[nfitz]

With privatization, York was able to terminate its contract with one of the operators following the strike. The union restarted talks with the other operators within a week and ratified deals within two weeks. Are you really saying privatization did not help to rein in the union?

The strike lasted over 3 months (at the end of the 14th week). York didn't terminate the contract until the beginning of the 13th week of the strike.

I can't remember any other GTA strike running anywhere near as long, and most of the others are not privatized.

Do you feel comfort that after a 3-month garbage strike, that the City of Toronto would then cancel the garbage contract? Given that according to the terms of the garbage contract, the company provides vehicles and facilitiies, yet in York Region, the Region provides the vehicles and facilities, it would take weeks to months to get garbage moving again.

I'm not saying this is a reason that it shouldn't be private. But I'd be more concerned about strikes under a private company - not less concerned. Simply because then you've got contracts and middlemen to deal with.

 

[Miscreant]

I'm sure this has come up already, but would anyone mind giving me a quick rundown of the arguments for making trash collection a public matter--i.e., what's typically argued for by the political left--and a rundown of the arguments for making it a private matter--i.e., what's typically argued for by the right?

If it's the case that privatization saves us, as is said, 11 million a year, why not do it? (To take one metric by which the issue can be adjudicated.)

 

[spider]

Though I don't know why you wouldn't doubt the veracity ... looks like the view from the Gardiner in the reflection. I don't see any reason why a passenger couldn't easily take such a photo. And Rob Ford already admitted that it happened ... so I don't know where you are going with this.

I don't doubt for a second that the photo is real, unaltered and taken by a person in the passenger seat of the pickup truck wearing a white shirt with dark stripes as evidenced by the reflection of said shirt on the inside of the truck window. I do however doubt that the photo was taken at highway speed or any speed at all because if the Escalade had been moving the seams in the concrete wall in the background would have been blurred because they are not parallel to the horizontal features of the Escalade which are not blurred.

Mr. Ford confessed to doing the deed but this photo does not capture that deed, it is a fraud.

 

[Miscreant]

But they are blurred.

 

[Miscreant]

Not to mention that it seems to me that, if you look at the highway wall just behind the Escalade, it pretty clearly looks to be passing by. That's why it's somewhat strained and stretched looking.

^
|

 

[Lenser]

Mr. Ford confessed to doing the deed but this photo does not capture that deed, it is a fraud.

Mr. Ford... does this guy even deserve that kind of respect anymore? Heck, it's Rob Ford - the belligerent, oafish rube who thought he could take on Toronto and bend it to his will, simply by virtue of running off at the mouth from time to time and running away from press scrums whenever he sensed he might be called on to account for his pronouncements and actions (or lack thereof).

And categorizing the photo as "a fraud?" It is to laugh. Again, this guy is all too happy to stumble into his own terribly authentic screwups - and haplessly let the press capitalize on same. His basest instincts would not permit otherwise.

 

[k10ery]

I'm sure this has come up already, but would anyone mind giving me a quick rundown of the arguments for making trash collection a public matter--i.e., what's typically argued for by the political left--and a rundown of the arguments for making it a private matter--i.e., what's typically argued for by the right?

If it's the case that privatization saves us, as is said, 11 million a year, why not do it? (To take one metric by which the issue can be adjudicated.)

Like you said, it just comes down to costs. The Right says that privatization means less paid to workers, and higher labour productivity (fewer sick days, better trucks, etc.). The Left does not dispute this - it is obviously true. Politicians suck at negotiating with unions. But the Left says there are no real cost savings, because the private companies charge more to make a profit.

I don't know where people got that $11 million figure. It is very hard to calculate the true cost of in-house collection, including all rent, depreciation, and overhead costs. The official statistics are cooked to make in-house look cheaper. This study by CD Howe (PDF) says the savings from privatization are much higher. But the Left says that was secretly funded by the Ontario Waste Management Association so it's not trustworthy. Who knows?

 

[nfitz]

I do however doubt that the photo was taken at highway speed or any speed at all because if the Escalade had been moving the seams in the concrete wall in the background would have been blurred because they are not parallel to the horizontal features of the Escalade which are not blurred.

A) They do look blurred to me (as Miscreant has noted).

B) Even my own camera - which is pushing 25 years old (though the model hadn't changed in 10 years then), I can use a shutter speed that's going to get rid of the blur, if I'm using the right film. I'm sure technology has advanced since I purchased my camera (though they still don't seem to have mastered the ability to take pictures without a power source yet ...)

 

[Miscreant]

Like you said, it just comes down to costs. The Right says that privatization means less paid to workers, and higher labour productivity (fewer sick days, better trucks, etc.). The Left does not dispute this - it is obviously true. Politicians suck at negotiating with unions. But the Left says there are no real cost savings, because the private companies charge more to make a profit.

I don't know where people got that $11 million figure. It is very hard to calculate the true cost of in-house collection, including all rent, depreciation, and overhead costs. The official statistics are cooked to make in-house look cheaper. This study by CD Howe (PDF) says the savings from privatization are much higher. But the Left says that was secretly funded by the Ontario Waste Management Association so it's not trustworthy. Who knows?

What remains unclear to me is what positive reasons the Left has for continuing with public garbage removal. If they grant that the private sector yields lower costs, then I'm not sure what other arguments are to be brought to bear on the issue. To my mind, it's ultimately a financial question.

That's to say, if the Left tried to argue for public service on the basis of some humanitarian ideal of unionized workers--you know, claims that unionized workers are given greater rights and protections, are less vulnerable to the vagaries of the markerplace because of their representations and contracts, etc.--then they're on shaky ground. Their position has reduced to one of ideological preference.

By sticking with a financial analysis, they're more likely to broker agreement with others and hence do real politics. And if the Right is right that privatization saves, then it seems to me they win the argument.

Clearly, I'm missing something--as if the situation were this simple, the asinine Right/Left dialectic of modern politics wouldn't be so entrenched.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I always worry about so called privatization. Rob Ford seems to think private companies can solve all the problems in the world. Those companies actually would prefer to run their companies without controls. It is the controls that can drive up costs, but also keep the needs of population in mind. Take a look at this link to see the problems they have with 21 private companies handling the garbage in the region of Campania, Italy (Naples). (You can also download the PDF.)

 

[doug]

Mr. Ford confessed to doing the deed but this photo does not capture that deed, it is a fraud.

Your tin foil hat is too tight.
The only fraud in that image is the subject.

 

[typezed]

So after one totally nuts attempt to dispute the photo, an attempt shown to have no merit after other posters noted that, yes, automobiles do carry passengers with hands free to take pictures, that modern cameras can focus on moving objects, especially when the camera is travelling at similar speed to the subject, and that Rob Ford has already admitted that he was probably cramming for his speech while driving, the writer says, "oh no, I didn't really believe any of that previous stuff, but how about this one other thing. Fraud!". It's like Donald Trump obsessing on birth certificates. Do people do this on purpose knowing they're peddling nonsense, or is this just a result of how their minds work, seeking convoluted explanations when the simple truth doesn't fit their worldview?

Similarly, does Doug Ford believe his words when he tells us that this occurred because his brother is so busy working hard for you that he requires a driver? The picture was taken at 10 in the morning. Busy men in leadership positions aren't travelling to the office at 10am. They're coming in to work at 10 in the morning because a) They're poorly organized and unsuited for the job they do and, or b) taking advantage of their position. The event happened because Rob Ford feels entitled and exhibits poor judgement. A driver is probably a legitimate expense for a mayor who needs to be transported during the workday to far-flung areas in the city But did Lastman and Miller use a driver to get them from house to office in the morning? That's probably a luxury that could be labelled gravy.

 

[Torontovibe]

^^ It's called a big, fat LIE and people will do anything to justify their political objectives. We never get the truth anymore. (did we ever?) All we get is spin, spin, spin. That picture is exactly what it looks like. Attempts to prove otherwise, are just pathetic.

 

[neubilder]

I don't doubt for a second that the photo is real, unaltered and taken by a person in the passenger seat of the pickup truck wearing a white shirt with dark stripes as evidenced by the reflection of said shirt on the inside of the truck window. I do however doubt that the photo was taken at highway speed or any speed at all because if the Escalade had been moving the seams in the concrete wall in the background would have been blurred because they are not parallel to the horizontal features of the Escalade which are not blurred.

Mr. Ford confessed to doing the deed but this photo does not capture that deed, it is a fraud.

Not even Ford is an apologist for Ford, yet you make this absurd attempt to defend him!?

 

[jje1000]

1.75% tax increase this year, 0% the next two- all well under inflationary rates. Services are clearly going to be cut again- but Ford doesn't care- he doesn't use any of them. He wants to be reelected on the pocketbook issue, while damaging the city's ability to serve its citizens.

City manager demands spending freeze of all city services
ELIZABETH CHURCH
The Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Aug. 17 2012, 10:28 PM EDT
Last updated Saturday, Aug. 18 2012, 4:55 PM EDT

An across-the-board spending freeze and a ban on new service initiatives are part of the guiding principles for Toronto’s 2013 budget, according to instructions given by the city manager to senior staff and agencies.

The fiscal guidelines are spelled out in a memo sent by the city’s top civil servant, Joe Pennachetti, and CFO Cam Weldon as staff began to prepare for this fall’s round of budget talks.

It assumes a $200-million gap between the city’s revenue and costs next year and asks for a “0 per cent increase†in all budgets “as a minimum starting point†to closing that shortfall.

The sweeping request touches all city services including the Toronto Transit Commission, libraries, the Toronto Zoo and Toronto Public Health.

The wording of the memo, sent May 1 and obtained by The Globe and Mail, is similar to the request made public earlier this week for a spending freeze to the Police Services Board. The freeze makes no provisions for inflation or wage settlements, which must be covered within existing budgets.

The directive sets the stage for what is shaping up to be an acrimonious autumn as Mayor Rob Ford and budget chair Councillor Mike Del Grande square off against councillors opposed to their cost-cutting agenda.

“We are going to have a difficult fall,†said Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, a fiscal conservative and member of the mayor’s executive. “I don’t know if council has the appetite to show the level of discipline that is required to get the number to zero.â€

Councillor Gord Perks, a critic of the mayor, countered that a blanket freeze is the wrong approach.

“An arbitrary number across the board is never a good way to budget,†he said. “We have a council and mayor that cannot figure out where the city is going. So there are no priorities, which means the civil service has to treat every department as the same – that will not fit the realities on the ground.â€

Mr. Perks predicted departments that met last year’s 10-per-cent budget-cutting target will get an easier ride this year than those that failed to meet that goal, such as the police. He also cautioned that the first draft of the budget prepared by staff rarely survives the budget process, which begins in earnest on Nov. 29 with the public launch of the operating budget.

In addition to cutting costs, council could balance the city’s books by increasing revenues – including taxes.

In a non-binding memo sent to staff this spring, Mr. Ford asked for a 1.75-per-cent increase in residential taxes next year, followed by a two-year freeze. Financial forecast documents prepared by staff earlier this year have assumed a 2.5-per-cent increase in residential taxes and 0.83 per cent for business.

Mr. Del Grande, who preached the need for austerity to the police board this week, said he is not out to close playgrounds or kill programs, as many of his critics would suggest, but to bring the city’s spending in line with available resources.

“I am doing this for everybody’s future,†he said. “Unfortunately, they want me to be the bad guy.â€

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...g-freeze-of-all-city-services/article4487754/