News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.2K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

Hydrogen said:
Yes screenplaying, and as I work in the private sector, I get to watch the people I work with (and for) write off the most impressive stuff on their taxes as "business expenses". They never get exposed in the newspaper. And let me tell you, they buy wine for prices that's make you blush.
Click to expand...

I'm in the private sector as well, I have a union background and I've seen more than enough crap to compete with you. I know a lawyer can ding you for 35 cents a page while the government can extort 50 cents per page. Impressive, huh? I've also dealt with the RCMP and OSC when it comes to white collar crime. Wow, ain't that ever fun. Have you read these recent articles? You want to see real waste?...

http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/281645
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/281772
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=142381

The system sucks and you gotta start somewhere. Turning a blind eye just makes it worse. The wine prices that make you blush were probably just Stintz-like glasses just a few years ago.
 
Thanks for the invite to a pissing contest, but I'll pass. I worked for the federal government and and have more than a passing familiarity with PSAC. And the wine I'm talking about would make you blush. I'll leave it at that.

The links your provided, while interesting, don't relate directly to the subject of the thread. But if you were a politician, and out to dinner, and if someone is buying wine for you that could end up raising all sorts of questions about why they were buying wine for you. Sometimes you just buy the wine because - well - it's better if you do.
 
Sarcasm, sir. Sarcasm. I don't like pedestals or unchallenged opinions.

The links your provided, while interesting, don't relate directly to the subject of the thread.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm... and the fact that you're in the *private* sector seeing insane wine-write offs does? My links are more relevant. Sorry. Until rules are tightened and people really care about the crap going on, it'll only get worse.

I think it's now in two threads that I've asked for someone/anyone to offer a reasonable explanation for allowing Giorgio's dinner date write-off. Nobody has bitten yet. Can I get more directly related to the subject? Before you attempt to answer, I should tell you that I used to serve in Yorkville and I have a bit of experience with the $1200 bottles and the smug Giorgio-type jackasses that frequent the area. The fact that he's using taxpayer money to flaunt and pose is more than a little irritating.

But if you were a politician, and out to dinner, and if someone is buying wine for you that could end up raising all sorts of questions about why they were buying wine for you. Sometimes you just buy the wine because - well - it's better if you do.
Click to expand...

Oh the horror of schmooozing! I alway found a $15 bottle of red good enough. Buying at a restaurant at a 3 to 1 markup will cost me about $45. If I was worried about expensing I think my politician's salary can afford to cover it.

So seriously, what sort of kickback can I and my constituents expect for splurging (that's splurging, not spooging) on a few Mexican businesswomen? In your fed goverment opinion?
 
I should tell you that I used to serve in Yorkville and I have a bit of experience with the $1200 bottles
Click to expand...

In my case, I wasn't serving it.

seriously, what sort of kickback can I and my constituents expect for splurging (that's splurging, not spooging) on a few Mexican businesswomen? In your fed goverment opinion?
Click to expand...

It's about appearances. Read the article. Think of your own assumptions. You assume a wrong-doing. Simple as that. Sometimes politicians just don't win. If they are seen being treated by someone, there will be assumptions of courting for favours. If the politician does the buying, they're wasting public money.

Politics is about people. People in public office have to meet with people all the time and in all different circumstances - and its not always meetings with constituents. If you want to find out about Giorgio et al., and what he was up to, ask him. But don't automatically assume the action of one, or a few, is automatically the actions of all. This "all politicians are crooks" theme is tired. Frankly, from what I've seen, politics is largely a thankless job.
 
In my case, I wasn't serving it.
Click to expand...

I would never have figured that! :rolleyes:

"It's about appearances"

Sure... showing off.

"Read the article"

I did sir, it brought me here.

"Think of your own assumptions"

That's the pre-cursor to further thought and written opinion. Yes.

"You assume a wrong-doing"

Well, I have this problem equating 'office' photocopying with buying 120+ Subway sandwich combos (chocolate chip cookies for me) over a couple days. Define expense account properly and maybe I'll back off. Slice out some of the office budget and let the councillors spooge it on whoever they want.

"Simple as that"

Sure is.

"Sometimes politicians just don't win."

Yes, but they win WAY more often than the lady bagging your groceries for minimum wage. And that's who they represent.

"If they are seen being treated by someone, there will be assumptions of courting for favours."

Such a horrid catch-22. Sorry to harp on Giorgio, because as much as I think the guy is a jackass, he isn't the only festering whitehead on the face of the council (I know that imagery just impressed the shit out of you - go pop him for me). You haven't convinced me that writing off a dinner with mexicans isn't the same as writing off dinner with the family. There has to be something legitimate to it. Or you pay out of your pocket. Simple as that, as some would say.

"If the politician does the buying, they're wasting public money."

Read through my post, while I check out the article.
 
I agree with the general sentiment that this kind of penny-pinching is pointless. There is only one issue of relevence, how much should councillors be given for their office budgets? Debate it for 20 minutes and never speak of it again. Dissecting what they spend their money on is itself a waste of tax-payer's dollars. Do we set up a new beaurocracy or level of regulations to further scrutinize the office budget? More waste, more complexity and less time talking about issues that matter.
 
Ford is a one-trick pony and the fact he has zero expenses is highly suspicious. According to him only people rich enough should be able to hold office because spending your councillor budget is a "waste of taxpayer dollars." All the cuts to plant watering, etc. are symbolic and wouldn't do zip. Does Ford support things like cutting the police budget? Of course not.

Why are all the rightwingers on council a bunch of buffoons? The only articultate conservative voice there is Karen Stintz. They might have to run an "outsider" in the next mayoral election (Fantino? Peter Kent? Dennis Mills?)
 
Instead of his suicide run against Joe Mihevc, it would have been nice to see John Sewell run against Case Ootes (who lost by something like 20 votes last time). This is a very progressive ward and yet Ootes manages to win based simply on name recognition/incumbency.
 
KofK:

Instead of his suicide run against Joe Mihevc, it would have been nice to see John Sewell run against Case Ootes (who lost by something like 20 votes last time). This is a very progressive ward and yet Ootes manages to win based simply on name recognition/incumbency.
Click to expand...

A lot of Ootes' supporters (seniors) are rapidly heading into the box, he wouldn't stand much of a chance next term, I'd imagine.

AoD
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top