[SimonP]

I call bullshit on this post. This forum shouldn't be used as a platform to explicitly solicit political contributions, and this post crosses the line in my opinion.

I think we can all figure out how to give financial support to a candidate if we're so inclined.

Sorry if this post offends you, but if people are concerned about a Ford victory, they really need to stop talking about it and get involved. If you have time, walk in to one of the campaign offices and start volunteering. If you have money, donate. If only 5% of the people on Twitter, on blogs, and on Facebook who are concerned about Ford actually got involved, this race would be transformed over night.

 

[archanfel]

Lets review,
Tower Renewal project: Care to point out any towers that have been 'renewed'?

Revitalization of neighbourhoods with large concetrations of public housing (like Lawrence Heights, which is in the burbs): Wow that was fast, are they finished Lawrence Heights already? Seriously, it has been announced not completed.

The first realistic large scale transit plan designed to concentrate affordable rapid transit expansion almost entirely in the burbs, in order to finally make them less dependent on automobile travel?: OK another plan, with nothing to show for it. Besides, increasingly people who live in the burbs work outside the city. TC is going (if/when) the wrong way. If they really wanted to help, maybe they could have had a tax climate that would have preserved or encouraged employment growth close by.

The "avenues" plan, designed to densify, diversify, and beautify the under-used major arterial roads across the inner burbs?: And as the city's Mid-Rise symposium clearly showed, there are multiple stumbling blocks to remake the Avenues as envisioned. Which is why they haven't been.

By encouraging massive development projects like Woodbine Live in the furthest reaches of Rexdale in order to infuse that dreary, long neglected part of the city with hundreds of millions of much needed investment?: IIRC the TIEG grants necessary to make this plan viable was not enthusiastically supported by the left on council. Keep in mind that that it was the very tax rates on commercial development that had a larger effect outside of the CDB that were the problem in the first place. Since it was not as much as a problem for downtown, the problem did not get the attention it deserved. This is has been an administration overly concerned with optics. after all.

Rob Ford will have an easy time reciprocating in kind. All he has to do is blow smoke up the ass of the downtown set.

Regarding Regent Park, the problem with the neighbourhood is community housing. You can't solve the problem without getting rid of community housing. Ironically, what the city is doing hurts everybody. In the short term, it waste taxpayer money and would not improve the neighboorhood over night. In the long term, poor people would be pushed out anyway due to gentrification. Here is a quote from lady who lives in a social-housing tower in the blighted St. Jamestown projects north of Cabbagetown.

“Oh god, if I could show you some city documents from the recent tower renewal, it's all just fluff language to make people get baffled,†she said. “It's a softener for the gentrification that's coming in. I just wish people would say, ‘Guess what, guys? You're being gentrified. Your buildings are probably all going to be torn down in a few years, so start planning now.’ I wish someone had the balls to tell me that. I think Ford would.â€

The full article here.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...is-why-im-voting-for-rob-ford/article1695994/

 

[archanfel]

In the National Post Q&A he said he'd both consider getting rid of it or at least looking at where the money goes. And it's a fee, not a tax. Personally, I think it should be higher than 5 cents.

And to echo what a number of OPs have said, great post last night, Towered.

Listening to the debate last night, I wanted to put both Ford & Pantalone in a corner for not allowing other people to speak. I despise the tactic of speaking over someone. I find it rude, childish and unnecessary. Pantalone's garden metaphor was wearing thin by the end of the night, Ford looked like he wanted to explode at a couple of points, Thomson doesn't seem to have enough fire, Smitherman came off well and I'm not sure what to think of Rossi. JMO.

Yeah, and the health premium is a premium, not a tax. Except for union workers, they are a tax, not a premium. No, I mean it's a premium not a tax, no I mean it's a tax not a premium, no I mean....

Give me a break. Call it whatever you want, it's an expense forced on to people.

 

[archanfel]

Sorry if this post offends you, but if people are concerned about a Ford victory, they really need to stop talking about it and get involved. If you have time, walk in to one of the campaign offices and start volunteering. If you have money, donate. If only 5% of the people on Twitter, on blogs, and on Facebook who are concerned about Ford actually got involved, this race would be transformed over night.

And if people are concerned that the city is rebating $225 for every $300 political donation, they should vote for change. Not necessarily Rob Ford, but definitely not the same old.

 

[Northern Magus]

retailers took it provincewide to take advantage of the toronto media profile.....as shown above, because it was on toronto tv everyone thought it was a tax they had to pay......so now everyone pays.....Rob Ford did not (as far as I know) say he would get rid of this...just look at where the money goes. sounds like he wants it for the city.

he may not make a good mayor....but there seems to be a lot of misrepresentation of what he is saying in this thread....and then to, basically, call anyone who would vote for him a homophobe is disgusting (IMO).

With absolute respect to you Lucy, I don't believe you've accurately characterized Ford's ideological positions, the intended audiences he's been dogwhistling to, or his chronic propensity to distort and fib.

The fact of the matter is that he has been dogwhistling to homophobes, bigots and haters with his comments on marriage and immigration. Not every Ford supporter will be one of these, of course. But I believe it is indisputable that he has been actively courting these elements into his fold.

And just as he has chronically fibbed about his apparent propensity for drunkenly embarassing himself, Ford is fibbing about the plastic bag fee and distorting it into a tax so that he can create a bogeyman that validates his ideological positions.

Other than that, he has identified less than 0.1% in potential savings but promised to substantially reduce the city's revenue through tax cuts.

If the city really does have financial problems, why should anyone trust the guy who will make them worse?

 

[TonyV]

Towered has written well and I can't drive any points home better than he (well, I think Towered is a he) has done.

Just this: Over a week ago I emailed the Smitherman campaign to express disappointment in George, for not being himself ("Furious George") from the get-go, during this campaign. In response I have been offered telephone canvass training, invitations to rallies, and that is about it.

Rossi, Pantalone, and Thomson would be showing ultimate vanity by staying in the race right now, and I remind you all that the race is not really over --- but it's all but sewn up. It was George's to lose, as of last February, and he let it get away. Ford was hard at work, making all the planetary alignments. Furious George let some-campaign-manager-or-other persuade him that he should hide his real image.

I am very disappointed. Ford is just not fit to lead this town.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

archanfel:

Regarding Regent Park, the problem with the neighbourhood is community housing. You can't solve the problem without getting rid of community housing. Ironically, what the city is doing hurts everybody. In the short term, it waste taxpayer money and would not improve the neighboorhood over night. In the long term, poor people would be pushed out anyway due to gentrification. Here is a quote from lady who lives in a social-housing tower in the blighted St. Jamestown projects north of Cabbagetown.

The problem with RR isn't community housing per se - but the lack of socioeconomic mix in the neighbourhood. St. Lawrence is a good counterexample of what works - and the current RR plan replicates that. In the long run your scenario for gentrification is only true if there is no social housing buildings around.

“Oh god, if I could show you some city documents from the recent tower renewal, it's all just fluff language to make people get baffled,” she said. “It's a softener for the gentrification that's coming in. I just wish people would say, ‘Guess what, guys? You're being gentrified. Your buildings are probably all going to be torn down in a few years, so start planning now.’ I wish someone had the balls to tell me that. I think Ford would.”

The tower renewal has nothing to do with tearing buildings down - but to provide physical upgrades to ensure they last another 50 years. If the intent is demolition, one would hardly be putting money into the building envelope. Besides, the city is required by law (SHRA) to maintain the number of units of social housing. I think someone is having a delusional episode - let's she how she like things after a few years of RF.

AoD

 

[gabe]

I watched the CP24 debate. I will vote for Ford if he bans Ben Mulroney from tv

 

[duper]

Rob Ford is perceived as most trustworthy.

Consider what lunacy that view is.
We're talking about a person who lies as a reflex.

1) Rob Ford caught having a profanity-ridden tirade while intoxicated at a Leafs game. The next day: "No, no wasn't me. No no no no no." Then eye witnesses identify him, and he's forced to concede, "okay, yes."

2) Rob Ford voted to end sidewalk clearing for seniors, and is called out by George Smitherman for it during a debate. The response "No, I supported it." Then Smitherman produced THE VOTE, forcing Rob Ford to embarrassingly admit to it.

3) Rob Ford's DUI conviction is brought up, and again: "No, that wasn't me." That lasts until it's exposed that it was him, then he admits to it.


Whether you believe these are important issues or not, what should strike each and every one of us is that this is a man who lies on impulse. Can you imagine what we have in store over the next few years if he gets his hands on the mayor's chair?

 

[duper]

Does it really matter? E-health, Eye examine v.s. Sex Change. I am sorry, but next.

How about bipartisan support for Smitherman? How about $600 million in annual savings as result of his health budget trimming? How about the wait times reduced? How about the hospitals built?
How about the substantive policy, as opposed to Ford's catchphrases and token plans?

Again, this isn't left or right. TORIES even think Smitherman is an effective leader.

In contrast, Ford offers nothing. He has nothing to contribute. The issues Rob Ford admits to wanting to cut, such as reducing the council to 22, will save less than 1/2 of a percentage point in the total budget. Again, Ford has nothing to offer this city.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

The issues Rob Ford admits to wanting to cut, such as reducing the council to 22, will save less than 1/2 of a percentage point in the total budget.

can this be the reason why some members of council are getting behind him? so they won't be the ones on the chopping block?

 

[archanfel]

How about bipartisan support for Smitherman? How about $600 million in annual savings as result of his health budget trimming? How about the wait times reduced? How about the hospitals built?
How about the substantive policy, as opposed to Ford's catchphrases and token plans?

Again, this isn't left or right. TORIES even think Smitherman is an effective leader.

In contrast, Ford offers nothing. He has nothing to contribute. The issues Rob Ford admits to wanting to cut, such as reducing the council to 22, will save less than 1/2 of a percentage point in the total budget. Again, Ford has nothing to offer this city.

Bipartisan support? Wasn't it the Tories who wanted his head for the e-health scandal? And let me get this straight, he saved $600 million, yet I have to pay for my own eye examines and a health care premium now? Where did that $600 million go? His own pocket? Or did he share it with the guy who would never raise taxes.

To be honest, I don't really mind paying for the eye examines. I had zero wait time the last time I did it. And if the OHIP covered nothing and the government refunded our tax money to pay our own expenses, the wait time for everything would be zero. Of course, for those who couldn't afford it, the wait time would be infinite. One more incentive for people to work harder and hold our future in our own hands, rather than relying on a bloated government. Forgive me for not willing to pay for somebody else's sex change operation.

As for Mr. Ford. I haven't decided whether I am going to vote for him yet. However, I don't vote for a candidate just to stop another candidate. I'd rather not vote at all than to vote for somebody I don't believe can be a good mayor.

 

[Prometheus The Supremo]

Bipartisan support? Wasn't it the Tories who wanted his head for the e-health scandal? And let me get this straight, he saved $600 million, yet I have to pay for my own eye examines and a health care premium now? Where did that $600 million go? His own pocket? Or did he share it with the guy who would never raise taxes.

To be honest, I don't really mind paying for the eye examines. I had zero wait time the last time I did it. And if the OHIP covered nothing and the government refunded our tax money to pay our own expenses, the wait time for everything would be zero. Of course, for those who couldn't afford it, the wait time would be infinite. One more incentive for people to work harder and hold our future in our own hands, rather than relying on a bloated government. Forgive me for not willing to pay for somebody else's sex change operation.

As for Mr. Ford. I haven't decided whether I am going to vote for him yet. However, I don't vote for a candidate just to stop another candidate. I'd rather not vote at all than to vote for somebody I don't believe can be a good mayor.

you come off as a homophobe. how many sex changes are actually performed in ontario per year? it's a relatively small cost in the big picture and more money would probably be spent dealing with the resultant mental and physical health issues that would arise by not covering the procedure. but i guess it's not your problem if someone hacks off their own penis or breasts or even commits suicide because they don't have access to a medical procedure. just a question for a penny pincher such as yourself, would you accept the use of your tax dollars to cleanup the corpses that would result because of said suicides or should people just walk around them and let nature take its course?

again, how many sex changes are there per year vs. eye exams? and if you think that nothing should be covered, why make such a comparative argument? what do you care about eye exam coverage in the first place? you could have easily only said nothing should be covered in the first place. if it was really about money, you would have been glad that eye exams lost ohip coverage. instead, you're upset that trannies get ohip coverage.

 

[nfitz]

I watched the CP24 debate. I will vote for Ford if he bans Ben Mulroney from tv

Enough with the homophobia!

 

[archanfel]

you come off as a homophobe. how many sex changes are actually performed in ontario per year? it's a relatively small cost in the big picture and more money would probably be spent dealing with the resultant mental and physical health issues that would arise by not covering the procedure. but i guess it's not your problem if someone hacks off their own penis or breasts or even commits suicide because they don't have access to a medical procedure. just a question for a penny pincher such as yourself, would you accept the use of your tax dollars to cleanup the corpses that would result because of said suicides or should people just walk around them and let nature take its course?

again, how many sex changes are there per year vs. eye exams? and if you think that nothing should be covered, why make such a comparative argument? what do you care about eye exam coverage in the first place? you could have easily only said nothing should be covered in the first place. if it was really about money, you would have been glad that eye exams lost ohip coverage. instead, you're upset that trannies get ohip coverage.

Eh, because I am forced to pay for it? I would be glad that eye exams lost OHIP coverage if it means I would pay less taxes. Sorry, let me clarify, by "Taxes" I mean Taxes + Premiums.

Let me put it this way. Say a car I would like to buy cost $30,000. Now, if the salesman comes over and say you can get a $300 discount if you don't want rust proof. I would be ok with it since I can get rust proof elsewhere using the money I saved. However, if the salesman comes over and say you have to pay $10000 more and we are not going to give you rust proof, but we are adding this feature that you will never need. I probably won't buy it. Now imagine the salesman put a gun to my head and say you have to take this deal. Well, I am not sure I would call him a salesman anymore. Now imagine this salesman want my vote to become the mayor of Toronto, what would you like me to do?