News   Jul 16, 2024
Minto Submits Modifications to Grand Park Village Plan in Mimico
 528     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
News Roundup for July 16, 2024
 548     0 
News   Jul 16, 2024
The Urban Jungle
 680     2 

Rob Ford - Why the Supervillian?

gristle said:
What's so fresh and new about a conservative perspective?
Click to expand...

In a forum deemed dominated by "sheeple", it can be framed as "fresh and new". And I suppose a leftist posting on Free Dominion can claim likewise on his/her behalf.

As for your claim that you purposefully post errors, that just shows the depth if intellectual dishonesty that some people are willing to stoop to. Let's face it, you make mistakes. To hide behind some silly claim that you do so in order to gauge the how attentive your audience is comes off as nothing more than monumentally arrogant.
Click to expand...

Talk radio and Fox News do it a lot. Their alibi is "entertainment".
 
adma said:
Fresh Start: if your kind of "fresh, new perspective" is on behalf of those McMansion types who're frustrated at having to deal with tree bylaws, heritage bylaws, etc, may I ask...what are you doing in Urban Toronto in the first place? It's almost like dealing with Kirby Inwood within a feminist/gender studies forum...
Click to expand...

Haha, lol. I have nothing against heritage buildings. In fact I prefer them to a lot of the tacky avant garde artitecture that's coming out now (e.g. the OCAD building). My gripe with tree bylaws is that it substracts from one's sense of liberty and freedom of property ownership. No one should have to go through 2 dozen hoops and months of back and forth consultation just to get a tree cut down. If I'm cutting it down at my own expense and labour, I'm doing the City a favor and increasing my property value if I aim to recondition my backyard through the installation of swimming pool or garden oasis or outhouse and said tree is presenting me with an obstacle. I know someone in my neighbourhood who threatened to call the cops because his neighbour wanted to cut off a single branch of his tree that hanged over the property line although said branch posed a major threat of expanding into his neighbour's roof if he didn't act ASAP. Toronto is designated as the greenest metropolis in North America, is it not? Why go overboard on desperate homeowners over one/one incidents whose total effect on reducing our oxygen supply or carbon footprint or whatever eco-mumbo jumbo reasoning being given is minimal at best?

Anyway, I like urban issues (particularly mass transit) and that's why I'm here. I've only tangented into politics lately because my regular hang-out (the T&I subforum) has been oversaturated with LRTistas retorting ad nauseum at us pro-subway advocates that somehow they have won a prized tinket; that their coveted Transfer City's here to stay and there's nothing that we can do about it despite the fact of it being an election year. Meanwhile no actual construction has begun, the original coverage area has shrunk by 65% and initial costs have increased by over 100%.
 
Fresh Start said:
Haha, lol. I have nothing against heritage buildings. In fact I prefer them to a lot of the tacky avant garde artitecture that's coming out now (e.g. the OCAD building).
Click to expand...

Hmm..."tacky avant garde architecture". Well, if you prefer this to OCAD
1-chedington-pl.jpg


you're all the more displaced in a place like UT. Sorry.
 
I wouldn't want to live in OCAD either, and if I had to choose between a street lined with the above or a street lined with OCADs...

Fresh Start's viewpoint is indeed refreshing, even if I don't agree with a lot of his points. At the end of the day there are too many around here just a little too blindly eager to defend City Hall policy and the spending of other people's money.
 
nfitz said:
What on earth are you talking about? Why are you making this stuff up? If we are bankrupt, why is Toronto's credit rating been improving (and it was already very good previously! The amount of money spent servicing the debt is only a small part of the budget. And taxes are lower than many surrounding cities, so there's lots of room to increase if there is a crisis (not that there should be one).

Why are you lying to us? What is your motive? Where is your proof?

Wow, that's the pot calling the kettle black! Your the one making wild and extravagant claims without a shred of evidence, and in opposition to experts who know far more about the subject than you.

What is it about elections that bring all the nutters out of the woodwork?

Good riddance I say. Hope you enjoy the higher property taxes ... and the improved quality of life ... not to mention having to shovel off the car to go get milk!

If you live in Toronto, and your car isn't a business car, and you register it to an address that isn't a your residence, that you are a liar, and a cheat. If one was to do that they would be a worthless piece of humanity, no better than a common criminal. Wow ... to have the gall to defend such despicable behaviour! Shocking ... to save $5 a month - laughable.
Click to expand...

If Toronto isn't in trouble, why is it they must continuously scramble to find funds to cover their costs?
 
nfitz said:
Only if the truth is being pulled out of the same orifice.

As long as we don't elect one of the Conservative-type spendaholics (you know, the Harpers and Bushes of the world), I don't see any reason that we wouldn't see the same kind of increases that we've seen for the last few years ... generally similar or lower than the surrounding suburbs.
Click to expand...

McGuinty has raised spending by 60% since 2003 going by their own projections for the by the fiscal year ending 2011/2012.

Old news, but relevant
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_10021.aspx

Obama is the new Bush
http://preview.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aYgo3fufKIbI

I think that spend spend spend mantra can be applied pretty evenly, though I suppose you only concern yourself with facts that serve your views.
 
Last edited:
The_Waffler said:
If Toronto isn't in trouble, why is it they must continuously scramble to find funds to cover their costs?
Click to expand...
What city doesn't? Whenever I'm in another city in the world, I grab the local papers. It's the same everywhere ... and often much worse; I haven't seen the layoffs and transit reductions in Toronto that I've seen reported in other North American cities this year.
 
The_Waffler said:
Old news, but relevant
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_10021.aspx
Click to expand...
How does quoting a news report from over 3 years ago that Toronto will be forced to declare bankruptcy in 2008 support your case that Toronto is going bankrupt? You might not be aware of this, but Toronto didn't decalre bankruptcy in 2008. Or 2009, or 2010.

It's the same BS meda story every year ... I'm amazed that people fall for it! Your naiveté is shocking! And I'm not sure quoting a retired York prof who is pushing 80 is really helping your case either!
 
Last edited:
I don't read about Calgary or Hamilton or Windsor teetering on the verge of bankruptcy every year. I wonder why they keep writing about Toronto's troubles since, according to you, there are none?
 
The_Waffler said:
I don't read about Calgary or Hamilton or Windsor teetering on the verge of bankruptcy every year.
Click to expand...
The media here do tend to be more sensational ... however my point was that one reads about financial problems for major cities everywhere; I wasn't really thinking smaller cities like these ... but it's not difficult to find such articles:
http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/2010/02/09/12810456.html http://www.stoneycreeknews.com/opinions/article/202374

I don't really see the need to make these claims that the sky is falling. Frankly, I'll put more faith in Moody's than chicken-little blogger!
 
The_Waffler said:
Oh, the media is more sensational here.
Click to expand...
You haven't noticed the tendancy of the Toronto media to publish all sorts of stuff that isn't true? You posted the 2007 article that said Toronto would decalre bankruptcy in 2008; clearly that wasn't true. Why do you believe it to be true?

The_Waffler said:
What about the York Prof, is he being sensational too?
Click to expand...
umm ... almost 80-year old retired York prof .... come on, let's be serious!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top