Make the case for one Ontario School System

124 posts / 0 new
Last post
David-Marc

Ah, of course - public money built the schools. thanks, Unionist.

 

EDIT to add: M. Spector makes this a little complicated again. Although these options lead to similar ends, in most cases, as I believe the Catholic Church would probably just hand the schools over in most cases if facing rent or eviction.

saga saga's picture

Unionist wrote:

Gee, we did it overnight in Québec. I guess we're just too simplistic here.

ETA: Sorry, David-Marc, I should clarify that all our discussion here is about eliminating religious public schools. I am certainly not opposed to separate linguistic schools.

Didn't it happen in Quebec because of a 'sea change' in public opinion, a reaction to church/government entanglement?? Duplessis?

I really don't see that happening in Ontario. It would not fly politically. If we want all kids in public schools, there will have to be accommodation for current religious schools and who knows what all will come under that label - That's the tricky part.

 I am in favour of having most kids in the public system, but to do thatI think we would have to accommodate many types of religious education as well as secular - ie, all of those in private schools now, and maybe more.

David-Marc

Well the elimination of relgious based school boards in Quebec happened about 40 years after Duplessis so I don't see what he has to do with it.

Fidel

And everyone's school taxes were lowered(ya right), the lame and lepers were cured, and children were only jerked around a little with bussing and school changes while public school funding and everything else continued to suffer mysterious funding gaps. The NDP was martyred for trying - privatization eventually set in -  and they all lived happily ever after in neoliberal Ontario. fini

Unionist

David-Marc wrote:
Well the elimination of relgious based school boards in Quebec happened about 40 years after Duplessis so I don't see what he has to do with it.

Correct. And saga, I didn't follow your point at all. No one is talking about eliminating private schools here. We're just talking about eliminating religious public schools. What accommodation would be needed?? I don't get it.

Fidel

Yes we should keep the barn door wide open for private schools. Must abide by corporate-friendly neoliberal agreements GATS and NAFTA at all cost. Screw the Canadian constitution and 1.2 million Francophones and Catholic voters though. Now, how do we convince the NDP to promise to do this sordid deed and shoot themselves in the feet for doing it?

We'll make neoliberal voodoo work right here in Ontario for the first time ever. Yes we can!!

Unionist

Fidel, the Catholic Church survived for millennia before you were born, and it will do fine without your able defence. Just please don't fabricate that ridding public schools of religion is an attack on Francophones. It does you no credit.

Fidel

So youll let us know when the inquisition comes rolling into town, right? And remember, we're counting on you

Unionist

We come by night;

Their hearts will feel

The fateful wheel,

Our massed might

 

Like copper burned

In summer's light

The craven flight

Our banner earned!

 

 

janfromthebruce

Fidel wrote:
M. Spector wrote:
The public school system that is underfunded is the secular public school system. A large part of the reason it is is underfunded is that education money is diverted to maintaining a parallel religion-based separate school system. There is a good reason why it is called a separate school system - it is separate and apart from the secular public school system. That's the system that should be funded by our secular public government.

It is impossible to underfund a separate school system that should not be funded at all.

Well now you seem to be making a parallel case for the neoliberal business model of running public sector economy, and at the same time, deflecting blame from the Liberals(again) for continuing to break their election campaign promises to fix the school funding formula.

Separate school students are about a third of total in Ontario and recieving about a third of public school funding.

We also happen to be enjoying multibillion dollar infrastructure deficits in Ontario and across Canada - $130 billion dollars altogether. Are we going to blame separate school funding for this as well as a chronic lack of money for job training and retraining, and money pared back from other areas of social spending?

Or is it simply that the 30 year-old neoliberal ideology and social democracy in general are incompatible? 

Fidel, and everyone else here who is interested for some facts. This is an important economic and principled issue. First the economics. Education funding in Ontario, as per our govt public accounts, is the second highest line, after health care, so to suggest that this isn't an economic issue or real concern, is far off. 

Fidel suggested that catholic schools are underfunded. The reality is that the funding formula actually provides a lot higher funding per catholic student in comparison to public school student. Public boards wish we got the same funding as Catholic boards. It isn't just the flawed funding formula but the twin problem of declining student enrolment that is effecting very school board in Ontario (both public and catholic), but nationally. Keeping half filled schools open is wasting resources that could be better spent in the classroom where the students are. It would eliminate chocolate bar sells!

Funding has actually increased dramatically under the Liberals but you are right, the formula is flawed, and you are right the liberals have been slow at correcting it. This past year there was a provincial panel setup to look at the funding formula which cannot be separate from declining student enrolment. 

If you have two half filled schools in a town (ignore the religious or secular designation for a moment), one would be of mind to consolidate to one school, thus saving on resource costs, and needless administrative overhead, and create one school. Each child should get the same funding allocated to them, regardless of race, sex and creed, thus creating equity and fairness. The money saved could go into extra programming, teaching staff, classroom resources, and extracurricular activities. If there is enough community interest,religious and non-religious groups alike could use the school facility (since it is owned by the public), and offer religious education in off school hours. This is putting all students and parents first. 

I can tell you as a parent I would be interested in sharing buildings and particularly if the money saved could be put into the classroom. We have a crazy system where we bus kids past schools that are publicly funded and closer to children's homes, due to whether they are public or catholic school attenders. 

This is not chump change we are talking about here. So I will post the whole powerpoint in a new comment.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

saga saga's picture

Unionist wrote:

David-Marc wrote:
Well the elimination of relgious based school boards in Quebec happened about 40 years after Duplessis so I don't see what he has to do with it.

Correct. And saga, I didn't follow your point at all. No one is talking about eliminating private schools here. We're just talking about eliminating religious public schools. What accommodation would be needed?? I don't get it.

My point is ... 

Eliminating publicly funded Catholic schools in Ontario is a political non-starter. No matter how you try to dress it up, it just won't fly, imo.

What politician is going to alienate .3 to .5 of the population? It just isn't sellable, imo. You can't eliminate publicly funded Catholic education, imo.

 

Then ... we are left with the current inequity, where one religion has public education and others don't.

Do we try to resolve that?

I'm in favour of whatever puts more kids into public schools.

Fidel

janfromthebruce wrote:

Fidel suggested that catholic schools are underfunded.

No I did not. I linked to the tvo.org article where Kitts' graphs show Catholic students are about a third of students and receive about a third of total funding depicted in the second graph. I realize it's not exactly 1-3-2/3, but it's close enough for me.

Quote:
The reality is that the funding formula actually provides a lot higher funding per catholic student in comparison to public school student.

And the reality is that per pupil funding for secondary school students is significantly higher than for primary. Primary school teachers are teaching significantly more classroom hours than their highschool counterparts(see "close the gap" campaign http://www.etfo.ca/closethegap/pages/default.aspx)

The reality is that one of McGuinty's more than 50 broken election promises is that he failed to deal with the broken public school funding formula. Pass the hat school funding is what we have in Ontario today ... BESIDES over a million people without family doctors, appalling hospital conditions, a multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit, "stubborn" rates of CHILD POVERTY, homelessness, and SOARING unemployment.

We cant run public sector economy according to a failed neoliberal business model. It doesnt work today as much as it didnt work last year and the ten years before that.

janfromthebruce

 CONSIDERATIONS

Combining Co-terminus boards can optimize financial resources, staff expertise, and student accommodation utilization.

Benefits are subject to population and geography of the co-terminus combination

Often co-terminus boards operate in existing consortiums relating to provision of administrative services and transportation Faith and Cultural programming can be protected at the school level rather than at a individual board level

Re-investments in student programming becomes the priority over investment in organizational structures

SOME SAMPLE SAVINGS

School Accommodation Co-Terminus Public/Catholic Board

                Board  Board Combined “A” “B”Total

Enrolment 19,000 3,500 22,500

Capacity  24,000  4,000 28,000

Combined Board Accommodation Savings:

Reduced Capacity 5,500 spaces

Annual Savings for reinvestment in Student program, capital repair or maintenance $3.3 Million.

BOARD ADMINISTRATION:

                                                            boards "A"  "B"    Total

-Supervisory Officer Staff/1,000 Students           .32  .85

-Supervisory Officers                                         6      3      9

-Supervisory Officers using Board “A” model                       7

Annual Savings Salary Benefits Overhead                          $350,000

Other Economic and Organizational Benefit

Optimization of School Size resulting in more resources for:

Diverse Program Offerings

School Administration

Student Supervision

Extra Curricular Activities

Larger Parent Base

Student Service Specialization

 IN CONCLUSION:

So about $3.6 million PER YEAR could be saved and reinvested ANNUALLY in student programming that would benefit all students equitably and provide excellence in education so that all students benefit EQUALLY in the use of our public dollars. Remember , the 2 school boards share the same geographical area and serve and compete for the same declining student population. These two boards are relatively small and serve a rural population. Image what we could do in education if we made our priority student programming rather than prioritizing organizational structures? Think about how many more teachers we could hire, resources such as ESL, and other special services if we put "kids first." ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

janfromthebruce

So Fidel, the Ministry of Education would actually have the money to close the gap between elementary and secondary teachers, and have lots left over to provide better education for all students. Looks like a win-win to me.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Fidel

So what? Something I read says the public system as a whole is short by somewhere over $1.2 billion dollars a year. The feds can continue downloading and with scorched earth until the only reasonable thing left to do is pawn everything off to big box privatization. In fact, I think that's the plan!

Neoliberal baloney doesnt work, Jan.

janfromthebruce

Fidel wrote:

So what? Something I read says the public system as a whole is short by somewhere over $1.2 billion dollars a year. The feds can continue downloading and with scorched earth until the only reasonable thing left to do is pawn everything off to big box privatization. In fact, I think that's the plan!

that is not a constructive response. I'm showing that the NDP could provide as one of its planks a consolidated school system that puts parents and students first, and meets the principles of economic and social justice that are the underpinnings of the party. ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

NorthReport

This issue is only growing, and is going to lose the NDP votes in Ontario in the next election. You can count on that. Embarassed

Fidel

Why not pledge to come good on McGuinty's broken promise to fix the funding formula?

How Ontario's education funding formula is shortchanging students  Hugh Mackenzie 2007

Quote:
TORONTO—Ontario’s at-risk students are slipping through the cracks in the $1.2 billion funding gap caused by the province’s education funding formula, says a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.

According to the study, authored by CCPA Research Associate Hugh Mackenzie, the flaws in Ontario’s funding formula have created large funding gaps in special programming for students from low-income families, ESL students, and other students at risk, and for school operations and maintenance. Not only is the funding for students at risk inadequate, but it is also routinely diverted to fill other funding shortfalls.

“Gaps in funding are paid for not by school boards as institutions, as the government would like us to believe, but by students who are expected to study in deteriorating facilities and by students at risk for whom needed support programs either do not exist or fall far short of what is needed,” says Mackenzie.

janfromthebruce

Fidel wrote:

Why not pledge to come good on McGuinty's broken promise to fix the funding formula?

How Ontario's education funding formula is shortchanging students  Hugh Mackenzie 2007

Fidel, I have read it and promoted that report. I actually approached Mackenzie to take a boo at the funding formula with an eye to wasted resources and duplicated administration. The funding formula could be easily fixed along with consolidation.

On its own - its boring, kind of like get orange.

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

janfromthebruce

Sure the NDP will lose votes. That's why in the last election, the last poll taken on support for one school system hit 78% for consolidation. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

47 per cent of Ontarians support the removal of public funding from Catholic schools; 45 per cent oppose it, and 8 per cent are undecided, according to [url=this">http://www.thestar.com/OntarioElection/article/256568]... opinion poll.[/url]

The NDP (at ~20% currently) could win votes by supporting a secular public school system. 

Fidel

Is that why McGuinty's Liberals won 22% of the registered vote?

I really dont think those voters will swing NDP for any reason. Central issue next election will likely be soaring unemployment and rising poverty.

NorthReport

Fidel, you have a lot of wisdom as I have seen it reflected here on many occasions. But maybe when a lot of people are so out out step with Johnny on a particular issue, it's time for Johnny to pause and seriously listen to what many others with similiar political goals as Johnny has, have to say. 

Fidel

Ben Levin, former Ontario Deputy Education Minister, said to Daniel Kitts: 

Quote:

"In the run-up to an Ontario provincial election, education is and should be much in the public eye," Levin wrote in the July 19 edition of the Toronto Star. "The danger is that our attention will be drawn to the wrong things. There will be a tendency in the next few months to focus on areas of conflict or on issues that are controversial but affect relatively few students. The things that really matter will be ignored."

Levin is concerned that discussing reform of the school system will take the focus away from what really matters: student achievement.

In a phone interview with me, Levin discussed the problems that other provinces had in changing their school systems.

When Quebec changed their Protestant/Catholic system into an English/French system, Levin said, it took about 20 years and a few visits to the Supreme Court to get it done. All this for what was essentially a name change. (Protestant schools were overwhelmingly English and Catholic schools overwhelmingly French, so not much apart from the signs changed).

And when Newfoundland amalgamated their schools into one public system in the late 1990s, Levin continued, for two or three years the education system was consumed with relocating hundreds of schools, merging collective bargaining agreements, reorganizing administration, etc, etc.

Levin argues it's better to work with the system we have, as imperfect as it might be, and focus on helping kids to learn.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Fidel wrote:

Is that why McGuinty's Liberals won 22% of the registered vote?

No, it has nothing to do with the vote percentages in the last election, since all the parties were aligned with the 45% minority who supported public funding for separate schools.

The significance of the poll is that it demolishes the oft-repeated canard that opposing public funding for Catholic schools would be electoral suicide for any party that adopted it.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Levin is actually the current Deputy Minister, having returned to the job in December, 2008.

Nice to know you've got the Liberal government bureaucracy on your side, eh Fidel?

Fidel

And I think you people are giving too much credit to the Liberals for having tried to fix school funding, health care, homelessness, the neoliberal economy in nosedive mode, and child poverty when they have not. When the federal Liberals were in power, McGuinty said equalization payments to Ontario were fair and equitable. He changed his tune a year later when Harper became the other 22% tin pot.

If you people dont mind neoliberal economics for skeletal funding of social programs and low taxation on profitable corporations and the rich, then make sure not to vote NDP in Ontario. Youll get more of the same. Before very long we'll have more than just private colleges in this Northern Puerto Rico.

 

janfromthebruce

Fidel wrote:

If you people dont mind neoliberal economics for skeletal funding of social programs and low taxation on profitable corporations and the rich, then make sure not to vote NDP in Ontario. Youll get more of the same. Before very long we'll have more than just private colleges in this Northern Puerto Rico.

Sure sounding Bush-like here Fidel: "you are either with us or against us." So if NDPer supporters and progressives which incidently, the vast majority I spoke to support consolidation and focussing on investment in education programming rather than investment in infrastructure, it means that they support neo-liberal policies. 

That's rhetoric and creates a black and white picture - so unbecoming of a social democrat. Thanks goodness the federal NDP is more enlightened and adopted a one school system policy. So the federal NDP must be neo-liberal lovers.

Anyway, running on the economy is a given. Just because the NDP adopts as party policy one school system does not mean that becomes what they promote during the next provincial election. There are lots of NDP policies that we have on the books but due to election timing does not get highlighted. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Unionist

janfromthebruce wrote:

Anyway, running on the economy is a given. Just because the NDP adopts as party policy one school system does not mean that becomes what they promote during the next provincial election.

Exactly correct. Which is why I said this above:

Quote:

The NDP should put forward a progressive, dynamic, bold program aimed at protecting and expanding employment, retirement income, etc. - and I mean bold. (I know, I know, it's the ONDY, but hope springs eternal.)

At the same time, it should include a few democratic reforms, like abolishing separate schools, without any big fuss.

Any other party that dares to challenge the NDP on this and make a big deal out of it will be rejected by the voters, who only care about the economy, their jobs, and their livelihood!!

The timing is perfect. It's now or never.

Those who fearmonger that the NDP will lose votes are generally the same ones who oppose taking any bold position on any controversial issue at all. Try to imagine the birth of medicare with such worthies at the helm: "The doctors will oppose us, and people love their doctors!"

 

genstrike

M. Spector wrote:

Levin is actually the current Deputy Minister, having returned to the job in December, 2008.

Nice to know you've got the Liberal government bureaucracy on your side, eh Fidel?

He's also working on a report to justify tuition increases for Gary Doer, so we know where he stands.

janfromthebruce

Unionist wrote:
janfromthebruce wrote:

Anyway, running on the economy is a given. Just because the NDP adopts as party policy one school system does not mean that becomes what they promote during the next provincial election.

Exactly correct. Which is why I said this above:

Quote:

The NDP should put forward a progressive, dynamic, bold program aimed at protecting and expanding employment, retirement income, etc. - and I mean bold. (I know, I know, it's the ONDY, but hope springs eternal.)

At the same time, it should include a few democratic reforms, like abolishing separate schools, without any big fuss.

Any other party that dares to challenge the NDP on this and make a big deal out of it will be rejected by the voters, who only care about the economy, their jobs, and their livelihood!!

The timing is perfect. It's now or never.

Those who fearmonger that the NDP will lose votes are generally the same ones who oppose taking any bold position on any controversial issue at all. Try to imagine the birth of medicare with such worthies at the helm: "The doctors will oppose us, and people love their doctors!"

I agree with that sentiment. 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Fidel

I think comparing Tommy Douglas' idea for medicare and changing the school bus schedule in Ontario is just a little over the top.

We could reduce myriad duplication with paring down ten provincial governments and two territorial. Canada has more government per capita than even the Yanks do. 

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually. Canada is 25th of 30 capitalist countries when it comes to social spending. GATS represents a threat to education across Canada in general, and I refuse to support the gutting of public sector economy as a prelude to even more private schools and private health care in this Northern Puerto Rico.

Soaring unemployment and rising poverty will be the central issue for McGuinty's 22 percenters next election not this nickle and dime funding issue for public schools warped into a Catholics versus the good people of Ontario one. APEC bigots in disguise.

Fidel

And apparently it's time to be even bolder about medicare in Canada, because that's in danger of falling apart, too. I wonder why? It must be those darned Catholics. Well we'll show them!

Bookish Agrarian

Unionist wrote:
Those who fearmonger that the NDP will lose votes are generally the same ones who oppose taking any bold position on any controversial issue at all. Try to imagine the birth of medicare with such worthies at the helm: "The doctors will oppose us, and people love their doctors!"

 

Bull-fucking-shit. Those that play the I am more progressive than thou card because you don't agree with me are no different than the religious fundamentalists they claim to be so counter too.

Fidel

Apparently McGuinty and his 22 percenters arent the only ones hiding behind the issue of faith-based school funding. I dont think we care to know who's behind this ignoble cause

Lord Palmerston

Quote:
Perhaps the most contentious question was about separate, religious school boards created within the public system, similar to the ill-fated musing of Ontario Conservative leader John Tory in the 2007 election. Every candidate suggested that there may be far more pressing issues in Ontario right now – jobs, the environment, or tuition fees – which are more pressing than separate schools, and this had such a divisive effect in the last provincial election. As Tabuns put it, “If we care about the future of this province, we have to think about what we want to debate. We have to focus on other principal questions that dominate the life of this province and try to work through those issues, rather than dealing with the issues we find dear to our heart.”

Horwath boldly added that “education is not the most important issue.” She pointed out that we need to first deal with the under-funding of public schools in general. “We need to look at schools that do not have enough resources to provide education for kids whose second language is English,” she explained. “Even children with special needs do not receive enough funding…and some schools are physically falling apart.”

Horwath suggested that Ontarians need to find a common ground and build upon that instead of having separate religious schools, since this “erodes money away from the public system.”

http://mediumonline.ca/?p=1074

janfromthebruce

Lord Palmerston wrote:
Quote:
Perhaps the most contentious question was about separate, religious school boards created within the public system, similar to the ill-fated musing of Ontario Conservative leader John Tory in the 2007 election. Every candidate suggested that there may be far more pressing issues in Ontario right now – jobs, the environment, or tuition fees – which are more pressing than separate schools, and this had such a divisive effect in the last provincial election. As Tabuns put it, “If we care about the future of this province, we have to think about what we want to debate. We have to focus on other principal questions that dominate the life of this province and try to work through those issues, rather than dealing with the issues we find dear to our heart.”

Horwath boldly added that “education is not the most important issue.” She pointed out that we need to first deal with the under-funding of public schools in general. “We need to look at schools that do not have enough resources to provide education for kids whose second language is English,” she explained. “Even children with special needs do not receive enough funding…and some schools are physically falling apart.”

Horwath suggested that Ontarians need to find a common ground and build upon that instead of having separate religious schools, since this “erodes money away from the public system.”

">http://mediumonline.ca/?p=1074

So common ground is based on common principles. What are the common principles that New Democrats share - equity fairness, equality, cooperation and interdependence. So how does our present system of education funding of boards and schools in this province not meet those principles and what system of providing education would do so?

But all of that isn't important. I actually am sick of hearing NDPers say the "answer is more money." Just maybe the answer is that money could be better spent. So if we actually focussed on student programming and not infrastructure we might get somewhere.  ______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Fidel

janfromthebruce wrote:
I actually am sick of hearing NDPers say the "answer is more money." Just maybe the answer is that money could be better spent. So if we actually focussed on student programming and not infrastructure we might get somewhere.

The federal Liberals projected a surplus of $55 billion over five to six years by 2010. They spent $80 billion "paying down the mortgage" at the expense of everything else that matters and produced the worst overall performing economy of 30 industrialised countries in the 1990's. They accumulated surpluses and lied to Canadians that the money wasnt there for people programs. And the equalization forumula still needs fixing.

2010 is when North American union is expected to happen. It will be the end of Canada and of rule by ourselves and of ourselves. And I wont support the scaling back of any people programs whatsoever in preparation for a police state.

Lord Palmerston

So Fidel is this the response you think Tabuns, Horwath and Bisson should give when asked "Do you support an end to funding separate schools?"

Fidel

Lord Palmerston wrote:
So is this the response you think Tabuns, Horwath and Bisson should give when asked "Do you support an end to funding separate schools?"

As an example, two-thirds of Canadians surveyed last year are supposed to be against this phony mission in Afghanistan. And yet the NDP didnt receive two-thirds of whatever the abysmal voter turnout was in October.

And I dont think promising to fire a bunch of people from their administrative jobs in downturn is such a good idea. Rae's NDP backed off public auto insurance partly because CUPE made a case against it due to the bad neoliberal economy even then, and partly due to concerns about a probable NAFTA challenge.

I think that with this flunky electoral system the way it is, the NDP should let it ride as a third rail issue same as before. I think that with this economy in tatters and overall discontent with pick an issue in general, there could be a repeat of 1990 in 2011.

genstrike

Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

Ghislaine

I am still stuck on the comment that bringing Ontario schools in line with the rest of the country and securalizing their public school system in 2009 is somehow considered "bold".  Ontario must be a strange place to live.

 Are these Catholic schools overtly religious or just called Catholic? Are there prayer times, etc.?

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact,

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact,

youre

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre

the

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre the

Fidel

genstrike wrote:
Fidel wrote:

We can't afford a lot of social spending since privatizing money creation in 1991, and since a terrible federal Liberal budget in 1995. You people seem to want to use this failed rightwing ideology as an excuse to help the neoliberals with their fiscal austerity and long game for privatizing all public services in Canada eventually.

You're the one whose always telling us "the NDP can't do this because of this budget 15 years ago".  You're the one who uses the failed right-wing ideology as an excuse to help neoliberals and divert people from their struggle.

No, I'm still blaming the two old line parties for racking-up one of the largest national debts in the history of the world in a country with unparalleled natural resource wealth, and then used it as an excuse for self-imposed impotence ever since Mulroney.

And you still have no clue. You think Gary Doer is a meany for not doing more than providing a 60% tax rebate on tuition fees in an NDP province with the lowest cost of living in the country.

In fact, youre tha

Pages