[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

romanP romanP:

in fact, yes it does. budget money not spent cannot be claimed for that purpose in the next budget. this is true for all federal and provincial departments.

Would love you to provide some information to back this up.

This is something anyone who has worked in Government knows.

Around here, it's called 'March Madness'. Fiscal year end is April 30th. If budgets aren't spent, they will be reduced the next year. So whatever is left in the budget is spent in March, because open tender suppliers need time to fill orders, and if the order doesn't arrive in the fiscal year it doesn't count.

I've seen basements filled with brand new, in the box PCs, 'aging' out. They sit in groups by the year they were purchased, and are sent for 'disposal' (HDDs shredded, Units sent to auction) based on the number of years they were in inventory.

Hundreds of PCs. They are destroyed, never having been used.

That's utter nonsense. As a 14 year old I knew what a colossal waste of money this is/was and it's no different today.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Would love you to provide some information to back this up.

This is something anyone who has worked in Government knows.

Around here, it's called 'March Madness'. Fiscal year end is April 30th. If budgets aren't spent, they will be reduced the next year. So whatever is left in the budget is spent in March, because open tender suppliers need time to fill orders, and if the order doesn't arrive in the fiscal year it doesn't count.

I've seen basements filled with brand new, in the box PCs, 'aging' out. They sit in groups by the year they were purchased, and are sent for 'disposal' (HDDs shredded, Units sent to auction) based on the number of years they were in inventory.

Hundreds of PCs. They are destroyed, never having been used.

That's utter nonsense. As a 14 year old I knew what a colossal waste of money this is/was and it's no different today.

It's almost hedonistic in it's waste. But nonsense or not, that's the way things work. That's the theory why Redford changed Alberta from a per-determined budget, to a goal based one. Now every dollar needs to be justified before it's spent, and there is no $50,000 minimum before it needs to be tendered or bought on standing offer. Some of the waste is reduced, but I don't think it's made much difference at year end.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The purpose of Government is to provide services to the citizens. Courts, Military, roads, etc. When they budget a certain amount for the healthcare of injured veterans, the you're damn straight that the money has to be spent!

So why is this only an issue now?

This has been done by every government as long as I can remember because it's the financially sensible thing to do.

It's an issue now because we have so many wounded who aren't being cared for, while the government does everything it can to reduce the care it provides them.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

What they are doing is reprehensible. They ask these people to serve Canada, to die if needed, and when they come back mangled and unable to do anything else they shut the purse. It's political posturing at the expense of the suffering of people we asked to defend this country.

What you and the rest are doing, is reprehensible. Trotting out veterans to use them as political pawns, using a practice that's been used by governments for ages to make Harper seem like some evil, veteran-hating person.

If the government took care of them to begin with, they wouldn't have to run for office to try to change things themselves. They are trotting themselves out, not us.

And the practice has not been used for ages. I see it every week in the Legion. There are the veterans who put in 25 or 30 years, who are on 3/4 pay for life because of their injuries, and who get all kinds of healthcare; and then there are recent veterans who put in 5 or 10 years before they were injured who have to apply to the Legion Poppy Fund to pay for their medications or to pay their electricity bill, because the government won't. They make promises to, but never follow through. That's reprehensible.

[romanP]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

romanP romanP:

in fact, yes it does. budget money not spent cannot be claimed for that purpose in the next budget. this is true for all federal and provincial departments.

Would love you to provide some information to back this up.

i don't know where i would begin looking for that information. all i can tell you is that i have heard teachers, supervisors, and co-workers, the latter two while working at Revenue, all say the same thing. if the budget money is not spent, it won't be there in the following budget.

$1:

romanP romanP:

they had to spend the money or they wouldn't get it the next year.

And we wonder why Ontario is so deep in debt?

i didn't say it made a lot of sense. but we're also in debt because we keep subsidising failing industries instead of letting them fail. when an individual falls on bad luck, or is just not able to get or keep their shit together, we look down on them and tell them to "pull up their boot straps", and "get a job". when corporations fail, we give them a bonus and then they hide it in some far away tax shelter, maybe even flee the country. we're in debt because thieves run our economy, and it doesn't matter if it's a Liberal, NDP, or Tory government, they're all playing the same game.

$1:

The Two Bums

The bum on the rods is hunted down as an enemy of mankind
The other is driven around to his club, is feted, wined and dined

And they who curse the bum on the rods as the essence of all that's bad
Will greet the other with a willing smile and extend a hand so glad

The bum on the rods is a social flea who gets an occassional bite
The bum on the plush is a social leech, bloodsucking day and night

The bum on the rods is a load so light that his weight we scarcely feel
But it takes the labour of dozens of folks to furnish the other a meal

As long as we sanction the bum on the plush the other will always be there
But rid ourselves of the bum on the plush and the other will dissappear

Then make an intelligent organised kick get rid of the weights that crush
Dont worry about the bum on the rods get rid of the bum on the plush

--author unknown, published in George Milburns' _The Hobo's Hornbook_, c.1930

[romanP]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Just because something is budgeted, that doesn't mean it HAS to be spent.

The purpose of Government is to provide services to the citizens. Courts, Military, roads, etc. When they budget a certain amount for the healthcare of injured veterans, the you're damn straight that the money has to be spent!

that is its stated purpose. its true purpose is maintaining and upholding capitalism.

$1:

What they are doing is reprehensible. They ask these people to serve Canada, to die if needed, and when they come back mangled and unable to do anything else they shut the purse. It's political posturing at the expense of the suffering of people we asked to defend this country.

all wars are boss' wars.

if the boss can profit from sending people to far away places to get maimed and killed in the process of accomplishing his goals, he will.

$1:

I can see if your high school doesn't need new computers, that the money doesn't need to be spent.

it's not just schools. all federal government departments now get new computers every two years because reasons. i know because i've built and asset tagged thousands of them. a lot of the old computers aren't even refurbished once the government is done with them, they just toss them all in the trash, "for security".

$1:

But when the government squanders our future because it doesn't like science, or defers repairing critical infrastructure, or leaves people that it is directly responsible for injuring in a position of suffering when it could help, they need to release the budgeted money as it's their duty to provide these services to Canadians.

but who can make profit from that?

"job creators", amirite?

$1:

Withholding this money to try to win a few votes is unacceptable. The sad part is it will probably be effective. Most voters stop listening after they hear 'surplus' and never bother to find out more.

Bill Gates, of all people, had a good TED piece on how budget surpluses and deficits are all smoke and mirrors to distract us from how money is actually getting spent or denied.

[romanP]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I've seen basements filled with brand new, in the box PCs, 'aging' out. They sit in groups by the year they were purchased, and are sent for 'disposal' (HDDs shredded, Units sent to auction) based on the number of years they were in inventory.

Hundreds of PCs. They are destroyed, never having been used.

if it had a Northern Micro label on it, there's a good chance i built it!

[romanP]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The purpose of Government is to provide services to the citizens. Courts, Military, roads, etc. When they budget a certain amount for the healthcare of injured veterans, the you're damn straight that the money has to be spent!

So why is this only an issue now?

because this government has made the deepest cuts to those benefits while talking out the other side of its mouth with jingoistic nonsense about "honouring the troops" and other hero worship garbage.

$1:

This has been done by every government as long as I can remember because it's the financially sensible thing to do.

the financially sensible thing to do would be to tax the shit out of corporations that are reaping massive profits while veterans, and many others, beg for change on the street. did you know there is currently enough dead corporate money lying around to pay off our national debt and still have billions left over?

$1:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

What they are doing is reprehensible. They ask these people to serve Canada, to die if needed, and when they come back mangled and unable to do anything else they shut the purse. It's political posturing at the expense of the suffering of people we asked to defend this country.

What you and the rest are doing, is reprehensible. Trotting out veterans to use them as political pawns, using a practice that's been used by governments for ages to make Harper seem like some evil, veteran-hating person.

who is trotting out what now? veterans are rightly pissed off with how this government has treated them. many are actively campaigning to make sure the next government isn't Conservative.

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If the government took care of them to begin with, they wouldn't have to run for office to try to change things themselves. They are trotting themselves out, not us.

Your spouting off Liberal/NDP talking points as well as those from the union-funded 'ABC' veteran group that pretend they speak for veterans.

Perhaps you and roman can explain how the huge increase in spending on Canada's Veteran's equates to being 'reprehensible'?

A 25% increase in funding while the total amount of veterans has dropped almost 10%.

A government that's added almost a billion dollars to the annual budget of Veterans Affairs during it's tenure.

romanP romanP:

because this government has made the deepest cuts to those benefits while talking out the other side of its mouth with jingoistic nonsense about "honouring the troops" and other hero worship garbage.

A 25% increase in funding over 10 years constitutes deep cuts?

romanP romanP:

who is trotting out what now? veterans are rightly pissed off with how this government has treated them. many are actively campaigning to make sure the next government isn't Conservative.

You mean the 'ABC' movement led by Ron Clarke? The same Ron Clarke and ABC movement that is funded by unions?

They don't speak for all veterans. In fact, another group has started their own movement: https://www.facebook.com/vetsfortheCPC

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If the government took care of them to begin with, they wouldn't have to run for office to try to change things themselves. They are trotting themselves out, not us.

Your spouting off Liberal/NDP talking points as well as those from the union-funded 'ABC' veteran group that pretend they speak for veterans.

Perhaps you and roman can explain how the huge increase in spending on Canada's Veteran's equates to being 'reprehensible'?

A 25% increase in funding while the total amount of veterans has dropped almost 10%.

A government that's added almost a billion dollars to the annual budget of Veterans Affairs during it's tenure.

You did read that article, right? 1.3 billion of the budget of Veterans affairs wasn't spent last year. So, that's a $300,000 decrease in the budget of Veterans Affairs.

Spouting off NDP talking points. . . . Did I not say these things I hear actual veterans saying every Saturday afternoon in the Legion? You know, actual Veterans? But hey, keep towing the CPC line on how they are more veteran friendly now!

[DrCaleb]

romanP romanP:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I've seen basements filled with brand new, in the box PCs, 'aging' out. They sit in groups by the year they were purchased, and are sent for 'disposal' (HDDs shredded, Units sent to auction) based on the number of years they were in inventory.

Hundreds of PCs. They are destroyed, never having been used.

if it had a Northern Micro label on it, there's a good chance i built it!

They were mostly Dell PCs.

That department to me was the epitome of waste. "Department of Learning". Almost no one I met had anything to do with teaching kids anything, or developing materials to teach kids anything. One guy, all he did was change tapes in the tape library and send them to the vault. That was his job. The other 7 hours of his 7 3/4 hour day were then free to pursue other interests.

The whole department could have disappeared and no one would notice.

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You did read that article, right? 1.3 billion of the budget of Veterans affairs wasn't spent last year. So, that's a $300,000 decrease in the budget of Veterans Affairs.

If that is indeed the case:
5 - 1.3 = 3.7

From your article:

$1:

He pointed out the department's annual budget has seen an injection of an extra $5 billion since 2006

.

Add to that, the lapsed spending on this file is an annual occurrence. This is NOT unique to the current government.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Spouting off NDP talking points. . . . Did I not say these things I hear actual veterans saying every Saturday afternoon in the Legion? You know, actual Veterans? But hey, keep towing the CPC line on how they are more veteran friendly now!

I don't doubt you hear them, but that doesn't mean they aren't talking points of the other parties...because they are.

Actual veterans are on both sides of the fence; the difference being, the pro-Harper groups aren't being funded by unions.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I don't doubt you hear them, but that doesn't mean they aren't talking points of the other parties...because they are.

Actual veterans are on both sides of the fence; the difference being, the pro-Harper groups aren't being funded by unions.

If they are party talking points, perhaps it's because they are worth talking about.

The vets at the Legion aren't funded by anybody. That's the problem.

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If they are party talking points, perhaps it's because they are worth talking about.

I'll remember that for future reference.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The vets at the Legion aren't funded by anybody. That's the problem.

I have a family full of current and former members of our military.

The problem is here, union groups and other activists are using the veterans to push their own political agenda. That's reprehensible. Many veterans are being spoon-fed information from these groups that is less than truthful and dragging them out to help move their own agenda along.

[2Cdo]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

If they are party talking points, perhaps it's because they are worth talking about.

I'll remember that for future reference.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

The vets at the Legion aren't funded by anybody. That's the problem.

I have a family full of current and former members of our military.

The problem is here, union groups and other activists are using the veterans to push their own political agenda. That's reprehensible. Many veterans are being spoon-fed information from these groups that is less than truthful and dragging them out to help move their own agenda along.

Nailed it!

[JaredMilne]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Creative Accounting. And here's how:

Federal departments left $8.7 billion unspent last year

It's not creative accounting. This happens every year in business and in government.

Just because something is budgeted, that doesn't mean it HAS to be spent.

I remember being back in high school and our science department ordered a classroom full of new Mac's. Why? They had money left over in the budget and wanted to spend it to ensure they got the same amount next year.

I budget a certain amount each month for groceries. If I have a surplus at the end of the month, I don't run out to Loblaw's to blow the rest of the budget.

You may not be running out to Loblaw's, but at the same time you're not making funding announcements to show what you are doing for your constituents and stakeholders. Take another look at what the article DrCaleb is talking about says...

$1:

But federal departments and agencies also chipped in by handing back an estimated $8.7 billion for different programs that had been requested — and in some cases publicly announced — by the government and approved by Parliament.

...

Canadians won’t know exactly which departments or programs were affected until after the election, when the government publishes its annual detailed accounts. But figures produced by the Parliamentary Budget Office over the weekend provide an idea of where some of the money came from.

The PBO figures aren’t final as not all departments, agencies and Crown corporations have reported their full end-of-year spending. But they do suggest hundreds of millions set aside for new military equipment, processing refugee applications, First Nations communities and transportation infrastructure went unspent.

That stuff sounds pretty damn important, particularly since all of these things have been prominent political topics over the last couple of years. It'd probably make for an interesting comparison to see what kinds of funding were announced by the Conservatives-announcements that are made for political purposes to get people to support the government of the day-and contrast it with how much of that money was actually spent.

There's a lot of difference between not spending the money that could be used to put a fancy mural on the garage, and not spending the money that's set aside to maintain the foundation.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I have a family full of current and former members of our military.

The problem is here, union groups and other activists are using the veterans to push their own political agenda. That's reprehensible. Many veterans are being spoon-fed information from these groups that is less than truthful and dragging them out to help move their own agenda along.

That description makes it sound like the veterans are a bunch of naive pawns who can't detect bullshit when they hear it or are too dumb to realize when they're being played.

Here's what one of them, at least, had to say:

$1:

My name is Dave Desjardins. I am a veteran, and a "pawn of PSAC" - according to Mister-MP-Captain Erin O'Toole, yet another Conservative Muppet.

When I was asked by the president of PSAC to speak to Conservative MPs in Ottawa, on behalf of veterans that could not make the trip to speak for themselves, I was a little skeptical. I saw it as the Conservatives interpreted it, a media ploy: disabled vet, in a wheelchair... what's a more compelling image to the media than that?

Truth be told, there is no media footage on our meetings; they were held behind closed doors. Which was fine by me. I'm no media hound and, quite frankly, would rather not have to do any of this and live the rest of my life in quiet obscurity. Although I wasn't in attendance at Tuesdays, I found out about it from those in attendance at the "meet and greet" as it was so lovingly dubbed by Mr O'Toole.

When this all started last December, I was shown statistics by PSAC representatives. With VAC only representing 8 percent of their client base, why would PSAC fight so hard for such a small faction?

PSAC was responding to the concerns of the case managers themselves - concerns for their clients, the veterans. Every case manager is a social worker. With the demands for social workers in today's society, they can find alternate employment for much higher wage at the snap of a finger. The case managers are not worried about finding new jobs. They are worried about their veterans.

...

Let me make one thing perfectly clear for the Conservative Government. We veterans may not all be as educated as an MP, we may suffer from a psychological injury of some form or fashion, but we are not stupid. WE are not pawns of anyone. WE are the people that signed up to do your dirty work; WE are the people that signed up to do the stuff the rest of Canada doesn't want to hear about. WE are the people that signed up so you can sit in your chairs in the House of Commons and decide what is in our best interest.

Not everyone who's worn the uniform might agree with him, of course, but it does indicate just how strongly those veterans who do agree with this stance feel about the situation.

And then there's the actions a number of veterans took on their own, without any prompting from the unions...

$1:

Veterans plan silent protests of government policies

When the clock strikes 11 a.m on Remembrance Day in Chilliwack, B.C., retired Air Force captain Claude Latulippe will be at the local cenotaph paying homage to former comrades and to the many other Canadians who gave their lives for their country.

But, when it is time for Mark Strahl, the local Conservative MP, to lay a wreath, Mr. Latulippe and other veterans will face away.


It is a gesture that Mr. Latulippe, 65, says he believes will be repeated in communities across Canada. Veterans, he said, want to turn their backs on the Conservative government “just like the Conservatives are turning their backs on veterans.”

...

Mr. Blais will not be among those veterans participating in Remembrance Day protests. It is the one day of the year, he says, when his heart is not in the fight.

But many other veterans will be making a statement, said Mr. Blais. And all Canadians, he said, should be asking themselves whether the government has a duty to care for veterans.

“That’s why we still assemble on Remembrance Day. We may not know who they were or what they have done but we still come and pay two minutes’ solitude for them,” he said. “Well, this year is different. This year, we have a government that does not believe it has a social contract, it does not believe it has a sacred obligation.”

Did the unions orchestrate all that, manipulate all of these vets' feelings, as part of some plan to disgrace Harper?