Featured post

A bit of personal history – archive of VoteJohnRichardson.ca

Archive Of VoteJohnRichardson.ca

This is a good place to keep a bit of personal history. For various elections I used the site: VoteJohnRichardson.ca

Here are archived versions of the site for different elections over the years:

2015 Federal Election – VoteJohnRichardson.ca

Around 2014 – Toronto Ward 29 Election

Municipal Election 2019 – Toronto Ward 29

And going back to 2006, here is the John Richardson Election site.

 

 

 

Featured post

Vote John Richardson – Independent Candidate – Toronto Danforth – Ward 29

Toronto is your city! Get out and vote!

Canada is one of the world’s great democracies. Democracy is something that you do! Democracy is not something you watch! To put it another way:

Democracy is NOT a spectator sport!

You must get out and vote!

The voter turnout in the 2006 elections was not just low – but abysmally low. In Toronto Ward 29 approximately 12,000 people voted. That’s 12,000 out of a possible 33,705. That’s a very low percentage turnout – marginally more than 33%. Toronto’s City Councillors are the representatives of only those who took the time to vote.  The winner in our Ward – Ward 29 – received less than half of those 12,000 votes. Therefore he was the choice  of at most 17% of eligible voters.

The residents of Toronto have come to expect and been forced to tolerate:

–         garbage strikes – see how Toronto’s  Councillor’s voted

–         a substandard TTC that  creates conflicts with its riders

–         A city council  which  allowed councillors  a pay raise in the midst of a recession

–         A city council that may favor the interests of  special groups  over taxpayers

–        A city council that will finance a city councillor to launch a lawsuit against a taxpayer

–        A city council that spends your money without lawful authority

–         A dysfunctional property tax system

–         A property tax system that discriminates again tenants who live in buildings with more than seven apartments

and more.

That’s what you get if you don’t get out and vote.

My name is John Richardson.  I have been your neighbour in Ward 29 since 1984.  I would like to serve you as your city councillor in Ward 29.   I look forward to meeting as many of you as can from now until October 25, 2010.

Toronto’s Tenant Tax – Keeping Toronto’s rents high!

Ward 29 - Toronto Tenants

Toronto’s “tenant tax”

Toronto  Tenants  Pay High Rents  Because  of Discriminatory Tax on Tenants

“It is assumed that because rental housing is a business, that higher rates of taxation can be charged, even though those levies are passed on dollar-for-dollar to the tenants under landlord and tenant laws, and even though the majority of tenants are renters because they have lower incomes and can not afford to be homeowners. Of course, since the tax levies are ultimately paid by tenants as part of our rents, most tenants unaware of the real source of any increased taxes, nor that over 20% of our rents are in fact due to municipal property taxes.”

http://www.ontariotenants.ca/taxes/toronto-property-taxes.phtml

You can see  the difference in the tax rates  here.

I  am amazed that  that few people  seem interested  in this  issue.  If you are a Toronto  tenant or  landlord you need to make your voice  heard…

View original post 30 more words

If you want corporate tax cuts, vote for Jack and the NDP

The last few days  have  have full of discussion about the rise in Jack Layton’s  popularity.  Hard  to understand – Jack Layton is a man who has made a career demonizing corporations and confusing a desirable  state  of affairs  with a just state  of affairs. In any case, if  the polls are to be believed (and the they may become a self-fulfilling prophecy), Jack Layton’s  popularity will bring the NDP  to heights  not seen since the  days of Ed Broadbent. What  does this  mean for the outcome  of the election on May 2?

My predication is that it means a Conservative Majority!

Look at it this way:

– Mr. Layton’s increased  popularity in Quebec will amount to nothing in relation to the Conservatives (the NDP  will just take seats from the Bloc). It could however mean something in terms of who  will be the Opposition Leader. The conventional wisdom is that Mr.  Ignatieff  will continue to be the Opposition Leader. That is far from certain.

– in the rest of Canada Mr. Layton’s popularity will be primarily at  the expense of the Liberals. The leaking of Liberal support  to the NDP gives the Conservatives  an excellent opportunity to win some of the closer  ridings. Interestingly,  the Conservatives  could  actually get fewer votes but win more  seats.

– The relevancy of the Green Party will be a casualty of  an increase of NDP  popularity.

So, the moral  of the story is:

If you want a Harper Majority then Vote  NDP!

Here is an interesting article written in June 2010 from a respected commentator which suggest  some of the same  things:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/817622–hebert-jack-layton-s-surge-great-news-for-stephen-harper

Hébert: Jack Layton’s surge great news for Stephen Harper

June 02, 2010

Chantal Hébert

Once in a blue moon, the political stars align in such a way as to give the federal NDP a bit of an edge over their Liberal rivals. Continue reading

Voting Reform – May Begin With The Format of the Ballot

On Sunday April 9, 2011 History Television began a mini-series about the Kennedy’s. The first instalment focused on John Kennedy’s rise to the presidency of the United States. Kennedy’s first foray into Federal politics was when he ran for Congress in Boston. In any case, (whether this is true of not), according to the show, in Kennedy’s first campaign he was running against two Joseph Russos – the name Joseph Russo appeared twice on the ballot. (Presumably there was another Joseph Russo in that district.) This meant that those who wanted to vote for their Joseph Russo did not know how to indicate that their vote was for their preferred Joseph Russo. The Joseph Russo vote was split and the name John Kennedy (if not the man himself) received the largest number of votes. Because of the second Joesph Russo, John Kennedy was “victorious”. This incident is also described in an excellent article by the journalist Seymour Hirsch. Continue reading

Parking bylaws do not apply to government officials

This is a picture taken at approximately 1:30 p.m. 0n Monday April 11/11 at 81 St. Mary St.

This car was there for a minimum of 45 minutes:

– parked illegally

– parking officer nowhere to be found

– car was there for a minimum of 45 minutes

Let’s compare the violations in Toronto to the St. Louis Parking Violations.

When it comes to |Toronto parking officers, sometimes they are:

– waiting to be found  – Toronto Parking Police will wait to ticket you; and

– nowhere to be found.

Here is another Toronto blog with examples of Toronto Parking Police officers parking illegally.

Democracy, The Appointment of Judges and the Charter of Rights

Democracy, The Appointment of Judges and the Charter  of Rights


We  are in the middle of a Federal  Election. Respect for the democratic process has been an issue in this campaign. The conservative government has  been the most heavily criticized of  the main parties.

The grounds of criticism include:

– overriding the wishes  of local  riding associations in selecting candidates;
– being held  in “contempt of  parliament”
– renaming Canada’s  parliamentary democracy “Harper Government”
– the “in and out”  financing of  the 2006 election
– the fact that Harper  has   prorogued parliament rather than face  parliament

All of these allegations are deserving of  investigation. That said, there  is  another area – which is  potentially far more  damaging – where  Mr. Harper has exhibited  a clear “contempt” for  democracy. Continue reading

Strategic Voting – To Split the vote or not, that is the question

Strategic Voting – To Avoid Splitting The Vote


The Green Party and Green Party supporters have the potential to make  a big  difference in the May 2 election. The Green Party is on a growth trajectory and  may become a victim of its own success. Although the Greens are unlikely to win many seats (if  any), they are likely to have an influence on the outcome of this election. Green Party supporters are most likely to take  support from the Liberals  and NDP – increasing the chance  of  a Conservative being elected – and potentially giving the Conservatives their  coveted majority.  The Conservatives, could get the same number percentage  of votes as  in 2008 and win a majority. To put it simply:

As goes the Green Party, So go the Conservatives! Continue reading

Federal Election 2011 – Some Thoughts and Prognostications

Yesterday I had lunch with a friend who is well connected and knowledgeable about Federal politics. The thoughts immediately turned to election prognostications. This election has a strange feel  to it – kind  of like  people  feel  that they should be interested in it – even if they aren’t. Welcome to my series  of  thoughts on Federal  Election 2011.

Why are we having this election at all? The answer is simple:

This election is  NOT about the well being of the country. This  election IS about the well being of the parties and the party leaders.  To put it simply we are having this  election because:

– Harper wants  a Conservative  majority government
– Ignatieff wants to be Prime  Minister
– Layton wants  to matter to something beyond the NDP

Political  parties  are private organizations whose activities  are  largely funded by Canadian taxpayers. Consider this:

– the election of 2011 is an activity orchestrated by The Conservatives, Liberals and NDP which will  cost Canadian taxpayers in excess of 300 million dollars (Query Mr. Layton – should  this 300 million not have gone to the poor instead?)
– political parties  receive $1.95 from the taxpayers for  each vote their party receives Continue reading

Transit problems across Canada prompt calls for politicians to address issue

Traffic piles up on the Gardiner Expressway as commuters head home during the evening rush hour in Toronto, Ont. March 14/2011. - Traffic piles up on the Gardiner Expressway as commuters head home during the evening rush hour in Toronto, Ont. March 14/2011. | Kevin Van Paassen/The Globe and Mail

Time to lead

SIRI AGRELL, LES PERREAUX, WENDY STUECK AND JOSH WINGROVE

From Saturday’s Globe and Mail
Published Friday, Mar. 25, 2011 9:50PM EDT
Last updated Saturday, Mar. 26, 2011 1:31PM EDT

 

Commute times in Canadian cities are no longer just a source of rush-hour irritation, but a national liability affecting the economic performance of our urban centres and requiring immediate intervention from Ottawa.

A new ranking of international cities by the Toronto Board of Trade saw major Canadian municipalities fall dramatically behind in the realm of transportation and transit, prompting big-city mayors and transit experts to call on all federal parties to address the issue in the election, or suffer the consequences. Continue reading

Why Wisconsin matters

National Post · Wednesday, Mar. 2, 2011

The following editorial appeared in Tuesday’s edition of the Wall Street Journal.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Wisconsin+matters/4369306/story.html

 

The raucous Wisconsin debate over collective bargaining may be ugly at times, but it has been worth it for the splendid public education. For the first time in decades, Americans have been asked to look under the government hood at the causes of runaway spending. What they are discovering is the monopoly power of government unions that have long been on a collision course with taxpayers. Though it arrived in Madison first, this crack-up was inevitable.

In 1960, 31.9% of America’s private work force belonged to a union, compared to only 10.8% of government workers. By 2010, the numbers had more than reversed, with 36.2% of public workers in unions but only 6.9% in the private economy. The sharp rise in public union membership in the 1960s and 1970s coincided with the movement to give public unions collective bargaining rights.

For decades, as the private union movement rose in power, even leftof-centre politicians resisted collective bargaining for public unions. Why? Because unlike in the private economy, a public union has a natural monopoly over government services. An industrial union will fight for a greater share of corporate profits, but it also knows that a business must make profits or it will move or shut down. The union chief for teachers, transit workers or firemen knows that the city is not going to close the schools, buses or firehouses.

This monopoly power, in turn, gives public unions inordinate sway over elected officials. The money they collect from member dues helps to elect politicians who are then supposed to represent the taxpayers during the next round of collective bargaining. In effect, union representatives sit on both sides of the bargaining table, with no one sitting in for taxpayers. In 2006 in New Jersey, this led to the preposterous episode in which Governor Jon Corzine addressed a Trenton rally of thousands of public workers and shouted, “We will fight for a fair contract.” He was promising to fight himself.

Thus the collision course with taxpayers. Public unions depend entirely on tax revenues to fund their pay and benefits. They thus have every incentive to elect politicians who favour higher taxes and more government spending. The great expansion of state and local spending followed the rise of public unions.

Current AFL-CIO chief Rich Trumka has tried to portray Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s reforms as an attack on all unions, but they clearly are not. If anything, by reining in public union power, Mr. Walker is trying to protect private workers of all stripes from the tax increases that will eventually have to finance larger government. Regarding public finances, the interests of public union workers and those of private union taxpayers are in direct conflict. Mr. Walker is the better friend of the union manufacturing worker in Oshkosh than is Mr. Trumka.

Notice, too, how fiercely the public unions are willing to fight for collective bargaining power even if it means public job layoffs. Without Mr. Walker’s budget reforms, Wisconsin will have to begin laying off thousands of workers as early as today. The unions would rather give up those jobs -typically for their younger members -than give up their political negotiating advantages. They know some future Governor or legislature will get those jobs back, as long as they retain their inordinate political clout.

This is the imbalance of political power that Mr. Walker is trying to break up. And he is right to do so