[zang]

My method is 100% impartial (same applied to all parties) and arguably just as accurate (if not more so) that any other method.

OMFG. You actually believe that, don't you?

 

[zang]

Feel free to show another metric.

Sure, done. Here's a graph of (basically) upward mobility over the past several decades:

(Source: Statistics Canada Longitudinal Administrative Databank custom tabulation and FAO.)

Notice its relative stability during the Bob Rae years (even despite a recession!)? And then the decline during the Harris years? Followed by a modest rise during the Liberals?

Greater job numbers mean squat if those jobs pay less, and there's regression of the middle class.

 

[Videodrome]

Well we do remember when he re-elected in October based on "overwhelming support", but that was only because the other high profile candidate was Keesmaat and not a lot of people know her. I think that was the last approval ratings for Tory if I'm not mistaken.

The last election had fairly low turnout, but that is common on the municipal level.

There were whispers someone was trying to draft him to be the OLP leader. It sounds unlikely, but he would be able to position himself as a credible blue-Liberal 'not-Ford' candidate. I think the strategy would be to put together enough wins in Toronto, the 905, plus Ottawa, and places like London and K-W to pull off a majority.

It makes sense, since Tory is the de facto opposition leader.

 

[Northern Light]

If I do this, I could artificially decide that different events were important to different governments and pick any date I want as the date that the new party is effective from. That would be very biased method. My method is 100% impartial (same applied to all parties) and arguably just as accurate (if not more so) that any other method.
I'll give you that it may be a touch early to judge Ford, with 13 data points. Although it's still not that bad. But the others all have at least 70 months data, so a shift of a few months is not that significant.

Your method is not accurate in any way, shape or form. Period. Full Stop.

It is not impartial either. The suggestion that you can simply be equally inaccurate about everything and everyone and that somehow creates impartiality is bizarre.

Your choices are not only arbitrary, they lack any fundamental soundness or reasoning; as I explained to you, at some length, only a few posts above.

That you fail to grasp this is not a flaw in my argument, nor a virtue in yours.

 

[jje1000]

There were whispers someone was trying to draft him to be the OLP leader. It sounds unlikely, but he would be able to position himself as a credible blue-Liberal 'not-Ford' candidate. I think the strategy would be to put together enough wins in Toronto, the 905, plus Ottawa, and places like London and K-W to pull off a majority.

That would be quite the political journey for Tory (ONPC-Mayor of Toronto-ON Liberals), but I bet he'd rather retire than put himself back into the political arena of provincial politics.

This discussion sort of has me wondering when we'll start seeing the rumblings of potential ON Liberal leadership candidates.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Stop cherry picking data to promote Conservative talking points. And most of all, stop trolling.

You asked him to elaborate on his point, and now you accuse him of trolling? I hate how on discussion forums someone asserts something, and then another person asks for supporting data, only to reject outright whatever is provided. We all know that whatever supporting info he provided that you were going to reject his assertion. That makes you the troll.

 

[zang]

You asked him to elaborate on his point, and now you accuse him of trolling? I hate how on discussion forums someone asserts something, and then another person asks for supporting data, only to reject outright whatever is provided. We all know that whatever supporting info he provided that you were going to reject his assertion. That makes you the troll.

Answering what Harris “fixed” with a flawed and highly partial (despite calling it otherwise—his methods started with a conclusion and just shoehorned cherry picked data in to “prove” it) chart doesn’t really qualify as elaboration.

And if he turns around and calls my follow up inaccurate and flawed, does than then get the title of troll in this game of hot potato?

Perhaps you’ve been absent the several dozen other times he’s come into a forum, made grand glowing *blatantly and demonstrably erroneous, false or disingenuous* statements about Doug Ford, Stephen Harper or Mike Harris?

Perhaps I’m giving the benefit of doubt here and this is a simple case of Hanlon’s Razor?

 

[tiffer24]

NEW: Tory today dropped an announcement for “additional” funding for police to immediately tackle gun violence totalling $4.5M. $1.5M of that is money that can’t be approved by council until October. Another $1.5M is money Ford already announced by the province last year...

 

[Admiral Beez]

As much as I hate the idea of more surveillance, it might be necessary at this point. You would hope that more cameras would at least deter some people from engaging in violence.

Cameras don't deter crime, police do. In the UK they have CCT everywhere, but it's not for recording crime that happened the night before, but more about identifying trouble in real time and dispatching police.

 

[zang]

Cameras don't deter crime, police do. In the UK they have CCT everywhere, but it's not for recording crime that happened the night before, but more about identifying trouble in real time and dispatching police.

In reality, society deters crime. The more we normalize crime, the more it happens (see; familial abuse, drunk driving, etc.). The less society normalizes it, the less it tends to happen. There will still be outliers, but society in the general determines how much crime we are willing to tolerate the anti-social. Police just enforce what society is not willing to put up with.

 

[Admiral Beez]

In reality, society deters crime. The more we normalize crime, the more it happens (see; familial abuse, drunk driving, etc.). The less society normalizes it, the less it tends to happen. There will still be outliers, but society in the general determines how much crime we are willing to tolerate the anti-social. Police just enforce what society is not willing to put up with.

I agree, but I don't know how to address societal breakdown in the high crime areas. Whenever there is a shooting the news shows the mother or the group of mothers crying about this or that, but as a dad married to my children's mother I'm shouting at the TV, where's the father, where are the fathers? Poverty, broken homes, etc.... does throwing tax money at basketball courts and community centres fix it? IDK.

 

[Northern Light]

I agree, but I don't know how to address societal breakdown in the high crime areas. Whenever there is a shooting the news shows the mother or the group of mothers crying about this or that, but as a dad married to my children's mother I'm shouting at the TV, where's the father, where are the fathers? Poverty, broken homes, etc.... does throwing tax money at basketball courts and community centres fix it? IDK.

No, throwing money at basketball courts etc. does not 'fix it' (meaning poverty, broken homes or crime).

What it does, aside from generally being a good investment in a quality of life in a community is provide young men (and when it comes to crime, that's what were talking about) something constructive to do w/their time, so they are a bit less likely to get into trouble.

Unto itself, its not enough, or anywhere close, but it is something positive.

***

On the subject of 'broken homes'..........while acknowledging the challenges of single parenthood; I would like to say, as someone from a lower-middle income background, whose parents parted ways when I was very young, that I still ended up an Ontario Scholar, went to and graduated a top-tier university and ended up gainfully employed, not in a life of crime.

As such, I think its important not to overblow the notion that single parenthood is a primary cause of criminality.

That said, there is an association between singe-parent households and lesser outcomes. Its really measurable in a couple of clear ways, the first is that as you'd expect a single person of moderate income is more likely to be in or near the poverty line
and that impacts them and their children, the simple absence of someone to split the bills with is a challenge. Its also a supervisory challenge when a parent has to work 40 (or more) hours per week, and there is no other parent keep an eye on the kids.

That said, I don't think the challenge there is one of promoting marriage or the value of 2-parent families. I think its one of offering free contraception to every single woman in this country from the age at which pregnancy is possible, such that teen pregnancy in particular, but unwanted/planned pregnancy at any age becomes far less likely.

That will do more to reduce single-parenthood is a single measure than any other intervention.

The second notion is that no matter what we do as a society, some people will end up in one-parent households.

So how can we support that household better, such that we reduce the disadvantages associated with them?

This is about reducing poverty more than anything else. You want that child not to fall behind at school; summer-enrichment programs are key.

But while we can provide some for free; its simply easier to make sure mom or dad has enough money to choose a camp/program/class for their kid; and in most cases they will do just that.

We address such issues by raising minimum wage; by reducing claw-backs on social assistance, by enhancing child benefits, particularly for those making less than $45,000 per year.

If we do things like that, and build some basketball courts, we can make a large difference.

***

Additionally, we need sound community design. (particularly an issue in large TCHC communities that are isolated from other neighbourhoods and are a pure concentration of poverty.

Regent Park's redevelopment shows the way forward. Integrate social housing w/mixed income rental and ownership; provide greater employment opportunity in the area; provide retail, and animate local main streets;
provide central park spaces that are open to main streets, and serve a range of ages, and uses to keep the place busy in a productive way; and try to bring employment opportunity through the trades, during redevelopment to those
underemployed youth.

The solutions are right in front of us.

None are a panacea, and some will always endup in difficulty or in crime; but we can cut those numbers down with sensible choices.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Regent Park's redevelopment shows the way forward. Integrate social housing w/mixed income rental and ownership; provide greater employment opportunity in the area; provide retail, and animate local main streets; provide central park spaces that are open to main streets, and serve a range of ages, and uses to keep the place busy in a productive way; and try to bring employment opportunity through the trades, during redevelopment to those underemployed youth.

I live beside Regent Park, have since 1998. One of the big changes I've seen in the redevelopment is the population of the RGI tenants has dramatically changed. Now most of the folks I see are new Muslim immigrants, with (from what I can see from my kids' friends and close classmates from the neighbourhood) apparent strong family ties and work ethic. I imagine pregnancy outside of marriage is rare. Also the couch surfers and those who resided informally in Regent are gone. I know what I write there sounds stereotypical but I'm trying to state that the demographics have changed so that the criminal element is less. I have no problem at all sending my kids into Regent solo to meet their friends, when in the old Regent Park even I wouldn't venture.

 

[Jonny5]

If anyone was not aware, refunds for contributions to 2018 election campaigns have been pushed out to 2020 due to some changes in procedure.They would normally be sent out about now. If you were expecting a fat cheque form the City in August or September you should know it now won't be coming for about another six months.

 

[Jonny5]

The downtown blitz aimed at muffling the worst offenders resulted in 95 tickets, almost all for speed, police said.
"Noise from vehicles was not observed much by the involved officers," said Sgt. Brett Moore, with traffic services.
One problem, he said, is the lack of an objective standard for measuring when vehicles are too loud.
"An offence is committed when a police officer is able to articulate how a vehicle's tires, motor or exhaust was unreasonable," Moore said. "The Highway Traffic Act does not provide a quantitative measurement for excessive noise."

The aim of the campaign that ran July 15-19 was both to curb, and raise awareness of, noise pollution from cars and motorcycles whose deafening roars are not only annoying, but, according to science, potentially harmful. Mayor John Tory and police held an outdoor news conference in the tony Yorkville neigbourhood to announce the campaign.

LOL. So, there is one problem here and it's not the lack of an "objective standard." It's that July 15 was Monday, and July 19 was Friday, and I bet that the (probably two) officers assigned to this were on duty between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m and stood only around the corner of King and Bay trying to find an investment banker with a mid-life crisis car they could throw the book at.

Why the hell wasn't this blitz done on Firday and Saturday nights, all night after 7 p.m. through to 5 a.m.? Liberty Village, the Club District, CityPlace, all of Lake Shore Blvd.; they could have nabbed a hundred drivers with shitty after-market mufflers.