CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20227
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:09 am
 


BartSimpson wrote:
bootlegga wrote:
Still, I do tend to agree that tax cuts for the wealthy and cheap beer are no replacement for good healthcare, education or adequately maintained roads.


Sometimes you cut taxes on the wealthy so you don't lose them altogether. :idea:

In California we've so heavily weighted our tax system against the wealthy that according to one of our state agencies (it's quasi-confidential and unpublished for now) so far this year California has lost 138 wealthy people.

That's doesn't sound like a big deal in a state with ~40 million residents, does it?

Yet according to this state agency those 138 people took fifteen percent of the state's personal income tax revenue with them and the state budget that just went into effect on July 1st will now be out of balance by as much as twelve billion dollars.

So once again we'll be looking at a mid-year budget renegotiation come December 31.

But yeah, let's fuck the rich because, well fuck the rich!

Oh, but now WTF do we do with all of the programs that depend on the rich people? [huh]

Seriously, you can't just willy-nilly fuck over the most very mobile segment of your population and expect them to pay through the nose for the privilege of being hated and raped by your political class.

These people can move to another state or country with relative ease. The proper balance of taxes is then not so much that it becomes sensible for these people to flee.


It's not about hating the rich or saying fuck the rich, it's about getting them to pay their fair share for the resources they use.

The wealthy (well those who actually work for living and not financial parasites like those on Wall Street) benefit more from the education system than you or I, because it churns out workers for them who need less training. They benefit from infrastructure spending more than you or I because it allows them to more their products to market more efficiently. They even benefit more from the health care system because it keeps their workers healthy enough to come in to work every day.

The fortunate thing is that it is difficult for many industries to move, because the resource they exploit is situated somewhere and will not move. Of course companies can choose a foreign country over a state/province in the North America, but while there are higher payoffs, some of the costs are higher (language, shipping, work culture, etc.) as well as the risks (corruption, extortion, terrorism, etc.). It seems like most NA companies prefer to operate here and hedge their bets overseas to boost profits, so share prices and dividends keep growing.

Besides the tax code is so full of tax exemptions that even if those 15 had stayed in California, odds are they still wouldn't have paid all that much - kind of like Donald Trump and his $900 million tax write-off in the 90s that meant he didn't have to pay taxes for 20+ years.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11605
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:10 am
 


Coach85 wrote:
BeaverFever wrote:
....Annd now the sex-ed curriculum had been reverted back to the 1990s version so kids will no longer be taught the proper names of body parts, or about modern issues like online predators, the dangers of sexting, sexual consent, otthat something called same-sex marriage exists.

Cue Fiddle to try and peddle the pack conservative nutjob lies that it teaches kids to have anal sex, requires them to cross-dress etc.


That's just as bad as what the nutjobs on the right are saying.

The curriculum teaches kids the names of their body parts. The proper names.

Only at older ages not at grade 1 as per the curriculum update.

Quote:
A revised curriculum will be back. In the meantime, as parents, we can step in and teach kids things and not leave it all on the teachers.


There’s nothing wrong with the one that Ford is killing, any revision would still be less adequate than what they’ taking away. And AFAIK there’s no firm commitment to revise anything any time soon anyhow.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11605
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:16 am
 


Thanos wrote:
Best now to strike while he can on issues like this and not waste the momentum from the election. All Ford's doing is pissing off a downtown Toronto that hates him anyway so he really has nothing to lose. At this stage in the insane wastage of money that's been going on in Ontario for a decade, simply going ahead and gutting anything that isn't a basic government duty to do, like funding for basic maintenance, would be a winning policy to follow. Keep the solar panel programs as it is a proven technology but nuke anything to do with crap like wind power or intensive recycling that costs more in labour (to sort household garbage for fucks sake :roll: ) than it's ever going to return in revenue.



I don’t know where you get your info but wind is just as proven a technology as solar and the purpose of recycling is not to generate revenue but reduce waste and conserve nom-renewable resources like metal. Gutting programs is never a good strategy in any mature western economy.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21475
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:48 am
 


Coach85 wrote:

A revised curriculum will be back. In the meantime, as parents, we can step in and teach kids things and not leave it all on the teachers.

Seeing what parents currently believe and know, I'm not sure that's a good idea. I wouldn't want parents teaching their kids calculus or physics and I'm not sure I want them teaching their kids about homosexuality and not being a fucktard on the internet. That's how you end up with flat earthers, people who don't believe in evolution, and people who think vaccines cause autism.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1044
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:57 am
 


BeaverFever wrote:

There’s nothing wrong with the one that Ford is killing, any revision would still be less adequate than what they’ taking away. And AFAIK there’s no firm commitment to revise anything any time soon anyhow.


How would you know if it would be less adequate without even seeing it?

You've just proved why it's an issue for so many. Everyone has an opinion on what's good and what's not in terms of teaching sex-ed.

Personally, I want to see a curriculum that didn't involve a pedophile in it's creation just as I wouldn't want a business related curriculum written but a guy with multiple business failures and bankruptcies.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1044
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:59 am
 


Tricks wrote:
Coach85 wrote:

A revised curriculum will be back. In the meantime, as parents, we can step in and teach kids things and not leave it all on the teachers.

Seeing what parents currently believe and know, I'm not sure that's a good idea. I wouldn't want parents teaching their kids calculus or physics and I'm not sure I want them teaching their kids about homosexuality and not being a fucktard on the internet. That's how you end up with flat earthers, people who don't believe in evolution, and people who think vaccines cause autism.


You don't have kids, that much is obvious which is why you would leave all of the sexual teachings to a teacher.

I'd much prefer to talk to my children about sex, relationships and everything else. It's not a tough thing to do and it's best when it comes from mom or dad.

Despite all of the education our kids get in science, there will always be people that believe in a flat Earth or creationism. There's no cure for stupid.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21475
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:13 am
 


Coach85 wrote:
Tricks wrote:
Coach85 wrote:

A revised curriculum will be back. In the meantime, as parents, we can step in and teach kids things and not leave it all on the teachers.

Seeing what parents currently believe and know, I'm not sure that's a good idea. I wouldn't want parents teaching their kids calculus or physics and I'm not sure I want them teaching their kids about homosexuality and not being a fucktard on the internet. That's how you end up with flat earthers, people who don't believe in evolution, and people who think vaccines cause autism.


You don't have kids, that much is obvious which is why you would leave all of the sexual teachings to a teacher.

I'd much prefer to talk to my children about sex, relationships and everything else. It's not a tough thing to do and it's best when it comes from mom or dad.

Despite all of the education our kids get in science, there will always be people that believe in a flat Earth or creationism. There's no cure for stupid.

I'm not saying parents shouldn't talk about it with their kids. I'm saying it shouldn't be the only source, especially when it comes to current conventions, like the internet. I know people who can barely use a computer, who have kids. How are they expected to talk to their kids about being safe on the internet? Or homosexuality. You want the like of Fiddle or Martin talking to children about same-sex marriage? With no opposite opinion? Half this planet are morons, and morons pass their stupid on. Having a standardized education that teaches actual facts and tries to inject morality where it may be absent is not a bad thing.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21475
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 2:40 pm
 


https://www.thebeaverton.com/2015/05/on ... about-sex/

Take note of the date. Now take note of the screeching from "concerned parents" over... nothing.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 11605
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:32 pm
 


Coach85 wrote:
BeaverFever wrote:

There’s nothing wrong with the one that Ford is killing, any revision would still be less adequate than what they’ taking away. And AFAIK there’s no firm commitment to revise anything any time soon anyhow.


How would you know if it would be less adequate without even seeing it?[quote

Because the one he scrapped was the one designed by experts. Logically the one designed by non-experts will be not as good. Especially if it’s designed to cater to the sensitivities of religious conservatives and laypeople as he has suggested.

Quote:
You've just proved why it's an issue for so many. Everyone has an opinion on what's good and what's not in terms of teaching sex-ed.


As Tricks suggested, just as with creationists and flat-earthers, the uninformed opinions of laypeople should have little bearing on school curricula.

Quote:
Personally, I want to see a curriculum that didn't involve a pedophile in it's creation just as I wouldn't want a business related curriculum written but a guy with multiple business failures and bankruptcies.
There we thousands of people involved in developing the curriculum including dozens of below Levin - who as deputy minister wouldn’t have be involved in writing curriculum details anyway - as well as external consultants and over 4,000 parent representatives. So that kind of immuendo belongs in the garbage.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1044
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:15 pm
 


BeaverFever wrote:

Because the one he scrapped was the one designed by experts. Logically the one designed by non-experts will be not as good. Especially if it’s designed to cater to the sensitivities of religious conservatives and laypeople as he has suggested.


So was the one from 1998.

BeaverFever wrote:
There we thousands of people involved in developing the curriculum including dozens of below Levin - who as deputy minister wouldn’t have be involved in writing curriculum details anyway - as well as external consultants and over 4,000 parent representatives. So that kind of immuendo belongs in the garbage.


It doesn't belong in the garbage at all. There's far more to the story.

In March of 2009, Levin took direct control over the new curriculum when he replaced another civil servant with himself, renamed the division and took over. He was tasked with the new approach and to implement it. Levin himself is quoted as saying just that.

Even your Liberal bias has you deflecting away from a convicted pedophile. Let that sink in while you look at those on the right and take aim at the over similar garbage on their side of the fence.

FWIW, I don't have a problem with the curriculum. I have a problem with a pedophile being at the centre of it's creation.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21475
PostPosted: Thu Jul 12, 2018 6:21 pm
 


Coach85 wrote:
FWIW, I don't have a problem with the curriculum. I have a problem with a pedophile being at the centre of it's creation.

So if a new team of experts came in and reviewed it and gave it the stamp of approval?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.