News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.5K     0 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cooper said:
Natalie Alcoba ‏@nataliealcoba 53m
Stintz: "I know there are ways we can fund that portion of the downtown relief line without going to people and asking them to pay more"

Haven't we been down this road before, Karen?
Click to expand...

Not to defend her, but predictions are that the relief line will run at a "profit" (ie; high enough capacity to surpass its operating costs as compared to the TTC average) from *day one*. This means the it'll lower the overall operating cost relative to load capacity for the entire subway system. This would make the capital costs the only major hurdle, and issuing bonds or other non-tax measures could take care of that. Compare this to every one of Ford's transit ideas, which end up costing us in both capital and ongoing, problematic operating expenditures.
 
Last edited:
anonymoose said:
Not really. The study says that many individuals have a genetic susceptibility to obesity which, combined with certain environmental factors (e.g. high food availability, low physical activity), leads to actual obesity.
Click to expand...

I was just about to post the same excerpt from the article. Apparently I just couldn't help myself - XKCD 336 in action! (Also, procrastination.)

Does anyone else think that there'll be some backlash against the Fords if one of the younger generation runs, either in Ward 2 or across the city? It is hard for me to be objective, but I think a lot of people would view it as a cynical move and that would reflect on Rob Ford.
 
The video on NOW's site is classic - as he tries to ignore and then explain how his tax increase isn't a revenue tool, you can see Doug's eyes go glassy as he realizes that this question will get asked again and again.
 
euler said:
Asks people not to interrupt him - immediately interrupts a reporter asking him a question.
Click to expand...

This is going to be the pattern, obviously. In fairness, the reporter kept harping on about "revenue tools" when he should have just said, "You approved a tax increase to fund your subway, how are you going to do Sheppard and Finch and the DRL without doing that again?" But it wouldn't matter because Ford might actually believe that when he agreed to the .5% increase, he was actually agreeing they would reduce the already-agreed-upon 1.75% increase BY .5% to fund his subway. It's insane and no one else at council thought that's what they were voting for but....it's not really even a Top 10 offense with him.

Tory has said he'll go the high road here and not ask all the Qs we want asked but hopefully that's because, as implied above, he knows the legal end is night for Ford. We can only dream. I'm sure the police want it to be an open/shut case but surely they want to act before the man has a chance at getting re-elected. I'm not sayiing Blair has told them to pull the trigger by Oct. 27 no matter what but, really, if they're building a case, how can they wait past then?
 
tdotdaver said:
Amazing thread de-railment, again, on a day when there are plenty of Ford-unfriendly topics to discuss. Coinkydink?
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

IMO, there are enough reasons to dislike the Fords without turning their poor health into a morality issue. It's the kind of cheap shot attack that plays into their hands.

euler said:
You neglected to emphasize the part of that research that says combined with an "obesogenic environment", which is why I said that it's very rare for someone to be obese simply because of their genetics (which the research states as well). This is why I said that the Fords are all fat because of the environment they grew up in first and foremost, and not any possible genetic factors.
Click to expand...

Okay, I think I get what you are saying: "Genetic predisposition, while it may exist, is irrelevant because without 'obesogenic' environment/behaviour, a genetic predisposition towards obesity would have no effect."

If that's what you meant, fair enough. It wasn't clear to me from what you wrote before. I could turn around and say that 'obesognenic environment/behaviour means nothing, because without the genetic predisposition towards obesity, people still wouldn't get fat." But it's clear that people tend to assign more weight to environment/behaviour vs. genetics, especially when making moral judgements, because if we said genetic predisposition was the overriding factor, then there'd be no moral judgement to be made.
 
tdotdaver said:
The video on NOW's site is classic - as he tries to ignore and then explain how his tax increase isn't a revenue tool, you can see Doug's eyes go glassy as he realizes that this question will get asked again and again.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
retailestate said:
Deer in the headlights for sure... and with all due respect to the guy he does not have the years of experience that his uncle(s) have in just dealing with people in general... I kind of pity him.
Click to expand...

But he's wearing a suit! He must be competent!
 
Dilla said:
Link?
Click to expand...

http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=196798

Direct Vimeo link:
http://vimeo.com/87502721

"We're not going to bring in revenue tools," Ford told Newstalk 1010 on Monday morning. "I'm not going to sit here and trash the other candidates. You know, they're revenue tool happy. And that's all they talk about."

But the mayor's claims are contradicted by the fact that in order to pay for the Scarborough subway extension, he supported a 1.6-per-cent property tax increase that will last 30 years. Council approved the increase in July, and Ford was one of 28 council members who voted in favour of it.

When asked about that contradiction in the scrum, Ford at first did not respond. Councillor Doug Ford, his campaign manager, tried to get reporters to ask a different question.

When they simply restated the query the mayor started to answer and blamed council for imposing the tax hike. But when Toronto Star reporter Daniel Dale tried to point out his own inconsistency on the issue Ford turned around as though he was going to leave.

"If I'm going to get interrupted, than that's it," he warned.
Click to expand...
 
anonymoose said:
IMO, there are enough reasons to dislike the Fords without turning their poor health into a morality issue. It's the kind of cheap shot attack that plays into their hands.
Click to expand...
I agree. Their being corpulent is irrelevant. What if he were fat and a great mayor? We wouldn't be discussing his weight. Ridiculing his girth is a facile ad hominem attack, and we should be above it, as nakedly brash and unlikeable as this guy is. He is utterly worthless as a mayor, he has no viable plan to move this city in the right direction, and he is a serial liar. Those are the key points of discussion, in my view.
 
pattycakes said:
According to Don Peat, Doug is on The Agenda on Thursday night. Is Doug running for mayor again? :confused:
Click to expand...

It's a little bit annoying and distracting to be honest. I can't recall the campaign manager for any other candidate in any other kind of election being so in front of the camera so often. Obamas' CM? Millers' CM? Harpers' CM? ....????

Yeah - why doesn't Dug just run and let Slob go back to Deco...?

Slob is like a 330lb sock puppet to Dugs' own stump campaign...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top