Minister's EI comments - An insult to the workers of Canada - Opinion 250 - News for Northern and Central Interior of British Columbia, Canada

Minister's EI comments - An insult to the workers of Canada

Tuesday, February 03, 2009 02:00 PM

Minister’s EI comments - An insult to the workers of Canada

By Peter Ewart & Dawn Hemingway

Federal Human Resources Minister Diane Finley has explained why she, and presumably the Harper government, are opposed to raising Employment Insurance payments for unemployed workers, or making it easier to qualify. “We do not want to make it lucrative for them to stay home and get paid for it,” she says.

In essence, she is saying that Canadian workers, in their hearts, are lazy and would prefer sitting at home to working.

If that is the case, how does she and her government explain that Canadian workers are considered to be among the most productive in the world? They work in demanding, difficult and often dangerous occupations. Whether it be bush work in –40 degree weather; in hot restaurant kitchens; in sawmills and pulp mills; in mines, steel mills and assembly plants; in fishing and farming; on oil & gas and construction projects; in hospitals and schools; in minimum wage service sector jobs - It is their labour which is the foundation of all wealth creation in this country.

The Canadian people like to work, and always have. It is one of their distinguishing and outstanding characteristics, and one that they take great pride in. How else to explain this country coming into being with a modern economy and infrastructure? How else to explain the wealth that has been extracted from a land with some of the harshest climactic conditions and geography in the world?

Indeed, one of the worst fears that Canadians as a whole have is losing their job. Psychologists have noted that worry about unemployment, and job loss itself, can be a significant cause of psychological distress, leading to depression, marriage break-ups, substance abuse, and other problems.

So just what kind of mindset are Finley and the Harper government proceeding from in making such slanderous statements against Canadian workers? According to Finley, the reason the government is making it difficult for unemployed workers to receive EI benefits, is so that they will be prompted to move away to some other part of the country where there are “significant skill shortages.”

So, a laid off millworker in Mackenzie or Fort St. James, BC, should close up the mortgaged house, help the spouse load up the car with mattresses and other household possessions, buckle the kids into the back seat, and go ….. where? Prince George? But the mills there are laying off, not hiring. The Alberta oil patch? Oil prices are plunging and people are losing their jobs. Vancouver? Idle cranes and abandoned construction projects are becoming a feature of the landscape. Southern Ontario? The manufacturing economy has been in the toilet for several years now.

According to Statistics Canada, unemployment is rising in all parts of the country, with “the worst yet to come.” Picking up and moving at this time could very well be a recipe for ending up out of work and homeless on the streets of some big city.

Instead of taking every measure so that the millions of Canadian workers can survive through this looming economic hurricane, hold onto their houses, pay their hydro and gas bills, and put enough food on the table for their kids, Finley and her Federal colleagues are fixated on making sure that EI payments remain inadequate, as well as difficult to obtain.

How mean spirited can they get? It is as if the federal government was operating a soup kitchen with public funds and putting ground glass into the porridge.

There is a lot of irony in the Federal Government labeling EI payments as being “lucrative.” For one thing, the maximum benefits are about $435 a week, which comes to about $1750 a month. Many people who pay into the fund are not even eligible, and many do not get anywhere near the maximum amount.

How can $1200, $1400 or even $1750 a month, for 50 weeks or less, be called in any way “lucrative”? In some towns and cities, rent and utilities alone will take up most of that amount. How does a single person keep his or her head above water, let alone a family with 2 or 3 kids?

But there is another irony here also. In fact, it is the Federal Government that is the one which should be accused of pursuing “lucrative” benefits, of getting something for nothing. One of the single most disgraceful things that the Government has done over the last few years has been to loot the huge EI fund. This fund, which amounts to over $54 billion, has been built up entirely by payments from workers and employers. Yet that has not stopped the Government from stealing almost all of it and using it for its own political and economic ends. As the old saying goes, the pot is calling the kettle black.

Yes, Minister Diane Finley, with your EI policy, you want to make sure that the “lazy” workers of Canada get out there and find a job, and, presumably, you’ll even tell them where to go and get one.

One thing you can bet on though. After hearing your recent comments, a lot of workers, whether they are employed or unemployed, whether they live in Mackenzie, Grand Falls or Windsor, would love to have a chance to tell you where to go.

Peter Ewart is a writer and college instructor who can be contacted at: peter.ewart@shaw.ca. Dawn Hemingway is a writer and university professor who can be contacted at: hemingwa@unbc.ca . They are both based in Prince George, BC.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Tuesday, February 03, 2009 02:00 PM in Views by Peter Ewart & Dawn Hemingway

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: diplomat on February 3 2009 3:09 PM

Boy, she is sure guarding that $54 Billion dollar accumulated EI contributions kitty with her life! Why is she so reluctant to dip into it when this is exactly the kind of circumstance that it was accumulated for?

The annual interest on it alone is quite a bundle.

Did somebody steal half of it and was the other half of it spent on Afghanistan?

I think we need a *royal* commission headed by the Spanish Inquisition.

Posted by: RRrabbitt on February 3 2009 3:18 PM

Well folks ...IMO ... these are the types of comments that lead to a general, two day, country-wide strike of all reasonable working people.

The PEOPLE of Canada have been known to make their feelings known when they are given such a collective slap in the face.

:-)

V.

Posted by: lifesucks on February 3 2009 3:33 PM

I read that comment also and it was a slap in the face. How dare accuse the unemployed workers for asking for what is rightfully theirs. Most of us sweated damn hard to put the money there for times like this. How many of us like being on E.I. and being under the poverty line? All most of us want is to have a house, a family and to be able to eat that does not make stand out on the lazy list.Most of us have never even taken E.I. benefits until now, and that is because we are forsted to do so. If there were jobs out there we all would be going for them. This just shown how ignorant Diane Finley is about all Canadians. She should be shown where the door is and where to go.

Posted by: rayban68 on February 3 2009 4:10 PM

life does suck, and the fact is what is rightfully yours under EI was well known up front when you got a job and started paying EI. Why should that change now that you need/want more dollars than EI provides? Where was the passionate lobbying demanding government changes to the EI system? Why should the people who have paid into EI previously and been shafted by the inadequate payouts have to stand by and watch mill workers receive inflated payments?

I believe qwaszxter is correct, we need less government sticky fingers in the EI pot, EI needs to be a private option much like disability and life insurances. If a person chooses not to sign up for EI, that's what the government funded welfare program is for.

Posted by: Harbinger on February 3 2009 4:23 PM

Country wide strike? Ha ha ha. Betcha ya couldn't get five people in a group and agree what to have for lunch. Good luck, pal.

Posted by: rayban68 on February 3 2009 4:46 PM

RRrabbitt - I'm on board for the 2 day strike for sure! This saturday and sunday are good for me. If not, the next saturday/sunday work also. If not then..............

Posted by: Palopu on February 3 2009 5:11 PM

$48 Billion of the $56 Billion in the EI Fund was syphoned off by the Liberal Government to balance their budgets, and pay down the debt. The Supreme Court last year ruled this was illegal because there was no legislation in place to allow this transfer of funds. If you have a bitch about the missing money, then send a letter to Paul Martin, as he was the Finance Minister at the time. The court has no authority to force the Government to replace this money, however it really doesnt matter because if the fund should go broke, it is the responsibility of the Government of the day to fund it, and it would be at that time that the **kited** money would start to be paid back.

Ewert and Hemmingway are somewhat naive if they think that **all** Canadians are good workers. People have been ripping off the EI system for years. There has to be checks and balances in every Government program.

There are a huge number of Canadians who work for $10.00 per hour, and are restricted to 20 hours per week so that their employers do not have to pay benefits. These people have to work at 2 jobs just to get 40 hours per week. Their gross salary in a year would be approx $20,000.00 about the same as a high paid worker would get at the maximum EI benefit of $435.00 per week. These people have little of no concern for the problems of the high paid union workers, who are now starting to feel the pinch, mainly because they have been feeling the pinch for years, and for them it is a way of life.

If you use the 16000 laid off auto workers in Windsor Ont. who would all quailify for the maximum benefit of $435.00 per week, it will cost the fund approx $33,000,000.00 just for these workers if they are off the job for a year. When you take into consideration all others in the Country that are laid off, and consider those that will be laid off in the very near future, and you do not have to be a College Instructor, University Professor, , or a genius to realize that the EI fund will be depleted in a very short time. To pay more up front now, could mean less for those laid off later.

People have to start thinking about either taking a lower paying job now, or relocating, while they still have EI benefits, because once the benefits run out they will still be facing the same problems. This recession could very well last for two or three years, and the sooner decisions are made, the better. Seems to me that the EI fund has money available to help people relocate.

There is no easy answers to the problems that laid off workers are facing, however they will have to make some decisions fairly quickly. Blaming the Minister of Human Resources, or the Government doesnt solve any problems,especially when the criticism comes from those who work for the Government, on high paid cushie jobs and are at least at this time in protected positions.

Posted by: pisspulper on February 3 2009 5:15 PM

Ironic that she should attack the people that provide her with life's sustenance. Not everyone has the privilege of obtaining a full pension after a meager effort in running the country. Not all of us have the pleasure of raising our income at the wim of a few raised hands, without loss.

I think she should follow my lazy ass for a four day tour, and my three off and see if she can keep up with my sorry ass.

I've toiled 25 years with no EI yet. I'll expect my refund promptly!! It is understood now that it is Employment Insurance that I pay for, so Diane find me another overpaid/under worked posting where I don't fact to risk my health and get your pension benefit, not to forget all the other perks I pay for you.

But, tonight you'll be getting paid as you devise a retraction or rephrasing your insensitive comments.

Posted by: ammonra on February 3 2009 5:15 PM

Governments should not be allowed to do anything they want with worker's money. When workers paid into the EI fund it was with the understanding that the money would be paid out in benefits when appropriate. The Government, however, decided something else without asking workers or employers whether they approved, and took the money to spend on other things, like balancing the budget.

Where was the Governments passionate justification to do this? Why did the Government make unauthorised changes to EI, reducing benefits without first seeking permission? Why have all workers in Canada been shafted by having their money, all $50 billion of it, siphoned off for other purposes so that workers now have to put up with inadequate payouts in these difficult times.

There is nothing wrong with a properly run EI system, so lang as Governments don't deliberately cripple it by sticking their hands in the till.

Posted by: Harbinger on February 3 2009 5:28 PM

EI is a tax on workers. Not an insurance policy. Any one who thinks otherwise is in for a rude lesson.

Posted by: NMG on February 3 2009 5:59 PM

Good post Palopu.

IMHO, the main reason that the 1 year extension shouldn't be implemented is because it wouldn't do a single thing to address the root problem, that being that the impacted industries are likely NEVER to return to what they were before this crisis hit.

Where the government has fallen down IMHO, is that they're simply not being realistic in regards to what these industries will look like in the next 10+ years. We have Pat Bell basically saying that the future in forestry will be bright as soon as we get through this rough patch. There is always talk about how the "basket of fibre" north of Mackenzie will save the day. I call BS. That "basket of fibre" was always there and while it will be there in the future, it won't replace the overall reduction in supply due to MPB. What it will do is allow SOME people to remain employed in forestry, but the overall workforce will still be reduced by thousands of people, permanently I predict.

Same goes for the auto makers. Every politician feels that they just need some temporary funds to make it through the tough times. The problem with that is that the business models of the companies there are supporting generally suck. They've been on a path of steady decline in comparison to the competition for decades and unless some sort of miracle occurs, they don't have the operational flexibility or insight to turn things around quickly enough before going under. Maybe one of the "big three" can survive, but like with forestry, there will be permanent job losses in the industry.

Governments need to find ways to create new industries and new jobs and we need to find ways to get workers trained for those roles. How about clean energy? How about environmentally friendly cars and heavy equipment? What will the world need 20-30 years from now and what can we do NOW to be positioned to take advantage of those things? That is what government should now be focusing on as that is a true investment in our future.

Handing out cheques for another 12 months amounts to nothing more than building a false sense of security that things will be alright in a year. For tens of thousands of people they won't be. Governments and people need to start realizing that so that they can start to get on with the business of working on real solutions.

Posted by: diplomat on February 3 2009 7:00 PM

"Why have all workers in Canada been shafted by having their money, all $50 billion of it, siphoned off for other purposes so that workers now have to put up with inadequate payouts in these difficult times."

Unless I am mistaken (and it happens every once in a while) employees contributions were matched by the employers.

This means that $25 billion were ripped off from the workers and $25 billion from business.

Why did business not raise a ruckus?

BTW: During this global meltdown extraordinary conditions exist, which call for extraordinary measures.

Governments are spending borrowed monies to alleviate the situation. If the $50 billion would still exist government could borrow from that accumulated fund and repay the money later during better times in order to assist those who badly need help.

However, it appears to have been liberated for other purposes.

Too bad. Very irresponsible.

Posted by: NMG on February 3 2009 7:30 PM

"Unless I am mistaken (and it happens every once in a while) employees contributions were matched by the employers"

You are mistaken. Employers actually contribute 1.4 times what the employee does. So in effect, that 50 billion was funded roughly 60% by employers and 40% by employees. That throws an entirely different wrinkle into the ole "return it to the workers" argument doesn't it :)

Posted by: fenceman on February 3 2009 8:02 PM

Great post Papopu. Fat times are over and the quicker people start to accept this and start to adapt the better off they will be in the coming years.
No EI for the self employed so if you are unhappy with the system feel free to jump the fence and start your own business. Then you will learn what work is. 40 hour weeks becomes a dream. I was once on a job site and asked by a Union type why I did not stop for coffee or lunch like he did. I responded that breaks are for those that get a pay cheque, those of us that sign them can not afford to stop till the job is done.
Hundreds of people in my town have been out of work due to mill closures. I posted 2 job openings last year with little to no response. So I have to think, either they are all too good to do what I do, are not will to work for a lower wage, or would rather sit around on EI enjoying the fishing then go do an honest days work for an honest days pay.
Union workers have had it way to easy over that last many decades. Time to wake up and join the real word, get dirty, put some sweat and blood into the money you earn.
If it means cutting back to the basics and getting a job at Timmy's for $10hr then so be it. Cream always rises to the top just like good employees. So if you are driven you will not be at the bottom long. If you are maybe it is time to access your real worth
Harsh words I know but harsh times. No one likes to start over at the bottom again but that is the reality of life.
IMO the extra five weeks added to the back end of EI was more then generous. I would have like to seen the Government add a lot more in the way jobs to their budget. I have very little faith in the HOME RENOVATION tax allowance creating many jobs. But that is another subject.

Posted by: ammonra on February 3 2009 8:36 PM

What I wrote in another sentence was "The Government, however, decided something else without asking workers or employers whether they approved,"

However, whether the contributions came from employees or employers and in what proportion is surely not the point. The point is that they were contributed 100% for providing insurance to compensate employees, workers, if they lost their jobs through no fault of their own. As such, it must surely be obvious that it is an integral part of their pay.

The Government of whatever stripe used that money, earmarked for compansating workers, for something else without anybody's permission or consent.

Posted by: lifesucks on February 3 2009 9:44 PM

My god Fenceman, do you think you are the ONLY ONE who has almost broke your back over a job. There are a good many of us that have put our hearts and soles into our jobs and having them taken away right in front of our eyes no fault of our doing. I agree there are some people who work just long enough to collect and they are allow to abuse the system, but people who have worked for 25 to 30 years and NEVER collecting you are begrudging us and calling us lazy. Not everyone has had the opportunity to get tickets for every single kind of job out there. And you talking about not wanting to work for a lesser wage, we dropped down $8.00 an hour and to a 4 day week, no how much less do you think we are getting. Do not want to mention job share because you will beat that to the ground also. Where in heck do you think people are going to get other jobs, nobody is hiring right now.

Posted by: NMG on February 3 2009 9:52 PM

"However, whether the contributions came from employees or employers and in what proportion is surely not the point. The point is that they were contributed 100% for providing insurance to compensate employees, workers, if they lost their jobs through no fault of their own"

The fact that they took the dough is wrong, but at the end of the day it's irrelevant. Employees who need EI will still get the cheques they are entitled to, whether it comes from the "EI fund bank account" or some other "government bank account". The surplus is largely an accounting presentation of the fund.

At the end of the day, the government is still on the hook for the payment of benefits and they will be paid out based on the rules that are in place, which are now more generous than they were when people contributed. The cheques come from the Government of Canada not the EI fund of Canada.

Posted by: rayban68 on February 3 2009 10:10 PM

NMG you are absolutely correct, and not only that, the 50 billion that was spent is money that would have been spent regardless, and would have had to been raised through alternate means - who here is willing to pay even more in taxes???

As was said by another poster, EI is simply a tax, not an insurance premium.

Posted by: seamutt on February 4 2009 12:17 AM

So fenceman you pay your slaves chicken scratch while pocketing most of the change, you are part of the problem.

Posted by: fenceman on February 4 2009 12:40 AM

"Where in heck do you think people are going to get other jobs, nobody is hiring right now."

I know of one Tim Horton's in the north who is having to bring in workers from offshore to fill positions, because they can find no one locally to work. I have been offered personally several driving and operator positions. So there are jobs available. Maybe not the high paying, structured union manufacturing jobs, but a job non the same. I will have several job openings once the snow flies and I believe I will have trouble filling these positions with reliable, self starting, good work ethic, and drug free employees.
IMO many people have been over living their means by borrowing, borrowing and borrowing. This putting them in an economic position of failure if they even hit the smallest bump in the road, they have no or little saves, large debt and payments, so if they loss their current job and/or have to take a pay cut they are in a position to loss their accustomed way of life, the Big House, New truck/car, sled, boat, ATV, Cabin, RV, Holiday in the sun etc. .
This current economic crisis was not hard to see coming the question was when it would start, now we know. You can only spend more than you take in for so long. This goes for government too. Iceland is bankrupt, and if the US Government keeps throwing money around like they have been they will need a wheel borrow to haul their worthless dollar down to the store to buy bread, and a dump truck to purchase our lumber.
The point I am making is things are going to get much worse before they begin to get better. So instead of crying over spilled milk, put that energy into adapting and self preservation. If it is a job you require do not wait for the job to find you go find the job or create one.
IBM in the US just announced it is going to be closing some of its facilities in the US and moving the jobs to Brazil and India. They have offered to relocate any current US employees to these locations do all the paperwork and pay for their relocation. The catch is once relocated they must work at local wage rates and labor standards. It would surprise me if any of the employees take them up on the offer, but they can not say they were not offered the job.
I am curious if a Pulpmill or Sawmill was to be purchased taken down and relocated to Eastern Russia and the employees were offered the same option as the IBM employees have been. Would anyone take the offer??

Posted by: fenceman on February 4 2009 1:20 AM

"So fenceman you pay your slaves chicken scratch while pocketing most of the change, you are part of the problem."

Seamutt,

Am I to understand that you have never been an employer then??

I believe in far pay for far work and this is a base on how I set my company pay scale as follows:

$8-10hr I baby sit you all day, show you and tell you everything that needs to be done, thinking is not required

$10-$15hr you are expected to learn and retain information after multiple instructions and training. Some thinking, efficiency and attention to detail required.

$15-20hr you are expected to learn and retain information quickly and effectively, be able to drive, be self starting and work with little supervision. Be efficient, show attentiveness, attention to detail, and have pride in your work

20-25hr you will know what is required and be able to know all the aspects of the job, the design, equipment, tools and material required. Be able to supervise others when required and work a job without supervision.

25+hr you are expected to know all aspects of company operations at he highest levels of efficiency and attention to detail. Have a supervisory position, able to train others. Design, layout, price, and implement jobs.

these wages are before company pays CPP, EI and WorkSafe contributions, Yes it does cost us more then what you actually see on your cheques
I general put in 80-100hrs a week. I would be lucky if make $15hr myself after all the hours I put in, many that are not billable. So if you think I make fat cat Wages Seamutt you are sadly mistaken.
I just chose to be my own boss and be in some control of my own destiny.

Posted by: lifesucks on February 4 2009 5:27 AM

Fencemen we do not own a cabin at the lake, boat or any of the above. We bought our 10 acres and a 30 year old house about 10 years ago. We have a 2004 car and a 2002 suv. That is what we have. We did have savings but they got used up throught the year because my husband was layed off when the flood happeded. We put countless resumes for any kind of work and nothing, we were told you do not qualify for this job. My husband will do just about anything so do not say every one is picky about the job and wages, or hours, or days of the week you have to work. Post your job openings on opinion 250 and the jobs might be snapped up just like that. What is it that you do anyway, just curious.

Posted by: diplomat on February 4 2009 6:52 AM

Ammonra: "Why have all workers in Canada been shafted by having their money, all $50 billion of it,...."

You say that "However, whether the contributions came from employees or employers and in what proportion is surely not the point. "

Well, I disagree. The point of me questioning WHERE the $50 billion came from is a valid one...in MY opinion.

I raised the question where all the money came from.

To me that is important. May you have an interesting day.

Posted by: metalman on February 4 2009 9:13 AM

NMG your postings are insightful and pretty accurate in my opinion, please allow me to point out that while the employers' EI share is indeed 140% of the employee's, that amounts to 71% of the EI fund provided by companies, and 29% by workers. And Diplomat, why does'nt business raise a ruckus about the misuse of the EI fund? Well business does, through membership in the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, to which anyone can belong. These organizations lobby on behalf of small business and the average taxpayer, and actually do make headway against various Canadian governments, typically federal and provincial. They are worth supporting.
I also agree with Ammonra, that regardless of who contributes what percentage, the issue is the misuse of the EI fund. Having said that, employers SHOULD be up in arms for having contributed 71% or 35.5 Billion dollars of a 50 Billion surplus towards the support of unemployed workers, and the money not being fairly distributed.
metalman.

Posted by: Shellshadow on February 4 2009 10:47 AM

People ...this is not the end of the problems. Things WILL get far worse and if you think that the government gives a rats ass about any of us, you will be disapointed! This is just a taste of what will be. All the problems are to far gone for any country, government or the masses to solve. We are going down and the poor and middle class will suffer greatly. If you notice, all the bailouts everywhere on this earth is going directly to the wealthy in the ruse of healping the economy. Nothing will help it!! All that is happening now is any excess of taxpayers dollars are being distributed into the class of the wealthy. What we will here withing a few years is OOOPS! Sorry it did not work!! Then what??? IMO we are in for hard times. End of story.

Posted by: diplomat on February 4 2009 11:06 AM

Metalman, thanks! If the employers have not been up in arms sufficiently enough to raise a ruckus I wonder why they haven't.

Successive governments have not been paying attention, obviously.

There is of course still the issue of how we allowed them to abscond with the money and why nobody holds their feet to the fire.

I asked a pointed question, namely: where did the money come from and it was answered.

Good enough for me.

Posted by: fenceman on February 4 2009 12:06 PM

Hi "Lifesucks", you really need to change your username. I hate to say that word or even think the thought. Life if life it is what you make it, keep your chin up and think positive "Yes I can, getter done attitude".
I would like to clear up that in my comments I have never used the term "everyone" I have said many. There are a lot of hardworking people and families out their that live well within there means and have set aside or put themselves in a position to weather some rainy days.
I am curious, you say you have ten acres of land. Do you grow any food, raise any livestock or fowl on this land? I know people that have made a living on less land then that. It maybe harder to do in our climate but the more food you can produce at home the more security you will have for any hard times ahead. Having acreage puts you in a much better position then someone living in a town house. The biggest problem many people face is what it costs` them to live every month. If you own your property and vehicles and only have some basic utilities, insurance, and food needs every month then cost of living is very minimal. Now add what your monthly payments for dept load are. I know people that never even ask what the final price of a car is when they borrow or lease to purchase, they just want to know "How much are my payments a month?" You go to the bank to get pre-approved to purchase a house. Again based on the maximum amount you can afford to pay each month. With this attitude people tend to purchase beyond their means. Yes we need a place to live, but does it need to be bigger and better. I think of the nice little well built old houses in the Fort George area, nothing fancy but simple and livable. Why do people feel the need for larger and larger homes today? they just cost more to build and more to live in!! Same with our vehicles. I own several vehicles all payed for, but also all older 10-20 years or more. Would I like newer? "Yes" can I justify borrowing the money for newer vehicles "No".
We all need to learn to live for our needs and not our wants. Wants and dreams are great to have we should all have goals, but not if you need to continually borrow money to our get there.

IMO Fenceman

Posted by: taxinapothole on February 4 2009 6:35 PM

When are we going to wake up? This is our money, not the governments! They are doing with our money what they want, and they don't give a damn about you and I. We need a general strike, and we need it now! If you disagree, then just wait. In the not to distant future, you and I will be out of work, and it will be too late to make things right. Dirty thirties, here we come! Shellshadow, you are so right.

Think of it this way if you can. We all have a bank account that we put money into (use to). If the bank moves our money, out of our account, and does something else with it, we will scream bloody murder! Sooooooooooo, what is the problem? Why are we not screaming bloody murder, when the Government moves our money out of "THE WORKERS" EI bank account???

Just wondering!!

Posted by: diplomat on February 5 2009 8:32 AM

"When are we going to wake up? "

Some of us are wide awake and criticize the poor performance of any government, any party, any agenda.

The problem is that one third of the population doesn't even bother to vote and most of the remaining two thirds wake up (partially) only when the next election with all the BS promises rolls around again.

Then, many of the ones that DO give a hoot are too busy defending their particular party's agenda and policies by denigrating others by every method they can dream up.

The politicians don't mind because after the dust settles it is business as usual again.

Cheers!

Posted by: dirtcheap on February 5 2009 8:52 AM

How long are we going to put up with a government telling us how we are doing.I am quite sure they are still getting paid,could someone please tell me if they are not.Many of us have paid into this fund for many years and if this is'nt a good time to pay some of it back ,then when will it be a good time......Gotta agree with RRrabbit.....it is time to let these arrogant people we call "The Government" know that we have had enough!!!!

Posted by: fenceman on February 5 2009 10:02 AM

Dirtcheap,Diplomat if you feel so strongly that they are doing a bad job. It is a free country you can always run for office. I would be interested to see if you still felt the same once you joined the ranks of "The Government"
It is easy to heckle from the ranks it is another to get up and lead!

Posted by: hammy on February 5 2009 10:15 AM

My E.I. has just run out as of Jan.29/09. I just had an interview this week for a 10.00 dollar an hour job and I'm praying I get the call next week. After reading Fencemans comment, I have to assume that all you bussiness owners think because were in a union that we were all paid big bucks. How does 12 sound to you. Too much! I have worked and lived in this town all my life. I have given my blood, sweat and tears for 2% pay raise, then 10% cut in pay only to have the place shut down anyway.I am an older person, and a damn hard worker. So fenceman if you have a job and a hammer I want to Know Where To Apply.Taxinthehole set a date and where to meet for this uprising and I'll be there to protest the resignation of this Diane Finlay. Lazy my a$$, wait till the next generation comes along ,most of them don't know what a shovel is let alone spell it without spell checker. Thats my grief.

Posted by: hammy on February 5 2009 10:19 AM

By the way Fenceman, I qualify for the 20-25 Dollar an Hour.

Posted by: dirtcheap on February 5 2009 1:04 PM

Hey fenceman, sounds like your a fence sitter working for government.Did you even read the article that this topic started with,put brain in gear before posting to this site....please.