News   Jul 15, 2024
 351     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 492     1 
News   Jul 12, 2024
 2K     1 

Premier Doug Ford's Ontario

The funding piece is missing from this discussion. Ontario has a significant deficit and high debt relative to the size of our economy. Contrary to the Wynne Liberals’ assertions, the size of the deficit isn’t a politically driven number open to different interpretations. It’s a hard number based on generally accepted accounting principles, and the non-partisan provincial auditor has been making the point for years. We know interest rates are going to rise. We can be reasonably sure of a US - and therefore probably global - recession in 2020/2021 as temporary US stimulus comes to an end. We know Ontario consumers are heavily indebted by historical standards. And we know that the last time the federal government raised the top marginal personal income tax rate, they collected far less money than they anticipated as people in that bracket adjusted their incomes. For that matter, provincial income tax revenues from the top bracket actually declined on the federal increase (reduced revenue base and no increase in provincial rates).

So...really no possibility of raising revenue from tax increases (because it’s politically unacceptable to raise taxes on anyone but “the rich”), a likely increase in interest costs from the $12 billion or so currently (and Ontario is going to roll $35 to $40 billion a year over the next few years so rate increases will bite), and a likely decline in revenue over the lifetime of the Ford government. In other words, we’re fucked. We blew it when times were good and now we’re paying the price. Literally, because deficit spending just shifts the time pattern of economic activity from the future to the present, at least in a small, open economy like Ontario’s. In other words, we’re now paying for all of Wynne’s good works in the past, and we’re going to be paying for them for a long time to come.

I don’t doubt the new campuses would be a nice to have. We sunk money into planning them, sure, but if that’s an argument for staying the course I’ve got a nice Vietnam War you might want to buy. And by the standards of pretty much any other country, we’re already rather oversupplied with underemployed university grads, so the investment in human capital argument is somewhat less than compelling.

Given all that, the provincial government made the right call. It’s going to have to make a lot more decisions like that over the life of its mandate. Cue the hysteria...
 
Last edited:
How much GTA growth is required? I'd wager we're about 10000 undergrad spots short, as it stands.

That's if we assume the current policy is sound. And this is what I was talking about. Are we sure that we need 10 000 more undergrad spots. Why not 10 000 more spots in college or trade school? And yes I recognize that some of the cancelled programs had some college partnerships. Interestingly on this front, the one new facility that the government is allowing, is Collège Boréal, at the Distillery District.

But that leaves the 2 suburban U of T campuses, with Mississauga also not far from total build out.

Disagree. I think both could easily densify to the point where they could handle 30-50% more students with sufficient investment.

I think new campuses are a fair consideration. Though I completely agree that Milton/Laurier does not make sense.

Sure. But you're also forgetting that colleges can grant degrees now. And we already have a new university in the GTA: the terribly named UOIT. As an aside, I remember when UOIT was supposed to be a sort of seed for an Ontario version of the UCs or MIT. Wonder why the Liberals didn't consider making all the new campuses UOITs.

I think it's a fair question to ask if the nearly dozen or so post-secondary campuses in the GTA could use the same funds more effectively and produce 10 000 more graduates. Certainly, they wouldn't have the same amount of recurrent operating expenses as entirely new campuses.

To me, the only campus of the three that was a truly serious affair was York-Markham. And the fact that they are pushing ahead shows that. The rest seem to largely be about brand building for the schools and development for the towns involved.

Why that should be supported with provincial tax dollars is certainly a valid question to discuss. We're talking about the same Brampton that thinks requesting a tunnel costing tens to hundreds of million for LRT on Main St, for no reason than aesthetics, is reasonable. Why can't they pay entirely for a campus that they think is vital to revitalizing their downtown? Seems to me that this is beyond the realm of education, as a provincial responsibility at this point.

If I had my way, we'd follow the California model for post-secondary education. But that would make a lot of middle class parents unhappy..... We have so many basic issues to fix. Heck, we can't even agree on what to call our degrees in a province of 13 million. Is it a Bachelor of Engineering or a Bachelor of Applied Science?
 
Last edited:
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. Don't we have a surplus of postsecondary spots in the province?

And personally, at least for Ryerson, as a grad, I thought it was a terrible plan. Ryerson has spent hundreds of millions developing its campus downtown. They've developed an identity and brand around being downtown. "Our MBA program is closest to Bay Street. Our journalism program is close to all the news orgs. Our radio and television arts program is close to all the media stations." Etc. Brampton was a poor fit for them IMO.

And I'm not sure if Ryerson was a great for for a Brampton. Even with the joint program with Sheridan. They'd have been better off with something like a York U satellite campus.
As another Ryerson grad, I agree with your assessment here. Ryerson in Brampton always seemed like a very strange fit. I would rather the money go towards downtown campuses and furthering the relations between Ryerson and George Brown.

Hell, renting out YSL development's podium space on a long-term lease would make way more sense.

The one campus that I am very surprised about being dropped is York's Markham campus. Expansion to Markham made sense as a lot of York's student body is in Scarborough and York Region, and the campus was supposed to anchor Markham's downtown.

My "wishes" are for the Brampton and Milton campuses to be dropped, and the Markham campus to be revived after the next provincial election.
 
As another Ryerson grad, I agree with your assessment here. Ryerson in Brampton always seemed like a very strange fit. I would rather the money go towards downtown campuses and furthering the relations between Ryerson and George Brown.

Hell, renting out YSL development's podium space on a long-term lease would make way more sense.

The one campus that I am very surprised about being dropped is York's Markham campus. Expansion to Markham made sense as a lot of York's student body is in Scarborough and York Region, and the campus was supposed to anchor Markham's downtown.

My "wishes" are for the Brampton and Milton campuses to be dropped, and the Markham campus to be revived after the next provincial election.

Ryerson might have been a good fit in say Markham or Vaughan, with the IT firms there. But building a national centre for cyber security in Brampton? Come on. Who will take that place seriously? No proximity to IT industry, regulators, security agencies or other academics.

I think the whole plan is backwards. Ryerson should be building in Markham and York should be building in Brampton. But at least York in Markham is somewhat defensible. And that is going ahead. I hope Ryerson doesn't just push ahead anyway, watching York do it in Markham.
 
I think the whole plan is backwards. Ryerson should be building in Markham and York should be building in Brampton. But at least York in Markham is somewhat defensible. And that is going ahead. I hope Ryerson doesn't just push ahead anyway, watching York do it in Markham.
I doubt it.

It was clear that Ryerson was after the 'free' public funds. With those dried up, they have no reason to move ahead.
 
[...]
Though Cybersecurity Catalyst will be opening in Brampton, operations of the centre will also be taking place on the Toronto campus. The centre plans to start offering training and certification for cybersecurity and programming within the next six months.

Finlay notes that one of the main goals of Cybersecurity Catalyst is to form partnerships with the community around Ryerson, as well as with the provincial and federal government.

“There’s great research and development going on in different faculties [at Ryerson],” he said. “Computer science, engineering, we are looking forward to partnering with all of these areas of the community.”

The centre also aims to aid entrepreneurs, established companies, and start-ups in developing advanced cybersecurity strategies. By making many partnerships, Finlay said that Cybersecurity Catalyst can contribute to the conversation surrounding the importance of security and technology.
[...]
https://theeyeopener.com/2018/09/ryerson-to-open-a-national-cybersecurity-centre/
 
I doubt it.

It was clear that Ryerson was after the 'free' public funds. With those dried up, they have no reason to move ahead.

We’ll see. York is the first one out of the gate pledging to soldier on anyway. Milton has their mayor pledging to raise funds. Could Brown do that in Brampton?

In the case of both Milton and Brampton, I question why the universities need to be involved. The colleges would be just fine in those locations. And bridge programs now offer pathways to degrees.
 
Ryerson might have been a good fit in say Markham or Vaughan, with the IT firms there. But building a national centre for cyber security in Brampton? Come on. Who will take that place seriously? No proximity to IT industry, regulators, security agencies or other academics.

I think the whole plan is backwards. Ryerson should be building in Markham and York should be building in Brampton. But at least York in Markham is somewhat defensible. And that is going ahead. I hope Ryerson doesn't just push ahead anyway, watching York do it in Markham.

Considering the centralization of tech, I'd say put it downtown - besides, this is the sort of thing that tend to be co-located with government and related-institutions anyways.

AoD
 
Considering the centralization of tech, I'd say put it downtown - besides, this is the sort of thing that tend to be co-located with government and related-institutions anyways.

AoD

Sure. My point was merely that Brampton was a poor location for it. If they had to leave downtown (and I think we agree that itself is a poor call), you'd think they'd locate where some partnerships were possible.

Also, the location of that cyber security institute is separate from where another campus should go. Nothing says they need to be located. This was Ryerson trying to add cachet to the new campus. And it's pretty transparent.

Calling it "the national cyber security centre" does not make it so. From the looks of it, they don't seem to have really built substantial partnerships with the feds with lots of federal funding and SCIFs to do classified research. I see virtually nothing but boilerplate language in all their announcements. And I question what kind of industrial partnerships they had leaving downtown when some of the biggest proponents of cybersecurity are financial institutions and public sector service providers.
 
Last edited:
Doug Ford looked so happy, so proud, at the unveiling of the new "Ontario Open for Business" signs to be placed at border crossings. I think you guys can breath a sigh of relief. Mission accomplished for Ford! The entire purpose of his struggle to win and gain acceptance in politics has reached its climactic fulfillment. Well played sir. Your legacy is assured.
 
Doug Ford looked so happy, so proud, at the unveiling of the new "Ontario Open for Business" signs to be placed at border crossings. I think you guys can breath a sigh of relief. Mission accomplished for Ford! The entire purpose of his struggle to win and gain acceptance in politics has reached its climactic fulfillment. Well played sir. Your legacy is assured.

When my daughter was quite young there were lots of election signs everywhere, so names actually became quite well known, for a time. Just names though. She was quite adept at taking things at face value, so when a gentleman candidate became a topic of discussion in our household, she observed quite rightly that " he was just a sign anyway " - no more, no less. This will pass too.
 
Every Single Similarity Between Doug Ford and Donald Trump

Over the course of the Ontario election, many people have remarked on the similarities between Doug Ford and Donald Trump.

But is it really that bad? The answer is yes. In fact, Doug Ford’s policies, statements and attacks on his political opponents are eerily similar to America’s most controversial President.

Attacking the press? Check. Locking up his political opponents? Yup. Huge handouts to the richest corporations at the expense of working families? You bet.

Here’s every similarity between Ontario’s Conservative leader and Donald Trump...

See link.
 
The online consultation for the education system is up and running: https://registration.fortheparents.ca/

lmao at how on this question about sex-ed, "religious and community leaders" as a source of information for sexual health are grouped together as if there isn't a big difference
Screen Shot 2018-10-29 at 11.18.36 AM.png
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-10-29 at 11.18.36 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-10-29 at 11.18.36 AM.png
    67.3 KB · Views: 610

Back
Top