tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post2509397473989243783..comments2009-10-01T12:30:13.121-04:00Ben Burdhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06372169478978720740ben@eagle.caBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-27067890962305570262009-10-01T12:19:55.229-04:002009-10-01T12:19:55.229-04:00Wally Keeler wrote: <i>Government is about dirty laundry and organized grime.</i><br /><br />Another comment, from the Sultan of Slash and Burn, a tireless advocate for the devolution of government and the denigration of the common good.William Hayeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14237954496211789520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-70962236726780618302009-09-23T12:30:58.162-04:002009-09-23T12:30:58.162-04:00We need someone to step up and lead the throng of people who don&#39;t want this plan to happen.<br /><br />If you take the basic train freaks, add in the historical preservation people and then people who just agree this is a stupid idea, maybe we can band together and force VIA and the stupid Town to give us a more appropriate solution.<br /><br />If we had a say in the harbour lands, why can&#39;t we have a say in this too?Deb O.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-31177276083545795472009-09-22T16:08:28.084-04:002009-09-22T16:08:28.084-04:00Government is about dirty laundry and organized grimeWally Keelerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02370532557074561490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-7923334113888184512009-09-22T14:53:42.728-04:002009-09-22T14:53:42.728-04:00&quot;It doesn&#39;t matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.&quot;Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-11535520040082903672009-09-22T13:10:35.850-04:002009-09-22T13:10:35.850-04:00Government is essential, party politics is another thing. I am dissatisfied with the system, not with the idea of government.<br /><br />&quot;Corrupt: to alter from the original or correct form or version&quot;<br /><br />Power corrupts. Government sways ultimate power and is most susceptible to corruption. The way power is manipulated to ensure the continued survival of corrupted practices is another one of my beefs.<br /><br />If you accept the status quo in this regard, you certainly see no sense in my comments about the &quot;stink&quot; in the system.<br /><br />It is our own responsibility to ensure that government stays true to the concept, and simply accepting the notion that is working as it should and it&#39;s the best it can be is sheer folly.<br /><br />Why is it that every party out of power wants to get into power to fix what the other guys have screwed up? Who then can be credited for the original screw-up?<br />Same crap, different party - give me a flippin&#39; break Bill!manfred schumannhttp://clearlyunclear.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-71352160864850792812009-09-22T11:52:27.271-04:002009-09-22T11:52:27.271-04:00I thought we got this government/business crap out of our systems, at least in Ontario, when Harris got the frozen boot. The impetus of the &quot; conveyance for common good &quot;, resides good government, and is not the driving force in business. If it&#39;s primarily the reduction of taxes that interests us, we know there&#39;s one party that promises just that, and little else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-48301972708410030922009-09-22T10:44:23.349-04:002009-09-22T10:44:23.349-04:00Thank you, Manfred, for coming clean with us on the matter of taxes, in particular, and government, in general: <i>tax dollars are a poor way to buy whatever it is we are buying through gov&#39;t channels</i>.<br /><br />No, Manfred, I have nothing in particular in mind. Rather, I have in mind your belief: everything in general is rotten in the government of Denmark!<br /><br />There is no royal road to a better world, but some of us believe that government offers a conveyance for the common good.William Hayeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14237954496211789520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-26197869433217330652009-09-22T09:29:38.403-04:002009-09-22T09:29:38.403-04:00Anonymous appears to have a reading comprehension deficiency. I did not assert that it had any good for Cobourgers. Train service to Port Hope is of negligable concern to me. Back to you.Wally Keelerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02370532557074561490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-57200355190092498872009-09-22T05:36:12.151-04:002009-09-22T05:36:12.151-04:00Er, no, Wally, it doesn&#39;t have any good to it. That&#39;s Why VIA sent their hapless Anglo perpetual bridesmaid, John Margison, to make the announcement. Go back a few posts and read what this is really about: Closing the Port Hope station and eliminating Port Hope as a stop. Seven-million dolars of your money is a cheap price for the oily snakes at VIA to create the impression that they&#39;ve actually improved train times in the corridor. Over to you; tell me what&#39;s good about any of this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-57367678537936963852009-09-21T16:34:36.147-04:002009-09-21T16:34:36.147-04:00Manfred wrote: &quot;To sort out good from not-so-good, you just have to look for the motivation.&quot;<br /><br />Nothing is without motivation. The project has good to it. So, who benefits most from the good? Certainly not Cobourg.Wally Keelerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02370532557074561490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-78319163086038149622009-09-21T16:30:11.613-04:002009-09-21T16:30:11.613-04:00William - a couple of scenarios, if you will.<br /><br />Combining GST with PST to create HST - when you can determine what the real motivation is you can decide if it&#39;s good or bad, or some of each.<br /><br />Buying the harbour from the gov&#39;t for a dollar, then figuring out who has to pay for the upgrades (after 40 or more years of neglect) and upkeep from then on (to maintain it at gov&#39;t mandated standards), gives us a clue as to motivation (by the gov&#39;t to sell) and whether it is a good idea or not to buy it (keeping in mind the revenues it will produce only if the expenditures are significant).<br /><br />If the gov&#39;t raises taxes for the express purpose of providing more services and the actual revenue from those increases is then actually put into providing those services, the motivation is, in the overall, a good one and the tax increase is a beneficial (good) one. However, if the motivation is one thing and the stipulated result does not follow through on that motivation, the increase is a sham.<br /><br />If 30% (arbitrary number) of tax revenue goes to running gov&#39;t, then we are only buying 70% worth of whatever we&#39;re buying through that system, (the other 30% goes to admin). Those same dollars spent buying the same things through non-gov&#39;t channels buy them at a significantly higher net value. In that context, tax dollars are a poor way to buy whatever it is we are buying through gov&#39;t channels. Taxes to cover those &#39;shortfalls&#39; in acquisitions are bad taxes, because the motivation for them is to cover waste and inefficiencies.<br /><br />Do you have anything particular in mind?manfred schumannnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-19505869542165982412009-09-21T14:59:05.190-04:002009-09-21T14:59:05.190-04:00Would his wife, Joanne Loken, consider a run to be re-elected to Town Council? If she doesn&#39;t want to do it because of the constant flak thrown her way (much like Miriam Mutton gets currently) it is understandable but she was often a smart, though outsider-lone-wolf voice (much like Mutton today).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-20601908832003617492009-09-21T13:40:29.280-04:002009-09-21T13:40:29.280-04:00Manfred wrote: <i>To sort out good from not-so-good, you just have to look for the motivation</i>.<br /><br />I&#39;m wondering, Manfred, what <b>your</b> motivation is in making this comment. My guess: you are someone who thinks, as does our Prime Minister, that there is no such thing as a good tax. The corollary is that nothing bought with taxed money is worth the price paid.<br /><br />Perhaps I wrong, Manfred. You certainly seem to take every opportunity to make this point. Say it isn&#39;t so.William Hayeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14237954496211789520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-47964322100880825052009-09-21T13:28:22.155-04:002009-09-21T13:28:22.155-04:00Ahem. Your attention for just a second or two -if you don&#39;t mind:<br /><br />The &#39;new&#39; Cobourg station is about one thing and one thing only: Permanently closing the unstaffed Port Hope station to facilitate a 15-minute saving on a Toronto-Ottawa trip.<br /><br />Everybody got that? Any questions?<br /><br />Good. Let the shovel-ready shovels begin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-19414743367915394582009-09-21T12:34:18.090-04:002009-09-21T12:34:18.090-04:00I agree with James’s letter to the msn. Cobourg’s station is attractive, adequate and the currently disused restaurant space could be adapted for extra waiting room area and associated customer service booths. The major shortcoming of the station is that the parking is inadequate due to its success.<br /><br />When VIA’s intention to build a new station was announced I noticed the lack of any justification for the need, nor was there any proposed design. I assumed that for some reason VIA could not accommodate a bridge or subway to the new proposed platform. However James’s letter makes it abundantly clear that state of the art tunnel or bridge, even with covered escalators is hardly likely to cost as much as the $8 million allocated for a new station.<br /><br />The current station is designated under the federal Heritage Railway Station Protection Act. However the best protection for our delightful station is to by continuing to use it.<br /><br />Unfortunately the Mayor is quoted as seeing VIA’s proposals for new tracks and a new station as a tribute to Cobourg, although in fact they are just part of an overall system upgrade in the same way the widening Highway 401 is nothing to do with Cobourg even though it benefits us.<br /><br />My experience that battling against unnecessary expenditures is frustrating and unlikely to succeed. I have battle scars in the campaigns to avoid widening Williams Street to 5 lanes outside Tim Horton’s and to avoid spending upwards of $2 million to put a barely successful Frink in existing park space. Perhaps Port Hope has a better record of preventing expenditures that provide no real benefit. I would gladly join a campaign to keep the existing station in use but it would have to be powerful and focused if it were to succeed.Greg Hancocknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-18018589087954524592009-09-21T11:51:46.840-04:002009-09-21T11:51:46.840-04:00A bit of local input could go a long way on this one. CN, who once held the central harbour lands, conducted a forum a number of years ago on imaginative uses for that site. I doubt if the eventual wall of condominiums was one of the preferred choices. Today&#39;s situation vis a vis the current rail lands presents a similar case, only this time private developers aren&#39;t waiting in the wings to buy the properties. A thought-provoking article by James Loken on the necessity for local participation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23948057.post-42286573188330949182009-09-21T10:38:32.043-04:002009-09-21T10:38:32.043-04:00When is a gift not a gift? When it causes more problems than it fixes. If it&#39;s not what you want, it&#39;s not a gift, it&#39;s a burden. As I&#39;ve said before, &#39;beware of droppings left by gifthorses&#39;( ref. waterfront frink money, harbour facility for $1, etc).<br /><br />It&#39;s the perpetual after-costs that always wear the lustre off the initial act of largesse - annual operating expenses &amp; repairs and replacements, all for things we couldn&#39;t afford at the outset (and that&#39;s why we didn&#39;t have them in the first place)<br /><br />Too bad there&#39;s no such thing as re-gifting in the municipal infrastructure category. At least then you could do some good for someone else as well as yourself, be passing on the &quot;gift&quot; to someone who has the cash and the expectation to afford it.<br /><br />To sort out good from not-so-good, you just have to look for the motivation, and that reveals the biggest part of the story.manfred schumannnoreply@blogger.com