The Walkerton Contamination
Rick
responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
Background:
--------------------
Many locals blame Tory cutbacks they say has crippled the
municipality's ability to adequately screen a water supply that's in
close proximity to cattle operations, making it susceptible to E. coli
contamination. E. coli live in cattle intestines and cow manure often
spreads the infection. (Toronto Star )
The e-coli contamination in Walkerton was caused by heavy rains that
washed contaminated water from the farms into the wells and water
supply. The Walkerton contamination is spreading and E. coli has been
found in Freelton water. Cases of infection are being reported in
several cities. Authorities suspect that some of the people getting
sick in Windsor, London and Kitchener passed through the Walkerton
area recently and drank the water
The ministry of the environment were informed by
GAP Microbial labs months before the Walkerton incident. When the
ministry was asked as why it didn't inform public health officials the
ministry refused to answer.
Eva Ligeti, who was the Ministry of Environment's top auditor from
1994 until last August, said the Walkerton tragedy could have been
averted even before deadly E. coli bacteria reached the town's water
supply if a groundwater management plan had been in place.
"Ninety per cent of Ontario's rural population depends on groundwater
as their water source. Municipalities have no capacity to prevent
things going in (to the water supply) - those (contaminants) are the
responsibility of the provincial government.'' (Toronto Star )
In 1996, the ministry staff assigned to water and drinking water
dropped by 42 per cent, from 113 to 48 employees, OPSEU figures show.
Staff assigned to groundwater and hydrogeology dropped 53 per cent,
from 28 to 15. Facts are that the Harris Government has laid off
nearly half the water-monitoring staff, and this deadly outbreak of
E.coli infection is the second waterborne virus to devastate an
Ontario community since the Tories restructured Ontario's water
system. (Toronto Star )
Within two years nearly two dozen communities in southwestern Ontario
were not meeting minimum standards for testing drinking water for
cleanliness. In 1998, 44 water treatment plant operators were cited by
the ministry for failing to meet minimum standards for testing
drinking water for cleanliness. Those problems were never reported to
the communities. Private water suppliers do not feel obligated to
notify Ontario residents of problems with the drinking water.
( Citizens on the web )
Privatized Labs Could Care Less About the Public - The Canadian
Environmental Law Society has been sounding the warning for years,
privatized water can lead to death, so it is better to keep these
utilities public. The Harris Government refused to listen and now in
an interview that took place Friday, Greg Patterson, president of A&L
Laboratories Canada East Inc. proves CELA's fears to be correct.
Patterson, the head of the laboratory hired to test drinking water in
Walkerton, says he had no duty or obligation to alert medical
officials even though he knew the water supply was contaminated
( Citizens on the Web )
In a time of budget surplus Mike Harris has just cut another 100
million from the environment. Thousands of citizens are dying each
year from air pollution. More water supply disasters are sure to
happen, and the larger nightmare of Harris' privatized Nuclear Plants
waits to explode from the darkness.
( Citizens on the Web )
New figures report that water pollution violations have tripled.
Elizabeth Christie of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund says that repeat
offenders are continuing to pollute and more are joining the
bandwagon. "It appears that when Mike Harris says Ontario is open for
business, it really means Ontario is an open sewer." More than 3,000
violations of water-pollution standards were reported in 1998, up from
1,013 in 1996.Two-thirds were repeat offenders and 16 have been on the
list for five years running. The Environment Ministry records show
only one prosecution during the year. Fines levied against water
polluters dropped from more than $3-million in 1995 to $864,000 in
1998. The province stopped publicly releasing pollution reports in
1995, and the Sierra group said it has to get them through public
information requests. ( Citizens on the web )
Observations
---------------------
There is one common denominator to all Neo-Conservative policies.
They represent the rich and fortunate people. In today's society, all
over the world, we have entered a time where the elite and rich, have
more power over others than they have in the recent past. As a
result, society has reverted to an attitude where the government and
the corporations are beyond blame and the individual is responsible
for all problems. Since the rich represent the minority of people,
they don't generally represent the best interests of the general
public who will suffer because of this. The longer this minority
controls the majority, the more totalitarian the world will become
because those with power will continue to acquire more power.
The elitist, who is rich and powerful, often doesn't understand
failure because they have never known extreme failure. Therefore, they
consider failure by people and society to be their own fault. You will
notice that every example below shows how the Neo-Conservative
attempts to move the blame for problems from the government to the
individual. While they are sipping $100 glasses of wine you will be
working for minimum wage while trying to get through university.
As the massive amount of pollution is destroying your environment,
the elitist will sigh and claim that the rest of the world is at fault
and there is nothing he can do. The elitist then signs his signature
to cut jobs at his car factory to save money .
Examples of Neo-Conservative policy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Neo-Conservatives now govern the province of Ontario. It is not
hard to see that this is the case when we notice the massive social
spending cuts to general public who don't have wealth or power.
Below are a list of this governments policies which clearly show
they believe that others are the root of all of society's problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris says that the privatization of water in Ontario was the
NDP's fault when they allowed municipal governments use of private
labs for water testing.
**This is not nearly as bad as savage cutting done by his government,
when In 1996, the ministry staff assigned to water and drinking water
dropped by 42 per cent, from 113 to 48 employees. **
## Mike Harris says this is a waste of money. Too bad we are drinking
sewer water!!! ##
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris has cut welfare by 22% which represent a very large
percentage of children.
** Why put children, the future of Canada, in abject poverty? We all
know about the Neo-Conservative propaganda about the lazy welfare
recipient. After-all. the Neo-Conservative mentality says that the
individual is the fault and not the government's fault **
## Mike Harris says he is forcing parents to work yet these children
are still on welfare. ##
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris is getting tough on young offenders and criminals
through harsher sentences.
** Why would he be getting tough on criminals when crime is steadily
going down??? Are individuals suddenly more guilty than they used to
be? Why does the government seem to be telling us that it is always
the individual's fault and not a problem with society? Why are kids
suddenly adult criminals??? **
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris wants to force mentally ill out-patients to take drugs.
** Is mental illness suddenly crime??? It is well documented that
these drugs can be quite harmful. In fact, it is hard to see why
anybody would take them unless they were about to die from their
illness." **
## Mike Harris says that people have been victims of mentally ill
people so they should be forced to take drugs. Then why don't we drug
all dogs because they have been known kill people??? This is pure
discrimination, prejudiced and against the law. It is like charging
insurance based on gender instead of individual driving records.
People have died from these drugs. ##
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris wants school children to wear school uniforms.
** Have we suddenly realized that people need to be more conformist,
and should be trained to be so at an early age, so we can be
responsible for our own actions??? Or is the government changing our
society so that we will be more susceptible to their will, and held
more responsible for their mistakes? **
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris has cut education funding $1.9 billion in provincial
cuts have forced: 22 school boards to cancel junior
kindergarten classes.
## Mike Harris says that we are wasting money in education and that
all the former governments were mistaken by wasting this money. Is
this another example of how a government's financial problems are
switched to be the problems of society? It would seem that children
don't have money or power so they are in the failure category.##
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mike Harris is attacking Ottawa for keeping files on 33 million
Canadians. Yet Harris has handed 50,000 files on Ontario residents
over to the to the Angus Reid, the polling group
** This is definitely and example of this government's attitude that
the little guy has no voice. **
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Harris is trying to bring in the Judicial Accountability Act.
** This act is another example of how the Neo-Conservatives consider
facets of society to be below that of the government. This bill is an
example of how the this government intends to be above the law of the
land. This sounds subversive? You betcha!!! **
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Harris wants to finger print all welfare recipients.
** Why doesn't he just put tattoos on them like Hitler did with the
Jews? Why are the poor treated like criminals? Could it be that
Harris considers all failure to be an individual's fault instead of at
least some fault of society?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is only so much bandwidth on the internet so I will have to stop
here instead of mentioning all the cuts Mike Harris has made to
society. We simply must have those tax cuts. Funny how the province
with the lowest taxes doesn't have the most economic growth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
************ SO WELCOME TO THE MACHINE**************
JMD
got it off your chest now, before we know what really happened with
Walkerton's water supply. It might have been more difficult to do all this
huffing and puffing later.
How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
against stupidity or bad judgement?
John Dowell
"Rick" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:39330190...@news.ican.net...
> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>
[rant snipped]
Dave Smith
> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
> against stupidity or bad judgement?
You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
to monitor and enforce those standards.
JHall
On Mon, 29 May 2000, JMD wrote:
> ...
>
> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>
not to mention a sense of responsibility - or any amount of sense.
John Angus
> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
on high about who done the deed.
It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
JA
Bill22
***************************************************
It is of immense importance to learn to
laugh at ourselves.
--Katherine Mansfield//////Question of the day.
Because it was shown on CNN?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bill22
You guys did it with your own NDP
Great move.
***************************************************
It is of immense importance to learn to
laugh at ourselves.
--Katherine Mansfield//////Question of the day.
Bill22
Bill22 <bil...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Doesn't belong here........
Dave Smith
> Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
> > There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
> > responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>
> Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
Oh boy! Harris sending in his goons. They served him well when they went
into Ipperwash and shot up the demonstrators and when they waded into a
crowd of OPSEU demonstrators, swinging batons at old ladies. I am sure
they will be prepared to help out their friend Mike.
Liz McLean
news:85n4jso6nhni095r6...@4ax.com...
> <copious FUD snipped...>
Er, what means FUD????
Michael T. Richter
news:EtyY4.114798$55.25...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
>> <copious FUD snipped...>
> Er, what means FUD????
"Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt." It's a buzzword used to describe certain kinds
of propaganda -- typically propaganda put out by someone whose views
disagree with yours. (Oddly, very few people call the propaganda they
happen to agree with FUD....)
Michael T. Richter
> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary.asp?f=000529/302483
"There is a natural tendency, in the wake of a tragedy like Walkerton's, to
cast about for someone to blame. At the same time, there is a wholly
unnatural tendency, on the part of some critics of the Harris Conservatives,
to blame them for everything -- or at least, to think them capable of
anything -- or at any rate, to hate them come what may."
My first observation of this phenomenon was when the Ottawa Citizen was
blaming things that were happening on a newly-elected Mike Harris -- two
weeks before he was even sworn in.
E. Barry Bruyea
<adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>JMD wrote:
>
>> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>
>You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
>system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
>wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
>to monitor and enforce those standards.
And exactly how would that have prevented the alleged negilgence on
the part of the local bureaucrats who failed to notify the Medical
Officer of Health? Rules & Regs have never interfered with an
individuals ability to have bad judgement or be just plain stupid.
>
>
EBB
John Angus
>> > responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>
>
> Oh boy! Harris sending in his goons. They served him well when they went
> into Ipperwash and shot up the demonstrators and when they waded into a
Y'know, I have no objection at all to them using whatever force is required
against thugs.
> crowd of OPSEU demonstrators, swinging batons at old ladies.
Like I said, thugs.
JA
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>
>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>on high about who done the deed.
>
>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>
>
>JA
I'm real glad that 'Rick' is not niggardly with his advice and hasn't
paddle-locked his keyboard. That way, we have the benefit of his far
reaching insight. Kind of a Nostradamus of the NG's.
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
<adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>John Angus wrote:
>
>> Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>> > There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>> > responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>
>> Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>
>Oh boy! Harris sending in his goons. They served him well when they went
>into Ipperwash and shot up the demonstrators and when they waded into a
>crowd of OPSEU demonstrators, swinging batons at old ladies. I am sure
>they will be prepared to help out their friend Mike.
Nice objective commentary, even with the hyperbole. Are you related
to the infamous Nameless, AKA Rick?
>
EBB
Michael T. Richter
> There HAS to be a reporting system implemented, to save us from the
> stupid, the evil, the incompetent and even the well meaning, it's
> just to much responsibility to safely entrust to just one person.
The problem is that the more people you add to a hierarchical organisation,
the more intrinsically incompetent *AND* evil such an organisation becomes.
I can work you through the math if you like.
Liz McLean
news:llh5js8hggl91ifmn...@4ax.com...
> to improve reporting, especially the speed of getting the data to the
> people who need it.
>
> As it is, due to cutbacks that any other party would have to have
> enacted (McLeod was going to cut the civil service, remember), the
> layoffs would be by seniority, not skill.
This is GROSS GROSS GROSS, who gives a shit about Lyn McLeod Mike Harris et
al? I want to know, if, for example, there are irregularities found in the
water in say, Stratford, just before the festival, that it doesn't come down
to just one guy. What if he is a pretty competent, pretty decent guy, but a
bit of a hot dog who thinks he will single handedly save the local economy,
by keeping things quiet, and fixing it himself, and he can't, and nobody
knows. There HAS to be a reporting system implemented, to save us from the
stupid, the evil, the incompetent and even the well meaning, it's just to
much responsibility to safely entrust to just one person. All of you Harris
bashers and Harris defenders are making me puke.
JHall
On Mon, 29 May 2000, Liz McLean wrote:
> This is GROSS GROSS GROSS, who gives a shit about Lyn McLeod Mike Harris et
> al?
> ...
> much responsibility to safely entrust to just one person. All of you Harris
> bashers and Harris defenders are making me puke.
wanna go out on a date some time soon ? I really appreciate someone who
understands a picture that is larger than the one others are viewing.
jh...@achilles.net I run my own business so I am not part of the corporate
crowd and this cuts down on my ability to find dates. Well it means zero
possibilities thus the net.
JMD
protocols you have in place, you cannot prevent someone from violating them
who is motivated to do so. There will never be 100 per cent protection but I
think we need to ensure that all those with a need to know are actually in
the loop. For example, a lab that finds drinking water contamination should
be required to notify the local medical officer of health in addition to
providing feedback to the local water management officials who commissioned
the lab tests. That's at a minimum. Probably provincial health officials
should be notified as well.
This procedure can be implemented quickly through regulatory change. It
does not require legislation, expanded bureaucracy or higher taxes.
Reportedly, people knew there was problem with Walkerton's water. It
appears, however, that this knowledge was not shared with the MOH until it
was too late.
John Dowell
"Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:NGAY4.115255$55.25...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
>
> This is GROSS GROSS GROSS, who gives a shit about Lyn McLeod Mike Harris
et
> al? I want to know, if, for example, there are irregularities found in
the
> water in say, Stratford, just before the festival, that it doesn't come
down
> to just one guy. What if he is a pretty competent, pretty decent guy, but
a
> bit of a hot dog who thinks he will single handedly save the local
economy,
> by keeping things quiet, and fixing it himself, and he can't, and nobody
> knows. There HAS to be a reporting system implemented, to save us from
the
> stupid, the evil, the incompetent and even the well meaning, it's just to
Chuck here
"Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:NGAY4.115255$55.25...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
> news:llh5js8hggl91ifmn...@4ax.com...
> > sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea) wrote:
> > >Dave Smith <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > >>JMD wrote:
> > >>
the
> water in say, Stratford, just before the festival, that it doesn't come
down
> to just one guy. What if he is a pretty competent, pretty decent guy, but
a
> bit of a hot dog who thinks he will single handedly save the local
economy,
> by keeping things quiet, and fixing it himself, and he can't, and nobody
> knows. There HAS to be a reporting system implemented, to save us from
the
> stupid, the evil, the incompetent and even the well meaning, it's just to
> much responsibility to safely entrust to just one person. All of you
Harris
> bashers and Harris defenders are making me puke.
>
advised but kept quiet. One bureaucrat saving another I guess. The only
group that did its job, and more, was the private lab that tested the water.
We should privatise the whole thing and get the bureaucrats out of it.
Rick
>n...@email.com (Rick) spewed:
>
><copious FUD snipped...>
>
>>Funny how the province
>>with the lowest taxes doesn't have the most economic growth.
>
>Alberta and Ontario, the two provinces with the lowest (or lowering)
>taxes, are the two provinces with booming economies.
It is well known that the US has strengthened our economy so there
needs to be a way of observing the effects of low taxation in the
largest provincial economies. These two provinces are the largest
economies so it is not unlikely that they would be able to grow their
economies the fastest even without lowered taxation. I'm just pointing
out that Ontario has the lowest taxation yet doesn't have the fastest
growing economy.
Rick
<word...@marktting-wizards.com> wrote:
>Nice rant. Full of sound and fury signifying nothing. But it is good you
>got it off your chest now, before we know what really happened with
>Walkerton's water supply. It might have been more difficult to do all this
>huffing and puffing later.
>
Rant and facts are two different things. There was some opinion
offered but you have failed to offer explanation to the factual parts.
>How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>against stupidity or bad judgement?
>
There is no doubt that the Walkerton water works were of some blame
but it is hard to not notice that the Harris government has cut nearly
50% of civil service in this area. What we do know is that the
beauracracy in the highest position, namely the Harris government,
knew about the problem but failed to report it. If the greatest
authority is negligent in this situation, how can we expect the lower
authorities to act properly?
Michael T. Richter
> Besides, we all know that Harris cuts have all areas of society just
> as his cuts have in the case of the service cuts in Walkerton water
> works.
Try as I might, I cannot parse the above into anything which even remotely
resembles semantically correct English. There seems to be a verb missing
somewhere, but God alone knows what that verb is and where it belongs.
Rick
wrote:
>On Mon, 29 May 2000 14:13:04 GMT, Dave Smith
><adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>JMD wrote:
>>
>>> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>>> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>>> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>>
>>You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
>>system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
>>wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
>>to monitor and enforce those standards.
>
>
>And exactly how would that have prevented the alleged negilgence on
>the part of the local bureaucrats who failed to notify the Medical
>Officer of Health? Rules & Regs have never interfered with an
>individuals ability to have bad judgement or be just plain stupid.
Two wrongs don't make a right. The provincial government is held
responsible for those bureaucrat under it. Besides, we all know that
Michael T. Richter
>> As it is, due to cutbacks that any other party would have
>> to have enacted (McLeod was going to cut the civil service,
>> remember), the layoffs would be by seniority, not skill.
> It never happened Goneaux.
Of course it didn't. The voters -- you remember those pesky people who seem
to have strongly disagreed with you? -- chose someone other than McLeod.
It must suck to be constantly wrong. How do you cope with it?
Rick
wrote:
>On Mon, 29 May 2000 19:32:48 GMT, sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea)
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 14:13:04 GMT, Dave Smith
>><adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>JMD wrote:
>>>
>>>> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>>>> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>>>> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>>>
>>>You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
>>>system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
>>>wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
>>>to monitor and enforce those standards.
>>
>>
>>And exactly how would that have prevented the alleged negilgence on
>>the part of the local bureaucrats who failed to notify the Medical
>>Officer of Health? Rules & Regs have never interfered with an
>>individuals ability to have bad judgement or be just plain stupid.
>
>It would be hard to argue that another layer of bureaucracy is going
>to improve reporting, especially the speed of getting the data to the
>people who need it.
>
Ahhh .yes.... the double speak of the elite where the word
"bureaucracy" is a dark horse. We have all noted the sudden shift
of word meanings in the right-wing. The word "Conservative" used to
mean that we stick to traditional values. We now think that it means
quantum change. The use of the word "conservative" is now used by the
elite as double speak to confuse the vote of the traditional
Conservative.
Steve Marskell
Rick wrote:
>
> Many locals blame Tory cutbacks they say has crippled the
> municipality's ability to adequately screen a water supply that's in
> close proximity to cattle operations, making it susceptible to E. coli
> contamination. E. coli live in cattle intestines and cow manure often
> spreads the infection. (Toronto Star )
So let's blame the Ontario government for choices made by municipal
officials in Walkerton.....they just spent millions rebuilding the
downtown core roads. Did not the problem of possible ground water run
off into their shallow wells exist last year?
Rick
wrote:
>Liz McLean <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote in message
>news:NGAY4.115255$55.25...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
>> There HAS to be a reporting system implemented, to save us from the
>> stupid, the evil, the incompetent and even the well meaning, it's
>> just to much responsibility to safely entrust to just one person.
>
>The problem is that the more people you add to a hierarchical organisation,
>the more intrinsically incompetent *AND* evil such an organisation becomes.
>I can work you through the math if you like.
>
I insist that you do the math. Is this like the army where the more
hierarchy there is in the army, the more evil it is? This is just
double speak where bureaucracy is a dark horse.
Steve Marskell
Dave Smith wrote:
> system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
> wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
> to monitor and enforce those standards.
Or ya teach politicians and potential politicians that with the power of
governing comes the responsibility of holding others lives in their
hands.
Rick
wrote:
>On 29 May 2000 15:01:34 GMT, an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Angus)
>wrote:
>
>>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>
>>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>>on high about who done the deed.
>>
>>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>>
>>
>>JA
>
>I'm real glad that 'Rick' is not niggardly with his advice and hasn't
>paddle-locked his keyboard. That way, we have the benefit of his far
>reaching insight. Kind of a Nostradamus of the NG's.
>
>EBB
Another example of millions where the facts are not the issue and
Bruyea with his ilk take it to a personal level.
Rick
wrote:
>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>
>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>on high about who done the deed.
>
>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
Stick to the facts please. What have I said that doesn't
show who the quilty parties are? We note your failure to do so.
Michael T. Richter
>> The problem is that the more people you add to a hierarchical
>> organisation, the more intrinsically incompetent *AND* evil
>> such an organisation becomes. I can work you through the math
>> if you like.
> I insist that you do the math.
Polite requests tend to get better responses.
met...@home.com
over 30 years. In fact the man in charge has been employed there for 28 years and was responsible for denying the
fact that the water was contaminated. Why are so many people so quick to jump on the 'I hate the government' band
wagon.
cheers,
derek
Rick wrote:
> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>
> Background:
> --------------------
>
> Many locals blame Tory cutbacks they say has crippled the
> municipality's ability to adequately screen a water supply that's in
> close proximity to cattle operations, making it susceptible to E. coli
> contamination. E. coli live in cattle intestines and cow manure often
> spreads the infection. (Toronto Star )
>
> The e-coli contamination in Walkerton was caused by heavy rains that
> washed contaminated water from the farms into the wells and water
> supply. The Walkerton contamination is spreading and E. coli has been
> found in Freelton water. Cases of infection are being reported in
> several cities. Authorities suspect that some of the people getting
> sick in Windsor, London and Kitchener passed through the Walkerton
> area recently and drank the water
>
> The ministry of the environment were informed by
> GAP Microbial labs months before the Walkerton incident. When the
> ministry was asked as why it didn't inform public health officials the
> ministry refused to answer.
>
> Eva Ligeti, who was the Ministry of Environment's top auditor from
> 1994 until last August, said the Walkerton tragedy could have been
> averted even before deadly E. coli bacteria reached the town's water
> supply if a groundwater management plan had been in place.
> "Ninety per cent of Ontario's rural population depends on groundwater
> as their water source. Municipalities have no capacity to prevent
> things going in (to the water supply) - those (contaminants) are the
> responsibility of the provincial government.'' (Toronto Star )
>
> In 1996, the ministry staff assigned to water and drinking water
> dropped by 42 per cent, from 113 to 48 employees, OPSEU figures show.
> Staff assigned to groundwater and hydrogeology dropped 53 per cent,
> from 28 to 15. Facts are that the Harris Government has laid off
> nearly half the water-monitoring staff, and this deadly outbreak of
> E.coli infection is the second waterborne virus to devastate an
> Ontario community since the Tories restructured Ontario's water
> system. (Toronto Star )
>
> Within two years nearly two dozen communities in southwestern Ontario
> were not meeting minimum standards for testing drinking water for
> cleanliness. In 1998, 44 water treatment plant operators were cited by
> the ministry for failing to meet minimum standards for testing
> drinking water for cleanliness. Those problems were never reported to
> the communities. Private water suppliers do not feel obligated to
> notify Ontario residents of problems with the drinking water.
> ( Citizens on the web )
>
> Privatized Labs Could Care Less About the Public - The Canadian
> Environmental Law Society has been sounding the warning for years,
> privatized water can lead to death, so it is better to keep these
> utilities public. The Harris Government refused to listen and now in
> an interview that took place Friday, Greg Patterson, president of A&L
> Laboratories Canada East Inc. proves CELA's fears to be correct.
> Patterson, the head of the laboratory hired to test drinking water in
> Walkerton, says he had no duty or obligation to alert medical
> officials even though he knew the water supply was contaminated
> ( Citizens on the Web )
>
> In a time of budget surplus Mike Harris has just cut another 100
> million from the environment. Thousands of citizens are dying each
> year from air pollution. More water supply disasters are sure to
> happen, and the larger nightmare of Harris' privatized Nuclear Plants
> waits to explode from the darkness.
> ( Citizens on the Web )
>
> New figures report that water pollution violations have tripled.
> Elizabeth Christie of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund says that repeat
> offenders are continuing to pollute and more are joining the
> bandwagon. "It appears that when Mike Harris says Ontario is open for
> business, it really means Ontario is an open sewer." More than 3,000
> violations of water-pollution standards were reported in 1998, up from
> 1,013 in 1996.Two-thirds were repeat offenders and 16 have been on the
> list for five years running. The Environment Ministry records show
> only one prosecution during the year. Fines levied against water
> polluters dropped from more than $3-million in 1995 to $864,000 in
> 1998. The province stopped publicly releasing pollution reports in
> 1995, and the Sierra group said it has to get them through public
> information requests. ( Citizens on the web )
>
> Observations
> ---------------------
>
> There is one common denominator to all Neo-Conservative policies.
> They represent the rich and fortunate people. In today's society, all
> over the world, we have entered a time where the elite and rich, have
> more power over others than they have in the recent past. As a
> result, society has reverted to an attitude where the government and
> the corporations are beyond blame and the individual is responsible
> for all problems. Since the rich represent the minority of people,
> they don't generally represent the best interests of the general
> public who will suffer because of this. The longer this minority
> controls the majority, the more totalitarian the world will become
> because those with power will continue to acquire more power.
>
> The elitist, who is rich and powerful, often doesn't understand
> failure because they have never known extreme failure. Therefore, they
> consider failure by people and society to be their own fault. You will
> notice that every example below shows how the Neo-Conservative
> attempts to move the blame for problems from the government to the
> individual. While they are sipping $100 glasses of wine you will be
> working for minimum wage while trying to get through university.
> As the massive amount of pollution is destroying your environment,
> the elitist will sigh and claim that the rest of the world is at fault
> and there is nothing he can do. The elitist then signs his signature
> to cut jobs at his car factory to save money .
>
> Examples of Neo-Conservative policy
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The Neo-Conservatives now govern the province of Ontario. It is not
> hard to see that this is the case when we notice the massive social
> spending cuts to general public who don't have wealth or power.
> Below are a list of this governments policies which clearly show
> they believe that others are the root of all of society's problems.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris says that the privatization of water in Ontario was the
> NDP's fault when they allowed municipal governments use of private
> labs for water testing.
>
> **This is not nearly as bad as savage cutting done by his government,
> when In 1996, the ministry staff assigned to water and drinking water
> dropped by 42 per cent, from 113 to 48 employees. **
>
> ## Mike Harris says this is a waste of money. Too bad we are drinking
> sewer water!!! ##
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris has cut welfare by 22% which represent a very large
> percentage of children.
>
> ** Why put children, the future of Canada, in abject poverty? We all
> know about the Neo-Conservative propaganda about the lazy welfare
> recipient. After-all. the Neo-Conservative mentality says that the
> individual is the fault and not the government's fault **
>
> ## Mike Harris says he is forcing parents to work yet these children
> are still on welfare. ##
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris is getting tough on young offenders and criminals
> through harsher sentences.
>
> ** Why would he be getting tough on criminals when crime is steadily
> going down??? Are individuals suddenly more guilty than they used to
> be? Why does the government seem to be telling us that it is always
> the individual's fault and not a problem with society? Why are kids
> suddenly adult criminals??? **
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris wants to force mentally ill out-patients to take drugs.
>
> ** Is mental illness suddenly crime??? It is well documented that
> these drugs can be quite harmful. In fact, it is hard to see why
> anybody would take them unless they were about to die from their
> illness." **
>
> ## Mike Harris says that people have been victims of mentally ill
> people so they should be forced to take drugs. Then why don't we drug
> all dogs because they have been known kill people??? This is pure
> discrimination, prejudiced and against the law. It is like charging
> insurance based on gender instead of individual driving records.
> People have died from these drugs. ##
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris wants school children to wear school uniforms.
>
> ** Have we suddenly realized that people need to be more conformist,
> and should be trained to be so at an early age, so we can be
> responsible for our own actions??? Or is the government changing our
> society so that we will be more susceptible to their will, and held
> more responsible for their mistakes? **
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris has cut education funding $1.9 billion in provincial
> cuts have forced: 22 school boards to cancel junior
> kindergarten classes.
>
> ## Mike Harris says that we are wasting money in education and that
> all the former governments were mistaken by wasting this money. Is
> this another example of how a government's financial problems are
> switched to be the problems of society? It would seem that children
> don't have money or power so they are in the failure category.##
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Mike Harris is attacking Ottawa for keeping files on 33 million
> Canadians. Yet Harris has handed 50,000 files on Ontario residents
> over to the to the Angus Reid, the polling group
>
> ** This is definitely and example of this government's attitude that
> the little guy has no voice. **
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Harris is trying to bring in the Judicial Accountability Act.
>
> ** This act is another example of how the Neo-Conservatives consider
> facets of society to be below that of the government. This bill is an
> example of how the this government intends to be above the law of the
> land. This sounds subversive? You betcha!!! **
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> - Harris wants to finger print all welfare recipients.
>
> ** Why doesn't he just put tattoos on them like Hitler did with the
> Jews? Why are the poor treated like criminals? Could it be that
> Harris considers all failure to be an individual's fault instead of at
> least some fault of society?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> There is only so much bandwidth on the internet so I will have to stop
> here instead of mentioning all the cuts Mike Harris has made to
> society. We simply must have those tax cuts. Funny how the province
> with the lowest taxes doesn't have the most economic growth.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ************ SO WELCOME TO THE MACHINE**************
Rick
wrote:
>On Tue, 30 May 2000 15:45:34 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 19:35:36 GMT, sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On 29 May 2000 15:01:34 GMT, an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Angus)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>>>>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>>>>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>>>
>>>>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>>>>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>>>>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>>>>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>>>>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>>>>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>>>>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>>>>on high about who done the deed.
>>>>
>>>>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>JA
>>>
>>>I'm real glad that 'Rick' is not niggardly with his advice and hasn't
>>>paddle-locked his keyboard. That way, we have the benefit of his far
>>>reaching insight. Kind of a Nostradamus of the NG's.
>>>
>>>EBB
>>
>>Another example of millions where the facts are not the issue and
>>Bruyea with his ilk take it to a personal level.
>
>You took it to a personal level when you called Canadian conservatives
>nazis, asshole.
Where did I call Conservatives Nazis? I made reference to their
similarities. After-all, extreme right-wing politics becomes the
totalitarian. What am I supposed to think about a party that removes
welfare benefits from children?
Liz McLean
news:8h0c3h$jvq$1...@news.storm.ca...
> That just it, Liz, it always comes to a judgement call. No matter how
many
> protocols you have in place, you cannot prevent someone from violating
them
> who is motivated to do so. There will never be 100 per cent protection but
I
> think we need to ensure that all those with a need to know are actually in
> the loop. For example, a lab that finds drinking water contamination
should
> be required to notify the local medical officer of health in addition to
> providing feedback to the local water management officials who
commissioned
> the lab tests. That's at a minimum. Probably provincial health officials
> should be notified as well.
>
> This procedure can be implemented quickly through regulatory change. It
> does not require legislation, expanded bureaucracy or higher taxes.
>
> Reportedly, people knew there was problem with Walkerton's water. It
> appears, however, that this knowledge was not shared with the MOH until it
> was too late.
As far as I understand,(and anyone, please correct me if I am wrong) both of
the private labs acted correctly in terms of meeting requirements. One
notified the PUC, the other notified the PUC and the MoE. The MoE then
notified the PUC. We have not heard the PUC guys side of the story, so it's
hard to say if he acted correctly or not. The implications for him are
terrible, and I am unwilling to condemn him for the deaths of his townfolk
without more information. So, to me anyway, the questions are---should
there have been a requirement for the labs to notify health officials (I
would say yes), and was there a requirement for the MoE to notify health
officials (if so, why did they not do so, if not, why not?). Did such
requirements exists previously? If not, why not? If so, and they were
dispensed with why? Was the legislation hastily written? Or was there a
justifiable reason?
Rick
wrote:
>On Tue, 30 May 2000 15:25:27 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 15:38:10 -0400, James Goneaux <jam...@my-deja.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 19:32:48 GMT, sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 14:13:04 GMT, Dave Smith
>>>><adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>JMD wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>>>>>> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>>>>>> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>>>>>
>>>>>You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
>>>>>system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
>>>>>wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
>>>>>to monitor and enforce those standards.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>And exactly how would that have prevented the alleged negilgence on
>>>>the part of the local bureaucrats who failed to notify the Medical
>>>>Officer of Health? Rules & Regs have never interfered with an
>>>>individuals ability to have bad judgement or be just plain stupid.
>>>
>>>It would be hard to argue that another layer of bureaucracy is going
>>>to improve reporting, especially the speed of getting the data to the
>>>people who need it.
>>>
>>
>>Ahhh .yes.... the double speak of the elite where the word
>>"bureaucracy" is a dark horse.
>
>You should be arrested for misuse of the English language.
>
Something wrong here?
>>We have all noted the sudden shift
>>of word meanings in the right-wing.
>
>Define "sudden". Thatcher was elected in 1979, Reagan in 1980. You're
>talking two decades ago.
>
Suddenly as in the relatively recent history of the last century.
>>The word "Conservative" used to
>>mean that we stick to traditional values.
>
>No, that is conservative. The capitalized word refers to a political
>party properly called the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada and
>Ontario. No, this isn't pedantry: its a real problem when they are
>confused. You've been so informed, so don't get huffy.
>
This sure is startling information?!
>>We now think that it means
>>quantum change. The use of the word "conservative" is now used by the
>>elite as double speak to confuse the vote of the traditional
>>Conservative.
>
>Do you ever stop to check that what you type makes the least bit of
>sense?
>
It is perfectly understandable to me. Perhaps some added information
would be helpful.
_Genuine_ conservatism acts as a societal gyroscope, resisting nearly
every kind of change, regardless of its direction. Conservatism's
catch phrase might be "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The New World
Order now uses the term "conservatism" differently . This is double
speak where the voting public are unaware of what the new term means.
>Ontario hasn't had a read conservative party since the 1960s,
Normally I wouldn't stoop as low as you do to point out spelling
mistakes. Look above Goneaux. Do you ever check what you are about to
type?
>so
>that's probably what confuses you and other critics of Harris. Davis
>was a Red Tory saddled with two minority governments propped up the
>NDP. Then we had the Liberals, then we had the NDP. ANY conservative
>government will look different in this context.
>
Davis aside, there is more about this new so-called conservative
than what most people know. This new conservative is really just the
New World Order. Please don't tell me that the NWO is just paranoia
because world leaders frequently use the term.
>>>As it is, due to cutbacks that any other party would have to have
>>>enacted (McLeod was going to cut the civil service, remember), the
>>>layoffs would be by seniority, not skill.
>>
>>It never happened Goneaux.
>
>What never happened? The cutbacks on which you've been blaming the
>tragedy? Even you aren't that stupid, so you must mean McLeod's
>promise to cut the civil service. And yes, it did happen. Now, I know
>your memory doesn't go much beyond, oh, lets be kind and say the
>beginning of last year, here are a few things to jog it:
>
The civil service was never cut to the best of my memory.
>http://www.eye.net/news/Park/1995/prk0406.htm
>
Thanks for the link.
>"In a dramatic departure from traditional left-wing and centrist party
>policies, McLeod's new economic program looks more like
>a conservative agenda than the policies of the previous Liberal
>government of David Peterson.
I can believe that. I thought Rae was right of centre.
>
>If elected, McLeod has promised to cut 12,000 government jobs, to get
>tough on welfare cheaters and to force welfare
>recipients to take training courses or face a reduction in benefits.
>She would also freeze transfers to schools, municipalities and
>hospitals for another four years and off-load billions of dollars in
>capital projects to the private sector."
Since you insist on comparing the political parties, if I had to
choose, I would choose NDP. I have also voted Liberal but generally
like the NDP. Just because the leader of a party wants to have certain
platforms doesn't mean that they will happen. A party
is composed of more than one person with ideas. I just know that the
government of Mike Harris is really not good.
>Sound like anyMike you know?
>
>http://www.dryden.net/~mmiller/727/promises.htm
>
>As I've said, this is exactly what we can expect from you:
>
>a) make a statement;
>b) be told that its wrong;
>c) question the motives of who corrected you;
>d) admit you were wrong;
>e) make another statement clarifying the first;
>f) see b)
>
Back to the same old insults. You never stick to the issues because
you use guerilla warfare.
Michael T. Richter
> Back to the same old insults. You never stick to the issues because
> you use guerilla warfare.
This coming from the "conservatives are Nazis" man?
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Mon, 29 May 2000 12:00:32 GMT, ear...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>n...@email.com (Rick) spewed:
>>
>><copious FUD snipped...>
>>
>>>Funny how the province
>>>with the lowest taxes doesn't have the most economic growth.
>>
>>Alberta and Ontario, the two provinces with the lowest (or lowering)
>>taxes, are the two provinces with booming economies.
>
>It is well known that the US has strengthened our economy so there
>needs to be a way of observing the effects of low taxation in the
>largest provincial economies. These two provinces are the largest
>economies so it is not unlikely that they would be able to grow their
>economies the fastest even without lowered taxation. I'm just pointing
>out that Ontario has the lowest taxation yet doesn't have the fastest
>growing economy.
Yes, it does and Alberta is not the second largest economy after
Ontario. You get off on being wrong, don't you, nameless?
EBB
Dave Smith
> It wasn't "just one guy" the bureaucrats at MoE Owen Sound were also
> advised but kept quiet. One bureaucrat saving another I guess. The only
> group that did its job, and more, was the private lab that tested the water.
> We should privatise the whole thing and get the bureaucrats out of it.
It wasn't a case of the MOE keeping quiet. They were aware of contamination
early this month and sent a report to the Walkerton PUC recommending that
improved use of chlorine, the need for staff training and to meet water sampling
standards. It was up to the town and the PUC to act on those recommendations.
The MOE was made aware of the recent and more serious contamination by an
anonymous call on May 20.
As for privatizing the whole operation, you should note that the company that
was doing the testing did not find it profitable, so they got out of the
business. A second private company took over the contract. Note also that the
privatization of the system is a recent change, and I don't remember ever
hearing of e-coli deaths and epidemics from drinking water in the days before
privatization.
E. Barry Bruyea
wrote:
>Rick <n...@email.com> wrote in message news:3937dba1...@news.ican.net...
>>> As it is, due to cutbacks that any other party would have
>>> to have enacted (McLeod was going to cut the civil service,
>>> remember), the layoffs would be by seniority, not skill.
>
>> It never happened Goneaux.
>
>Of course it didn't. The voters -- you remember those pesky people who seem
>to have strongly disagreed with you? -- chose someone other than McLeod.
>
>It must suck to be constantly wrong. How do you cope with it?
It must be obvious to all that nameless 'gets off' on humiliation.
It's a lot cheaper for him, using a keyboard than it is one of
Toronto's leather bound sweeties you read about in the Sun.
>
EBB
Dave Smith
> Another example of millions where the facts are not the issue and
> Bruyea with his ilk take it to a personal level.
Some people find it easier to insult and label than to be confused by
facts. ;-)
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Mon, 29 May 2000 19:35:36 GMT, sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea)
>wrote:
>
>>On 29 May 2000 15:01:34 GMT, an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Angus)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>>>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>>>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>>
>>>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>>>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>>>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>>>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>>>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>>>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>>>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>>>on high about who done the deed.
>>>
>>>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>>>
>>>
>>>JA
>>
>>I'm real glad that 'Rick' is not niggardly with his advice and hasn't
>>paddle-locked his keyboard. That way, we have the benefit of his far
>>reaching insight. Kind of a Nostradamus of the NG's.
>>
>>EBB
>
>Another example of millions where the facts are not the issue and
>Bruyea with his ilk take it to a personal level.
When did 'facts' every interfere with your posts? Allegations,
mis-interpretations, distortions of historical events, lack of reading
comprehension; all form the component parts of any post you've ever
penned, nameless. The fact that you fool yourself into thinking
otherwise is in itself proof of your total lack of adult intelligence.
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Tue, 30 May 2000 12:03:10 -0400, James Goneaux <jam...@my-deja.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2000 15:45:34 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 29 May 2000 19:35:36 GMT, sha...@dusk.com (E. Barry Bruyea)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 29 May 2000 15:01:34 GMT, an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Angus)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>>>>>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>>>>>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>>>>
>>>>>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>>>>>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>>>>>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>>>>>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>>>>>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>>>>>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>>>>>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>>>>>on high about who done the deed.
>>>>>
>>>>>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>JA
>>>>
>>>>I'm real glad that 'Rick' is not niggardly with his advice and hasn't
>>>>paddle-locked his keyboard. That way, we have the benefit of his far
>>>>reaching insight. Kind of a Nostradamus of the NG's.
>>>>
>>>>EBB
>>>
>>>Another example of millions where the facts are not the issue and
>>>Bruyea with his ilk take it to a personal level.
>>
>>You took it to a personal level when you called Canadian conservatives
>>nazis, asshole.
>
>Where did I call Conservatives Nazis? I made reference to their
>similarities. After-all, extreme right-wing politics becomes the
>totalitarian. What am I supposed to think about a party that removes
>welfare benefits from children?
Removes Welfare Benefits from children? When did this happen? And
how come the news media hasn't reported it?
>
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
>On 29 May 2000 15:01:34 GMT, an...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (John Angus)
>wrote:
>
>>Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>>> There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>>> responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>
>>Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>>We could save a pile of money by just delivering up heads
>>right away. Who needs an investigation when "Rick" has all the
>>answers right off the bat? Think of all the money we could save
>>on royal commissions and the like by just asking "Rick"! Heck,
>>we don't even neeed trials, nor police to investigate crimes.
>>The all-knowing "Rick" will will just make pronouncements from
>>on high about who done the deed.
>>
>>It must be wonderful to have such a gift.
>
>Stick to the facts please. What have I said that doesn't
>show who the quilty parties are? We note your failure to do so.
Your first post on the tragedy at Walkerton was a knee-jerk reaction
to your paranoid, pathalogical hate of Mike Harris and at the time of
the post, you had no facts whatsoever to back up your idiocy.
>
EBB
JHall
3 holes in the ground (woooow no pun intended), however,
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Steve Marskell wrote:
> ...
>
> Or ya teach politicians and potential politicians that with the power of
> governing comes the responsibility of holding others lives in their
> hands.
you must be joking, right ? The reason I write this is 'cause I'm having
a problem finding anyone who is responsible for anything and that includes
getting thru each and every day.
Dam there are more victims than there are people and every one is
insisting that the responsibility of/for/by/over/under whatever rests
elsewhere.
Most of our Can. politicians don't even take their necessary appearance
before the public responsibly just why would anyone think that others'
lives amount to more than a potential vote (should the person be of age
and inclined to make his/her vote) in his/her favour, if even that much.
Walter Petelka
<adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>JMD wrote:
>
>> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
>> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
>> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>
>You do it the same way that it is dealt with in many other issues. You set up a
>system of reporting to and monitoring by a larger body. You set up a province
>wide system to set certain standards and use legislation, policies and programs
>to monitor and enforce those standards.
Translation: You set up a bureaucracy thereby creating new members for
OPSEU and the other unions that feed off the taxpayer.
The best thing would be to privatize all PUCs and let the private
sector do what they know best.....how to be efficient, effective and
able to turn a profit.
>
wpetelka@<NOSPAM>idirect.com
VISIT http://webhome.idirect.com/~wpetelka
With Freedom Comes Risk-Ban Anon Sigs.
Walter Petelka
<adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>John Angus wrote:
>
>> Rick (n...@email.com) writes:
>> > There is now absolutely no doubt the Ontario government are
>> > responsible for the Walkerton contamination.
>>
>> Wow. And the OPP have only just begun to investigate.
>
>Oh boy! Harris sending in his goons. They served him well when they went
>into Ipperwash and shot up the demonstrators and when they waded into a
>crowd of OPSEU demonstrators, swinging batons at old ladies. I am sure
>they will be prepared to help out their friend Mike.
Somebody must be posting under David Smith's id. I can believe these
comments coming from the kent cabal, robertson, et al but not from
someone, with whom I disagree most of the time, but usually posts
rationale postings.
Steve Marskell
Rick wrote:
> I'm just pointing
> out that Ontario has the lowest taxation yet doesn't have the fastest
> growing economy.
Oh, now Ernie Eves is a liar when he stated that Ontario had the fastest
rate of growth of any G7 country. Did you even glance at the budget
documents before damning the rate of growth in the economy?
Rick
wrote:
Funny comparison. We are talking about provinces.
Steve Marskell
Rick wrote:
> >Oh, now Ernie Eves is a liar when he stated that Ontario had the fastest
> >rate of growth of any G7 country. Did you even glance at the budget
> >documents before damning the rate of growth in the economy?
>
> Funny comparison. We are talking about provinces.
Funny if he's the only one stating a better rate than the G7 countries,
that leads me to believe the other provincial finance ministers cannot
make that claim. I'd die of shock if another politician didn't take the
time to crow about his provincial economy outperforming the G7 countries
as a whole ;)
JMD
God's sake. Who has a greater interest in pure water in Walkerton? The
people who live there or remote provincial bureaucrats? The local people
apparently knew of the problems but did not act. Why?
We need to know what happened here before hurling accusations, assigning
blame or rushing in with half-baked solutions that may not address real
problems. We need a public inquiry, not political cheap shots and
anti-Harris rants.
John Dowell
JMD
of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge? The temptation to totalitarianism is far
more prevalent among socialists than it is among us conservative folk.
After all, you are the ones who advocate big government with lots of
bureaucrats, regulations, and intrusion into lives as part of the agenda to
perfect society. We rightoids believe the best government is the least
government. That leaves little scope for government bullying and little
opportunity for petty bureaucrats to mess about in our lives. The Nazis were
not believers in small government and they did call themselves "Socialists".
John Dowell
"Rick" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:3935175a...@news.ican.net...
Rick
wrote:
>
>
You are correct. Apparently, I was looking at older figures. With
Alberta being such a rich province, I was very surprised to see that
things have changed. Budget 2000 has changed all that with Ontario
having a 5.7% growth in 1999. Isn't that just my luck to post
something like this and ruin my original post. :( However, this still
doesn't have much to do with the Walkerton issue. I apologize for the
misleading facts
We still have to wonder who it was that makes all the money. Corporate
taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
street sees very little of the economic growth We had to contend with
massive cuts to society. I must admit that it is getting harder to
disprove the Harris tax cuts but I really believe that these cuts are
not worth the meager benefits. From what I have read, most economist
think the hot US economy has been fueling Canada's economy. This makes
sense since our industry is vastly owned by the Americans.
ps.....I appreciate the fact that you didn't insult me as others have
done.
Rick
<word...@marketing-wizards.com> wrote:
>The "lower authorities" are the among the people who drink this water for
>God's sake.
I hear you but let's remember that many people drink bottled water.
Namely, the guys who can afford to. Municipalities have very little
authority in this country and I hold the provincial government
responsible. When Mel Lastman stated he wanted to make Toronto
a separate province, comments were made that basically he couldn't
because he didn't have the authority to.
>Who has a greater interest in pure water in Walkerton? The
>people who live there or remote provincial bureaucrats? The local people
>apparently knew of the problems but did not act. Why?
>
Under the old system the Provincial Environment Ministry controlled
water testing. If a test were to come in saying the water was bad, the
provincial water tester would inform the local public utility and
medical officer and action would be taken.
When Harris got elected he decided to privatize water testing. The
private labs work under the local utilities and have no authority.
What most likely happened in Walkerton is that the chap running the
Public Utility got a report of bad water from the private testing
company. Since the testing company wouldn't be telling anyone else and
had no authority over him, he then decided that he would keep the
water running, play hero and fix the problem himself. No one would
know the better.
>We need to know what happened here before hurling accusations, assigning
>blame or rushing in with half-baked solutions that may not address real
>problems. We need a public inquiry, not political cheap shots and
>anti-Harris rants.
Everything was fine until Harris changed the situation in 96. How many
years did everything run smoothly before these changes?
Rick
<word...@marketing-wizards.com> wrote:
>And extreme left-wing policies? Ever heard of the Soviet Union? Ever heard
>of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge?
Absolutely, these were horrible regimes. This is a lesson that
absolute power had better be avoided or terrible things will happen.
>he temptation to totalitarianism is far
>more prevalent among socialists than it is among us conservative folk.
This is a ridiculous way of looking at it when we know that either
means of becoming a totalitarian system is horribly bad. When people
start saying that one means of becoming totalitarian is less prevalent
than another, I suspect that they are trying to promote it.
>After all, you are the ones who advocate big government with lots of
>bureaucrats, regulations, and intrusion into lives as part of the agenda to
>perfect society.
Ah yes, the comparison of me with communism. I believe in the free
market capitalist system. Why is the word "bureaucrat" a bad word? It
wasn't that way before? Are you trying to tell me that you are an
anarchist that wants no government? Of course not. What you are trying
to do is promote the double speak of the NWO, where many words have
changed definition. This allows the multi-national corporations to
confuse the traditional conservatives into voting for radical
neo-conservatism.
>We rightoids believe the best government is the least
>government. That leaves little scope for government bullying and little
>opportunity for petty bureaucrats to mess about in our lives. The Nazis were
>not believers in small government and they did call themselves "Socialists".
Less government means more control for the ultra rich who want to
steal the resources of many countries. Although, Nazis did call
themselves socialist, this really wasn't the case since they strongly
supported big business. This claim of being socialist was either
another example of double speak or perhaps it was due to the fact that
socialism was more popular during these times. By definition and
platform, the Nazis were not socialist. More or less government were
not factors of being left or right-wing. It is only in this day that
the right-wing have popularized the idea of right-wing being less
government.
I think that most people know that the propaganda of the right-wing
and less government is just plain ignorance. People don't like
wasteful government but know that good government needs to be
resourceful and have many good people to run well. The high debt
combined with many other problems such as high taxes, have caused the
public to distrust government. It is for this reason that people have
created the trend of wanting less government. This does not mean that
wanting more government means that this person is socialist.
The trend is changing with the disparity of wealth between the rich
and the poor growing. A strong government is needed to distribute the
wealth evenly.
Liz McLean
"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:s9eajskmnpvn0bha3...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
> >Corporate
> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
> >street sees very little of the economic growth
>
>
> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>
> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>
> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage of
corporate profits?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.Dr.Jenkins.ukgateway.net/
A site devoted to the Chuff of Klan Akins
Michael T. Richter
> Although, Nazis did call themselves socialist, this really wasn't
> the case since they strongly supported big business.
They also provided socialized medicine and universally-accessible education.
IIRC, these are two major holy cows of socialism.
Rick
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 16:30:27 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
>>The high debt
>>combined with many other problems such as high taxes, have caused the
>>public to distrust government
>
>Rick:
>
>Can you tell us why you, on one hand, blame the tax cuts for the
>tragedy, yet say that high taxes are a problem?
Although high taxes are a problem they are needed to curb debt and
other social problems like water pollution. In a perfect world we
should have no taxes. The real culprit of taxes is a corrupt banking
system.
Rick
wrote:
>Rick <n...@email.com> wrote in message news:39373795...@news.ican.net...
You may think so but the literature I have seen doesn't. I really
don't think most people think of the Nazis as socialist. They see them
as fascist. When right-wing politics becomes extremely right-wing they
become fascist. When socialism becomes extremely left-wing they become
communist. This is common knowledge.
Michael T. Richter
>>> Although, Nazis did call themselves socialist, this really
>>> wasn't the case since they strongly supported big business.
>> They also provided socialized medicine and universally-
>> accessible education. IIRC, these are two major holy cows of
>> socialism.
> You may think so but the literature I have seen doesn't.
Then it's time to broaden your reading. Hint: there are bookstores other
than Octopus Books.
My own source of this information is one Ena Erasmus, a mid-level Nazi
bureaucrat who administered this kind of thing. My great-aunt.
> I really don't think most people think of the Nazis as
> socialist.
What most people think is irrelevant. It's what reality is that counts.
And the reality is that the Nazis had socialised medicine and universal
education: two major socialist holy cows. They also had work programs which
forced employers to give annual vacation leave to workers (a radical notion
for the time -- and one which belies your "strongly supported big business"
line), public works programs that provided community centres (and
gymnasiums, theatres, opera houses, etc.) for the use of all and a whole
host of other social niceties. I don't know if they had welfare programs or
not, but they certainly had the traditional communist goal of universal
employment.
This doesn't make the Nazis any less repugnant a group. The Nazis were pure
evil for all practical purposes. They were just smart enough to realize
that the only way to get the high levels of support they needed was to keep
people contented. And many socialist programs do a wonderful job of keeping
people contented and supportive.
> When right-wing politics becomes extremely right-wing they become
> fascist. When socialism becomes extremely left-wing they become
> communist. This is common knowledge.
It's also "common knowledge" that electrons orbit a nucleus of protons and
neutrons in atoms. This doesn't change the fact that it is wrong. Last I
heard, the truth doesn't change according to the number of votaries.
Omegatimes
In article <393633b6...@news.ican.net>, n...@email.com (Rick)
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 10:57:39 -0400, "JMD"
><word...@marketing-wizards.com> wrote:
(snip)
>What most likely happened in Walkerton is that the chap running
the
>Public Utility got a report of bad water from the private
testing
>company. Since the testing company wouldn't be telling anyone
else and
>had no authority over him, he then decided that he would keep
the
>water running, play hero and fix the problem himself. No one
would
>know the better.
The people where already 'drinking' the problem, which he
apparently was smart enough not to drink himself, nor would he
shut the water off so others wouldn't continue to drink it. Since
the problem was extreme and he knew it, he should have taken the
initiative and shut the water down, THAN notified the public and
attempt to fix the problem.
If the Harris government hadn't been so frugal with taxpayers
money, the six people who died would be alive today plus many,
many others who have died because of his hospital cuts!!!
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Dave Smith
> We need to know what happened here before hurling accusations, assigning
> blame or rushing in with half-baked solutions that may not address real
> problems. We need a public inquiry, not political cheap shots and
> anti-Harris rants.
Mr. Harris does not want a full enquiry. He says it might take too long.
Heaven forbid suspicions that it might point ot his policies.
E. Barry Bruyea
<lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>
>"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:s9eajskmnpvn0bha3...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>>
>> >Corporate
>> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
>> >street sees very little of the economic growth
>>
>> Sorry, Rick, but no.
>>
>> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
>> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>>
>> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
>> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>>
>> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
>> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
>
>How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
>revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage of
>corporate profits?
I'm not sure what your point is Liz, other than to imply that it
doesn't matter if tax revenue from corporations goes up, only that
profits for the big old mean corporations goes down. Great attitude,
Liz.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.Dr.Jenkins.ukgateway.net/
> A site devoted to the Chuff of Klan Akins
>
>
>
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 04:59:59 GMT, Steve Marskell <smar...@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Rick wrote:
>>
>>> I'm just pointing
>>> out that Ontario has the lowest taxation yet doesn't have the fastest
>>> growing economy.
>>
>>
>>Oh, now Ernie Eves is a liar when he stated that Ontario had the fastest
>>rate of growth of any G7 country. Did you even glance at the budget
>>documents before damning the rate of growth in the economy?
>
>Funny comparison. We are talking about provinces.
You're still wrong. Ontario has the fastest growing economy of any of
the provinces.
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 14:14:42 GMT, Steve Marskell <smar...@home.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Rick wrote:
>>
>>> >Oh, now Ernie Eves is a liar when he stated that Ontario had the fastest
>>> >rate of growth of any G7 country. Did you even glance at the budget
>>> >documents before damning the rate of growth in the economy?
>>>
>>> Funny comparison. We are talking about provinces.
>>
>>
>>Funny if he's the only one stating a better rate than the G7 countries,
>>that leads me to believe the other provincial finance ministers cannot
>>make that claim. I'd die of shock if another politician didn't take the
>>time to crow about his provincial economy outperforming the G7 countries
>>as a whole ;)
>
>You are correct. Apparently, I was looking at older figures. With
>Alberta being such a rich province, I was very surprised to see that
>things have changed. Budget 2000 has changed all that with Ontario
>having a 5.7% growth in 1999. Isn't that just my luck to post
>something like this and ruin my original post. :( However, this still
>doesn't have much to do with the Walkerton issue. I apologize for the
>misleading facts
>
>We still have to wonder who it was that makes all the money. Corporate
>taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
>street sees very little of the economic growth We had to contend with
>massive cuts to society. I must admit that it is getting harder to
>disprove the Harris tax cuts but I really believe that these cuts are
>not worth the meager benefits. From what I have read, most economist
>think the hot US economy has been fueling Canada's economy. This makes
>sense since our industry is vastly owned by the Americans.
>
>ps.....I appreciate the fact that you didn't insult me as others have
>done.
That's 'cause he doesn't know you like we do.
>
>
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
Harris has called for a full public inquiry. Now, I'm sure you'll
post something negative about that.
>
>
>
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
Would you care to elaborate on this somewhat staggering accusation?
EBB
E. Barry Bruyea
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 17:52:26 GMT, "Michael T. Richter" <m...@igs.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Rick <n...@email.com> wrote in message news:39373795...@news.ican.net...
>>> Although, Nazis did call themselves socialist, this really wasn't
>>> the case since they strongly supported big business.
>>
>>They also provided socialized medicine and universally-accessible education.
>>IIRC, these are two major holy cows of socialism.
>>
>
>You may think so but the literature I have seen doesn't. I really
>don't think most people think of the Nazis as socialist. They see them
>as fascist. When right-wing politics becomes extremely right-wing they
>become fascist. When socialism becomes extremely left-wing they become
>communist. This is common knowledge.
Communism and Fascism become one when they are taken to the extreme.
There is no difference between Stalin and Hitler.
>
EBB
Carl St-Jean
well be correct. Just because the government collected more corporate taxes
in previous years, doesn't in any way suggest that taxes have gone up.
Corporate tax may have gone down substantially, and yet government has
brought in far more tax revenue, probably because corporations are making
far more money, and there are far more corporations then during the NDP's
time.
E. Barry Bruyea
>steal the resources of many countries. Although, Nazis did call
>themselves socialist, this really wasn't the case since they strongly
>supported big business. This claim of being socialist was either
>another example of double speak or perhaps it was due to the fact that
>socialism was more popular during these times. By definition and
>platform, the Nazis were not socialist. More or less government were
>not factors of being left or right-wing. It is only in this day that
>the right-wing have popularized the idea of right-wing being less
>government.
>
> I think that most people know that the propaganda of the right-wing
>and less government is just plain ignorance. People don't like
>wasteful government but know that good government needs to be
>resourceful and have many good people to run well. The high debt
>combined with many other problems such as high taxes, have caused the
>public to distrust government. It is for this reason that people have
>created the trend of wanting less government. This does not mean that
>wanting more government means that this person is socialist.
>The trend is changing with the disparity of wealth between the rich
>and the poor growing. A strong government is needed to distribute the
>wealth evenly.
Re-distribution of Wealth by government fiat is a socialist and in the
extreme, Marxist approach. Is this what you want?
>
>
EBB
Liz McLean
> "Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
> >"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
> >>
> >> >Corporate taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the
>>>> average man on the street sees very little of the economic growth
> >>
> >>
> >> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
> >> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
> >>
> >> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
> >> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
> >>
> >> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
> >> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
> >
> >How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
> >revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage
of
> >corporate profits?
>
Nice try James, answer the question.
Dave Smith
> >Mr. Harris does not want a full enquiry. He says it might take too long.
> >Heaven forbid suspicions that it might point ot his policies.
>
> Harris has called for a full public inquiry. Now, I'm sure you'll
> post something negative about that.
Of course I will make a negative comment on that, because it is not entirely
true. The government wants to restrict the terms of reference strictly to the
event at Walkerton.
rootboy slim
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
> >Corporate
> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
> >street sees very little of the economic growth
>
> Sorry, Rick, but no.
>
> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>
> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>
> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
What percentage of the $billions$ in deferred taxes corporate trough
suckers evade paying each year has Mike Harris managed to increase?
What's that? A deafening silence?
rootboy slim
written posting and then wrote:
> n...@email.com (Rick) spewed:
>
> <copious FUD snipped...>
>
> >Funny how the province
> >with the lowest taxes doesn't have the most economic growth.
>
> Alberta and Ontario, the two provinces with the lowest (or lowering)
> taxes, are the two provinces with booming economies.
> ---
>
> "Cannot run out of time. There is infinite time. You are finite.
> Zathras is finite. This.. is wrong tool." -Zathras
If the questions being raised are too difficult for you to grasp, and it
appears they are, just go back to playing Halflife.
rootboy slim
blather snipped
> How do you explain that those in charge of Walkerton's water reportedly knew
> there were problems but did nothing? How do you legislate or program
> against stupidity or bad judgement?
>
> John Dowell
How many municipal water supply systems killed and sickened its users during
the watch of the previous governments? I may be wrong but I can't remember
another event like this going back in my memories to at least the 50's. Since
Harris has gutted the MOE and screwed up the testing and reporting protocols,
so some of you yuppie assholes can go buy an extra bottle or two of chianti per
month, we now have 9 dead and hundreds sickened. The abject stupidity of those
who seek to minimize the responsibility the Harris government has in this
tragedy is almost overwhelming.
rootboy slim
> <ear...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:85n4jso6nhni095r6...@4ax.com...
>
> > <copious FUD snipped...>
>
> Er, what means FUD????
Fear
Uncertainty
Doubt
You know, the kind of horseshit that is the stock in trade of the
Tory?Reform?CRAP? whatever thugs at Queens Park.
rootboy slim
>
> You took it to a personal level when you called Canadian conservatives
> nazis, asshole.
Just when you thought things couldn't get any dumber....
rootboy slim
> Rick <n...@email.com> wrote in message news:39373795...@news.ican.net...
> > Although, Nazis did call themselves socialist, this really wasn't
> > the case since they strongly supported big business.
>
> They also provided socialized medicine and universally-accessible education.
> IIRC, these are two major holy cows of socialism.
Whoops! Spoke too soon. It just got dumber still.
Liz McLean
"E. Barry Bruyea" <sha...@dusk.com> wrote in message
news:393596b7...@news1.sympatico.ca...
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 17:03:41 GMT, "Liz McLean"> >news:s9eajskmnpvn0bha3...@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Corporate
> >> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
> >> >street sees very little of the economic growth
> >>
> >> Sorry, Rick, but no.
> >>
> >> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
> >> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
> >>
> >> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
> >> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
> >>
> >> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
> >> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
> >
> >revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage
of
> >corporate profits?
>
> doesn't matter if tax revenue from corporations goes up, only that
> profits for the big old mean corporations goes down. Great attitude,
> Liz.
<sigh> Rick said that corporate taxes have gone down, they have. Instead of
admitting this, James sidesteps it by presenting figures that show corporate
taxes as a % of gov't revenue. I am sorry that this is not obvious to you, I
thought it would be obvious to almost anyone. When a person says that their
taxes went down, they mean that they paid less, either their pay check was
bigger, or their property tax bill was smaller, or they paid less sales tax
in a store when purchasing something, etc. Said person does not mean that
gov't collected less income tax, property tax etc as a % of revenue. Not too
hard to figure out eh? Good boy.
Liz McLean
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.Dr.Jenkins.ukgateway.net/
A site devoted to the Chuff of Klan Akins
"Omegatimes" <johnlN...@tcn.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:07699175...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
> > "JMD" <word...@marketing-wizards.com> wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> >What most likely happened in Walkerton is that the chap running
> >the Public Utility got a report of bad water from the private
> >testing company. Since the testing company wouldn't be telling
>>anyone else and had no authority over him, he then decided that
>> he would keep the water running, play hero and fix the problem
>>himself. No one would know the better.
>
> The people where already 'drinking' the problem, which he
> apparently was smart enough not to drink himself, nor would he
That is a pretty serious statement, did you read someplace that he didn't
drink the water? Or did you assume so because he didn't get sick?
> shut the water off so others wouldn't continue to drink it. Since
> the problem was extreme and he knew it, he should have taken the
> initiative and shut the water down, THAN notified the public and
> attempt to fix the problem.
>
> If the Harris government hadn't been so frugal with taxpayers
> money, the six people who died would be alive today plus many,
> many others who have died because of his hospital cuts!!!
>
John Ramsay
>
> Rick wrote:
>
> > I'm just pointing
> > out that Ontario has the lowest taxation yet doesn't have the fastest
> > growing economy.
>
> rate of growth of any G7 country. Did you even glance at the budget
> documents before damning the rate of growth in the economy?
Eves may or may not be a liar but he's hardly to be trusted if he thinks
Ontario is a G7 country.
Rick
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
>>Corporate
>>taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
>>street sees very little of the economic growth
>
>Sorry, Rick, but no.
>
>The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
>which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>
>The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
>which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>
>In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
>since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
In the beginning there was the NDP......
I understand your pension for bench marking the NDP but do realize
that
there were issues before them.
Budget 2000 announced high tax cuts for the corporate world. The poor
paid for these tax cuts through welfare cuts!!!
Rick
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 17:03:41 GMT, "Liz McLean"
><lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>
>>
>>"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>>news:s9eajskmnpvn0bha3...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>>>
>>> >Corporate
>>> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
>>> >street sees very little of the economic growth
>>>
>>> Sorry, Rick, but no.
>>>
>>> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
>>> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>>>
>>> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
>>> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>>>
>>> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
>>> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
>>
>>How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
>>revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage of
>>corporate profits?
>
>On what do you think corporate income taxes are based, Liz?
An Angus Reid Group poll conducted for The Globe and Mail has found
that 46 per cent of those earning $60,000 a year or more are better
off financially now than they were two or three years ago. Only 19 per
cent of those earning less than $30,000 annually could make the same
claim. Sept /99. In other words the disparity of wealth is increasing.
Direct taxation is not the problem. The problem stems from taxation
breaks in the stock market. Why do our governments spend tens of
billions of dollars to subsidize the stock market investments of
Canadians through RRSP tax breaks, when the fruits of their frugality
can completely disappear in the course of one bad season? Surely we
can find more lasting and tangible ways to spend our tax dollars.
In other words, Harris's tax cuts are on top of all tax breaks of the
federal government. The little guy has to pay for all of Harris's tax
cuts. Although it appears that Harris corporate tax cuts in budget
2000 are needed, this really isn't the case when we see the federal
tax cuts.
E. Barry Bruyea
Tax revenues in Ontario have risen substantially in the past five
years, so how is the 'little' guy paying for anything? Or is it
restricted to 'small' minds, such as yours? Ontario's Welfare rates
are above the national average, so you can't use that, nameless.
Harris has instituted the Trillium drug plan for the working poor, so
they're better off. 85% of the jobs created in Ontario in the past
five years have been full time jobs, so you can't use that. There is
more money spent on Health Care now, than five years ago, so, using
that would be a bad move. What you can use, is the theft committed on
the citizens of Ontario by the federal liberals with their massive
cuts in transfer payments in the past few years. But you won't use
that, will you, nameless?
EBB
Rick
<lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>news:ifhajs8tmq4m6ialm...@4ax.com...
>> "Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>> >"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>> >> n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Corporate taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the
>>>>> average man on the street sees very little of the economic growth
>> >>
>> >> Sorry, Rick, but no.
>> >>
>> >> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
>> >> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>> >>
>> >> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
>> >> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>> >>
>> >> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
>> >> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
>> >
>> >How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
>> >revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage
>of
>> >corporate profits?
>>
>> On what do you think corporate income taxes are based, Liz?
>
>Nice try James, answer the question.
The interesting thing about the massive corporate profits is how they
are getting them while the little guy is suffering. Here we have this
big booming economy yet the average man seems to be struggling.
I have to hit myself for not noticing the massive movement of stock
markets and the recent, extraordinarily high, demand for rrsp's. We
must remember that the stock market is also a market!!! In the old
days we used to have inflation on money because we would print it out
faster than the economy could handle it. A good dose of hyper
inflation would tighten are money making plans. Now days the stock
market is the big money making press with hyper-inflated stocks.
Although the corporate taxation appears to be high, this really isn't
the case due to the rrsp tax incentives. Corporate welfare.
E. Barry Bruyea
Rick
wrote:
>On Thu, 01 Jun 2000 10:30:10 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 31 May 2000 13:04:25 -0400, James Goneaux <jam...@my-deja.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 31 May 2000 17:03:41 GMT, "Liz McLean"
>>><lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"James Goneaux" <jam...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:s9eajskmnpvn0bha3...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Wed, 31 May 2000 15:45:33 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >Corporate
>>>>> >taxes have gone way down so we can assume that the average man on the
>>>>> >street sees very little of the economic growth
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, Rick, but no.
>>>>>
>>>>> The last NDP budget saw corporate income taxes at $4,557 million
>>>>> which was 13.2% of all revenue and 1.5% of Ontario's GDP.
>>>>>
>>>>> The latest Tory budget saw corporate income taxes at $7,820 million,
>>>>> which is 18.0% of all revenue, and 2.0% of GDP.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, while the Ontario economy has grown by almost 29%
>>>>> since 1995, corporate taxes collected have gone up over 71%.
>>>>
>>>>How disingenuous of you. Corporate taxes as a percentage of government
>>>>revenues may have gone up, but what about corporate taxes as a percentage of
>>>>corporate profits?
>>>
>>>On what do you think corporate income taxes are based, Liz?
>>
>>An Angus Reid Group poll conducted for The Globe and Mail has found
>>that 46 per cent of those earning $60,000 a year or more are better
>>off financially now than they were two or three years ago. Only 19 per
>>cent of those earning less than $30,000 annually could make the same
>>claim. Sept /99. In other words the disparity of wealth is increasing.
>>
>>Direct taxation is not the problem. The problem stems from taxation
>>breaks in the stock market. Why do our governments spend tens of
>>billions of dollars to subsidize the stock market investments of
>>Canadians through RRSP tax breaks, when the fruits of their frugality
>>can completely disappear in the course of one bad season? Surely we
>>can find more lasting and tangible ways to spend our tax dollars.
>>
>>In other words, Harris's tax cuts are on top of all tax breaks of the
>>federal government. The little guy has to pay for all of Harris's tax
>>cuts. Although it appears that Harris corporate tax cuts in budget
>>2000 are needed, this really isn't the case when we see the federal
>>tax cuts.
>
>
>Tax revenues in Ontario have risen substantially in the past five
>years, so how is the 'little' guy paying for anything? Or is it
>restricted to 'small' minds, such as yours?
Then how would you explain the growing disparity between the rich and
the poor? Do you always have to insult people in an attempt to win
arguments?
> Ontario's Welfare rates
>are above the national average, so you can't use that, nameless.
NO??? I think all the welfare rates are too low. But of course you
fail to mention that Ontario rents and cost of living are much higher
than other provinces.
>Harris has instituted the Trillium drug plan for the working poor, so
>they're better off. 85% of the jobs created in Ontario in the past
>five years have been full time jobs, so you can't use that.
Oh yes, the infamous slush fund. You keep throwing these figures
around yet we all know that there are more homeless, higher rents,
extremely low wages etc...
> There is
>more money spent on Health Care now, than five years ago, so, using
>that would be a bad move.
I would certainly hope there is more money in health care since there
are rising health care costs.
>What you can use, is the theft committed on
>the citizens of Ontario by the federal liberals with their massive
>cuts in transfer payments in the past few years. But you won't use
>that, will you, nameless?
Harris has downloaded to the municipalities? Harris hasn't made any
cuts to services? Harris hasn't caused massive hikes in hydro?
Rick
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 May 2000 19:22:32 GMT, n...@email.com (Rick) wrote:
Actually no. I don't feel confident enough to properly discuss this
issue.
JMD
wasn't ordinary Russians. They lined up for basic consumer goods. No, it
was the party apparatchiks with their access to foreign goods stores,
country dachas etc. The most polluted areas of this earth are the former
republics of the Soviet Union, supposedly run for the well-being of the
people.
The Nazis did not "support" big business. They "used" big business. They
needed its industrial capacity to achieve their statist agenda, including
construction of a war machine. Nazi Germany was very much a command
economy; it was not consumer driven.
There is no better wealth distribution mechanism than a market economy.
Look around the world. The countries with the best standards of living are
those with free economies.
I will put my faith in small democratically-elected government. The smaller
it is, the better we can control it. Least government, by the way, means
the minimum required to do the jobs that need to be done by government. I
think Canada surpassed that threshold sometime shortly after the Second
World War.
John Dowell
"Rick" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:39373795...@news.ican.net...
[various snips]
> Less government means more control for the ultra rich who want to
> steal the resources of many countries. Although, Nazis did call
> themselves socialist, this really wasn't the case since they strongly
> supported big business.
> I think that most people know that the propaganda of the right-wing
> and less government is just plain ignorance. ...... A strong government
JMD
don't really have any taxation powers.
John Dowell
"Rick" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:393c4ae7...@news.ican.net...
JMD
Unprofitable companies don't create jobs and prosperity. They go out of
business.
Long live profits! I have no pension plan and I will depend on corporate
profits for income in a very few years when I no longer work.
"Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:NBbZ4.125155$55.27...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
JMD
encourage such savings. Otherwise you would have many destitute retired
Canadians looking to government for support.
As the population ages, the proportion of working people to pensioners will
decrease dramatically. If young working Canadians had to support this huge
group of pensioners, taxation levels would grow to the point of shutting
down the economy.
Don't know how old you are Rick, but if you are young, you better damn well
pray lots of us old farts have good RRSP portfolios. Otherwise you are
going to go broke supporting us.
John Dowell
"Rick" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:39373650...@news.ican.net...
JMD
CONTAMINATION BUT DID NOT ACT. It wasn't lack of information that left
people exposed to bad water, it was the fact -- apparently -- that the
information was not shared in a timely fashion. That's what I mean about
stupidity and bad judgement. Comprendez?
John Dowell
JMD
and what lessons can be learned? What else should the inquiry cover?
John Dowell
"Dave Smith" <adavid...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3935A2BF...@sympatico.ca...
Chuck here
"Omegatimes" <johnlN...@tcn.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:07699175...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
>
>
> apparently was smart enough not to drink himself, nor would he
> the problem was extreme and he knew it, he should have taken the
> initiative and shut the water down, THAN notified the public and
> attempt to fix the problem.
>
> If the Harris government hadn't been so frugal with taxpayers
> money, the six people who died would be alive today plus many,
> many others who have died because of his hospital cuts!!!
>
being "so frugal" with taxpayers money prevented the PUC from shutting down
the system when they knew there was a problem?
Mercy to Unborn Children
"Liz McLean" <lizmcle...@home.com.REMOVE> wrote:
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.Dr.Jenkins.ukgateway.net/
> A site devoted to the Chuff of Klan Akins
>
> news:07699175...@usw-ex0105-038.remarq.com...
> > > "JMD" <word...@marketing-wizards.com> wrote:
> >
> > (snip)
> >
> > >What most likely happened in Walkerton is that the chap running
> > >the Public Utility got a report of bad water from the private
> > >testing company. Since the testing company wouldn't be telling
> >>anyone else and had no authority over him, he then decided that
> >> he would keep the water running, play hero and fix the problem
> >>himself. No one would know the better.
> >
> > apparently was smart enough not to drink himself, nor would he
>
> drink the water? Or did you assume so because he didn't get sick?
Did any of those who KNEW about it get sick???
> > shut the water off so others wouldn't continue to drink it. Since
> > the problem was extreme and he knew it, he should have taken the
> > initiative and shut the water down, THAN notified the public and
> > attempt to fix the problem.
> >
> > If the Harris government hadn't been so frugal with taxpayers
> > money, the six people who died would be alive today plus many,
> > many others who have died because of his hospital cuts!!!
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.Dr.Jenkins.ukgateway.net/
> A site devoted to the Chuff of Klan Akins
>
>
--
"To those who were robbed of life: the unborn, the weak, the sick,
the old, during the dark ages of madness, selfishness, lust and greed
for which the last decades of the twentieth century are remembered . ."
-C. Everett Koop, MD-
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Michael T. Richter
news:3935BA4A...@home.com...
>> Er, what means FUD????
> Fear
> Uncertainty
> Doubt
> You know, the kind of horseshit that is the stock in trade of the
> Tory?Reform?CRAP? whatever thugs at Queens Park.
Or, for a far better and more immediate example, just look at any message
entered by "rootboy" or "Rick".
Michael T. Richter
> Just when you thought things couldn't get any dumber....
... "rootboy slim" enters the fray.
Michael T. Richter
> Then how would you explain the growing disparity between the
> rich and the poor?
Overblown leftist tripe.
> Do you always have to insult people in an attempt to win
> arguments?
This coming from the "conservatives are Nazis" guy?