1901 - 1902 Oliver Aiken Howland
32. 1903 - 1905 Thomas Urquhart
33. 1906 - 1907 Emerson Coatsworth
34. 1908 - 1909 Joseph Oliver
35. 1910 - 1912 George Reginald Geary
36. 1912 - 1914 Horatio Clarence Hocken
37. 1915 - 1921 Thomas Langton Church
38. 1922 - 1923 Charles A. Maguire
39. 1924 W. W. Hiltz
40. 1925 - 1927 Thomas Foster
41. 1928 - 1929 Sam McBride
42. 1930 Bert Sterling Wemp
43. 1931 - 1934 William James Stewart
44. 1935 James Simpson
-. 1936 Sam McBride (2nd incumbency - died November 10)
45. 1936 - 1937 William D. Robbins
46. 1938 - 1940 Ralph C. Day
47. 1941 - 1944 Frederick J. Conboy
48. 1945 - 1948 Robert Hood Saunders
49. 1948 - 1951 Hiram E. McCallum
50. 1952 - 1954 Allan A. Lamport
The Metro Toronto Era (1953-1997)
Beginning in 1953, Toronto was part of a federated municipality known as Metropolitan Toronto. This regional entity had the same boundaries as present-day Toronto, but consisted of the City of Toronto and 12 other municipalities, each with its own mayor and council. From 1953 to 1997, the most senior political figure in Metropolitan Toronto was the Chairman of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto, which was distinct from the city's mayor. The list of the mayors of the city of Toronto continues below; for a list of Metro Chairmen, see Chairman of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto.
51. 1954 - 1955 Leslie Howard Saunders
52. 1955 - 1962 Nathan Phillips
53. 1963 Donald Dean Summerville (died November 19)
54. 1963 - 1966 Philip Givens
55. 1966 - 1972 William Dennison
As of 1967 (during the incumbency of William Dennison), an internal amalgamation eliminated the seven smallest municipalities in Metropolitan Toronto. Of these, the villages of Forest Hill and Swansea were amalgamated into the City of Toronto. The remaining mayors of Toronto during this era are listed below.
56. 1972 - August 31, 1978 David Crombie (resigned)
57. September 1 - November 30, 1978 Fred Beavis
58. December 1, 1978 - November 30, 1980 John Sewell
59. December 1, 1980 - November 30, 1991 Art Eggleton - longest serving mayor at 11 years
60. December 1, 1991 - November 30, 1994 June Rowlands
61. December 1, 1994 - December 31, 1997 Barbara Hall
As of 1998, Metropolitan Toronto and all its municipalities were amalgamated into a single City of Toronto. The mayors of the unified city have been:
62. January 1, 1998 – November 30, 2003 Mel Lastman
63. December 1, 2003 – November 30, 2010 David Miller
64. December 1, 2010 – present Rob Ford
December 9th, 2011
His Worship Mayor Rob Ford and Toronto City Council
Toronto City Hall
100 Queen Street West
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2
Dear Mayor Ford and Councilors,
I feel it is necessary to voice my concerns about a number of the proposed budget cuts currently being looked at by Council. As a former mayor and budget chief I understand the difficulty that goes into crafting a budget and the tough decisions that must be made about certain programs. However, I hope Council will reassess some of the proposed cuts in this budget, especially those that affect the most vulnerable among us.
Among the proposed cuts are decreases to a variety of services and programs that the poor and less fortunate rely on every day to help improve their quality of life. Cutting back on school-based day care, public transit, swimming pools, library services, and nutrition programs for children, have a major impact on young people and the disadvantaged while saving the city a small percentage of the overall operating budget. Itâ€™s simply not worth the damage these cuts could create.
Early learning and care spaces are a fundamental need, not a luxury for many families. Research has shown that high quality, licensed early learning and care supports the development of cognitive and social skills in the early years and enhances school readiness. The proposed cuts would mean an extra yearly cost of more than $500 per child. This would put a significant burden on the average family who are already struggling to pay the bills.
The recreation programs teach young people valuable life skills, while also getting them out of the streets and away from the drugs, gangs and crime that can have such a bad influence on them. They are also relied upon by families who cannot afford to put their children in organized sports. The elimination of nutrition program support means children will be going to school hungry which diminishes their ability to learn.
The cuts to the TTC, combined with a fare hike, are also troubling at a time when transit is needed more than ever in our city. We need a long term plan for transit in Toronto, not cuts to a service that so many Torontonians and especially those of lower incomes rely on every day.
Last, I hope Council will not close the Birchmount Shelter, Downsview Dells Shelter, and Bellwoods Shelter. These shelters are instrumental in helping to get people off the streets or away from abusive relationships and into a safe, warm environment.
I urge Council to review carefully the proposals that have been made and look at the long term consequences these cuts would have. Council should consider using some of the $139 million surplus from this fiscal year to the key programs I have outlined.
City budget cuts should not target the voiceless, the vulnerable, the youth, and the people living in poverty. With a few tweaks the city can still accomplish fiscal prudence while maintaining support for our most vulnerable.