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.
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
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:
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
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
Vote John Richardson - Independent Judgment For Toronto Danforth - Ward 29! 