fwiw, it's well understood that a lower dollar creates jobs in ontario. and, it just happened again.
if a confederacy is fundamentally a decision to use the same currency, it's hard to have a stable country when the east and west are in this zero-sum game, where one has to lose for the other to benefit.
we're told that a strong oil industry is good for the country. but, ontarians that are not yet convinced need to wake up to the reality of it: our economy moves opposite to the price of oil. it always has. and, there's no reason to think it will change any time soon.
Friday, April 28, 2017
it may very well have been a last minute addition, with the intent to leave expansion to an election issue.
at the provincial level in ontario, we have more of a traditional left-right axis. and, because ontario is what it is, you can expect that most people in the traditional center swing (which includes a lot of low income workers) will support universal pharmacare - if the liberals present it, rather than the ndp. so, the liberals just need to match the ndp to dominate them.
i live on disability, and even if i was merely on welfare i'd still have better drug coverage than a large percentage of wage workers. report after report has called this out for years as irrational and drawn all kinds of conclusions, including presenting it as a disincentive to employment. but, nobody wants to take away drug coverage from people on assistance.
it's a good start, anyways.
http://globalnews.ca/news/3410017/ontario-budget-2017-families-get-free-prescriptions-drugs-for-children-more-aid-for-students/
at the provincial level in ontario, we have more of a traditional left-right axis. and, because ontario is what it is, you can expect that most people in the traditional center swing (which includes a lot of low income workers) will support universal pharmacare - if the liberals present it, rather than the ndp. so, the liberals just need to match the ndp to dominate them.
i live on disability, and even if i was merely on welfare i'd still have better drug coverage than a large percentage of wage workers. report after report has called this out for years as irrational and drawn all kinds of conclusions, including presenting it as a disincentive to employment. but, nobody wants to take away drug coverage from people on assistance.
it's a good start, anyways.
http://globalnews.ca/news/3410017/ontario-budget-2017-families-get-free-prescriptions-drugs-for-children-more-aid-for-students/
at
19:17
this is the reality of "liberalizing markets" in agriculture.
the farmers need to clue-in: the governments of the world work for the agri-business companies of the world. their systems are not safe in government hands. they should organize outside of government.
it makes all kinds of sense - you just need to realize that government today is operated by lobbyists.
https://www.pressprogress.ca/one_chart_shows_why_the_liberal_uturn_on_the_canadian_wheat_board_makes_no_sense
the farmers need to clue-in: the governments of the world work for the agri-business companies of the world. their systems are not safe in government hands. they should organize outside of government.
it makes all kinds of sense - you just need to realize that government today is operated by lobbyists.
https://www.pressprogress.ca/one_chart_shows_why_the_liberal_uturn_on_the_canadian_wheat_board_makes_no_sense
at
13:30
this is an infringement on free speech.
....and this principal should be reprimanded and fired.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-education-13-reasons-why-netflix-1.4089238
....and this principal should be reprimanded and fired.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-education-13-reasons-why-netflix-1.4089238
at
13:06
if trudeau wants a way out of this supply management fiasco - and don't fool yourself, he is not ideologically aligned with those that would uphold it - he may want to think about privatizing it, rather than abolishing it. and, he may find more support for this on the left than he thinks.
if you think the liberals are going to stand up for supply management, let's remember what happened with the wheat board:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-leader-challenges-liberals-wheat-board-qp-1.3451181
but, don't misunderstand me when i talk about privatizing it. what the conservatives did with the wheat board - sell it to the fucking saudis - is just about the worst thing that could be done to dairy. what i'm talking about is spinning it off from government into an independent body.
see, i'd rather get the government out of it, too. but, the key point that people are missing is that the supply management system is not intrinsically tied to government. if the farmers want to maintain the system, they can always organize the system on their own. this would create a cartel, but it is a situation where a cartel makes sense and a cartel should be supported. i mean, if the farmers choose a cartel, how can the state prevent it from forming?
an independently run cartel would probably be more efficient, and those efficiencies would no doubt be passed on to the consumer.
i don't want to pretend that i have the background required to organize this. i just want to get the idea across that farmers don't need the government to manage the supply for them. if they believe in the system, they can take control of it and manage the supply on their own. and, that is where my ideological leanings actually lie.
if you think the liberals are going to stand up for supply management, let's remember what happened with the wheat board:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-leader-challenges-liberals-wheat-board-qp-1.3451181
but, don't misunderstand me when i talk about privatizing it. what the conservatives did with the wheat board - sell it to the fucking saudis - is just about the worst thing that could be done to dairy. what i'm talking about is spinning it off from government into an independent body.
see, i'd rather get the government out of it, too. but, the key point that people are missing is that the supply management system is not intrinsically tied to government. if the farmers want to maintain the system, they can always organize the system on their own. this would create a cartel, but it is a situation where a cartel makes sense and a cartel should be supported. i mean, if the farmers choose a cartel, how can the state prevent it from forming?
an independently run cartel would probably be more efficient, and those efficiencies would no doubt be passed on to the consumer.
i don't want to pretend that i have the background required to organize this. i just want to get the idea across that farmers don't need the government to manage the supply for them. if they believe in the system, they can take control of it and manage the supply on their own. and, that is where my ideological leanings actually lie.
at
12:59
my understanding is that this operation has an extremely high success rate. the government of alberta has a lot of skeletons in it's closet regarding it's motives around public health, and it should revist this policy.
http://globalnews.ca/news/3410342/calgary-family-to-pay-600k-for-little-girls-liver-transplant-after-canadas-health-system-says-no/
http://globalnews.ca/news/3410342/calgary-family-to-pay-600k-for-little-girls-liver-transplant-after-canadas-health-system-says-no/
at
11:20
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)