We went out to one of the most talked about restaurant/night clubs in Toronto last night - The Spice Route and had a somewhat mixed time. Here is the review I posted on several restaurant review sights:
A visually dazzling environment with decent (but not spectacular) food is unfortunately stained by the horrendous service and mindless security staff. I realize that things can get busy, but 1/2 hour between visits from the waitress - even when I'm waving the menu and asking to order?
How about this exchange with the "door security" when my friend "Bob" was attempting to return to the patio after a trip to the facilities:
Security: "You can't go out there - it's full"
Bob: "I just came from out there...my drinks and my party are all out there"
Security: "Sorry sir, you still can't go out there, you'll have to wait in (the massive) line"
Bob: "I don't think so - I've got a drink out there and you're not making any sense"
Security: "You still can't go out there"
Bob: "Okay then. I have a $200 bar bill out there - I guess I'll just leave"
Security: "Okay sir...uh (scratching head and straining to think)...wait...um...(grabs Bob's shirt)...go back to the patio"
I'm sure all of the trendy "clubbies" will put up with this type of service and attitude, but the folks who spend the real money will quickly grow tired of this. It's too bad, because this place has great potential.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Tear Down The Gardiner?
For the past few years, we've been reading and hearing about the need to tear down the Gardiner Expressway. Urban planning experts and civic leaders claim that it is an eyesore and cuts the city off from the waterfront. There have been many ideas on how to replace this major artery from burying it (dismissed as too expensive) to replacing it with a widened Lakeshore Boulevard. This all sounds rosy and happy without any grounding in reality- the type of bizarre visions we've come to expect from the left-leaning elite in this city. I happen to have a couple of comments on this subject.
To those who suggest that replacing three lanes (in each direction) of controlled access highway with an extra lane (or even two) of Lakeshore Blvd. and having it only add 3-4 minutes to the average trip downtown, I must ask - what have you been smoking (and can I have some)?
This weekend the Gardiner was closed in both directions for regular maintenance (which was definitely needed) and we all got a taste of what life would be like without our expressway. According to Toronto Traffic Services (which happens to be controlled by the same crackpot lefty mayor and councillors) there were no major incidents. Hmmm. I wonder what is considered a major traffic incident? People setting up tents in the street? Godzilla stomping holes in the pavement?
I spent an extra 90 minutes trying to traverse 7 km of distance which would have taken me less than 5 on the Gardiner. I could have walked that distance much faster and would have if I hadn't been headed to Burlington. I'm not sure how 3-4 minutes morphed into 90 minutes - maybe it was a rounding error? The only thing I know for sure is that by the time I had been sitting for 45 minutes, I was already well into developing rather evil and nasty fantasies about the demise of our civic leadership.
So maybe they were a little misguided on their estimates, but just imagine - the city would no longer be cut off from the waterfront - everyone can join hands and sing! Well...just what exactly do they mean? I never seem to have any problems accessing the waterfront from the rest of downtown. The Gardiner is a raised expressway precisely so that people CAN pass underneath and easily get to the water.
We already have to cross six lanes of Lakeshore Blvd., to get to the waterfront - what happens if they expand that to eight or ten lanes? It's going to be worse than University Avenue, which is often a 2-light exercise in crossing for all but the best Olympic sprinters. Are they going to supply jet packs to magically fly over the road?
I also wonder what they plan on doing with the solid wall of condos that they have allowed to be built? Are they planning on demolishing them when they tear down the Gardiner? I think our civic leaders should remember the old saying: "People in glass houses should not throw stones". If they think the Gardiner creates such an eyesore on the waterfront, perhaps they should have thought twice before granting dozens of building permits for those massive glass and steel condos -which are the true culprit in cutting off the waterfront.
The only shinning light in all of these discussions is that David Miller is our current Mayor and is far too incompetent to even get something this complex to the planning phase, let alone reality.
One final note to the folks doing the maintenance work on the Gardiner - good job done. It looks like you'll finish 12 hours ahead of schedule (according to the news this morning) and give us back our vital link. Thank you!
To those who suggest that replacing three lanes (in each direction) of controlled access highway with an extra lane (or even two) of Lakeshore Blvd. and having it only add 3-4 minutes to the average trip downtown, I must ask - what have you been smoking (and can I have some)?
This weekend the Gardiner was closed in both directions for regular maintenance (which was definitely needed) and we all got a taste of what life would be like without our expressway. According to Toronto Traffic Services (which happens to be controlled by the same crackpot lefty mayor and councillors) there were no major incidents. Hmmm. I wonder what is considered a major traffic incident? People setting up tents in the street? Godzilla stomping holes in the pavement?
I spent an extra 90 minutes trying to traverse 7 km of distance which would have taken me less than 5 on the Gardiner. I could have walked that distance much faster and would have if I hadn't been headed to Burlington. I'm not sure how 3-4 minutes morphed into 90 minutes - maybe it was a rounding error? The only thing I know for sure is that by the time I had been sitting for 45 minutes, I was already well into developing rather evil and nasty fantasies about the demise of our civic leadership.
So maybe they were a little misguided on their estimates, but just imagine - the city would no longer be cut off from the waterfront - everyone can join hands and sing! Well...just what exactly do they mean? I never seem to have any problems accessing the waterfront from the rest of downtown. The Gardiner is a raised expressway precisely so that people CAN pass underneath and easily get to the water.
We already have to cross six lanes of Lakeshore Blvd., to get to the waterfront - what happens if they expand that to eight or ten lanes? It's going to be worse than University Avenue, which is often a 2-light exercise in crossing for all but the best Olympic sprinters. Are they going to supply jet packs to magically fly over the road?
I also wonder what they plan on doing with the solid wall of condos that they have allowed to be built? Are they planning on demolishing them when they tear down the Gardiner? I think our civic leaders should remember the old saying: "People in glass houses should not throw stones". If they think the Gardiner creates such an eyesore on the waterfront, perhaps they should have thought twice before granting dozens of building permits for those massive glass and steel condos -which are the true culprit in cutting off the waterfront.
The only shinning light in all of these discussions is that David Miller is our current Mayor and is far too incompetent to even get something this complex to the planning phase, let alone reality.
One final note to the folks doing the maintenance work on the Gardiner - good job done. It looks like you'll finish 12 hours ahead of schedule (according to the news this morning) and give us back our vital link. Thank you!
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Go Ahead...Make My Day
I think that Mayor Miller has finally found the proverbial straw that will break the camel's back and get him removed from office. What could possibly be this bad that even his left-leaning voters would get rid of him?
Did he get caught misappropriating funds? Well no, although some may argue his budgeting skills would technically qualify.
Was he caught in a sex scandal? Nope, although quite frankly that might at least make him seem human instead of a robotic tax & spending machine.
Was he caught shoplifting? Parking illegally? Scaring small children? Nope.
He is now proposing something so universally horrifying that everyone in the city would be affected. David Miller and his gang of left-wing cohorts (led my Councillor Howard Moscoe) are proposing a ban (or tax) on the ubiquitous paper coffee cup. It matters not if you wear a Jack Layton t-shirt to bed or you're a Bay Street banker, everyone loves their coffee and the vast majority enjoy it in a paper cup.
I realize that we all have the option to bring our own mug to be filled, but it usually ends up being a giant hassle. People forget them at home or work. They forget to wash them. And what do you do with your mug when you're done with it at the Saturday morning kids hockey game? Throw it at the ref?
Miller and company realize that an outright ban is probably not going to fly, so their "deposit" tax is their next best thing. The idea is that people would pay a deposit on these cups (as well as takeout food containers), which would be returned to the retailer when you're done with them. Great idea - we really need huge mountains of used (and smelly) coffee cups gathering in the hopefully sanitary environment of your local Tim's or Starbucks.
And what are the retailers supposed to do with them? Well they should recycle them of course. That would be fine, except that the City of Toronto does not allow these cups in their recycling program. So now what are the retailers to do with them?
The third option is just an outright tax on these cups, which would give the City the money needed to deal with the issue properly. Of course in David Miller's world, that plan would include 15 years of studies culminating with no plan, all the while pissing the new tax money away on foreign junkets.
One option I didn't see proposed would probably make the most sense - start accepting these cups and containers into the recycling program. They can be recycled - they certainly do in other cities. That of course is far too simple - no program that doesn't offer the opportunity for publicity and additional management overhead would ever be approved.
The only good thing that would come out of this entire mess is a certainty that the citizens of Toronto would finally be fed up with our wavy-haired golden boy. So go ahead David...make my day.
Did he get caught misappropriating funds? Well no, although some may argue his budgeting skills would technically qualify.
Was he caught in a sex scandal? Nope, although quite frankly that might at least make him seem human instead of a robotic tax & spending machine.
Was he caught shoplifting? Parking illegally? Scaring small children? Nope.
He is now proposing something so universally horrifying that everyone in the city would be affected. David Miller and his gang of left-wing cohorts (led my Councillor Howard Moscoe) are proposing a ban (or tax) on the ubiquitous paper coffee cup. It matters not if you wear a Jack Layton t-shirt to bed or you're a Bay Street banker, everyone loves their coffee and the vast majority enjoy it in a paper cup.
I realize that we all have the option to bring our own mug to be filled, but it usually ends up being a giant hassle. People forget them at home or work. They forget to wash them. And what do you do with your mug when you're done with it at the Saturday morning kids hockey game? Throw it at the ref?
Miller and company realize that an outright ban is probably not going to fly, so their "deposit" tax is their next best thing. The idea is that people would pay a deposit on these cups (as well as takeout food containers), which would be returned to the retailer when you're done with them. Great idea - we really need huge mountains of used (and smelly) coffee cups gathering in the hopefully sanitary environment of your local Tim's or Starbucks.
And what are the retailers supposed to do with them? Well they should recycle them of course. That would be fine, except that the City of Toronto does not allow these cups in their recycling program. So now what are the retailers to do with them?
The third option is just an outright tax on these cups, which would give the City the money needed to deal with the issue properly. Of course in David Miller's world, that plan would include 15 years of studies culminating with no plan, all the while pissing the new tax money away on foreign junkets.
One option I didn't see proposed would probably make the most sense - start accepting these cups and containers into the recycling program. They can be recycled - they certainly do in other cities. That of course is far too simple - no program that doesn't offer the opportunity for publicity and additional management overhead would ever be approved.
The only good thing that would come out of this entire mess is a certainty that the citizens of Toronto would finally be fed up with our wavy-haired golden boy. So go ahead David...make my day.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
What Are TTC Employees Afraid Of?
This week the TTC management announced plans to begin a drug and alcohol testing for employees in safety sensitive jobs (e.g. drivers, mechanics and some maintenance workers). This announcement comes on the heels of numerous recent incidents involving drug & alcohol abuse on the job (including a worker killed while high in April 2007). The move is intended to help ensure that riders and the public at large feel safe on and near TTC vehicles (let's not even talk about the streetcars that constantly run the stop sign near my house).
This program should be a no-brainer, right? Pee in a bottle once in a while and everyone is happy, OK? Well...not if you're the TTC union leadership. It seems that they take great exception to this new program and have threatened to throw a very public temper tantrum, including the possibility of another strike. Bob Kinnear, head of the Amalgamated Transit Union claims that the proposed program violates the privacy of its members.
Let's weigh that one for a minute. On one hand we have workers who don't want to pee in a cup. The potential violation of their privacy? It might actually show that they have a drug or alcohol problem. Consequences if they're caught? Unless they are actually caught driving impaired (which is an offence even the union admits merits dismissal), they will likely be given the option to enter a treatment program. Oh the horrors! Getting treatment for a serious problem would improve their lives (and the lives of their families) AND protect the public. The TTC management must be truly evil to want this - right?
On the other hand, we could just forget about this whole program and let things go on as usual. So what if that maintenance worker was too wasted to re-assemble those streetcars brakes properly. And what does it matter if the bus drivers are drunk on duty? Nothing happened to the passengers on the bus when the driver was caught with double the legal limit, did it?
It's really hard to fathom how the TTC union can justify their stance on this issue. They are responsible for the safety of millions of passengers each year and even one fatality due to drug or alcohol use is too many. If the Amalgamated Transit Union thinks their last strike was unpopular, imagine the public's reaction over this issue. In essence, they are telling the public that they don't care what happens to them as long as their union members aren't embarrassed.
The icing on the cake of this whole issue is the fact that Mayor David Miller and TTC Chairman Adam Giambrone are actually siding with the TTC union! I understand that they both lean so far to the left that their ears scrape the sidewalk, but come on now. This is the safety of their constituents that's at stake here - I hope the voters remember their attitude come next election.
This program should be a no-brainer, right? Pee in a bottle once in a while and everyone is happy, OK? Well...not if you're the TTC union leadership. It seems that they take great exception to this new program and have threatened to throw a very public temper tantrum, including the possibility of another strike. Bob Kinnear, head of the Amalgamated Transit Union claims that the proposed program violates the privacy of its members.
Let's weigh that one for a minute. On one hand we have workers who don't want to pee in a cup. The potential violation of their privacy? It might actually show that they have a drug or alcohol problem. Consequences if they're caught? Unless they are actually caught driving impaired (which is an offence even the union admits merits dismissal), they will likely be given the option to enter a treatment program. Oh the horrors! Getting treatment for a serious problem would improve their lives (and the lives of their families) AND protect the public. The TTC management must be truly evil to want this - right?
On the other hand, we could just forget about this whole program and let things go on as usual. So what if that maintenance worker was too wasted to re-assemble those streetcars brakes properly. And what does it matter if the bus drivers are drunk on duty? Nothing happened to the passengers on the bus when the driver was caught with double the legal limit, did it?
It's really hard to fathom how the TTC union can justify their stance on this issue. They are responsible for the safety of millions of passengers each year and even one fatality due to drug or alcohol use is too many. If the Amalgamated Transit Union thinks their last strike was unpopular, imagine the public's reaction over this issue. In essence, they are telling the public that they don't care what happens to them as long as their union members aren't embarrassed.
The icing on the cake of this whole issue is the fact that Mayor David Miller and TTC Chairman Adam Giambrone are actually siding with the TTC union! I understand that they both lean so far to the left that their ears scrape the sidewalk, but come on now. This is the safety of their constituents that's at stake here - I hope the voters remember their attitude come next election.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
An Election Topic I'd Like To See
With the October 14th election campaign now in official and full swing, we've started to see what the top issues will be. Between the economy, the environment, health care and energy policy, there are no shortage of important issues for the candidates to argue about. All of these issues are very important to our country and deserve to be front and centre, but there is one more that I think should be on this platform - welfare reform.
Now I realize that some of my ideas may offend some of my readers, but I do ask that you give careful thought before you react. Additionally, to help moderate the tone of my ideas, I do need to say that I completely believe in the "concept" and need for a public welfare system. Life happens to people and tough events can find some in true need of help, and for that all Canadians should be willing to share in that burden. With that out of the way, I must also say that our public welfare system is horribly broken and is not only a huge problem itself, but spawns other major problems that impact us all.
The first major problem is the fact that the concept of welfare being a "hand-UP" has been bastardized into a system of multi-generational "hand-OUTS". Public welfare was put in place to give a temporary hand to people down on their luck and help them get back on their self-sustaining feet. Today that welfare has turned into a system that encourages multiple generations of families to stay at home and live off the taxpaying Canadian public.
The system is set up to encourage single mothers to have multiple children and raise them without a central father figure. It is generous enough with basic living allowance, subsidized housing, drug benefits and other subsidies to encourage people to settle for a life of "comfortable poverty".
The life of "comfortable poverty" causes a plethora of other ills that can spread the destructive effect of welfare even wider. Subsidized housing is often lumped into vast "ghetto-ized" neighbourhoods, which breed additional despair and crime (that affects us all). In many cases, children (especially young boys) don't have a strong father figure and fall under the spell of gangs, drugs and violence as their way of trying to break out of the despair.
Worse yet, the system actively discourages people who do want to break the cycle and climb out of the system. They are not given adequate daycare assistance, training or counselling. They are also penalized when they do start to work, with benefit claw-backs and dramatic (and unmanageable) raises in their subsidized housing costs, which don't give them the chance to build a small nest egg and start fresh. The failure rate for people trying to break out of the system is extremely high - it's just easier to slip back into the welfare lifestyle than to try and fight the system.
The greatest tragedy of all is that despite what the rest of Canada might think, people on welfare are not bad or lazy people at heart. Most people on welfare do care about their children and don't want to be where they are (or worse yet, don't know any better), but have no other choice. They are people who have experienced tragedies in their lives that have forced them to seek help, only to be trapped in this broken system. Worst of all, are the children who grow up knowing no other way of life and follow their parents into the system.
How can we fix this problem that affects hundreds of thousands of Canadians directly and all of us through the expense of running the system, lost productivity of able-bodied adults and increased crime? I don't have all of the answers, but I do have an idea - revert the system back to it's original intent. Turn the Welfare system back into a hand-up instead of a hand-out. Here are some of the highlights of my idea:
Now I realize that some of my ideas may offend some of my readers, but I do ask that you give careful thought before you react. Additionally, to help moderate the tone of my ideas, I do need to say that I completely believe in the "concept" and need for a public welfare system. Life happens to people and tough events can find some in true need of help, and for that all Canadians should be willing to share in that burden. With that out of the way, I must also say that our public welfare system is horribly broken and is not only a huge problem itself, but spawns other major problems that impact us all.
The first major problem is the fact that the concept of welfare being a "hand-UP" has been bastardized into a system of multi-generational "hand-OUTS". Public welfare was put in place to give a temporary hand to people down on their luck and help them get back on their self-sustaining feet. Today that welfare has turned into a system that encourages multiple generations of families to stay at home and live off the taxpaying Canadian public.
The system is set up to encourage single mothers to have multiple children and raise them without a central father figure. It is generous enough with basic living allowance, subsidized housing, drug benefits and other subsidies to encourage people to settle for a life of "comfortable poverty".
The life of "comfortable poverty" causes a plethora of other ills that can spread the destructive effect of welfare even wider. Subsidized housing is often lumped into vast "ghetto-ized" neighbourhoods, which breed additional despair and crime (that affects us all). In many cases, children (especially young boys) don't have a strong father figure and fall under the spell of gangs, drugs and violence as their way of trying to break out of the despair.
Worse yet, the system actively discourages people who do want to break the cycle and climb out of the system. They are not given adequate daycare assistance, training or counselling. They are also penalized when they do start to work, with benefit claw-backs and dramatic (and unmanageable) raises in their subsidized housing costs, which don't give them the chance to build a small nest egg and start fresh. The failure rate for people trying to break out of the system is extremely high - it's just easier to slip back into the welfare lifestyle than to try and fight the system.
The greatest tragedy of all is that despite what the rest of Canada might think, people on welfare are not bad or lazy people at heart. Most people on welfare do care about their children and don't want to be where they are (or worse yet, don't know any better), but have no other choice. They are people who have experienced tragedies in their lives that have forced them to seek help, only to be trapped in this broken system. Worst of all, are the children who grow up knowing no other way of life and follow their parents into the system.
How can we fix this problem that affects hundreds of thousands of Canadians directly and all of us through the expense of running the system, lost productivity of able-bodied adults and increased crime? I don't have all of the answers, but I do have an idea - revert the system back to it's original intent. Turn the Welfare system back into a hand-up instead of a hand-out. Here are some of the highlights of my idea:
- Increase the welfare allowance to the median Canadian family income level, indexed to the area that they live (Toronto residents need more that rural Nova Scotians). This amount is roughly $68,000 per year.
- Provide a mandatory fully-funded two year education at a college or technical trade school. No offence, but a university education is not going to prepare them to enter the workforce quickly enough AND Canada has a serious shortage of skilled tradespeople.
- Continue to provide "top-up" subsidies for wages, health care and childcare costs for the first year of employment. This will greatly reduce the likelihood of people failing in their new lives. If people enter a skilled trade, then they should receive a top-up declining top-up for their entire apprenticeship period (typically 4-6000 hours).
- Provide fully funded daycare to single mothers or fathers.
- Provide a transportation allowance.
- Provide improved health care including proper dental care - nobody wants to hire a toothless 30 year old.
- Provide individual and/or group counselling to help them overcome self-esteem and other issues associated with the stigma of living on welfare.
- Completely erase their credit histories and allow them a fresh start. This doesn't give them good credit, it just doesn't mark them with bad credit.
So far most of you must think I've got Jack Layton sitting beside me with a gun to my head - just hang on for the flip-side:
- No able-bodied person in Canada over the age of 18 or under 60 can participate in this welfare program for more than 2 years in their entire life. Of course exceptions would be made in serious cases of physical or mental disability (the mildly disabled should be treated equally, but possibly receive moderate top-up subsidies). Nobody can ever get back on - no exceptions (except for the previously mentioned severe disability).
- Once they enroll in the system they must move out of and at least 10km away from their subsidized housing. This allows them to integrate into mainstream neighbourhoods and gets their children away from the bad influences (e.g. gangs). If any of their children are known gang members then the requirement for relocation increases to 100km. Vacant housing units should be sealed up and when possible, demolished.
- Anyone caught abusing or not complying with the program will be immediately ejected and left to fend for themselves.
- Anyone who doesn't want to participate in this program can either live on the street or leave the country (yes there's the hard-ass conservative in me). I believe that we all have a moral obligation to help those down on their luck get back on their feet. I don't believe that we have any obligation whatsoever to support those same people for their entire lives.
People may think this idea is too harsh - too bad. Some fellow conservatives may think this is too expensive? Think again. The average welfare recipient will cost Canadian taxpayers (all costs in) around $1.6 million over a 40 year period vs. approximately $250,000 to "graduate" from this program. And once they have entered the workforce, they begin to pay taxes and will eventually pay that entire amount back into the system.
I realize that the critics would be many and politicians would probably run screaming from an idea like this, but I think it's an idea that time has come.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Bike Lane Chaos is Now Complete
Now that school is back in and everyone is back to work, the true effect of the new bike lanes on Eastern Avenue in Toronto is now being felt. There are several ways I could describe the situation - total chaos! Charlie Fox! SNAFU!
All of these phrases are accurate and can probably give you a sense of just how bad these new bike lanes have made things, but I have decided to unveil a brand new word in the Toronto Dictionary - Millered. (Mill-erd) Adjective. Describes the chaos and or decimation caused by left-wing politicians.
I think I've probably made myself abundantly clear on how I feel about these bike lanes, but now we're starting to see a large number of others jump on that bandwagon. Not only has Eastern Avenue (the last clear road downtown from the east) become a hopeless mess, but now frustrated drivers are spilling onto Lakeshore, Dundas and worst of all Queen Street. What makes Queen Street the worst is that these frustrated drivers are zig-zagging along trying to make headway and in the process they are seriously jamming up the flow of streetcars.
Nice work Mayor Miller (and your partners in chaos, Adrian Heaps and cycle-nut extraordinaire, Glenn De Baeremaeker) - what do you have for an encore?
All of these phrases are accurate and can probably give you a sense of just how bad these new bike lanes have made things, but I have decided to unveil a brand new word in the Toronto Dictionary - Millered. (Mill-erd) Adjective. Describes the chaos and or decimation caused by left-wing politicians.
I think I've probably made myself abundantly clear on how I feel about these bike lanes, but now we're starting to see a large number of others jump on that bandwagon. Not only has Eastern Avenue (the last clear road downtown from the east) become a hopeless mess, but now frustrated drivers are spilling onto Lakeshore, Dundas and worst of all Queen Street. What makes Queen Street the worst is that these frustrated drivers are zig-zagging along trying to make headway and in the process they are seriously jamming up the flow of streetcars.
Nice work Mayor Miller (and your partners in chaos, Adrian Heaps and cycle-nut extraordinaire, Glenn De Baeremaeker) - what do you have for an encore?
Monday, September 08, 2008
Good Luck in Toronto Mr. Harper
So it seems that our Stephen Harper has finally pulled the rip cord and called an election for October 14th. It's been an interesting couple of years for Mr. Harper, but all in all not bad for a minority government that's been "threatened" numerous times by the increasingly spineless Liberals. Despite the minority, Mr. Harper has managed to govern reasonably well and for the most part (the Income Trust fiasco being a glaring exception) has kept his word - he's done what he said he would do.
Now the Liberals, NDP and Bloc (do they really count?) would have you believe that Mr. Harper has broken his word by calling a snap election despite his pledge to fix election dates (the next was supposed to be October 29, 2009). I guess this is technically true, but I for one fully support his decision. While the Conservatives have done an admirable job in governing during a minority, they have pretty much exhausted the "jellyfish" quota in the Liberal party and are faced with a very dysfunctional parliament going forward.
As the economy struggles, war beats on in Afghanistan and we face a new leader to our south, we now need a government that has a fresh, clear mandate to govern with. While a majority government is within the sights of Mr. Harper, even a renewed minority government would shut the opposition down for the immediate future and allow him to get on with business. That majority government that Mr. Harper so desperately desires - and deserves - would be a whole lot closer if not for one "small" problem - Toronto.
While the Conservatives are somewhat challenged in the entire province of Ontario, the truth is that Toronto is the driving force behind that challenge. For some unexplained reason, the economic engine of Canada is populated by people who chose to vote for the most "business un-friendly" parties in Canada. Does big business really want an economy crippling (and profit destroying) carbon tax? Do they really want their profits taxed more heavily and distributed to the people? How about pissing off the giant American bear to the south by withdrawing from Afghanistan suddenly?
The answer to these and other common sense questions is most likely no, yet the citizens of Toronto continue to elect Liberals and yes, god help us all, the NDP. I live in one of the more affluent areas in the city, populated by the same folks who own and manage those businesses and guess who my Member of Parliament is? Yup, none other than Jack Layton himself - ARGH! I just don't get it.
What is going through the heads of these people? Do they really believe that Jack and his NDP have a hope in hell of forming a government? And even if they somehow managed that miracle, do they realize the devastation that would wreak on Canada?
If they need a reminder of what damage a left-wing leader can cause, they need only look as far as Toronto's mayor, David Miller. He's taken a somewhat shaky city (from Mel Lastman's bombastic leadership) and turned it into complete and utter chaos. Now just imagine the mess that Toronto is in under Mayor Miller and extrapolate that to a national level - that's what we would get with Jack Layton as our PM (he did get his training as a left-wing Toronto city councillor after all).
On a somewhat different note, I suppose I can sort of excuse folks for voting Liberal - I guess we have had a couple of decent Liberal PM's in living memory - but why would anyone want Stephane Dion as their PM? The man has the personality of a boiled potato and some rather dangerous ideas that could cause great harm to our country. His "Carbon Tax" sounds like the mother of all complicated messes and would likely make the gun registry fiasco look like small potatoes (boiled?).
It's highly unlikely that either Stephane or Jack are going to oust Mr. Harper, so perhaps the folks here in Toronto should try something new - back a winner.
Now the Liberals, NDP and Bloc (do they really count?) would have you believe that Mr. Harper has broken his word by calling a snap election despite his pledge to fix election dates (the next was supposed to be October 29, 2009). I guess this is technically true, but I for one fully support his decision. While the Conservatives have done an admirable job in governing during a minority, they have pretty much exhausted the "jellyfish" quota in the Liberal party and are faced with a very dysfunctional parliament going forward.
As the economy struggles, war beats on in Afghanistan and we face a new leader to our south, we now need a government that has a fresh, clear mandate to govern with. While a majority government is within the sights of Mr. Harper, even a renewed minority government would shut the opposition down for the immediate future and allow him to get on with business. That majority government that Mr. Harper so desperately desires - and deserves - would be a whole lot closer if not for one "small" problem - Toronto.
While the Conservatives are somewhat challenged in the entire province of Ontario, the truth is that Toronto is the driving force behind that challenge. For some unexplained reason, the economic engine of Canada is populated by people who chose to vote for the most "business un-friendly" parties in Canada. Does big business really want an economy crippling (and profit destroying) carbon tax? Do they really want their profits taxed more heavily and distributed to the people? How about pissing off the giant American bear to the south by withdrawing from Afghanistan suddenly?
The answer to these and other common sense questions is most likely no, yet the citizens of Toronto continue to elect Liberals and yes, god help us all, the NDP. I live in one of the more affluent areas in the city, populated by the same folks who own and manage those businesses and guess who my Member of Parliament is? Yup, none other than Jack Layton himself - ARGH! I just don't get it.
What is going through the heads of these people? Do they really believe that Jack and his NDP have a hope in hell of forming a government? And even if they somehow managed that miracle, do they realize the devastation that would wreak on Canada?
If they need a reminder of what damage a left-wing leader can cause, they need only look as far as Toronto's mayor, David Miller. He's taken a somewhat shaky city (from Mel Lastman's bombastic leadership) and turned it into complete and utter chaos. Now just imagine the mess that Toronto is in under Mayor Miller and extrapolate that to a national level - that's what we would get with Jack Layton as our PM (he did get his training as a left-wing Toronto city councillor after all).
On a somewhat different note, I suppose I can sort of excuse folks for voting Liberal - I guess we have had a couple of decent Liberal PM's in living memory - but why would anyone want Stephane Dion as their PM? The man has the personality of a boiled potato and some rather dangerous ideas that could cause great harm to our country. His "Carbon Tax" sounds like the mother of all complicated messes and would likely make the gun registry fiasco look like small potatoes (boiled?).
It's highly unlikely that either Stephane or Jack are going to oust Mr. Harper, so perhaps the folks here in Toronto should try something new - back a winner.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
