HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #2221  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 3:57 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Identity Condiment
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 38,875
The NDP incumbent in Kenora Rainy River is leaving politics to focus on raising her family, and Greg Rickford is running in the riding which no longer includes the far north (which was strongly NDP/Liberal), so that riding might actually become a PC stronghold as long as it exists in its current configuration. I think it's all but certain at this point that Rickford will win that seat.

The Liberals in Thunder Bay will be easily re-elected, though. As for Keewetinong, it really is a toss-up. The result is going to pivot on how many indigenous people vote. The white people there largely vote PC, with some NDP support. Native people are split roughly down the middle between Liberal and NDP, but the PC candidate is a First Nation chief. So it could go any way there. I honestly can't tell you who might win this seat because it literally could be any of the three. Voter turnout on reserves is wildly unpredictable and with a native PC candidate (though I expect all of the candidates to be native, to be honest) that might put them into contention more than it should. Ford's populism could also be appealing to them, we'll have to see if he bothers to visit the far north at all. He has barely been north of Barrie, so if he does campaign hard up here he might make inroads.
__________________
Thunder Bay Updated 2018!other photos | my geofiction | my cities | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2222  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 3:58 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
Looking at the 2014 election map how many seats actually have a realistic chance of flipping to Conservative? We can assume all of the rural ridings that voted Tory will stay that way and we can also assume that Windsor/London/Hamilton seats will stay NDP. Yes, Etobicoke is a lost cause but where else could he pick up seats? I can't see the North flipping so does it ultimately come down to the Toronto suburbs and Ottawa? Surely there are enough reasonable educated folk in those two areas to keep him out.
In Toronto, Scarborough-Agincourt is very likely to go PC.

York Region could also prove to be a good area for Ford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2223  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 4:00 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,290
Other ridings in the province that come to mind; Cambridge (Liberal in 2014, normally Tory-leaning), Brantford (Dave Levac leaving), Niagara Centre (Cindy Forster of the NDP leaving), Oshawa (could flip back to the Tories if they like Ford's populist message).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2224  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 4:58 AM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 9,401
In the 613 there are 4 Liberal seats that could be PC gains - Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, Orleans, Ottawa West-Nepean, and Ottawa South. The first of these is an exurban/rural seat that is only Liberal because of its large Franco-Ontarian population and the latter 3 are suburban Ottawa seats. Ford will have a tough time in Ottawa though as the city is mostly white collar with a large public sector population.. The sort of working class voters that would be drawn to populism are not particularly common.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2225  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 5:08 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
In the 613 there are 4 Liberal seats that could be PC gains - Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, Orleans, Ottawa West-Nepean, and Ottawa South. The first of these is an exurban/rural seat that is only Liberal because of its large Franco-Ontarian population and the latter 3 are suburban Ottawa seats. Ford will have a tough time in Ottawa though as the city is mostly white collar with a large public sector population.. The sort of working class voters that would be drawn to populism are not particularly common.
Agree, I find it very difficult to imagine Ford prevailing Ottawa West-Nepean, regardless of the province-wide trend. Ottawa South is also probably one of the 5 safest Liberal ridings in the province, it's proven to be a "fool's gold" riding for the Tories in the past, and the PCs under Ford should do worse there than a generic PC leader.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2226  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 5:12 AM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,290
Ford will likely throw a monkey-wrench in traditional partisan loyalties, so you won't be able to simply predict how a riding will go based on the past Conservative vote. For example, I can't imagine Don Valley West or Eglinton-Lawrence in Toronto going PC with Ford leading them, even if "the numbers" say they will.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2227  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 5:35 AM
ssiguy ssiguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: White Rock BC
Posts: 6,006
Quote:
Originally Posted by haljackey View Post
Hate the 3 main provincial parties like me? Go green yo!
I appreciate your Green enthusiasm but the more votes the Greens get, the worse the environment will become. Any potential Green voters will automatically be ex-NDP/Liberal voters and thus the far bigger chance of a Ford majority.

People will wait it out and see who is leading the pack between Wynne and Horwath near the end of the election and then at the last moment do what the Tories are dreading.........vote strategically. The ABC vote would be far less pronounced with either Brown or especially Elliot as both maybe not be who those voters want but, unlike Ford, there was no real sense of "danger" that people have of Ford. Brown was wishy-washy and Elliot a bit of a patrician but people can live with that but people will not be able to live with a potential leader who is criminal, crude, loud mouthed, policy bankrupt, misogynistic, and ill tempered meathead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2228  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 1:33 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Pro Trivia Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 35,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
In the 613 there are 4 Liberal seats that could be PC gains - Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, Orleans, Ottawa West-Nepean, and Ottawa South. The first of these is an exurban/rural seat that is only Liberal because of its large Franco-Ontarian population .
Goode pointe.

One thing I've noticed though is that GPR has been voting less and less like a *typically francophone* riding in recent elections.

I don't know if that's due to demographic changes (more anglos moving in) or cultural changes within the Franco-Ontarian population itself (who are still the majority, but may be becoming more anglicized?).

Ottawa-Vanier, incidentally, has less than half the francophone proportion that GPR has (roughly 30% vs. 60%) but at first glance still votes like a francophone riding. I think that's because the departing francophones there have been largely replaced by immigrants and their kids. Who tend to be Liberal voters.

Orléans also no longer votes systematically like a francophone riding, and has even elected unilingual anglophone right-wingers IIRC.
__________________
Vous n'êtes pas écoeurés de mourir, bande de caves?

Last edited by Acajack; Mar 14, 2018 at 1:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2229  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 2:02 PM
HillStreetBlues HillStreetBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: KW/Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blitz View Post
Looking at the 2014 election map how many seats actually have a realistic chance of flipping to Conservative? We can assume all of the rural ridings that voted Tory will stay that way and we can also assume that Windsor/London/Hamilton seats will stay NDP. Yes, Etobicoke is a lost cause but where else could he pick up seats? I can't see the North flipping so does it ultimately come down to the Toronto suburbs and Ottawa? Surely there are enough reasonable educated folk in those two areas to keep him out.
To answer your question, yes, it comes down to the Toronto suburbs and to a lesser extent those around Ottawa.

Depending on how you count them, GTA suburban riders are nearly a third of the total, and are the ones that can most easily be swung. Rural Ontario belongs to the Tories. The 416 never will. The Liberals have already been shut out west of KW, and can only pick up there.

The Liberals dominated the 905 in 2014, and as a result won.

I don't know if the Tories under Ford can do that, but it's very possible.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2230  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 2:13 PM
HillStreetBlues HillStreetBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: KW/Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
I was going to suggest simply increase the angle of the progressive tax rates a bit more, but Ontario spreads from 6% to 70% when the other provinces are 12% to 30% spreads, so we're already about as extreme as it gets...

Punch in 25,000 (minimum wage) and 200,000 (top 1% of earners) and see the difference. Although it takes a while to get there, even at 55,000 Ontario remains the lowest income tax rate.

https://www.drtax.ca/en/DTMax/support/calculator.aspx
Where do you get 70%? In Ontario, the top combined marginal tax rate is 54%- which is not (quite) the highest in the country. For the vast majority of filers, Ontario's income tax rates are in the middle of the pack.

I think that increasing the basic personal amount is good policy, and thanks for pointing out that it's long-standing Green policy. It is the right kind of tax cut, extremely progressive. It's good stimulus, since low-income-earners are more likely to spend more of their tax savings, and more likely to spend it in-province.

Without paying for it with spending cuts, or tax hikes elsewhere, though, it is not fiscally conservative. We are not in recession, so this stimulus (debt-fueled spending) is not needed. Doug Ford wants our children to eventually pay for his tax cuts today, with interest. That's no good. The economy is doing great, we should be drying out our powder for when stimulus (as defined by government taking on more debt) is needed, in the inevitable next recession.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2231  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 2:47 PM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,990
Here in The Sudbury area, we have 3 ridings - Nickel Belt, Sudbury and Temiskaming James Bay.

Sudbury is where Glen is, and I am unsure if he will hold it. The other 2 are NDP, and will likely hold it.

I doubt any of these 3 will go PC.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2232  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 3:11 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is online now
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brockton Village, Toronto
Posts: 8,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by geotag277 View Post
Finally, this type of rhetoric sounds very familiar:



"Bush was a terrible president but at least he cared and did some good, Trump is an unstable misanthrope who will only bring chaos and destruction!".

In reality, Bush started two needless damaging expensive wars, and these rhetorical devices are used more as political sensationalism than effective elucidation regarding the political choice at hand.

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but I've been attacked online multiple times for pointing this exact fact out - I'm personally baffled at the resurgent love affair with George Bush simply because he seemed likable and was "presidential".

Maybe it wasn't clear but I was specifically referring to Rob's tenure as city Councillor, where he did not have the ability to guide the agenda for Council. He did focus on local issue (albeit badly) and aside from throwing tantrums didn't really overstep his bounds. The story was different as mayor, even though it was largely characterized by inaction, as opposed to whatever the analogy would be using Bush.


Quote:
Originally Posted by geotag277 View Post
Doug Ford's political enemies seem all at once falling over themselves to equate him with his brother, and at the same time talking out of the other side of their mouth about how Doug Ford is actually an even worse catastrophe.

This would be fair, except that Doug repeatedly invokes his brother when citing his supposed successes in government. I'm having trouble finding the exact quote but when he announced he was running for leadership he touted his experience in politics as being the brother of the former mayor of Toronto. And because he was in that unique position had direct management of the city's budget.

The same is true with the Matt Elliott article I posted (largely because I knew exactly what the response would be). Taken out of context it seems trite, but it followed an excruciatingly repetitive pattern of behaviour from Doug. I don't expect you to have followed Toronto politics at the time, but trying to take credit for something Rob did which in reality had little connection to his policies as mayor was endemic with Doug.

I wouldn't be surprised if Doug unironically considers himself the Dick Cheney behind Rob Ford as Bush.


Quote:
Originally Posted by geotag277 View Post

His biggest policy failure was a too-ambitious unrealistic redevelopment project? That doesn't seem all that bad, all things considered.

Again, I don't expect you to have followed Toronto politics but that's not a very good characterization of what happened. He attempted to scuttle what is arguably the largest redevelopment plan in Toronto's history that has support of all levels of government - even across party lines. This was done through quite literal backroom meetings with developers he made false promises to and would have resulted in considerable personal gain if went through. The whole process was possibly illegal (albeit not worth pursuing), certainly corrupt and had the end result of turning the city against the Ford's. So I suppose you could even credit Doug with ruining his brothers career... or at least initiating the beginning of the end.

FWIW I'm not trying to convince anyone online not to vote for Doug. In person I would articulate things differently but I honestly don't see the point on the internet, particularly in this day and age.
__________________
Check out my pics of Johannesburg

Last edited by niwell; Mar 14, 2018 at 5:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2233  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 3:22 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is online now
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brockton Village, Toronto
Posts: 8,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post

Speaking of ideas I agree with: Ford announced today that he wants to increase the basic personal amount to $30,000 (which means provincial income tax won't apply to the first $30,000 in income). Currently the Basic Personal Amount is about $10,000 or so. The Green Party has long proposed increasing that to $20,000, so this represents a far more generous proposal than even they've proposed, and will put an extra $1,000 or so in everyone's pocket, evenly. No idea how he will pay for this (it will cost around $8 billion dollars) but if he can make it work, it will help low income workers and the consumer economy. The other benefit to this is that it doesn't cost businesses anything; if the payroll tax goes down an equal rate (which I assume it would?) they will save money too. This is a green party policy I've supported for many years.

The other thing he proposed is free market control of cannabis, which I support to a degree. Knowing a couple people who work in the cannabis industry in the US states where it's legal, I think it's fairly obvious that their free-market based system is much more effective and responsive to consumer demand than the disaster the Liberals have proposed. I can't recall the Green party's policy on this off the top of my head but again, I think it was similar to this, as the Ontario Greens are a fairly pro-business/pro-corporate party. (The Green Party movement in Canada was the first to approach environmentalism from a right wing, pro-business perspective, which was part of their success a decade ago.)
.


These are both decent policies - I'm personally in favour of some form of licensing agreement to allow businesses to sell cannabis. This can even run alongside government stores if they so wish. Why the current government is focusing solely on government run stores was a bad choice IMO (I know other options were presented).

My only issue with his proposed tax cuts is how will a fiscally conservative government pay for it? Ontario's strategy for the past 5 years has been to try and achieve fiscal balance through streamlining of programs and has had an extreme aversion to any form of tax increase, in part due to the Taxpayer Protection Act. I'm wary that barring revenue increases on other fronts, that additional spending will result in cuts to other services.


EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues View Post
I think that increasing the basic personal amount is good policy, and thanks for pointing out that it's long-standing Green policy. It is the right kind of tax cut, extremely progressive. It's good stimulus, since low-income-earners are more likely to spend more of their tax savings, and more likely to spend it in-province.

Without paying for it with spending cuts, or tax hikes elsewhere, though, it is not fiscally conservative. We are not in recession, so this stimulus (debt-fueled spending) is not needed. Doug Ford wants our children to eventually pay for his tax cuts today, with interest. That's no good. The economy is doing great, we should be drying out our powder for when stimulus (as defined by government taking on more debt) is needed, in the inevitable next recession.

My thoughts exactly.
__________________
Check out my pics of Johannesburg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2234  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 5:23 PM
geotag277 geotag277 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 5,091
Just wanted to say thanks niwell for taking the time to explain some of these. Can't fault your level headed analysis here, and it's true I don't follow Toronto politics as closely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2235  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 6:28 PM
Docere Docere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 3,290
This report suggests that Kathleen Wynne could lose in DVW, but I'm pretty certain Forum is using a "universal swing" model based on previous results.

http://www.680news.com/2018/03/13/wynne-election-poll/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2236  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 7:58 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Docere View Post
This report suggests that Kathleen Wynne could lose in DVW, but I'm pretty certain Forum is using a "universal swing" model based on previous results.

http://www.680news.com/2018/03/13/wynne-election-poll/
This is the Forum poll from the other day.

It surveyed only 900 people province wide, or about 8 per riding.

Using their own sampling error calculator (Forum's) you get +/- 34 % at the riding level making it absolutely worthless.

Even at the GTA level the margin of error was up around +/- 7%

Which is still huge
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2237  
Old Posted Mar 14, 2018, 8:11 PM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
But if you hate Wynne, Ford and Horwath, voting for either of them is also throwing your vote away. Why not throw it away into a trashcan that represents ideas you agree with?

Speaking of ideas I agree with: Ford announced today that he wants to increase the basic personal amount to $30,000 (which means provincial income tax won't apply to the first $30,000 in income). Currently the Basic Personal Amount is about $10,000 or so. The Green Party has long proposed increasing that to $20,000, so this represents a far more generous proposal than even they've proposed, and will put an extra $1,000 or so in everyone's pocket, evenly. No idea how he will pay for this (it will cost around $8 billion dollars) but if he can make it work, it will help low income workers and the consumer economy. The other benefit to this is that it doesn't cost businesses anything; if the payroll tax goes down an equal rate (which I assume it would?) they will save money too. This is a green party policy I've supported for many years.

The other thing he proposed is free market control of cannabis, which I support to a degree. Knowing a couple people who work in the cannabis industry in the US states where it's legal, I think it's fairly obvious that their free-market based system is much more effective and responsive to consumer demand than the disaster the Liberals have proposed. I can't recall the Green party's policy on this off the top of my head but again, I think it was similar to this, as the Ontario Greens are a fairly pro-business/pro-corporate party. (The Green Party movement in Canada was the first to approach environmentalism from a right wing, pro-business perspective, which was part of their success a decade ago.)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toront...view-1.4573465

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa...ning-1.4573790


This isn't making me migrate to the Ford camp (repulsive!) but it slightly reduces my fear of a potential Ford government. If he follows through on his promise to be "socially progressive and fiscally conservative" then maybe this won't be the end of the world after all.

One can hope.
There's a thread on Reddit where some folks have done an enormous amount of math.

It would seem you could recover a significant portion of the gross cost by raising the tax bracket on the 30k-42k range to 9-10%.

Though, its still a net cost in the low(er) billions per year.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolit...tax_exemption/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2238  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2018, 3:11 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Identity Condiment
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 38,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues View Post
Where do you get 70%? In Ontario, the top combined marginal tax rate is 54%- which is not (quite) the highest in the country. For the vast majority of filers, Ontario's income tax rates are in the middle of the pack.
I literally linked to the website where I got that number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HillStreetBlues View Post
We are not in recession, so this stimulus (debt-fueled spending) is not needed. Doug Ford wants our children to eventually pay for his tax cuts today, with interest. That's no good. The economy is doing great, we should be drying out our powder for when stimulus (as defined by government taking on more debt) is needed, in the inevitable next recession.
In that case, he can achieve a better result (about $1,900 per minimum wage worker instead of $1,100 per every worker, with tax revenue on that income) if he allows the next phase of the minimum wage increase to proceed, especially if employers who didn't advance their employee's wages high enough this year decide to boost them again.
__________________
Thunder Bay Updated 2018!other photos | my geofiction | my cities | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2239  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2018, 3:27 AM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Identity Condiment
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 38,875
Quote:
the only thing i knew about sex at the age of nine was that

1) it was for mommies and daddies who were married;

2) it made me, my five year old sister, and my baby brother.

i learned everything i knew about sex from the internet while secretly browsing grownup sites on my 4th generation ipod touch i earned for doing so well at a piano recital. because of the nature of, you know, men and their internet porn, i learned that my sexual role as a woman was to be slapped and pissed on and tied up. i didn’t know what healthy sex was. i didn’t know it should be mutually consensual, or that it was okay to want sex with girls. i didn’t know that sex should be good for both people. i learned that sex would hurt, and that sex was about men and men only, and that i would be forced into sex whether i liked it or not, and that it was normal to have sex with big, burly, grown men as a teenager. i learned it was normal to cry during sex. i was scared of sex for so many years because of that, and the way i was exposed to sex at a young age led to the inappropriate and traumatic sexual encounters i had (occasionally with older people) later on in my teen years.

the day i got my first period, i was ten-and-a-half. i was swimming in the river with my best friend, and when i got out to go to the bathroom, i noticed brown blood on the inside of my mint-green tankini bottom. i knew what a period was, but i hid it from my mother in shame. she found out, eventually, of course. she told me, you have a woman’s body now, and if you have sex, you could have a baby. all i heard was, you have a woman’s body.

i started shaving my vulva when i was eleven, because i saw memes on memegenerator about how disgusting “hairy pussy” was. i wanted to be sexy. i was eleven years old, and all i wanted was to be sexy. it hurt, and it itched, and it made me uncomfortable, and i’d sometimes nick my labia with the razor, but i did it anyway, because i didn’t want to have a nasty, “hairy pussy.”

eleven was the age i first started getting pinched on the EL. i was an early bloomer: i had B-cup breasts already, and my menstrual cycle was regular enough that i could keep a calendar. i started wearing a full face of makeup to school and buying shorts that rode all the way up my skinny twelve-year-old thighs. i remember the day i stopped jumping off the swings the summer after fifth grade. skinned knees weren’t sexy. smooth, flawless legs were sexy, and i was a sexy girl. i was probably the sexiest little girl in the whole world. my parents hated it. they told me i was too young, but i knew the truth. my body was older, maybe 17 or 18, so my brain must be, too.

when i was twelve, i had a secret kik account that my parents didn’t know about. i used it to message strangers. i made all sorts of friends. i wasn’t stupid. i used a fake name. never showed my face. one of my friends asked me for a bra picture. i was a cool girl, right, i was sexy, so i sent him a picture of me in front of my bedroom mirror in my little white training bra with the blue butterflies.

sexy, he said.

that was all i wanted.

i’m not typing out all this bullshit because i think it’s something special. i’m typing it out because it’s not. i’m typing it out because i see the same thing happening to my little sister. i’m typing it out because i see the same thing happening to that little millie bobbie brown, sexiest actress at thirteen. i’m typing it out because i’m sixteen years old now, a girl in the eyes of the law and a woman in the eyes of men.

mothers, talk to your daughters. tell them to jump off the swingset and skin their knees. tell them to get dirt on their dresses. tell them that they’re a woman on their 18th birthday, not at ten-and-a-half on the first day of their menstrual cycle. the world is confused. the world is sick. if your daughters don’t hear about how to treat their bodies from you, they’ll hear it from the sick, sick world, and they’ll do the things i did.

let girls be girls.

don’t force womanhood on little girls.
I read this on Tumblr. I can't link to the actual account of the person who made it because it's been deactivated (presumable due to harassment, which is rampant on that site). But it demonstrates the importance of early and comprehensive sexual education today. Volunteering with youth, I've seen kids at young ages act like this. My own cousin did, having her first child at 13. The new curriculum just missed her.

It isn't the 90s anymore. We need our school curricula to keep up with technology, not lag behind it, or we're putting our kids and our whole society at a disadvantage.
__________________
Thunder Bay Updated 2018!other photos | my geofiction | my cities | random things | skyscraper diagrams
It's not about what you don't have—it's the little you're given, and how far you can run with it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2240  
Old Posted Mar 15, 2018, 5:50 PM
HillStreetBlues HillStreetBlues is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: KW/Hamilton, Ontario
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
I literally linked to the website where I got that number.
In that case, how did you get 70% using that calculator? I don't see how. The top combined income tax rate is 54% in Ontario; there's no tax rate on the site you linked to that comes anywhere close to 70%.

Nor are Ontario's income tax rates especially progressive compared to other provinces, as you suggested. They're in the middle of the pack by any measure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:30 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.