I've been thinking about this a lot over the last few days (I was getting killed at work and realized my posts were resembling less like English, but I've been reading a lot and am looking forward to returning to this subject -- it is enormous, though, and progress will be slow).

Parks had $27 million of 630 million cut -- 4%. They reduced park hours and cut guided tours.

Environment Can took a 25% cut (!!!) BUT: this is due to temporary programs coming to scheduled ends. (And here) There's no reason to send them an extra $400 million if the programs it used to be spent on are over.

Fisheries and Oceans: "But the measures will target Ottawa headquarters and will be relatively painless to the regions, documents suggest. Bureaucrats are to target “administrative overhead,” reduce“duplication,” and improve decision-making."

How is any of this anti-environment or anti-"science"?


If the idea is that Harper, because he hates "science" and the outdoors, we think, is painting targets on those departments, I think a lot remains to be established to support this.

I'm happy to go through each dept in this way but I do want to point out that this particular thread of discourse started when PIPSC launched their "public awareness" campaign in 2012. It is they who coined "muzzling scientists" in reference to scientists who are funded by the government and can publish their findings without restriction, but if they are to speak with the media the PMO wants to know about it first -- Harper didn't establish this practice, Martin did, and Cabinent ministers are similarly "muzzled." I don't like it but this too is overstated.

Their objective is to preserve their jobs and access to unlimited funding.

Last year they published the findings of their survey which forms the basis for the campaign you are a part of today. "Fafard said what concerned him the most about the survey results was that so many scientists reported cases in which the health or safety of Canadians may have been at risk. However, he said it was hard to tell how big a problem this was, since threats to health and safety were combined with threats to environmental sustainability, which he considers less of an urgent concern."

They are pissed off that they are being required to compete for grants (there is a billion dollars available, half of this is earmarked and the other half is awarded through the proposal/award system), and moreover they are pissed off at the CIHR's dollar-matching program: the scientists feel this will force them to "knock on doors" to get NGOs on board, which they feel is beneath them. My uncle is at NRC and this 'door knocking' has been his job for twenty-five years.

Speaking of muzzled, here's an actual case of a scientist being forced to approve animal medications of unproven safety or known danger to humans: Shiv Chopra. He blew the whistle on Health Canada and was fired. Publishers wouldn't touch him and Chapters blacklisted his book.

2004 tho. This didn't happen under Conservatives so no one really noticed or cared.

There is no requirement to take the lump sum.

You can take the lump (375,000$ or something)
A smaller lump + monthly
Only monthly -- this will give you the most money in the long run, but if you need to retrofit your house with ramps or move, then a larger upfront lump is obviously a good idea.

The monthly is 41,000 + whatever supplements you qualify for, so a permanently disabled vet gets 62,000 as long as they didn't take a lump.



So do you invest in BCE or Telus or something that attempted to convert to income trusts to avoid paying taxes, or your personal income trust was in some way damaged?

Lozen, speaking of yuppies: In Ottawa 21% of the participating labour force works for the federal government -- since Harper took over in 2006 their numbers grew 18%.





http://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/doc...ent_survey.pdf


A friend of mine is self-employed as a mechanic and was ready to buy a duplex to live in and rent out the other level. The bank told him that for them to consider giving him a mortgage he needs to get a government job and find a wife with a government job. He is still renting.

Unilingual anglophones are by and large ineligible for employment.

Hahah, and this, a lady called into one of the morning shows to bitch about a $20/month service charge on her hydro bill and said to the host, y'know, people can't afford that, $72,000 isn't a lot of money.

A friend was on a team of twelve that managed the Mint's website, each was paid $110,000.

It's impossible to live here and not see massive waste. Henry's friend uses his time to manage his fantasy baseball team, another guy watched porn all day and was fired, then got his job back because he argued that the reason for all the porn-watching was because there wasn't enough for him to do.

There are lots of people who believe the role of the civil service is to employ people employed by the civil service. These same people launch PR campaigns if the PM does anything that might help the economy that generates the revenue from which the taxes are collected to pay their fat asses.

So some of them will lose their jobs. Like, Fisheries and Oceans is near my house, the closest body of water is the Ottawa river -- put your hand in with five fingers, it comes out with six. No one goes near it.

Meanwhile, this is where some of those saved funds go: "In 2008, the federal government contributed $110 million for a five-year research project to explore effective options to cope with mentally ill people who were homeless.

The At Home/Chez Soi study found that starting with providing housing, and backing that up with support services, was more effective and cost-efficient at getting people off the streets than trying to treat them first.

The federal government has since expanded the program, committing an additional $600 million over five years."


But no 1 curr because "science."

I find Facebook politics incredibly ignorant and spiteful, especially when it comes from people who think they support "evidence" and "logic."

Did Canada invade a country when i wasn't looking?

Were still in Iraq but not in a fighting capacity. Though our specialized forces are shooting back. Our Government calls that non combat as we do not shoot first

I had a good chunk of cash in trusts based on Harper telling CDN's we will not touch Income Trusts and how they are taxed. Than boom they lost a key tax status and dropped 40%


Than you have no choice but to take the lump sum if you have a serious injury. Plus things like Dental and drug costs have been an issue as well

OK lets add in we spend millions to celebrate the war of 1812 5 million on John A Mcdonald. Our flag turns 50 and they spend $50,000 as the liberals introduced the falg and its Red and White the liberal colors

Yup. It's getting pretty funny around here in Ottawa predicting what the next thing to be renamed after a Conservative PM will be.

Are they not building some huge monument to the fall of communism or something like that also that no one in Ottawa wants?

sounds like he's acting like an american conservative.

take to the ****ing streets, man.

Yeah, it's supposed to be this monstrosity going right next to the Supreme Court building. Completely inappropriate location even leaving aside there are about a thousand things I'd build a monument for before one opposing a set of socioeconomic principles.

Lol no.

no? misrepresenting himself, bending over for business, raping the environment, strange obsession with 'dem commies', unabashed israel supporter, etc.

sounds like he's two seconds away from privatizing their health care system.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...-harpers-world

There does not seem to be a recent thread on Canadian politics. This is the most recent. Would prefer an open thread for the upcoming election rather than this based on Harper. I'm not much of a political junky but interested in the next few months.

I agree I know I would participate.

Nobody I talked to in real life can really tell me why they hate Harper, but it seems to be the popular bandwagon here in Quebec.

I can tell you why I hate him

• Way back said We will not touch the way we tax Income Trusts than shortly after changed the way they were taxed
• Has no concern for the environment
• Repeatedly srewed our Veterans
• His appointments of Senators
• Republican Tax strategy
• Only runs false attack ads
• Duffy Scandal Nigel Wright knew. Does anyone think he didnt

This is just a small list.

sad state of affairs when the best option is justin trudeau

As you wish: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/41.../#post47891476

As a (former) member of the Canadian Forces, I feel the Canadian government more than compensates their soldiers for their efforts. They make a significant income (and pension) for relatively unskilled labour. Additionally, Veterans Affairs gives out decent chunks of change for seemingly innocuous situations. I know hordes of people retiring with $70k/year pensions after 20 years of service, plus receiving 6 digit (yes 6 digit) severance packages. **** that.

There is a ton of civil servant employment that needs to be culled - and good for Harper for doing that. The problem is that every other thing he's done is terrible.

Trudeau and his getting-rid-of-income-splitting (plus his pro-legalization policies, even though I don't smoke) is pretty enticing.

The CF issue is with injured veterans, not retirees.
I was in the CF for 12 years. Lots of guys who got messed up in Afghan are basically been thrown to the gutter

That's fair - I'd be in support of a program that re-allocated PLD from areas that don't need it (Toronto/Vancouver/etc) to injured veterans

that Canada even has a military at all is absurdly wasteful navel gazing in a pragmatic sense

That is the issue. Also the lack of help for PTSD. Though the Patriotic USA is just as bad at abandoning their soldiers

I'll assume neither of you (True North, Lozen) work in the railway industry. The railway is safe, and gets safer year by year. The difference is the level of coverage that accidents get on the news.

There is significant railway legislation in place, and there were appropriate rules in place to curb what happened in Lac Megantic, but human error (and general laziness) played a big factor.

I don't see how anything Harper did, or didn't do, would have prevented it.