Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Sagacious

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Sagacious

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 1) The constitutional protections you speak of are illusory and were easily removed by Quebec and Newfoundland. 2) Studies show that we would save big just by eliminating the Catholic board and merging students into one public system. 3) Polls also show that a majority of Ontario voters support the move. 4) It is unethical to publicly fund one separate board for one religion As of right now Doug Ford is a lame duck Premiere in need of a miracle to be reelected in 2 years time. Maybe saving a billion plus without the ridiculous cuts that will harm education and student well-being is the chance he has to take. If you call following majority opinion, saving the billions already foretasted by multiple studies and not forcing harms on students a chance. The clown of a premiere could then even blame the bad ideas and squabble with teachers on Lecce, demote him and claim the common sense victory as his own.
  2. The potential savings has been studied multiple times and was calculated at $1.5 to $2+ billion annually. The systems don't compete for excellence. One merged system would require fewer buildings, fewer board offices, fewer board office employees, much less busing and transportation costs. Removal of the Catholic board would be easy and it has already been done in other provinces. Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan are the only three provinces left that publicly fund a Catholic board. Also, the United Nations Human Rights Committee determined that Canada was in violation of article 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, because Ontario's Ministry of Education discriminates against non-Catholics by continuing to publicly fund separate Catholic schools, but not those of any other religious groups. Eliminating overlapping separate boards is an easy decision both ethically and financially. The $1.6 - $2 billion in savings would go a long way to helping the province balance the books without sacrificing the quality of education yet the Ford government didn't even consider it.
  3. I skimmed the replies and it seems most ignored the premise of this thread; which, is real cost savings. The Ford government, that pretends to be all about balancing the books but is actually spending more than its predecessor, has ignored the largest, simplest and most straightforward path to saving a whopping $1.6 Billion+ per year. Why focus on gutting student supports, mandating large class sizes and implementing mandatory eLearning courses that already have sky high failure rates when the combined savings is still nothing compared to axing the unfair and wasteful practice of running separate, publicly funded school systems? Ontario could still service every student wanting a public education without a downgrade in quality and damaging cuts and still save more than one and a half billion dollars annually. With savings like that this lame duck government would have loads more cash to hire friends of Ford or dismantle clean energy projects that have already been paid for or prop up the necessities like horse racing facilities run by former finance ministers. Griping about an inept government aside, it just makes sense to eliminate and merge the separate systems.
  4. At least a hundred years ago I was a young lad that found myself in Kitchener Ontario one night getting "shittered" in this very establishment. I stumbled across this video that was painstakingly prepared and thought it should be shared.
  5. Is Ralph at fault for suggesting they light the signal fire to alert passing ships that ultimately killed the boy. Maybe it was Piggy for lending his specs to ignite it. Possibly it was the fault of boys for being boys and playing instead of monitoring the fire. In my opinion, assigning any sort of power, meaning or importance to ancient works of fiction like the bible is asinine. Railing against adults that cling to fairy tales may feel good but it is ultimately a waste of time. Besides the act is kind of like taking a stand against DVDs, fax machines, physical retail outlets, or cable TV. They are all dead or dying anyway. Sure it may feel productive to hurl logical arguments at those who believe in magic; but, they aren't impressed or moved by reason or reality. Take pride in your superior respect for evidence and "sucks to your ass-mar"!
  6. We all knew that a demographic bubble was coming, yet money was never set aside to deal with aged Boomer cost burdens. As we inch closer to the point that the sick, old, retired fold outnumber the working, governments are trying to clamp down on costs knowing that Boomers are about to bankrupt our horribly inefficient health care system. Sadly, those same seniors tend to be the most vocal opposition to allowing immigration to fill our numbers and skills gaps. Health and education are our two biggest line items and the Ford government who has already lowered provincial revenue is intent on extracting money from the latter. Too many governments tell any idiot that will listen that they can reduce revenue and find the savings by reducing "waste." Then far too many of us idiots swallow that BS. This government is now telling us that the education system is wasteful, classes could easily be larger, support workers are largely unnecessary and students can be cheaply educated online. I think even most "team blue" supporting conservatives know that this is BS. Online classes have a sky high drop/failure rate and for many years separate spaces for students with special needs, learning disorders and behaviour issues have been erased, meaning the average class is far different than the cleanly streamed populations of our youth. Pretending that adding more IEP ladden, anxiety ridden, behaviourly challenged, defiant, parentally neglected students into the same room is an acceptable idea is simply asinine. If this government really does want to lower costs in a responsible manner why is it avoiding the obvious and sensible solution of defunding and merging the separate school system. Can Ontario really afford to ignore a savings of $1.6 billion per year? This government is searching for quarters in the couch cushions while ignoring the bars of gold sitting in plain view.
  7. Sad and touching...
  8. True, but a belief similar to having faith in the lack of existence of unicorns, Snarks or Grumpkins. It is hard to prove a negative but the odds are....
  9. By the evidence of Holy Scriptures? Really? Is that any different than knowing the motivations of Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore or Aslan the lion by evidence of the book?
  10. I suppose it depends on what the group is advocating. So often "right wing" groups are seeking to infringe, restrict or prevent the equal rights of others. I don't hear of too many violent protests where leftists attack a peaceful meeting about reducing taxes for the wealthy.
  11. Dude, quit while you are behind. Way behind. Some homophobic, bigots were violent. Defending such actions is a major problem.
  12. Taxes are used as levers. For a long time is was free to dump carbon pollution into the air. Applying a price to that pollution is a lever that creates incentive to reduce that pollution. The revenue generated by that tax can be given back to consumers to offset the increased costs or used to green buildings, cars, relocate those who will be flooded etc. Business will seek to reduce costs. If it is profitable to reduce carbon emissions, they will. Thus the emissions problem is solved in an efficient, predicable and economically sound fashion. That's why a carbon tax is the most efficient, predictable and conservative way to reduce carbon pollution with the lowest opportunity for waste and corruption.
  13. I am on board with nuclear fission (for 40-50 years) and China is building green energy capacity faster than any nation. I am also on board with strengthening building codes, flood walls, creating funds to relocate communities that have built in flood plains, etc. However, we also have to continuously work towards the elimination of carbon pollution. I think even conservatives know that a carbon tax is the most efficient way to reduce our emissions. Let's put a price on carbon, let them market work to mitigate emissions and use the revenue to soften the blow of the costs of the painfully obvious need to shift away from fossils. Some of the same revenue will help offset some of the cost of relocating and protecting those living near the coasts. At the same time we can definitely stop subsidizing oil and probably revamp nuclear regulations to significantly reduce costs.
  14. Scheer's betting his campaign on more tax cuts; which, according to his plan have to equate to massive cuts to other programs. Our federal revenue as compared to GDP is, historically speaking, very low. More tax cuts are not warranted right now. That plan is irresponsible. We need to keep current tax levels and control spending. Unfortunately, nobody is arguing for that route.
×
×
  • Create New...