Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
geoffrey

We pay while Indians live in luxury

Recommended Posts

This is a little bit of an issue for me.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/column...4b-2c96de049216

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/s...65c0&k=4124

Couple of links...

Anyways, we are paying for 600 squatters, not all Indians, but mostly, to hang out in hotels while their squatting area is repaired. I honestly can't believe this. The government doesn't help you if your house burns to the ground... Red Cross brings you some stuff to get you by until insurance, but no government will lift a finger.

But God forbid if some Indians living in accomodations they don't even pay for may be exposed to asbestos! They put them up in hotels!! A million bucks of our money.

It's crazy. Firstly, why can't they take care of a building? These barracks were in good condition when they were turned over, now they are a disgusting unsightly mess. I know the asbestos isn't their fault, but drive by this 'Black Bear Crossing' one day and you'll see what I mean. It's just horrible.

Secondly, why do we pay for their accomodations when they don't even pay for the use of our buildings?

Well, we quickly get their reasoning, with resident Bill saying that 'It's our land!"... what a cop out. I don't care who's land it is, people need to take care of their buildings.

Why isn't Tsuu Tina paying for their own? They are constructing a multi-million dollar casino (oh how that's going to help them <_<), it's not like they don't have the money.

Bottom line it's not our responsibility to provide hotels to squatters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they're not all indians, then why do you single them out as "indians"?

And if your idea of luxury is a hotel then you need to perhaps get out a little more.

This would be an interesting topic worth looking at a little deeper if it wasn't framed in such an obviously bigoted way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And if your idea of luxury is a hotel then you need to perhaps get out a little more.

If you were a squatter, and didn't pay rent, being put up in a hotel with three squares a day and new clothes, that would be a hardship?

So what's your idea of luxury for a squatter?

Don't know where you've been,but I do know where you can go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reserve system needs to be replaced. The current state is unnacceptable. Not because Indian's aren't getting money from the government, they get plenty and don't have to pay taxes. However problems such as alcohol abuse, drug abuse, and domestic abuse, are rampant on the reserves. For much too long the government has simply thrown money at the problem. But if you give an alcoholic more money, all that means is another 12 pack. I think we should stop the cycle, get aboriginals to start paying taxes like the rest of Canadian's. What I'd prefer to do is give Natives 20,000$ that they must spend on education and only education. Their also has to be more accountability for were money goes on the reserves as well.

But when we say that the government hasn't done enough for natives, they have provided them with more then enough money. However the government has for the past century failed to address any social problems on reserves, the only response has been to either ignore it, or throw money at a problem hoping it will go away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they're not all indians, then why do you single them out as "indians"?

And if your idea of luxury is a hotel then you need to perhaps get out a little more.

This would be an interesting topic worth looking at a little deeper if it wasn't framed in such an obviously bigoted way.

Why? Because only Indians would get such a deal. If we were talking about a run down apartment complex full of your standard non-Indian vagrants, then they'd just be removed the building demolished.

Instead, we fix the building, and keep them in hotels.

That's bigotry my friend, when our government treats one race in a superior manner to another.

And yes, a hotel is extremly luxorious for many people. For me? Not really, I'm sure it's not a 5 star palace. But for you to say a hotel isn't great, that's definitely your silver spoon socialist syndrome showing through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear geoffrey,

from your link...

Prentice, told reporters Friday at the Eden Valley reserve near Longview, that he hopes people can move back into the rundown housing complex on the southern edge of Calgary as soon as the buildings are safe.

The Calgary Centre-North MP added he wants people living in the former military barracks this winter, until a long-term solution can be found for housing on the reserve.

"We will look at all the alternatives, but you know, it does seem as though most of the units at Black Bear Crossing can be rendered quite safe, quite habitable, for the course of this winter," said Prentice, breaking his week-long silence on the issue.

( My wife and I have been on the Eden Valley Reserve too, it is part of the Stoney Tribe and it is administered out of Morley). My wife and I have been on Tsu'u T'ina (or Sarcee), perhaps a hundred or more times. Once, we found ourselves trying to catch some stray dogs, and wound up on the old DND weapons range...a bit harrowing!

There seems to be some unexplained things here, like why does the gov't want them back in that particular housing? Why is it any of the government's business where they live? How did Health Canada get there? If it was old gov't property, I suppose the gov't must take some responsibility to hand over a non-fatal building, but was that ever negotiated when the lease was signed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There seems to be some unexplained things here, like why does the gov't want them back in that particular housing? Why is it any of the government's business where they live? How did Health Canada get there? If it was old gov't property, I suppose the gov't must take some responsibility to hand over a non-fatal building, but was that ever negotiated when the lease was signed?

Also in the equation is the fact that the Tsu'u T'ina don't want these squatters back. They are about to build a huge casino in those parts and these squatters will be a hinderance in attracting tourists to their casino.

Good question,why is Prentice pushing to have them returned.

Why not demolish the buildings instead of pumping $$ into those old army buildings just for squatters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figure the reason why the asbestos is an issue is mostly due to neglect of the building's maintenance. The UofC has been replacing asbestos as renovations happen over the last decade, I go to class in rooms with asbestos. It's only an issue if disturbed or improperly maintained.

Is there more to this? Seems like the government would rather not have the messy PR of having some Indians die of hypothermia, so this solution is a cheap and effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I figure the reason why the asbestos is an issue is mostly due to neglect of the building's maintenance. The UofC has been replacing asbestos as renovations happen over the last decade, I go to class in rooms with asbestos. It's only an issue if disturbed or improperly maintained.

Is there more to this? Seems like the government would rather not have the messy PR of having some Indians die of hypothermia, so this solution is a cheap and effective.

The initial amount of asbestos found was well below standards but the government wanted to do thorough inspection,suposedly to take two weeks. With a Million dollars being spent to house the squatters in a hotel for one month, why couldn't the government have an mass inspection in a couple of days? There a lot of companies who remove asbestos who could be hired to inspect without the million dollar price tag. Obviously Prentice doesn't think there is much concern about the asbestos if he's talking about renovation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Canuck E Stan,

Why not demolish the buildings instead of pumping $$ into those old army buildings just for squatters.
I would think that the decision over the buildings lies with the Chief and Council. I am not positive, But I also believe that the Chief (and council) have the right to distribute land and monies as they see fit. Families will get a tract of land, and then they divide it up and build houses on it, while some may choose to farm. We met a couple of ranchers, and a couple of farmers that were doing very well, and we also met some people who just wanted to live off the system. Oddest of all, probably, was an old German woman (well, a 'Sudetenland Czech' who lost her home when the Brits signed it over to Hitler), a widow of a former chief. She made us some traditional bannock, and talked our ears off. Wonderful and interesting lady.
Obviously Prentice doesn't think there is much concern about the asbestos if he's talking about renovation
He doesn't show much concern over a million dollars, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canuck,

I see the same problem here. It's their building now, so we can't just tear it down or anything. But why are we paying to fix an Indian building. I thought they were all pro self-governance folks?

I don't have the government fix my buildings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't have the government fix my buildings?

If you were living in a poor, unhealthy building, I would be happy to pay a few extra cents in taxes to have it fixed :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you were living in a poor, unhealthy building, I would be happy to pay a few extra cents in taxes to have it fixed :)
Lot's of middle and low income people bought condos in Vancouver that turned in the mouldy health hazzards. The gov't didn't give them a cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lot's of middle and low income people bought condos in Vancouver that turned in the mouldy health hazzards. The gov't didn't give them a cent.

Condos in Vancouver start at around $250,000-300,000. I don't know how much they cost to fix, but if a family can not live in those condos because of health concerns, and they can not afford to buy/rent a new place, I would also be happy to pay the few extra cents to make sure they have a cheap place to live. Not something that costs 300 thousand, but enough to give them shelter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Condos in Vancouver start at around $250,000-300,000. I don't know how much they cost to fix, but if a family can not live in those condos because of health concerns, and they can not afford to buy/rent a new place, I would also be happy to pay the few extra cents to make sure they have a cheap place to live. Not something that costs 300 thousand, but enough to give them shelter.
A cardboard box under a bridge in Vancouver costs $200K now. In most cases people were forced in bankruptcy because even if the condo was worth 200K when they bought it the unit lost most of its value as soon as a leak was found. In some cases the cost of the repairs could be as high as 50-100K/unit.

I was not joking about the cost of a cardboard box either. Right now the city is trying to build social housing and the budget for a one room studio is at least 200K/unit. Obviously a lot of people asking why the gov't should be shelling out so much cash so a single lottery winner can get cheap housing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was not joking about the cost of a cardboard box either. Right now the city is trying to build social housing and the budget for a one room studio is at least 200K/unit. Obviously a lot of people asking why the gov't should be shelling out so much cash so a single lottery winner can get cheap housing.

Approximately how much of that 200K is the government subsidizing, and how much will they get back from rent/sales?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Approximately how much of that 200K is the government subsidizing, and how much will they get back from rent/sales?
200K is the cost per unit that the gov't would pay. And the rent would be zero for most tenets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
200K is the cost per unit that the gov't would pay. And the rent would be zero for most tenets.

I wonder how much it will cost, per person, to fix this housing for Natives? Can't be more than 200K can it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic question here is whether the government would do the same for white people squatting in an ex-government building. I'm going to say with a reasonable degree of certainty absolutely not.

This isn't a gaurnteed treaty right, to have asbestos removed and hotel accomodations found at Canada's cost. So why are they doing it?

Can we all agree now that race definitely buys you some significant perks? Why aren't more Canadians upset at this?

--

qc, I'm thrilled that you'd be so kind to pay for my reno's, but when the costs of every house found to be inhabitable are factored in, I'm sure you'd quickly change your mind (would you give up a couple paycheques to help everyone?). If that were the policy, that everyone's house would be fixed, I'd have a tax/spend issue, but not a racial issue. This policy of only helping out Indians is undoubtably extremely racist and should be a serious issue for a nation that claims to be a leader of equality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Can we all agree now that race definitely buys you some significant perks? Why aren't more Canadians upset at this?"

Because the mere suggestion that Indians receive extra benefits will get you branded a racist, regardless of its factual accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
qc, I'm thrilled that you'd be so kind to pay for my reno's, but when the costs of every house found to be inhabitable are factored in, I'm sure you'd quickly change your mind (would you give up a couple paycheques to help everyone?). If that were the policy, that everyone's house would be fixed, I'd have a tax/spend issue, but not a racial issue. This policy of only helping out Indians is undoubtably extremely racist and should be a serious issue for a nation that claims to be a leader of equality.

I suppose I'd have to know how much it would cost. It's hard to put an exact figure on what I'd be willing to pay. If it is only for homes that are uninhabitable, and only for people/families that could not otherwise afford housing, then I doubt it would cost too much money. I wouldn't be willing to put them up in nice new condos, but basic shelter in former military housing (which I am assuming would not otherwise be used) shouldn't be too expensive.

It would be nice to see everyone in Canada have the basics of food, shelter and healthcare. This may sound idealistic, but if I had more money I would be happy to donate it for this cause (in the meantime I have to worry about my own shelter and food!). BUT this is my personal opinion. I also realize it's extremely unrealistic to expect others to do the same. However, I also see government money being 'wasted' in other areas. I would rather see that money go towards these priorities, or else not be spent at all.

I could also see this open to abuse. It's one thing to pay for people who genuinely need it, but what to do with people who simply don't want to work? Maybe make sure that the food and shelter are basic enough to ensure survival but still provide motivation for people to do 'better' for themselves? What about guaranteed workfare? (I might be using the wrong term here, but basically I mean guaranteeing government-paid work for everyone, even if it means cleaning up garbage in the park for example)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear geoffrey,

Can we all agree now that race definitely buys you some significant perks?
Not really, for I work near the 'Chateau Drop-Out' centre in Downtown Calgary, and they, along with many other services, provide daily handouts to the addicts, the lazy, and in some cases, the mentally ill. Regardless of race. They spent 15 million bucks on that building, and it has become a beacon for the 'homeless' across the nation. From Newfoundland to Vancouver (and I hear them talk about it all the time), word on the street is that 'Calgary is the place to be' for free handouts.

gc1765,

What about guaranteed workfare? (I might be using the wrong term here, but basically I mean guaranteeing government-paid work for everyone, even if it means cleaning up garbage in the park for example)
I am all in favour of this. The mentally ill, for whom this might be too much, comprise (in my estimation) about 5-25% of those people getting gov't assistance, when really they should make up 100%. Communist Russia used to do this, and they had a very low unemployment rate. One of my brothers was there years ago, and saw battalions of older ladies sweeping the streets with home-made brooms. Still, it was a job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original post:

This is being done for indians, but it would not be done for white people. That is the point of contention, not whether it should be done or not. The reserves receive more than enough to look after reserve indians, but for some reason, the building they inhabit falls under government responsibilty to repair (and put them in a hotel).

Why? No government official would dare risk being called a racist, and the indians would be the first to play that card.

Only white people can be called racist. Prove me wrong.

If an indian were to refuse something to a white person, it would no doubt be put down as the choice of a minority. Women can have a women's only hospital, Native Friendship centers, Negro College Fund, RCMP intake quotas for minorities, and the list goes on.

Can you imagine the sh*t storm if I started the Caucasion Youth College Endowment Fund? Any bets on how many SECONDS it would take for the first comparison to Hitler to hit the news?

The building in question will be inspected and repaired on the taxpayer's tab, and no taxpayer had better say a word in public. It makes no difference whether or not it needs it, or whether or not the indians in question can pay for their own accomodations in the meantime. It will be done because they are indian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really, for I work near the 'Chateau Drop-Out' centre in Downtown Calgary, and they, along with many other services, provide daily handouts to the addicts, the lazy, and in some cases, the mentally ill. Regardless of race. They spent 15 million bucks on that building, and it has become a beacon for the 'homeless' across the nation. From Newfoundland to Vancouver (and I hear them talk about it all the time), word on the street is that 'Calgary is the place to be' for free handouts.

Is that why our streets are polluted with street people, more so than I've seen in Vancouver or Toronto? Maybe it's time to dim the beacon a little and look after our interests for once. I'd hate to see the downtown of the richest city in the world infested with homeless people just because Calgary has nice handouts to them.

Workhouses are non-racist and would take them all off our streets... save us millions in the labour shortage we are facing. Why not get these vagrants to build our roads and stuff like that, provide general labour that's badly needed. In return, we give them a bed and good food. A little bit of cash they can save up for a down payment on renting their own apartment and becoming self-sufficient.

gc1765,
What about guaranteed workfare? (I might be using the wrong term here, but basically I mean guaranteeing government-paid work for everyone, even if it means cleaning up garbage in the park for example)
I am all in favour of this. The mentally ill, for whom this might be too much, comprise (in my estimation) about 5-25% of those people getting gov't assistance, when really they should make up 100%. Communist Russia used to do this, and they had a very low unemployment rate. One of my brothers was there years ago, and saw battalions of older ladies sweeping the streets with home-made brooms. Still, it was a job.

Exactly, I hadn't read the rest of this when I started writing my above. Calgary doesn't have the cleanest downtown, with a full platoon of gardeners, sweepers and general cleaners, it'd be great. And we wouldn't have those people grabbing your legs for a few bucks on every corner (if you haven't been to Calgary lately, it's actually awful, way worse than anywhere I've ever been). Forced labour is fine with me, as long as they are paid a meagre sum that they can choose to save in order to leave and become self-sufficient. If they want to blow it on booze, that's fine, but then they work for us forever.

In a region with such a labour shortage, I can't understand why the provincial government hasn't look at this more seriously.

The building in question will be inspected and repaired on the taxpayer's tab, and no taxpayer had better say a word in public. It makes no difference whether or not it needs it, or whether or not the indians in question can pay for their own accomodations in the meantime. It will be done because they are indian.

Our Mr. Scourge already implied in another thread that I'm anti-'Native'. It doesn't take long for them to pull the race card.

You'll find folks like us Hydra that want real equality of right between races only on the conservative side and generally labelled as horrifically racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...