123 responses so far ↓

• 1 A Taxpayer // Feb 21, 2015 at 3:51 pm

  If overpaying public sector employees by 6.7% is good for the economy, why stop there? Why not increase that to 10% so they would have even more money to spend in the local economy. Maybe that is Ontario’s strategy as the Fraser Institute has calculated the public/private sector differential there at 11.5%. So for it is not working out too well for Ontario as they are still running a $10 billion deficit.
  Whenever someone hauls out the contribution to the local economy argument to justify a redistribution of income, they always forget to acknowledge that money left in the hands of the taxpayers will also be spent supporting the local economy. What can be more democratic than letting people decide for themselves where they want to spend their hard earned income.

• 2 A Taxpayer // Feb 21, 2015 at 3:57 pm

  I would like to give credit to the CTF for running an effective campaign on a shoestring budget but I suspect most of the credit should be given to the Board of Directors at Translink.

• 3 MB // Feb 21, 2015 at 4:08 pm

  Bombing Sunni-affilated jihadists in Iraq did nothing to prevent any of the incidents you listed. In fact, it will only help the Shia majority who are affiliated with Iran. You will remember our PM and his former foreign minister, known for his bombast, not for his intellect, copped out of Iran by closing the embassy in a fit of chest thumping. Now Canada is actuallgy helping Iran by fighting its enemy. It’s amazing to see the comically naive base drinking vats of Conservative Koolaid.

  Harper is beng very selective. If he wasn’t then Canada would have had a military foerce in Darfur. long ago. Jihadist vilence here at home dsn’t even begin to compare to home-grown criminal gang violence and certaintly does not deserve the gross violation of our civil liberties that seem to be in the works under C-51.

• 4 spartikus // Feb 21, 2015 at 6:01 pm

  If overpaying public sector employees by 6.7% is good for the economy, why stop there?

  This gap has long been understood, though not by the Fraser Institute, as being the result of legislation requiring the public sector to pay women and people of colour equal wages for equal work.

• 5 spartikus // Feb 21, 2015 at 6:06 pm

  Oddly, in 2013, the Fraser Institute found the differential to be 13.6%. A year later it’s 6.7%.

  http://www.fraserinstitute.org/uploadedFiles/fraser-ca/Content/research-news/research/articles/comparing-public-and-private-sector-compensation-in-BC-ff-2013.pdf

  Did the facts on the ground change? No.

  The Fraser Institute’s methodology changed, after being widely mocked by real economists.

  As mentioned above, the differential is almost entirely due to that pesky requirement by the public sector to pay women and people of colour the same wage as white males.

• 6 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 21, 2015 at 8:12 pm

  Cheap Shot Backfires.
  The federal community infrastructure fund dates from 2012. It has nothing to do with 2015 being an election year.

• 7 MB // Feb 21, 2015 at 10:01 pm

  If that is such a huge amount of investment for a nation of 34 million people, 85% of whom live in cities, why are we lagging so badly with inadequate transit funding? Why are we begging for a microscopic 1/2 of one percent tax increase for transit? Why are our cities so inefficient compared to every European, Asian and US city with historically generous investments in decent metros, commuter rail, bus networks, ferries and trams? Why must the majority of Canadians be handcuffed to car ownership with its inherent negative impacts on their health and family budgets? Why are we being driven into becoming a petro state with all the associated economic dependencies, partly due to our very high fossil fuel consumption when we have such potential to lower that dependency through investments in urban transit accompanied by appropriate land use planning?

  There are more questions than answers, and it stems from a near complete vacuum of understanding in Harper Conservative circles just how vital cities are to our economy in their zeal to export raw resources and create jobs in Asia for a paltry return compared to the masssive contribution by our largest cites. What a pity.

• 8 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 21, 2015 at 11:29 pm

  The million dollars Ian Jarvis is receiving by the time his contract is up is irrelevant because we decided to dump him.

  The new guy is only making an annual rate of $420,000.00

  Around here, that’s how we spend Your money. Get over it.

  Sounds to me like a winner!

• 9 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 21, 2015 at 11:50 pm

  If the rambling had some focal point there could be an answer but perhaps a couple of good books might help.

  One could ask why Vancouver has such a large number of single storey buildings and concurrent low-density along so-called main roads such as Broadway or Kingsway.

  This concept about a petro state was frequently mentioned a few ayers ago by Tommy Mulcair, when he was going on about us having Dutch Disease. How is it that he’s shut that one up now? Did Stephen Harper follow Tommies advice?

  In your last paragraph you seem to be calling for a government sponsored, or perhaps owned, oil refinery. Would you like to see one here in the lower mainland? If a new refinery is so needed then why cannot all the international multi-billion dollar oil companies that operate in Canada see this too?

• 10 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 22, 2015 at 12:09 am

  Canada 2020, yes the Montreal ex China Business guys that are now Bluesky Strategy. Ex Government agency types who understand how Ottawa works so they can now help international and local corporation in the regulatory processes and contracts. I see they are working for Bombardier and other aerospace and defence companies. I see to that they are also in the oil patch. Who isn’t?

  “From the oil patch and alternative energy, to power transmission and innovative new clean tech, Bluesky Strategy Group helps our clients engage with the decision makers in both the private and public sectors, raising their profile and deciphering the complex political, regulatory, social and economic issues in domestic and global energy markets.”

  The Laurentian power elite we remember so well.

• 11 Keith // Feb 22, 2015 at 6:39 am

  Money saved on the wages of any workers will not go to the hands of the majority of taxpayers. Wages in the public and private sector have not moved in 30+ years. All gains from increased productivity and economic growth have gone to the cliched one percent.

  There are a thousand arguments that have been made which boil down to “for the good of the economy, we must stiff the workers.” It’s particularly odious when one worker is pitted against another by saying the solution is to take away from someone who has more. Far better to improve the lot of lower income workers by paying a living wage.

  This province froze the minimum wage at eight dollars an hour through an entire economic cycle, all the while claiming an increase would be a job killer, even at the peak.
  They wound up increasing it during the worst economic crisis since the thirties, and it magically didn’t derail the recovery.

• 12 A Taxpayer // Feb 22, 2015 at 11:00 am

  You are correct that our actions did not prevent these atrocities and, of course, it is impossible to point to specific individuals that did not suffer the same fate because of our involvement but I think we can agree that those terrorists killed by our actions will not be party to any future atrocities.
  No, we do not have the same risk in Canada as Europe and a majority of Canadians want to keep it that way by dealing with the problem now.
  By the way. You must have missed Obama’s conference on violent extremism as it is inappropriate to use the term “jihadist” and you should refer to these murderers in non-religious terms like “violent extremist”.

• 13 A Taxpayer // Feb 22, 2015 at 1:52 pm

  Any reference to support this statement?

• 14 MB // Feb 23, 2015 at 12:48 am

  The “rambling” is about fostering a sustainable economy and community and the need to practice long range planning. It gets back to investing in our cities.

  There is a lot of disjointed rhetoric issued from the Conservatives about how important oil is to the economy. But they ignore value added when promoting the export of the near raw resource. And they don’t seem to get the basic concept of diversification at all. It’s like they are employed by Suncor, not ensconced in Ottawa.

  I would rather see in-stream tidal power with its intermittancy stabilized by hydro and some serious R&D into geothermal power to fire up new industry instead of refineries.

• 15 Chris Keam // Feb 23, 2015 at 9:20 am

  As always, I will point out that an individual implying another has a monetary reason for supporting policy — without putting forth one’s own areas of potential conflict or self-interest, displays a double standard that should be an opportunity for reflection and consideration of one’s approach to online conversations. I suspect A Taxpayer will let this opportunity escape.

• 16 A Taxpayer // Feb 23, 2015 at 10:10 am

  I do not work in the public sector and receive no compensation from government. My monetary interest is that I must pay for government services out of money I earn and I want to get the best value for my tax dollars.

• 17 Chris Keam // Feb 23, 2015 at 11:00 am

  Ah yes, but who does pay you? One suspects it would be enlightening.

• 18 A Taxpayer // Feb 23, 2015 at 1:05 pm

  MB works in the public sector and it is in his self interest to maximize compensation in that sector so it is relevant when he is expressing an opinion based on personal experience in both the private and public sectors, his employment there is relevant. While I do have a financial interest as a taxpayer in ensuring we get value for tax dollars, I did not express an opinion but referred to the Fraser Institute study. Of course, if you can’t rebut the message, all you have left is to attack the messenger.

• 19 Chris Keam // Feb 23, 2015 at 2:11 pm

  Hmmm, I’m merely pointing out the double standard. It appears as though you are the one attacking MB, and frankly, the aphorism holds.

• 20 A Taxpayer // Feb 23, 2015 at 4:43 pm

  Perhaps you should consider posting anonymously and then just maybe you would not feel compelled to defend every idiotic comment you post which only serves to make you appear more foolish, as difficult such a task is to accomplish.

• 21 Chris Keam // Feb 23, 2015 at 5:29 pm

  So, upset with the message… you’re attacking the messenger? LOL.

• 22 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 23, 2015 at 7:43 pm

  It’s not every day that we see foot shooting with such precision.

• 23 Lysenko's Nemesis // Feb 23, 2015 at 7:49 pm

  Then go for it. The government will probably have some funding for R&D. Geothermal is here now, if would like to pay for it.