analyst Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Jason When there is a change in government in most democratic countries, nearly all of the existing projects approved by the previous government are honoured. Jason Don't overlook the 180 degree turn on the Toronto airport, the helicopters and nuclear submarines, etc, etc. The political stripe in power does matter, not as much as they like to pretend, but it does matter. The Conseravatives will elect most of their MPs in the West so why would they want to spend money on a soccer stadium in a liberal riding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard It would seem yet again Loud Mouth Soup is living right up to his self imposed moniker. Oh no! Should I feel all sad and insulted? Glad I piss you off so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bettermirror Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 (i have not read thsi entire thread) i am not sure they could cancel the SSS if they win. in chilliwack a supreme court of British Columbia was built a few years ago. the new government came in prior to construction beginning. however, contracts had been signed, and deals made - thus the building went ahead. the government made it clear they would have cancelled the project if they could have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Loud Mouth Soup Oh no! Should I feel all sad and insulted? Glad I piss you off so much. You don't piss me off you vulgar, puerile yob, you're just pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted November 19, 2005 Author Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by bettermirror (i have not read thsi entire thread) i am not sure they could cancel the SSS if they win. in chilliwack a supreme court of British Columbia was built a few years ago. the new government came in prior to construction beginning. however, contracts had been signed, and deals made - thus the building went ahead. the government made it clear they would have cancelled the project if they could have. Any commercial contract or commitment can be cancelled or reneged on at any stage no matter what the terms. It is merely a question of balancing the cost of cancellation against the cost of continuing. Clearly with the Chilliwack courthouse it was more costly to cancel than to proceed. What none of us here knows in any detail is just what formal, binding contracts and terms exist between the parties involved with the Toronto stadium. Until we do it behooves us to be cautious and circumspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by analyst Don't overlook the 180 degree turn on the Toronto airport, the helicopters and nuclear submarines, etc, etc. The political stripe in power does matter, not as much as they like to pretend, but it does matter. The Conseravatives will elect most of their MPs in the West so why would they want to spend money on a soccer stadium in a liberal riding? The projects you mentioned were high publicity, big dollar, politically charged deals. The Toronto SSS is none of these things in a comparative sense. All of those issues you mentioned were regular items on the national news. I don't think the Toronto SSS has ever been on the national news period. It didn't even lead sportscasts when announced, probably not even in Toronto. I'm not saying that cancellation absolutely couldn't happen but realistically the only reason a new government would do it would be for political reasons. It's not worth the legal headaches for any other reason. I just don't see any particular politcal advantage to doing so. It's not like cancelling the project will bring them support, even in their western base. It's not an issue on the political radar screen. If I asked 100 random people today in Calgary what they thought of the Toronto SSS I would be surprised if 5% of them even knew of the project. As hard as it may be for some of you Ontario folks to believe, most westerners have nothing against people in Toronto or Ontario. There is no specific desire to stick it to Ontario among the mainstream. I don't think at some secret Conservative Party meeting in Calgary (remember all the meetings are secret because of the hidden agenda, oops I said too much) that supporters are saying, "Well, I'm not sure if I'd vote for Harper, but if he takes away that Toronto soccer stadium, I'm in." Why would a new government would want to do it as it would make Ontarians mad and not help them in the west? Even if they didn't win many Ontario seats, they ultimately would want to so where is the political advantage? Sorry, I just don't see it. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loud Mouth Soup Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard You don't piss me off you vulgar, puerile yob, you're just pathetic. Oh boy, I'm a yob now! Yay for me! Yay for Robert being all adult-like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RS Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Oh boy, I'm a yob now! Yay for me! Yay for Robert being all adult-like! Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Man Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DoyleG CALLING OUT RICHARD!!!!! How is Stephen Harper bad for Canada? Any political party that when founded had links to the Heritage Front is a danger. All the Reform party has done is take over a long established party and stole it's name and in inserted it's orginal agenda. you can dress up a racist as a progressive, but at the end of the day, he's simply a progressive racist. Just take a look at the nutters on Freedominion.ca and you'll know why central canda gets the creeps when Harper's name is raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 Thanks for inviting me to join into this discussion guys. It really means a lot to me. First off, I doubt that Dick can heed his own advice and just ignor me. Now to the meat of the matter. Who is going to loosen their purse strings first? Should Kevan Pipe have already secured some or all of the federal funds promised? I guess we'll find out in January if they start construction of the T.'sSSMLSFTPS (that's a lot quicker for a one finger pecker like myself than typing out Toronto's Soccer Specific Major League Soccer Federal Transfere Payment Stadium). If Kevan has failed to shake loose any federal sheckels (feel free to criticize my English, as long as you understand what I'm trying to say) by that time, who will be the first to commit their cash? The City of Toronto? Like how far will $10Mil go with union hole-diggers? Okay, lets forget about Layton. How about the good old folks with the most to gain over at MLSE? Well maybe not, eh? After watching them sit on the fence for so long when it came to financially committing to this project, it's hard to imagine them jumping to the front of the line with their chequebook in hand. That leaves the Ontario taxpayer holding an empty bag. Yeah, I love it. It's time to quit Harping, Mr. Pipe. Let's have some action. What are you waiting for Kevan? Christmas? I thought you said the final hurdle had been cleared? Yeah right, you dumb little yob. The final hurdle will not be cleared until the WYCs kick off in July of 2007. We haven't even touched on potential labour disruptions yet, have we? But hey, look at the bright side as some here on this board claim. Kevan did a great job when we hosted the women's U19 tourney a few years back. How many $60M stadiums did Kevan build for that event? How many pro teams did Canada gain? Here's a clue, the answer's the same to both questions. That's right, ziltch, zero, nado, sweet fuk all. No wonder Dick's worried with a track record like Kevan's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted November 19, 2005 Share Posted November 19, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Richard You don't piss me off you vulgar, puerile yob, you're just pathetic. What is pathetic is you throwing out the possibility that the meagre funding for the soccer stadium is in jeopardy if the Liberals lose power. I'm no fan of Stephen Harper but Lord knows I have no desire to come upon this site and read some pro-Liberal tripe from a west coast windbag . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted November 20, 2005 Author Share Posted November 20, 2005 Then why did you read beyond the first post in the thread Ed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john tv Posted November 20, 2005 Share Posted November 20, 2005 What if the C.P would make the cancellation of this stadium part of their platform along with some other project under the disguise of saving t.payers money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoyleG Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by G-Man Any political party that when founded had links to the Heritage Front is a danger. All the Reform party has done is take over a long established party and stole it's name and in inserted it's orginal agenda. you can dress up a racist as a progressive, but at the end of the day, he's simply a progressive racist. Just take a look at the nutters on Freedominion.ca and you'll know why central canda gets the creeps when Harper's name is raised. Your not Richard so shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Man Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by DoyleG Your not Richard so shut up. yes preston or is that ernst? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Keay Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by G-Man yes preston or is that ernst? Just wanted to quote that so G-Man couldn't edit it out later. I definitely don't see eye to eye with DoyleG on politics (amongst other things), but to compare him to the worlds most notorious holocaust denier is rediculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Man Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by Ryan Keay Just wanted to quote that so G-Man couldn't edit it out later. I definitely don't see eye to eye with DoyleG on politics (amongst other things), but to compare him to the worlds most notorious holocaust denier is rediculous. Just as comparing me to a baby killer or a 911 terrorist is just as lame cause i'm not for corporate welfare SSS's. But that didn't bother you did it? Funny old world that is. Your knee jerk outrage is mocked. And the world most notorious holocaust denier is probably David Irving. He can actually write, while earst can only bark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealGooner Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Believe it or not, I actually have to agree with G-Man here. John-TV has called him a terrorist on here, and got away with it, so if we are fair then G-man has to be able to call people names too. OR...we can just cut out the name-calling and labelling altogether (a solution a favour). This despite the fact that G-Man does himself no favours by having has one of the dirtiest mouths on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanKeay Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 You are a doody head realgooner and i dont like you very much...... i think thats dirtier then g-man... also until g-man talks about gorilla masks... he definatly isnt anywhere as dirty as me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Keay Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 quote:Originally posted by RealGooner we can just cut out the name-calling and labelling altogether (a solution a favour). We have the right answer here... btw, I did see the reference to G-Man as a "baby killer" and it was a tongue in cheeck mockery of JohnTV's post. I also agree the terrorist comment was out of line. As much as you want to make yourself a martyr G-Man, your comment was totally ignorant. By comparing it to an equally ignorant comment, you're merely admitting you were wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Keay Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 Actually, I'm locking this thread. It was unfounded speculation in the first place and its been threadjacked straight into the useless category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.