NDP broke and busted 2

All this sailor chatter floated past the issue here awhile ago, if anyone noticed.  And why can't there ever be an honest discussion of NDP policy without the schoolyard antics of pointing at others, regardless of their faults?  Granted, in the case of the liberals and cons and that other weirded out entity, the greens, the faults are blaringly monumental, but still fodder for threads of their own without polluting every discussion of NDP matters with their crap. 

If this is the attitude of the NDP partisan faithful in failing to grasp the obvious flaws in policy regarding minimum wage levels, and many other areas of concern for that matter, then it's no wonder that people who are looking for a place to cast their vote would view all of this hackery as just another example of the usual lip service provided to people by the two main rogue gangs.

The truth is that the Harris-McGuinty's welfare snitch lines are bullshit. And the niggling old line party rules for welfare are so ambiguous and punitive that it's surprising there arent more violations contributing to the low incidence for it that does exist. And at least one study shows that snitch lines are being used by abusive ex-husbands to falsely accuse their partners with breaking punitive and arbitrary Liberal-fascist bureaucratic welfare rules. Women on welfare live in fear not knowing that they are being coerced or really what the fascist rules are from month to month and year to year as they change constantly. Liberal-fascists have poor people living in fear of breaking the Liberal-fascist bureaucracy's punitive rule setup. 

UN officials said recently that the Liberal-fascist welfare bureaucracy and slave minimum wage are violations of basic human rights in Liberal Ontario.

Cueball wrote:

It's not poor bashing to point out that people MUST scam something somewhere in order to get by on the pitiful wages being offered by snipped

For the most part, NO THEY DO NOT "scam" your party's Liberal-fascist welfare setup. Even though they should anyway, the poor by and large abide by the Liberal-fascist bureaucracy's punitive setup. Youre full of shit, kid. Go play with yourself.

Oh Fidel and Cueball,....Cueball and Fidel...,  where would we be without you? 

Speaking of which, holy poop Fidel what a potty mouth.  Could you please stop the abusive attacks?  Thanks.

Personally, I think you each hover between 40 -75 % of being correct on any given post, which ain't too bad for a couple of dudes who only semi know what they're talking about.  Actually, it's always surprised me a bit you two don't get along better.

But anyhoo, I work daily at the rockface of mostly subsidized poverty.  A very lot of people, usually to a pretty minor degree, avail themselves of "the underground economy", because that means they don't run out of money as fast before they run out of month.  I'm just surprised at the number who don't.  Just plain despair I guess.

Maybe "underground economy" is a more palatable way of putting it.  I don't see any poor bashing.

So in your expert opinion, oldgoat, the poor would be better off if they took advantage of black market economy with its lax rules for safety and worker's rights.  

We should go all the way and ask this Liberal government in Toronto to pass some sort of right-to-work legislation and tighten welfare restrictions even further to deal with the undeserving poor in this Northern Puerto Rico, yes?  

oldgoat wrote:

I don't see any poor bashing

If you say so you old fart. Youre wrong, but that's your prerogative, I guess.

What's a very lot of people participating in underground economy to a small extent mean? Is it negligible as some other experts have described, or is Ontario rife with welfare fraud as Cueball stated so plainly? Apparently people like Ruby Dhalla make sure that no welfare assistance rules are broken in Toronto, Ontario, just minimum wage laws.

I remember reading about Kimberly Rogers in Northern Ontario. The welfare rules changed drastically from Rae to Harris. One moment she was playing within the rules and the next she was under house arrest. It was all over the news then. I guess it comes down to one's personal view of whether the poor can be categorized as deserving and undeserving. Social democrats and anti-poverty activists have all said it's an obsolete view of the poor and poverty in general and should have been forgotten along with Dickensian era England. 

Unionist wrote:

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

It broke my heart knowing they were working so against their own interests.   Add that to all the civil servants, teachers and others who were doing similar things and you learn the lesson that we Canadians are not quite so politically sophisticated as one would hope.

Brilliant, really, and touching as well. Only two mysteries left unresolved: 1. Why these unsophisticated people (compared to you) who broke your heart elected the NDP in the first place. 2. Why these same people never elected the NDP again. If you felt a little less superior to all these people "working so against their own interests", you might have figured out the profound feeling of betrayal that they felt - having believed the lying promises, having trusted Bob Rae and his clique, only to see them cynically breaking their word about auto insurance, tearing up collective agreements to make workers pay for the recession, and then telling their own caucus they could vote like homophobes on same-sex beenfits if they felt like it. You see, these people figured out something you've never grasped. They'll wait for someone who will return their trust before they entrust it again - even if it means electing the more honest kinds of bastards (Harris, McGuinty). Today, with the departure of Hampton and others of that dark period, and the advent of someone who doesn't look and sound like a toady and a coward, there is actually (IMHO) some hope for the ONDP - but not if they keep listening to the advice of cheerleaders. They should listen to me. Stop funding Catholic schools and give the savings to the poor and minimum wage workers. Kill two birds with one stone. Now don't you go stealing my platform!!

Once again you show what a complete blowhard ignoramous you are.

I feel superior to no one - you however, might want to have a look in the mirror.

Harris campaigned on a platform of cutting welfare rates and eliminating people who were legitimately receiving assistance as a scapegoat and an attack on working people in unions too.  The NDP had nothing to do with it for me, or my comments.  If it was only about the NDP Lyn McLeod would have been elected.  I was not even a part of the NDP in those days having left the party over despair at Rae.

The people I was talking about were supporting a political party and agenda that was going to make their already desperate lives worse.  Why because Harris demonized the most economiclaly vulnerable in our society.  He did it to the point where even people receiving welfare were blaming people on welfare for the economic bad times.   That was heart-breaking any way you cut it.

Bookish Agrarian wrote:

Once again you show what a complete blowhard ignoramous you are.

Does it make you feel that your point is more convincing when you make comments like that?

You seem incapable of answering a simple question. Why did those people who "broke your heart" vote the NDP in and then why did they vote them out?

You have no answers, no analysis, nothing but swearing and insults and belittling. It's characteristic of a social class that just has no clue where its future is or whether it has one. So don't take it personally.

Quote:

Poor math skills. If you have an average wage at least half of all people earning that wage will be less than the average.

This one you [b]should[/b] take personally. If by "average" you mean "median", then it won't be "at least half", it will necessarily be one-half, plus or minus one for rounding. If by "average" you mean "mean" (which is usually how the word, taken alone, is used), then it is impossible to know how many are below and how many above - it depends on the distribution curve.

In short, why would you want to insult someone's math skills when you flunked Grade 3 arithmetic?

Average wage is a meaningless figure. Median incomes and median earned-incomes, both before and after taxes are paid, are relevant statistics. 

Closing for length.