CBC is reporting that Jamie Hachey, President of the Saint John Police Association, is extremely upset that the city is broke.
No, actually he is upset that the city may finally do something about their abysmal financial situation.
The City of Saint John is driving residents away. Maybe de-indexing pensions is better than bankruptcy, but Mr. Hachey does not seem to care how broke the city is, how shoddy the infrastructure is, or how many people leave the city to get away from runaway staffing costs inflating their tax bills and eating up city taxes that could be spent fixing roads.
Those who cannot afford to move to Quispamsis or Grand Bay will be left holding the bag in Saint John.
Like Fredericton to the north, many city employees have so little interest in supporting their city they will not even live in it. The union leadership in Saint John is blind to reality. The provincial government is not going to bail them out.
Saint John is a city in decline in search of leadership. Ivan Court is not it, and obviously the union leadership thinks there are still 90,000 people living in the city paying property taxes.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Taking 'til It Hurts
Alec Bruce of the Moncton Times Transcript has a great article titled 'Giving until it hurts'.
Read it here
Now the T&T has some run some stupid columns, but is there nobody there reviewing this crap?
Mr. Bruce starts off with a wonderful bit about how charitable we are (second only to Malta, tied with Ireland!), then starts on some garbage about the federal government wanting value for money or some stupid thing from those organizations our tax money gets showered on. Imagine! Actually showing you did something with the money, what do these damn crazy right-wingers want?
A few points for Mr. Bruce:
1. The federal government taking your wealth and sending it elsewhere is not charity, it is taxation. Charity is money you voluntarily part with.
2. Expecting said charities to actually DO what they claim to do may seem onerous or unrealistic to you, but expecting more than nice brochures and a couple of trips to the Caribbean is not too much to ask, is it? The people the money was confiscated from would like to know who got to go to Barbados and did they get the buffet. And did Busty Hookers get expensed?
3. You then move on to a paragraph about the crime bill and the gun registry. It is damn stupid legislation to lock up pot heads for being stupid, but what does this have to do with charity? And allowing people to own guns without a Toronto bureaucrat in the loop? What does that have to do with charitable giving? Or are the billions wasted on that more 'charity'?
4. Next we move on to Britain. PM David Cameron expects the private sector to burden more of the charity work. Well duh, if the government is doing it, it ain't charity.
5. Lastly, you state 'There is no credible evidence that points to federally-funded, Canadian non-profits wasting vast amounts of taxpayer money en masse.' Well Sherlock, who is measuring it? Nobody, that's who. And you seem too suggest this person, nobody, is who should measure it.
Confusing charity with taxation is possibly the dumbest thing the T&T has printed this week. But it is only Monday.
Read it here
Now the T&T has some run some stupid columns, but is there nobody there reviewing this crap?
Mr. Bruce starts off with a wonderful bit about how charitable we are (second only to Malta, tied with Ireland!), then starts on some garbage about the federal government wanting value for money or some stupid thing from those organizations our tax money gets showered on. Imagine! Actually showing you did something with the money, what do these damn crazy right-wingers want?
A few points for Mr. Bruce:
1. The federal government taking your wealth and sending it elsewhere is not charity, it is taxation. Charity is money you voluntarily part with.
2. Expecting said charities to actually DO what they claim to do may seem onerous or unrealistic to you, but expecting more than nice brochures and a couple of trips to the Caribbean is not too much to ask, is it? The people the money was confiscated from would like to know who got to go to Barbados and did they get the buffet. And did Busty Hookers get expensed?
3. You then move on to a paragraph about the crime bill and the gun registry. It is damn stupid legislation to lock up pot heads for being stupid, but what does this have to do with charity? And allowing people to own guns without a Toronto bureaucrat in the loop? What does that have to do with charitable giving? Or are the billions wasted on that more 'charity'?
4. Next we move on to Britain. PM David Cameron expects the private sector to burden more of the charity work. Well duh, if the government is doing it, it ain't charity.
5. Lastly, you state 'There is no credible evidence that points to federally-funded, Canadian non-profits wasting vast amounts of taxpayer money en masse.' Well Sherlock, who is measuring it? Nobody, that's who. And you seem too suggest this person, nobody, is who should measure it.
Confusing charity with taxation is possibly the dumbest thing the T&T has printed this week. But it is only Monday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)