News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.1K     0 

Didn't see a post to this blog by Steve Paikin.

Apparently, Wynne was not a gay woman in 2004 when she won the election - or maybe the public didn't notice. Now that she converted, or the public has noticed, they are opposed to her. Couldn't be due to cash-for-access, bribing teachers unions, by-election charges, etc., could it?
 
Pretty much what's going to happen. How are they going to monitor this? If they have to spend resources making sure that people aren't double dipping, then the purported cost savings of mincome are negated.

Just get a job under the table then.

The income payments are designed to encourage people to work. Recipients will keep what they earn, with their basic income payments decreasing by half of that amount.

Single people will receive up to $16,989 per year, less 50 per cent of any income they earn. Couples will receive up to $24,027 per year, less 50 per cent of any income they earn. People with disabilities will receive up to an additional $6,000 per year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/0...hamilton-lindsay-thunder-bary_n_16208370.html
 
Pretty much what's going to happen. How are they going to monitor this? If they have to spend resources making sure that people aren't double dipping, then the purported cost savings of mincome are negated.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/0...hamilton-lindsay-thunder-bary_n_16208370.html

Perhaps the solution is that you don't monitor it - that the demogrant work as a floor, and you let those who are willing and capable to work to do so without penalizing them. Do that, and check back maybe 2 years later and see what happens. Besides, it is not like the current system fares any better at encouraging people to work given the clawbacks.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Didn't see a post to this blog by Steve Paikin.

Apparently, Wynne was not a gay woman in 2004 when she won the election - or maybe the public didn't notice. Now that she converted, or the public has noticed, they are opposed to her. Couldn't be due to cash-for-access, bribing teachers unions, by-election charges, etc., could it?

Uh, where did you get that from? She was already "out" as a school trustee, prior to her winning DVW in 2003 (not 2004). And re "the public" noticing: at that point, the only "public" in such a position was that within her own constituency who voted her in as MPP--and evidently, they weren't that concerned about her sexuality...
 
Guaranteed income I think is a decent idea but I have serious reservations as this being a new way forward and seems doomed to fail in the long term.

As our population grows and automation reduces the number of jobs, many people will have to live off this income and not work as there are not enough jobs for everyone.

The idea is greater efficiencies through automation will drive up corporate profits and the government will have more money to give to people through taxes.

The issue is any student of history can use some common sense and realize, why would the rich pay money to poor people to sit around and do nothing for them?

Yes rich people pay taxes, but I have this almost dystopian sense it will be more like a small percentage of the population will live in luxury and everyone else is barely getting by with basic income funds just to get by.

Therefore I do think its a good way to solve poverty but I have serious reservations about it being a complete solution to your future society in reducing inequality. It seems it would rather cause everyone out of the elites to be at a permeant low end instead.
 
I think for the guaranteed income scheme to work in the long term there will need to be some kind of automation tax to compensate the economy for the hit it's going to take from all the lost jobs. That tax used towards paying the basic income could make it viable. It's in corporations' best interests to agree to something like this anyway, since anyone who ends up poor/destitute from losing their job to automation won't be able to afford the goods/services those companies are producing.
 
The Wynne Liberals seem to be pivoting to the left before election time, possibily in an attempt to gain ground lost by Horwath and the NDP. This is an almost identical strategy to 2014 (and recently by the Trudeau Liberals). If the NDP is smart, they'll avoid he temptation of moving to the centre to the fill the void, and be even more aggressive in putting forward left wing policies.
 
If the NDP is smart, they'll avoid he temptation of moving to the centre to the fill the void, and be even more aggressive in putting forward left wing policies.

This will never occur while Horwath and the Hamiltonians are in charge. The party needs a reboot, which will hopefully happen when they botch another election (or not, the ONDP seems to like to stick to their guns regardless of what is going on around them).
 
The Wynne Liberals seem to be pivoting to the left before election time, possibily in an attempt to gain ground lost by Horwath and the NDP. This is an almost identical strategy to 2014 (and recently by the Trudeau Liberals). If the NDP is smart, they'll avoid he temptation of moving to the centre to the fill the void, and be even more aggressive in putting forward left wing policies.
The NDP's pharmacare announcement is likely an early sign that they aren't moving to the centre to fill the void, but time will tell.
 
I'm very happy about the NDP's pharmacare proposal, and so far the details look pretty good (better than Mulcair's last minute "pharmacare" plan which was really just bulk buying with the hope that "eventually" pharmacare would emerge). It's good to see the NDP thinking big again.
 
They say that Kathleen Wynne is very well liked in Queen's Park — even by those in the opposition. Yet, the public perceives her as unlikeable and as not being genuine and sort of conniving and politically calculated. Today, I got to experience that paradox first hand. And it's so eerie!

Working at Queen’s Park today, I saw Wynne interacting with constituents in spontaneous, unplanned meetings in the hallways, stopping and taking time to speak with them and to listen to them with genuine interest. Then I saw her bumping into members of the opposition and they all seemed to genuinely like her.

I was photographing a member of parliament for a magazine and Wynne came up to us to poke fun at the MPP for being on the cover of Vogue (it’s not Vogue), introduced herself to me and by God… is the woman ever likeable!!! She even remembered my name some time later on her way back and I don't have an easy name to remember. She’s cursed with poor public perception and now I understand why she got emotional about the subject.

I doubt that she's going to keep her job and that must truly suck if you’re a genuinely good person doing the job for the right reasons but somehow can’t connect with people over the barrier of the media for whatever mysterious reasons.

I don't think that is exclusive to Wynne. It's just politics. Every candidate faces scrutiny by the media and opposition when cameras are rolling, and negative press always gets more air time.

Most politicians put aside their differences in person and the dynamic completely changes outside of question period or media availability. Even Rob Ford was respected by colleagues outside of the media circus that surrounded his life. At the end of the day, all politicians understand that they are people first. Same goes for the public. Most people can act all big and tough online or on tv, but when face to face with the person - that dynamic shifts.

I think Wynne's issue has less to do with herself than it does with the party as a whole. She took on a lot of baggage and the party has had to make some difficult decisions that have managed to piss off people from all political stripes. Wynne owns the Liberal's issues, whether or not she was responsible.
 
I'm very happy about the NDP's pharmacare proposal, and so far the details look pretty good (better than Mulcair's last minute "pharmacare" plan which was really just bulk buying with the hope that "eventually" pharmacare would emerge). It's good to see the NDP thinking big again.
I just read their document on this proposal, and it is promising. Implementation will be key. My elderly mother, who lives in Québec, the only province with pharmacare, ended up paying a total of $1,800 for her medications last year, and she is on a fixed income of about $26,000. I'm not impressed.
 
I don't know anyone on assistance or living in social housing that actually reports their side income. The same will be true for this program. Why would anyone report any additional income if it's clawed back at 50%?

On the other hand it might actually save government money over the long run by reducing government expenditures while appearing progressive much like the new Canadian child benefit.
 
This will never occur while Horwath and the Hamiltonians are in charge. The party needs a reboot, which will hopefully happen when they botch another election (or not, the ONDP seems to like to stick to their guns regardless of what is going on around them).

I would love to see the NDP botch this election, but if anything they will probably get a boost only because of Liberal unpopularity.
 
I don't think that is exclusive to Wynne. It's just politics. Every candidate faces scrutiny by the media and opposition when cameras are rolling, and negative press always gets more air time.

[...]

I think Wynne's issue has less to do with herself than it does with the party as a whole. She took on a lot of baggage and the party has had to make some difficult decisions that have managed to piss off people from all political stripes. Wynne owns the Liberal's issues, whether or not she was responsible.

IMO the issue is the total lack of trust Ontarians place in the Liberal government, which is in turn, extended to her.

From all I've heard, Wynne is a good person and great to be around. But people see Liberal issues like expensive hydro, a tax promise broken by McGuinty, rising costs of living and perceived government waste- and associate her as being responsible for all those issues. Yes, she is partially responsible for these problems since nearly no action was taken on the more pertinent issues until this year- but those responsibilities are not hers alone- the policy makers in the back halls of Queens Park are as equally if not more responsible.

Anyways, a perspective from the CBC:

Kathleen Wynne laying out plan to campaign from the left in 2018

With a speech spelling out her vision of government as a "force for good," Premier Kathleen Wynne has sent her clearest signs yet that she will lead the Ontario Liberals into the 2018 election campaign.

Wynne was in Hamilton to announce a project to test the effectiveness of a guaranteed basic income, but her message went well beyond that.

She signalled that balancing the budget on Thursday will provide her government the freedom to embark on new initiatives, and she promised "bold" steps in the coming months to help workers, especially those struggling with low wages or in part-time or temporary employment.

"This is no time to retreat,"declared Wynne in a speech to an audience that included union members and anti-poverty activists at a Laborers' International Union of North America conference.

"People are anxious about their jobs and their futures," she said.

"When I first stood in front of the people of Ontario as premier, I was very clear that I believe government can and must be a force for good. I believe that even more strongly today," she said. "In the days and the weeks and the months to come, our government will reveal more details of our plan."

Wynne's words ought to put to rest any speculation that she will resign before the election, according to two of her most ardent supporters in the Liberal caucus.

"She is not going anywhere," said Deputy Premier Deb Matthews in an interview Monday. "She is definitely excited about the next year, excited about the next campaign. This is really an opportunity to do what she and many of us went into politics to do."

To those who think Wynne will quit, the speech says, "Set that notion aside," said longtime Hamilton-area MPP Ted McMeekin. "We have a vision, she wants to be part of that, I want her to be part of that."

McMeekin said the budget will be "a new foundational launching post not just for the premier but for our party as well."

'Build a fair society'
The speech reveals how the Liberals intend to campaign from the left. Although she offered no specifics, Wynne laid out the general thrust of her three-part plan to "build and preserve a fair society."

Here are three quotes that paint in broad strokes where the premier and her government want to go:
  • "We must do more than simply protect people's wages and their ability to earn a good living. We must work to create a fair economy that provides opportunity and security for everyone."
  • "Building a fair future for Ontario workers."
  • "A far-reaching focus on education, to give everyone in Ontario a fair start."
You will notice the repeated use of the word "fair." Wynne said fair, fairly or fairness 14 times in her five-page speech. The word is also prominent in what the government calls its "Fair Housing Plan" and "Fair Hydro Plan."

Wynne signalled clearly in her speech that appealing to workers will be a key thrust of her re-election campaign. Here's a revealing passage:

"We'll be focused on providing help in areas where employers have withdrawn from their traditional role. We'll be looking at the challenges faced by those who are supporting a family and at the same time working at a minimum-wage job. At a time when companies are choosing to create more part-time and contract jobs, we'll be working to ensure those workers are treated fairly. And we'll be exploring how we can further support workers in an era where jobs don't last a lifetime anymore, and sometimes fail to deliver even basic benefits."

This comes as Wynne's government considers significant changes to the rules governing workplaces, such as paid sick days and vacation provisions.

Wynne 'has done enough damage'
NDP leader Andrea Horwath, who has promised a $15 minimum wage and a universal pharmacare program, is unimpressed by Wynne's "force for good" comment and her left-leaning signals.

"The government in this province has been a force for bad for 14 years," Horwath told reporters Monday. "This premier has done enough damage and it's time for a big change."


Horwath blames the Liberals for the very problems Wynne is now pledging to solve.


"This Liberal government has created a situation where folks are worried about their future," Horwath said, dismissing Wynne as "a premier frankly who's been more interested in her own political well-being, and in feathering the nests of her friends and her buddies in high places, than in looking at what's happening to real Ontarians."


To those who might be tempted by Wynne's politically progressive talk, Horwath pointed to the sale of Hydro One and cuts in the health-care system and said, "Buyer beware."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...n-to-campaign-from-the-left-in-2018-1.4082969


Ironically, despite her new campaign direction- a new study has found that Ontario has become less fair over the last few years:

Ontario is the second worst economy in Canada for younger generations

http://www.gensqueeze.ca/ontario_is_the_second_worst_economy_in_canada_for_younger_generations
 

Back
Top