看到加拿大国企的无耻广告 气得喷饭

Lescid

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

事实上，今天的工会有很多问题，特别是他们被制度化合法化以后，逐渐脱离了他们代表的工人阶级，有时变得象一个官僚机构了。 这是工会的最大缺点之一。如果你感兴趣，我们可以谈工会更多的缺陷和不是。

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！

loneshepherd

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

    The funny thing about conspiracy people is that they believe pretty much everything is a conspiracy. The most famous one is the Truthers, the most recent one is from Thomas Mulcair(The deputy leader of Canada's new Official Oppositibin party) about pictures of bin Laden's body.

Normal people see things differently: they believe a conspiracy when they see it.

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

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 said enough and say it one more time and let's end it now:

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.?

One more thing to the elites, do not assume people are stupid.?

Have a nice Victoria Day!

Lescid

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

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

loneshepherd

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

This was my original post: "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). "

It is difficult for an honest discussion if the other side does not know (or ignore) the difference between "this is a scandal" and "some scandals actually happened".
It is even more difficult if the other side simply opens another subject if he/she feels he/she cannot win the original subject.

说实话，我不太愿意跟精通＂辨证法＂的人（咱们大陆移民不少人精通此法术）讨论。但愿你不属于此类人

桃木钉

回复 17# BL666

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

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。

法官

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

我希望你把私人企业的工会和政府工会区别开来. 政府工会的雇主是纳税人, 也就是普通老百姓, 不是资本家, 大部分纳税人比政府工会会员收入低.  我不反对私人企业工会为员工的合法利益与雇主较量. 我说的贵族工会基本上是指政府工会, 他们的收入+福利+工作保障己经大大超过了私人企业同行的待遇, 这就是私有化可能省钱的原因.

你让"政府工会代表和保护工人阶级的利益，让工人少受资本家的剥削", 实际上就是要挟纳税人多交税, 给政府员工加薪, 否则2009年多伦多臭气熏天的市府员工大罢工就是向纳税人展示政府工会的肌肉. 相信没太多华人喜欢政府工会更加强势.

法官

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

   

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

有的人就是喜欢政府工会, 政府工会越强大越能要挟纳税人, 他越高兴.

Apple001

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.

普通老百姓

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

贵族工会的意见-->  私有化带来灾难, 骗一次是一次. 我都不信贵族工会能干什么对老百姓有益的事, 他们只在乎每年加薪!