Joe King Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 1 minute ago, King Heffy said: Do the Feds build hospitals, or is that provincial jurisdiction? Give that 1.5 billion to our veterans instead of paying bonuses to the big wigs at the CBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 2 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Do the Feds build hospitals, or is that provincial jurisdiction? From my understanding its 75% province 25% Feds, but that was just an example of what 1.5 billion could get you, could use that money for other stuff as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6of1_halfdozenofother Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 2 minutes ago, King Heffy said: Do the Feds build hospitals, or is that provincial jurisdiction? Well, technically... they could make a massive donation and have hospitals across Canada have the same "Government of Canada" wing built for all of them... only to have funding cut by the Tories when they cycle into power to instead be given as corporate welfare subsidies to their buddies in the multi-national corporations in the hopes of "trickle down economics". 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe King Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 This whole CBC thing. I think if they made shows that a large number of Canadians craved seeing they wouldn't need such a huge subsidy. Advertisers would pay more of the cost to run the station. By needing such a huge subsidy says to me they are not listening to consumers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Ravioli Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 2 minutes ago, Joe King said: This whole CBC thing. I think if they made shows that a large number of Canadians craved seeing they wouldn't need such a huge subsidy. Advertisers would pay more of the cost to run the station. By needing such a huge subsidy says to me they are not listening to consumers. Bingo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poilievre-vows-to-fire-envoy-as-canada-buys-a-9m-condo-for-diplomat-in-nyc-1.6967108 PP just gifted this guy a massive pay out. Sure incoming politicians replace diplomats and senior berocrats.... But to go on the record and say due to PP believing this guy is a liberal.hack he will.be fired ....this is gonna cost us tax payers many many millions in severance that any person with even the basics on how to run a business.... Let alone a government .... Should have know to avoid PP is now on the record as saying non conservatives face being fired. Not for work related issues but solely on political affiliation Like I said every government change sees a changing of hired staff. Atleast those before PP ,,( even Harper ) had some real world experience and knows the difference between firing someone because you hate their views .....vs laying them off in a restructuring. PP gonna cost us a fortune with his scorched earth revenge tour 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 I wonder if CBC has to operate by different rules than the other networks; and that is why they get the subsidy? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe King Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 3 minutes ago, Gurn said: I wonder if CBC has to operate by different rules than the other networks; and that is why they get the subsidy? Rules like all 46 network executives receive $3,020,021 each in bonuses. While 800 workers get their jobs cut. And we pay the bill. I know I have never received a 3 million dollar bonus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6of1_halfdozenofother Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 6 minutes ago, Gurn said: I wonder if CBC has to operate by different rules than the other networks; and that is why they get the subsidy? The biggest requirement that they need to follow that is different than the other networks is that they are required to have a presence from coast to coast to coast in order to service all local (rural and urban) communities. Good luck finding a commercial network willing to abide by those requirements. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapper Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 2 minutes ago, Gurn said: I wonder if CBC has to operate by different rules than the other networks; and that is why they get the subsidy? In Canada nearly all the news media is owned by just a few corporations who largely are conservative leaning. They have a near complete monopoly on media. Most of the new start ups are politically backed and definitely right wing. We have a few left leaning media like the Tyee but they aren't out there Canada wide on any level The USA has better anti monopoly rules that we do by far and that's why other news media can compete and survive and why they have cheaper groceries and cell phones etc How can the CBC compete and Canadians hear both sides of the story when conservatives own nearly all private news media sources? The trade off for allowing the monopoly to form was things like having the CBC. Now that they have eliminated all competing media of note they just need to shut down the CBC and have full control over the message. That's not to say that the CBC should have a complete revamp in what they provide and how they structure and pay bonuses to corporate types .... That should occur But telling the CBC to compete and cutting of funding is the same as telling a family grocery business in a small town that they are letting Walmart set up beside them and it's up to them to compete .... It's important that we give space to voices and opinions not just conservative but all sides of the story. If they hated the CBC so much they should have kept small town news alive and printing instead of allowing one or 2 companies buy , control and close as they please 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/supreme-court-won-t-disclose-mysterious-donor-behind-expensive-gift-to-chief-justice/ar-BB1q8zRq?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=e7a0d7d9a5c9411891ffacf3e7edbae3&ei=136 OTTAWA – The Supreme Court of Canada won’t say which private interest paid for a lifelike bronze bust of Chief Justice Richard Wagner that sits prominently in the building’s Grand Entrance Hall, a lack of transparency that concerns legal and ethics specialists. Visitors who enter the Supreme Court of Canada’s (SCC) Grand Entrance Hall in Ottawa will quickly notice a detailed bust of Wagner that sits adjacent to the central stairway leading to the main courtroom. But what they won’t see on the bust, unlike on those of previous chief justices also on display, is any indication of who paid it. The sculptor said in an interview he usually charges $18,000 for a bust like Wagner’s. For weeks, the National Post has repeatedly asked the SCC Executive Legal Officer Stéphanie Bachand information about who paid for the bust — since it’s neither the court nor the government — and if the donor has any business or interests with the court. Bachand has repeatedly refused to answer detailed questions, insisting only that the donor wanted to remain anonymous. “The Chief Justice’s bust was donated to the Court by a donor who specifically asked to remain anonymous. For this reason, the plaque bears no mention of the donor. We have no information on the cost of the bust,” Bachand said in an email. “Neither the Chief Justice nor the court’s administration know about the donor’s identity,” she added. The court refused to answer questions about who at the court knows the donor’s identity, if the donor is a current member of a Canadian Bar Association, has or has had business in front of the SCC, or works in any capacity as counsel or for a firm that provides legal services. The court’s opacity surrounding who knows what about who paid for Wagner’s bust is surprising to a half-dozen experts and lawyers interviewed for this story, many of whom asked to remain anonymous because they either fear retribution or may have business in front of the SCC. “It creates an appearance of conflict of interest, an appearance that is very problematic on an ethical level,” said Université Laval professor Patrick Taillon. “The Court has a duty to be exemplary on ethical questions such as this.” “We ask out elected officials to divulge nearly every last gift they receive, we submit them to rules,” he added. “The court should voluntarily adopt exemplary rules that are at least as transparent as those for the government, such as regarding gifts or sponsored travel.” -------------------------------- much more at link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 38 minutes ago, Sapper said: In Canada nearly all the news media is owned by just a few corporations who largely are conservative leaning. They have a near complete monopoly on media. Most of the new start ups are politically backed and definitely right wing. We have a few left leaning media like the Tyee but they aren't out there Canada wide on any level The USA has better anti monopoly rules that we do by far and that's why other news media can compete and survive and why they have cheaper groceries and cell phones etc How can the CBC compete and Canadians hear both sides of the story when conservatives own nearly all private news media sources? The trade off for allowing the monopoly to form was things like having the CBC. Now that they have eliminated all competing media of note they just need to shut down the CBC and have full control over the message. That's not to say that the CBC should have a complete revamp in what they provide and how they structure and pay bonuses to corporate types .... That should occur But telling the CBC to compete and cutting of funding is the same as telling a family grocery business in a small town that they are letting Walmart set up beside them and it's up to them to compete .... It's important that we give space to voices and opinions not just conservative but all sides of the story. If they hated the CBC so much they should have kept small town news alive and printing instead of allowing one or 2 companies buy , control and close as they please The two biggest news channels I can think of off the top of my head are CTV and Global News and both are pretty center? Edited July 17 by Bure_Pavel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 7 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said: The two biggest news channels I can think of off the top of my head are CTV and Global News and both are pretty center? CTV is a tad right of center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Just now, Satchmo said: CTV is a tad right of center. Bias checks says ever so slightly, Global is a tad left though to counter balance 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satchmo Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Just now, Bure_Pavel said: Bias checks says ever so slightly, Global is a tad left though to counter balance Maybe so. The government can't do much about Global though. I wonder if CBC would be in their sites if they were less woke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Optimist Prime Posted July 17 Popular Post Share Posted July 17 1 hour ago, Bure_Pavel said: I know but what I'm saying is that one show is not worth 1.5 billion in tax dollars per year. That's like 2-3 extras hospitals they could build per year. The absurdity of thinking it is one show. lol. The CBC is also the RDS and also CBC Radio and a 24 hour news channel and much more than this even, a robust website of information and news as well. CBC is to Canada what NPR is to America. It is important that the Rupert Murdock's of the world not be able to buy every possible news source in a given country. CBC is incredibly important to Canada, it isn't going anywhere EVEN with a Conservative majority. 1 1 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: The absurdity of thinking it is one show. lol. The CBC is also the RDS and also CBC Radio and a 24 hour news channel and much more than this even, a robust website of information and news as well. CBC is to Canada what NPR is to America. It is important that the Rupert Murdock's of the world not be able to buy every possible news source in a given country. CBC is incredibly important to Canada, it isn't going anywhere EVEN with a Conservative majority. They just need to revamp and modernize their platform and not rely on 70% of their revenue from our tax dollars. I'm fine with a much much smaller subsidy. Even after that 1.5 billion dollars in free money/year they still report a loss, lay off 800 employees, and still give management massive bonuses. Do you not understand how poorly a business has to be run to still report a loss when 70% of your revenue is a free hand out, its extremely hard to do. Their actually costs would have to be more than double their actual revenue. In the age of internet CBC is a relic only kept around for its historical significance. Edited July 17 by Bure_Pavel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 29 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said: They just need to revamp and modernize their platform and not rely on 70% of their revenue from our tax dollars. I'm fine with a much much smaller subsidy. Even after that 1.5 billion dollars in free money/year they still report a loss, lay off 800 employees, and still give management massive bonuses. Do you not understand how poorly a business has to be run to still report a loss when 70% of your revenue is a free hand out, its extremely hard to do. Their actually costs would have to be more than double their actual revenue. In the age of internet CBC is a relic only kept around for its historical significance. I am with you there, The TOP dog or dogs could perhaps use a shakeup, and I am against million dollar plus bonuses too. But that is a far cry from selling off the public broadcaster. Common ground seems to be that they are audited and maybe have less expensive talent come into the board room. Edit: I completely disagree with your final sentence. Full stop. I am just one person but I am not alone, for sure. I listen to CBC radio for an average of an hour a day, I watch CBC News Network like 2 hours a day, three or four if you count just in the background of my other doings and goings on. I am on the CBC news website at least once every day. Projecting what you watch and listen to as the nations choices seems unsound. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johngould21 Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 1 hour ago, Bure_Pavel said: The two biggest news channels I can think of off the top of my head are CTV and Global News and both are pretty center? I'll call bs on that one, they're both right of center, but Global is moreso. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Just now, Johngould21 said: I'll call bs on that one, they're both right of center, but Global is moreso. For Profit news rooms with incredibly rich owners/CEO's are always going to skew right of center due simply to the math of taxation. Traditionally the right wing likes lower taxes and therefore less social safety nets, while the left prefers better social safety nets and therefore higher taxes. The big news rooms in Canada are owned or run by billionaires/millionaires, ergo, they will always skew right of center in adopting the bias of the decision makers there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph. Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Honestly I'd probably be open to watching more CBC stuff if they'd fix the fucking functionality on gem. Some glitches and things they could change to make it more user friendly for sure. Most of the content tbh is very "meh" to low-good. Some unwatchable nonsense, but that's the same with any other network as well. I don't do cable (or radio anymore, really). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Johngould21 said: I'll call bs on that one, they're both right of center, but Global is moreso. Im just going off the link below, which states they are actuall left leaning. But maybe they are bias as well. Also depends where you consider center to be. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/global-news/ Edited July 17 by Bure_Pavel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 Generally speaking the 80% of the population excluded from the top 20% of income earners really in a perfect world vote for their own best interests and therefore center/left. The upper 20% of income earners generally would be expected to vote for less taxes, not necessarily their own best interests, but their own bottom line. Up until last Fall that is how the polling more or less shook out too. Only with the rise of the more right wing folks, the cowboy convoy, and P.P. embracing them and other factions of the right and disaffected non voters has the last 9 months or so really skewed to the Federal Conservatives polling wise. It is simply populism, with no substance, as about half of the Poilievre supporters are generally voting against their own best interests at this point in polling numbers. It will certainly be interesting to see if it holds up thru an election. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimist Prime Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 3 minutes ago, Ralph. said: Honestly I'd probably be open to watching more CBC stuff if they'd fix the fucking functionality on gem. Some glitches and things they could change to make it more user friendly for sure. Most of the content tbh is very "meh" to low-good. Some unwatchable nonsense, but that's the same with any other network as well. I don't do cable (or radio anymore, really). I enjoy that GEM is free with commercials, or cheap for a full membership. I buy the membership, but those who can't do so don't get locked out, that is awesome and only with a publicly owned CBC is that possible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bure_Pavel Posted July 17 Share Posted July 17 10 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said: I am with you there, The TOP dog or dogs could perhaps use a shakeup, and I am against million dollar plus bonuses too. But that is a far cry from selling off the public broadcaster. Common ground seems to be that they are audited and maybe have less expensive talent come into the board room. Edit: I completely disagree with your final sentence. Full stop. I am just one person but I am not alone, for sure. I listen to CBC radio for an average of an hour a day, I watch CBC News Network like 2 hours a day, three or four if you count just in the background of my other doings and goings on. I am on the CBC news website at least once every day. Projecting what you watch and listen to as the nations choices seems unsound. I just feel like if there was a considerable amount people with similar usage of their network, there financials wouldn't be where they currently are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.