"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Monday, 8 December 2014

"I don't always agree with you but "

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Happiness Grows in a Circular Motion":

I have to disagree with you. After blowing away billions with the last 12yrs of scandals, and coming back with a majority screams: “We can do as we please”. Hudak was a fool with his talk about cutting union jobs. He lost his status as leader and should have lost his seat as well for stupidity. That being said the Liberals will continue their scandalous ways, because the people of this province gave them the 2 thumbs up to continue.
Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 8 December 2014 at 14:3


You are not disagreeing with me. You  are saying the same thing.

 Isn't that comical?

Even when a person agrees with me, they always feel they have to qualify agreement by the rarity of the occasion. 

Long ago I came to the conclusion it had to do with my own proclivity for saying what I think without waiting to discover the prevailing opinion. 

Modern politicians of all stripes will do exactly what the noisy ones want.

It's the Yellow Brick Road to political success. 

Doesn't matter if  the demands are not emanating from all of the people. 

No politician in his/her right mind is going to take on  professional organizations of Police, Firefighters,Nurses Teachers and Doctors.

 I don't think the military is entitled to organise.

I don't think a police  officer,firefighter,teacher,nurse or doctor is likely to take on the force of their own  professional association.

.Many  professional organisations are more virally political than governments themselves.

They have more money. More than the government has debt.

No police chief in Canada is secure in his job.

When  pensions for public service were established and in the years thereafter,  government was able to borrow from  public pension funds at a preferred rate of interest to finance public projects.

The investment had to be safe . Borrowing was a benefit to the public sector and  presented earnings to the pension fund.

The pensions were not the same either.

But  that's a vestige of times long past.

Organizations  won the right through negotiation to make their own investments.

I may be wrong but I think if  an investment goes south , payments have to be made by the public sector to make up for the loss.

Most politicians are  contributing to the pension fund. It's not possible for them to take an impartial view of the matter.

Many , but not all, public sector employees are better off retired than working for a living.


Anonymous said...

I was a bit shocked to see that a recently elected MPP who decided to quit because of " personal reasons " was entitled to a large sum, far greater than he had earned in a few months. Fortunately the ensuing uproar caused him the decline the money.

Anonymous said...

I am not sure about your generalization about politicians not taking on organizations. The Prime Minister through his representative appears to have taken on the veterans. No amount of digging is going to get him out of that one in my books. Whether it resonates elsewhere I have no idea.

Anonymous said...

"Modern politicians of all stripes will do exactly what the noisy ones want.

It's the Yellow Brick Road to success.

Doesn't matter if the demands are not emanating from all of the people."

Just like the vocal, self-serving opposition to the South-East Old Aurora Heritage Conservation District.

Anonymous said...

Or those demanding the designation.

Anonymous said...

Leave it alone, 18:32. That dog will not hunt and I think the breeder has gone out of business. The Blog had nothing to do with that fiasco. Residents decided the issue without importing extra bodies to intimidate.

Anonymous said...

Except for the fact that the proponents didn't carry the day, 19:28. The politicians that supported the initiative got a case of weak knees in the face of the vested naysayers.

Anonymous said...

Yes . I suppose you could say the residents had a vested interest. They either owned or rented properties there. They simply made their case.

Anonymous said...

Right, 09:11. It was their personal interests and fears versus the best interests of the town as a whole; maintaining the built-heritage integrity of a large area of our historic core.

Anonymous said...

All I saw was on-going expenses with the OMB & a lot of angry residents. We had already spent far too much on studies. And I do not live in that area so I had no " vested " interests and did not attend the scream-ins