Dear Sir:
A few more hints about how good our provincial government is performing. In the month of June, this year, the Province of Ontario created more jobs than the rest of Canada and the USA combined. Don’t even think this is solely the work of the federal government because, although the federal government must have contributed something, so did the provincial government. There is enough credit to go around for everyone to have a share.
On the downside, if the opposition parties had their way, the provincial green energy plan would be scrapped and there would be 150,000 jobs down the drain. How satisfying would it be to see 150,000 jobs lost through lack of foresight and lack of understanding? That is how many jobs would be lost if we cancelled our provincial green energy plans. Must the taxpayers of Ontario really have to shoulder these kinds of burdens as the Tories or the NDP learn the ropes of governing? We presently have an experienced leader and there is no reason to change because we all know incoming political parties DO NOT change what is working.
The amount of energy coming from natural sources, the wind and the sun, is presently very little but that is what the green energy plan is all about – increasing the amount of energy from natural sources. Once this is achieved maybe the cost of our energy usage will drop. There is much debate about the amount of money we are paying another country for equipment and knowledge. The debate is fallacious since that is one of the main reasons why Ontario is forging ahead with its green energy plan; to gain knowledge and experience so we may, one day, export what we will have in the future. Learning is not free and the only way in which we can pave a new route for the generations who will follow behind us is if we try to make the future better for them.
In the past, despite endless warnings to previous political parties as they governed our province, Ontario failed to take up the challenge; the warnings were ignored and the Province of Ontario fell behind other more dynamic jurisdictions. The question has to be asked, do we want to be a leader in any given technology or are we content to buy what we need from others – no matter the asking price?
In the interest of today and tomorrow we must vote not to change our provincial government at the next election. Mark A. MacDonald will surely help us in Stormont, Dundas, South Glengarry to get our share of the technological advantages and job opportunities, whatever plans the provincial government creates, providing we do not change our current successful leadership.
John E. Milnes,
South Stormont
(Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)
Seems to me Mr John Manley, a respectable man with strong liberal roots, was concerned a few months ago with our provoncial debt. I am as equally concerned about the deficit as debt and would expect more debate on how OUR money is being used. 5 billion for full day kindergarten, something like 10 billion a year for interest payments, really adds up and the voters should take another look at the big numbers that we normally shy away from.
Now is not the time to go into more debt for natural sources of energy, although hydro from dams is way more natural. Sure it may kill a few fish, but other creatures, birds for example, would be saved from windmills.
I agree that now is not the time to change Ontario’s leadership, October 6th is fine.
Where do you get your information from? “In the month of June, this year, the Province of Ontario created more jobs than the rest of Canada and the USA combined.” Have you looked at how many people have moved from Unemployment to Welfare?
Cornwall is notorious for making statements like I have seen in the freeholder and seaway news that looks like this : “Unemployment rate drops for the third month in a row!” and then the article will show you how our unemplment has dipped by a bout 1% over a 3 month peeriod! However, compared to the year prior a 1% drop in EI recepients is nothing compared to the 12% increase in Welfare recipients and none of this includes pention or ODSP recepients!
Unemployment, covers everyone for only up to 50 weeks! After that if you have not found a job you must apply for Welfare! The welfare rate increasing, at such a high rate, shows that we are not replacing jobs faster than newer people are entering the workforce!
As an example, the Samsung deal which is going to cost atleast $7 billion dollars will supposedly create 16,000 jobs according to Mc.Fibber! However, Samsung is only guaranteeing 900 jobs!
$7 billion dollars / 16,000 is $437,500 per wishful employee or $7.8 million per guaranteed employee! Can anyone think of a better way to create jobs that doesn’t cost at least $437,500 per employee. Any employer will tell you that they can GUARANTEE you that they can hire atleast 1 employee if gave them $437,500! Again, GURANTEE you!
Infrastructure should be a consistent investment and viewed almost as if it is properly MAINTAINING the province! It should NOT be viewed as a method of creating jobs during a recession because their is NO “Mulitplier Affect!” in other words it would be better to continously create these jobs rather than create them and then lose them! The proper investmetn into Education, Healthcare and the revamping of supporting small business will create an economic boom that would double employment as compared to infrastructure investments!
This recession happened under the Liberal reign and in no way are we better off then the rest of the world! Ask anyone who lives in Windsor how well the infrastructure investments have helped them!
In the meantime, let’s claim no new taxes and then create a record number of NEW taxes!
Thank You,
Mike Bedard
Thank You,
Mike Bedard
Have to agree with John Milnes when he says “We presently have an experienced leader and there is no reason to change”. Thats true, we won’t change this month nor next month nor the next, but come October it’s going to be OUT with the BAD (Bye bye Dalton McSkinningUsAlive) and in with the NEW!
Isn’t October the month after next month?
I listen to the rhetoric put forth by these “tea-Party” styled commentators and I have to laugh. THey feel that Dalton McGuinty is personally responsible for our economic mess as if the Global economy, Ontario’s reliance on American trade and Federal Govt leaving Ontario to (for all intents and purposes) twist in the wind in terms of stimulus (except for key conservative held ridings of course…read Tony Clement). Get real. McGuinty is spending us into more debt, yes. He’s also spending us into energy independence, forming a brand new green energy/manufacturing sector and even improving our competitiveness in R&D and overall employability through education programs like Second Career.
Any economist who understands Keynesian market theory knows that you save during a boom and you spend during a bust. What the Ontario Tories REALLY resent is that Dalton gets to play the rule of Spender during this bust and NOT THEM! In the Federal Government, the only thing that Harper did RIGHT (albeit in a misguided manner) was to spend stimulus money. Did he get value for our money? Hell NO, but at least he’s following Keynesian economics (the broadstrokes anyways…)
What Timmy Hudak is not saying is that he’d be spending like a drunken sailor if elected and if sure as hell wouldn’t be on smaller class sizes, medical treatments and shortening wait-times and green energy independence. He’d be giving tax breaks to the richest 4% of Ontarians just as Mike Harris and Ernie Eves did. Let’s face it. If he Looks like a duck, squawks like a duck, and dodges sociietal questions by ducking his head under water….then he’s a Duck….a Tory Duck.
Solar energy recently announced they are up to 17.3% efficiency. Windmills require electricty to turn the rotor, heat the blades and such. Both types require components that are being manufactured in other countries and we get a few construction jobs.
If you want to use the solar to operate the windmills, and be in better economic times, I might take another look at this expensive inefficient experiment with taxpayer dollars. Greatly subsidizing payouts to these operators for the miniscule amounts of production is also not very funny.
The Tories in Ontario announced and put a plan into action to close one of our coal fired electricty plants before 2004, of course the Liberals come in and take credit for it.
Creating several “arms lenght” agencies for dozens of areas just creates more administration that cost us. Some of the agencies and commisions found on the following website were created during the last 8 years, and I would like an audit done on all of them to see if they are really needed and not duplicated elsewhere. Government should create circumstances for people to create jobs, not do it themselves. http://instruct.uwo.ca/law/407/admin/tribunal.htm
Jamie:
I studied business in College and took Micro and Macro Economics and many other courses! You are right in saying that spending should take place during recessions and cuts/savings during booms. But spending tax dollars comes from taxation and you can not decrease taxes without cutting spending and you can not increase spending without increasing taxation, plain and simple!
However, since you want to get technical, the Laffer curve has been debunked by all credible thinkers! The laffer curve, for those of you who are not familiar without, is the idea that if you lower taxes that it will create spending and additional tax revenue because people will spend/invest more, due to savings, and will claim income instead of hiding it! The basic idea is that instead of getting 30% of small pie you would be better of to get 20% of a large pie!
However, this has been debunked becasue the fact is people want to keep their money period and the only way governemnts still maintain a balanced budget while cutting corporate tax rates, or any taxes, is to cut spending as well! And increasing spending, such as McGuinty did, will require increased taxes to recover or reduce the debt unless you cut spending from one program and give it to another! Or “Steal form Peter to pay Paul!”
P.S. – Nice to see a new blog and an intelligent reply!
Thank You,
Mike Bedard
Eric. Who pays the massive construction costs for your new hydro dams? Where are the rivers we can dam? Who takes care of the cost of removing the mercury created by flooding the land for a head pond?
John Milnes: Well it certainly won’t be Dalton McFibber and the Fiberals! They are on their WAY OUT!
Mr Milnes, we can buy hydro from Quebec for areas within a few hundred KM of the Quebec border, much like Cornwall does, and the same near Manitoba as places like Kenora does. This could reduce the amount Ontario needs to produce, perhaps even more than the 2 to 3 % that wind & solar may generate in good conditions.
Natural gas fired turbines are not evil either and can be switched on and off to meet demand instead of selling at greatly reduced prices that we have been hearing about over the last couple of years.
Because of immigration numbers settling in large cities, much electricity is needed there, maybe immigration should be looked as well. ( If we had a tax structure that would allow a parent to stay home, current residents may be encouraged to, well, you know)