新当选的福特市长一上台,就开始工作,努力将多伦多的环卫工作民营化。结果一落实才发现,市政府与环卫工会里竟然有这样的条款,政府如果取消某些岗位,不得辞退从该岗位上下来的人员,必须把这些人员安排到其他的相近岗位上,市政府哪里有那么多相近的岗位呀。没办法,只好采用辞去临时人员和自然减员的办法,先在局部地区开始民营化。
NDP政客苗大伟干的好事, 贵族工会的代表.
法官 发表于 2011-5-16 14:17 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
换位思考: 环卫私营后, 纳税人会受益?
受益人只能是私营公司老板!!!!!!!!!
请研究一下福特家族发家史
View Sonic 发表于 2011-5-16 15:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
换位思考: 环卫私营后, 纳税人会受益?
受益人只能是私营公司老板!!!!!!!!!
请研究一下福特家族发家史
View Sonic 发表于 2011-5-16 15:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
有一个好市长是全市人民的福分。
tont xin 发表于 2011-5-16 13:13 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我很讨厌上次的垃圾罢工,但是,我们要警惕有人趁火打劫。
给大家提个醒:
市政府里负责垃圾私有化计划的负责人Geoff Rathbone宣称垃圾私有化可以节约8百万元,可他自己却将经离开市政府,去到一个私人垃圾回收公司Progressive Waste Solutions任职,他会转身回来投标垃圾。 -- 这垃圾私有化计划里面有腐败假公济私之嫌。
我怀疑我们市民给人玩弄了,有人利用公众的愤怒,为自己谋私利,再一次伤害公众利益。
垃圾是金,可以捞到白花花银子。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 21:58 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
刚投完NDP, 又跑来给政府工会说话, 你够忙的嘛. 公众为什么对垃圾工工会这么愤怒, 还不是工会为了私利以市民为人质要胁的结果吗? 你以为工会是好东西?
法官 发表于 2011-5-16 22:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我很讨厌上次的垃圾罢工,但是,我们要警惕有人趁火打劫。
给大家提个醒:
市政府里负责垃圾私有化计划的负责人Geoff Rathbone宣称垃圾私有化可以节约8百万元,可他自己却将离开市政府,去到一个私人垃圾回收公司Progressive Waste Solutions任职,他会转身回来投标垃圾。 -- 这垃圾私有化计划里面有腐败假公济私之嫌。
我怀疑我们市民又给人玩弄了,有人利用公众的愤怒,为自己谋私利,再一次伤害公众利益。
垃圾是金,可以捞到白花花银子。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 21:58 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
看看其他城市的收垃圾情况:
埃德蒙顿 - 50%的垃圾私有化回收 - 花费 $135/每市民
温哥华 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $92/每市民
卡尔加里 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $71/每市民
摘自Now Magazine February 3 - 10, 2011, by Enzo Di Matteo;
不要骂我,如果你不相信,请向作者Enzo发Email质问他:
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 22:34 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
换位思考: 环卫私营后, 纳税人会受益?
受益人只能是私营公司老板!!!!!!!!!
请研究一下福特家族发家史
View Sonic 发表于 2011-5-16 15:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
谢谢你的参与讨论。如果你能够摆事实,少一些愤怒,你的Comments才会有份量。
你不至于否认Geoff Rathbone离开市政府去私人垃圾公司Progressive Waste Solutions这个事实吧?
你不会否认Geoff Rathbone作为市政府垃圾私有化负责人,宣称私有化节约8百万吧?
请大家愤怒之后,好好想想这两件事之间的联系。警惕再一次受愚弄。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 22:19 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
公開投標,價低者得。
私營公司當然要有利潤才能接標才能經營,
如果接標後做得不好的,市政府又可換承辦商,
而市民不用再看那些'公職人員'的嘴臉,
本人未有發現以私營公司承包的壞處!!
威先生 发表于 2011-5-16 15:13 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
市议会关于垃圾外包条例
老顽童 发表于 2011-5-16 21:25 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
市议会关于垃圾外包条例
老顽童 发表于 2011-5-16 21:25 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
换位思考: 环卫私营后, 纳税人会受益?
受益人只能是私营公司老板!!!!!!!!!
请研究一下福特家族发家史
View Sonic 发表于 2011-5-16 15:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
回复 View Sonic
有病!老毛的思想。管他谁受益!只要大部分百姓也受益就好!在说了,不私营化,就没有人受益啦?那2万多名清洁工就是可耻的受益者!
abasban 发表于 2011-5-16 22:42 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
私营就一定好吗? 看看407私营后的结果:100年内,我们都会被407ETR这个私营机构无止尽的剥削。看看407ETR的报表就知道它赚多少了。 另外一个方面,看看每年道路翻修外判给私营公司,这些私营公司到底是浪费了纳税人的钱,还是节省了。
我不是说环卫私营不好。 只是想说,在加拿大这个人口相对少的国家,不是一切私营就好得。 其实说到底就是两个字“竞争”。 如果一个行业没有竞争,比如说道路翻修(来来去去就这几家能做的),私营不一定就比公营好。 极端的例子就比如407ETR, 垄断的私营比公营更差。
私营的决定性的判断条件就是是否有足够的市场竞争。对于这点,环卫这种低门槛的工作是适合私营的。但是绝不是一切都该私营。
szwesley 发表于 2011-5-16 23:01 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
谢谢你的参与讨论。如果你能够摆事实,少一些愤怒,你的Comments才会有份量。
你不至于否认Geoff Rathbone离开市政府去私人垃圾公司Progressive Waste Solutions这个事实吧?
你不会否认Geoff Rathbone作为市政府垃圾私有化负责人,宣称私有化节约8百万吧?
请大家愤怒之后,好好想想这两件事之间的联系。警惕再一次受愚弄。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 22:19
你想表达什么?何不公开地说出来?
如果这里面有阴谋,不用你在中文论坛里鼓噪,反对党和工会早就拿出来大做文章了,对吧?靠一些模棱两可模模糊糊的东西来暗示一些站不住脚的结论,这种把戏没什么意思。
不过,垃圾工人在过去几年的骄横贪婪,垃圾工会的无理罢工给多伦多市民带来的痛苦,可是一桩桩一件件有目共睹的。
西风纵 发表于 2011-5-16 23:00 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
嘿嘿。
这世上的愚人不少啊。
前几个月才在51上看的新闻,福特的手下说:对私营垃圾公司的投诉率(11%)仅比公营的(9%)高2%。
居然有一大帮子人说私营垃圾公司公营的要好,不知好在哪里?好在投诉率高?
Electron 发表于 2011-5-16 23:45 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我很讨厌上次的垃圾罢工,但是,我们要警惕有人趁火打劫。
给大家提个醒:
市政府里负责垃圾私有化计划的负责人Geoff Rathbone宣称垃圾私有化可以节约8百万元,可他自己却将离开市政府,去到一个私人垃圾回收公司Progressive Waste Solutions任职,他会转身回来投标垃圾。 -- 这垃圾私有化计划里面有腐败假公济私之嫌。
我怀疑我们市民又给人玩弄了,有人利用公众的愤怒,为自己谋私利,再一次伤害公众利益。
垃圾是金,可以捞到白花花银子。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 21:58 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
大家对垃圾罢工带来的不便感到愤怒,气头上什么事都可能发生。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-17 00:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我不会编造事实,只是摆出事实,两个事实之间的联系,必须由大家自己来分析。
我已经在前面贴出了我的分析:这事有腐败假公济私之嫌。
-- 在公家政府干事,把利益输送到私企,然后到私企供职,去接受私企的大钱回报。前安省省长Mike Harris,对私企输送利益有功,下台后被5个私企聘为董事会董事,一年坐收60多万。你不要吃惊,这样的事比比皆是,老百姓有什么招?!
中文论坛的读者大多是多伦多市民,这事对我们很重要,当然要在这里谈论,不要小看我们中文论坛的影响力。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 23:18 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
换位思考: 环卫私营后, 纳税人会受益?
View Sonic 发表于 2011-5-16 15:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我很讨厌上次的垃圾罢工,但是,我们要警惕有人趁火打劫。
给大家提个醒:
市政府里负责垃圾私有化计划的负责人Geoff Rathbone宣称垃圾私有化可以节约8百万元,可他自己却将离开市政府,去到一个私人垃圾回收公司Progressive Waste Solutions任职,他会转身回来投标垃圾。 -- 这垃圾私有化计划里面有腐败假公济私之嫌。
我怀疑我们市民又给人玩弄了,有人利用公众的愤怒,为自己谋私利,再一次伤害公众利益。
垃圾是金,可以捞到白花花银子。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 21:58 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
看看其他城市的收垃圾情况:
埃德蒙顿 - 50%的垃圾私有化回收 - 花费 $135/每市民
温哥华 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $92/每市民
卡尔加里 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $71/每市民
摘自Now Magazine February 3 - 10, 2011, by Enzo Di Matteo;
不要骂我,如果你不相信,请向作者Enzo发Email质问他:
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 22:34 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
Please post data of $/ton of garbage as $/capita is partial. What if Edmontonians throw out everything?
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-17 12:35 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
你不至于否认Geoff Rathbone离开市政府去私人垃圾公司Progressive Waste Solutions这个事实吧?
我不会编造事实,只是摆出事实,两个事实之间的联系,必须由大家自己来分析。
我已经在前面贴出了我的分析:这事有腐败假公济私之嫌。
-- 在公家政府干事,把利益输送到私企,然后到私企供职,去接受私企的大钱回报。前安省省长Mike Harris,对私企输送利益有功,下台后被5个私企聘为董事会董事,一年坐收60多万。你不要吃惊,这样的事比比皆是,老百姓有什么招?!
中文论坛的读者大多是多伦多市民,这事对我们很重要,当然要在这里谈论,不要小看我们中文论坛的影响力。
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 23:18 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
回复 loneshepherd
Not paid for by the UNION my freind ; I know in China there are no UNIONS, I think you need to research the word UNION and read some books about Labour and Unions .
All Unions in Canada are controlled by the Canadain Federation of Labour / they are not part of the government or any political party . Some education about the UNIONs will make things clearer for everyone. The UNION is good for some places ; but sometimes they are not good for some business . It is common in Canada to belong to a UNION , if you work for a bad employer then you should join a UNION . Governments do not like UNIONS and I know in Mainland CHINA there are no UNIONS. You like to drive a car well then you should thank the CAW one of the most powerful UNIONS in Canada. Maybe to big , everytime you buy or repair your car ; you pay the CAW and the government .
idorun 发表于 2011-5-19 14:55 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
政客一己私慾,害百姓於水深火熱,
去年的罷工,垃圾工會的糾察線阻止市民'自己倒垃圾',當時那群人的凶悍表情,至今不能忘掉!!!
威先生 发表于 2011-5-16 14:52 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
The company that Geoff Rathbone joined is banned in bidding. So what do you say now?
I personally think they should allowed bidding as long as the contract is transparent. But speculate an conspiracy without any evidence is irresponsible.
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-18 12:27 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
What you described is a possibility not a fact. Five years from now if privatization costs more, you can come back and declare you are right.
You like conspiracy and I like facts.
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-17 12:30 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
Please post data of $/ton of garbage as $/capita is partial. What if Edmontonians throw out everything?
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-17 12:35 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
Do you have any fact of how much it is going to save by privatizing garbage collection?
Are you going to quote the "$8 millions/year" as a fact?
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 20:16 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
please ask the writer:
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 20:22 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
The fact that the company that hired Geoff Rathbone has been banned to bid for the contract, confirmed my suspicion of the potential corruption of municipal officials. The voting result by the city council said loudly agreeing with my analysis on the conspiracy in my earlier comment.
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 20:05 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
It is ridiculous to ask for a "fact" of future saving (or wasting). Ford and most counselors and majority of Torontonians (and lots of 51 viewers including myself) believe contracting out garbage collection will save, you and quite some Torontonians believe the opposite.
In a democratic society, election has consequences, contract out garbage collection is one of them.
I understand you posted some data about the cost of other municipals. I wanted you to post more data to reflect the true cost, however I have not seen those data. There is a hardcore fact right here in Toronto, Etobicoke, which you seem not want to look at.
There is only one way to know the actual cost, several years from now.
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-22 20:34 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
I thought your original point was that Mr. Rathbone purposely exaggerated the saving to benefit himself, which is quite difficult in a transparent society (it could happen though). The voting result proved the opposite of your conspiracy theory.
Truth sometimes hurts, and accepting truth requires courage.
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-22 21:04 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
我知道你是为工会说话的, 不奇怪你的言论与大多数51网友相反. 民主社会, 你可以自由的继续发表支持工会的观点. 只是政府工会这些年干的坑害老百姓的事太多了, 大家都不是傻子, 你的帖子有多少人信, 是个问题.
法官 发表于 2011-5-17 09:40 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
Yes, my original thought is Rathbone and possible others in city hall exaggerated the saving.
However, the whole thing regarding Rathbone has been blown out in media, that declared the death of the sweet plan by some individuals or groups in city hall. The truth is they are forced, though they don't want, to ban Progress Waste Solutions from bidding.
So is their decision to let an independent third party to make impartial review on how much the projected saving in future is.
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 21:46 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
You are right when you said it is ridiculous the fact of actual saving is a fact of future, not a fact yet toady.?
However, I intentionally asked this ridiculouse question to expose the fact that Ford and his disciples use the no-credibility figure "$8 millions/year" as a "fact", which is from his spin doctor Geoff Rathbone who is in an interest-conflict position.?
Therefore, the whole privatization of garbage collection is an assumption of saving that is based on a no-credibility figure, even a lie. Can we see now how ridiculous the whole thing is?!
In my eyes, the privatization is a sheer strategy that Rob Ford used to play on people's anger at the garbage worker strike of 2009 and to get elected. I doubt that he really believes that the privatization is going to save $8 millions/year.?
But, I know he is smart, he is capitalizing on people's anger, capitalizing on all the assumptions that have no credibilty as long as he can win the election. He does not care if it's possible or fact of future or it will hurt Toronto in future as long as he can use it now in his favour. ?That's the rule in his politics play book.
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 21:36 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
I already said in my previous post, it is quite difficult to hide in a transparent society. I do not see how it is possible not to expose Mr. Ruthbone's "conspiracy" by the media
loneshepherd 发表于 2011-5-23 08:34 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
Please click the link to take a look at Toronto Computer Leasing Scandal that clearly started with a back-door conspiracy.
Nobody had discovered or said anything wrong with the deal before it ended up a "full-fledged" scandal which costs big tax money. And you know what, the even "sweeter" thing is nobody was really held accountable for this scandal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_Computer_Leasing_Inquiry
BL666 发表于 2011-5-23 11:29 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
埃德蒙顿 - 50%的垃圾私有化回收 - 花费 $135/每市民
温哥华 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $92/每市民
卡尔加里 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $71/每市民
在资本主义私有制度下,雇员和雇主的利益永远是一对矛盾。工会是这个制度下唯一最能代表工人阶级利益的组织不论它今天有多少缺陷,我们必须整改工会(包括大家说的贵族工会),使它能更好地代表和保护工人阶级的利益,让工人少受资本家的剥削。
不瞒您说,有时候,我非常怀疑某系工会的管理层被资本家收买,为自己的利益,同资本家沆瀣一气,损害它代表的工人的利益!
BL666 发表于 2011-5-22 22:26 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
看看其他城市的收垃圾情况:
埃德蒙顿 - 50%的垃圾私有化回收 - 花费 $135/每市民
温哥华 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $92/每市民
卡尔加里 - 100%的垃圾公有化回收 - 花费 $71/每市民
BL666 发表于 2011-5-16 22:34 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
回复 BL666
埃德蒙顿如何同温哥华、卡尔加里比,你去北极$1350也干不下来。
桃木钉 发表于 2011-5-24 17:03 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
垃圾回收算不算高科技? 政府工会应该让步? 这些都不是问题的关键: 垃圾回收很重要, 但谁来回收都一样; 工会组织当然应该保护工人的合法权益, 但不是要挟和两头通吃.
从技术层面上来说, 垃圾回收私有化通常会增加成本. 实际上, 对政府提供的公共服务项目私有化通常都会增加成本. 如同医疗卫生和教育一样, 公营成本只有私有化(和美国比)的一半或更低. 原因很简单, 这些服务对最终消费者没有弹性和可替代性, 而且很难引入市场化的竞争机制. 私有化不光会造成中间环节增加和商业交易成本增加, 还会出现资本垄断和商业贿赂.
垃圾回收私有化后, 市民作为消费者会更难了解私营公司的运作, 也无法产生影响. 而增加的成本, 最终都会由市民承担.
至于工会组织不让步, 就算导致工人工资上涨, 对普通市民而言是利弊均分. 而工人收入的增加, 对成本的影响是渐进和良性的, 可以促进管理效率和降低消耗.
代表工薪阶层利益的政府是不应该考虑将公共服务私有化的. 当然, 公共服务机构面临的改革和调整, 是多伦多市面临挑战的主要内容.
多市政府的收入靠增加地产税已经难以为继, 但支出却是一年高过一年. 垃圾回收只是冰山一角, 其他问题可能更严重. 关键在于多伦多市财政能不能提高效率, 执行平衡预算. 私有化其实是逃避现实, 结果可能会和很多的美国城市和州政府一样, 因债务危机面临破产或关闭.
经济大环境出现繁荣和萧条既然是正常现象, 问题就在政府是否执行平衡预算. 政府应该增强适应能力, 通过稳定调整市政服务, 提高效率, 同时争取在政治层面上获得市民的支持和谅解.
Apple001 发表于 2011-5-31 12:36 http://bbs.51.ca/images/common/back.gif
欢迎光临 无忧论坛 (https://bbs.51.ca/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.2 |