5 Great Reasons to Move to Winnipeg

Hard to say. Probably would. Although I believe less and less. However I think that kind of thing is an opiate to any government. They argue that once in power they'll do this and that but once there things "change". It's anybody's guess.

I believe that a Conservative party would be more attractive to businesses looking to relocate and for existing businesses to grow. I believe they'd develop policy that would result in more jobs and higher paying jobs. Of course I'm all for increasing wages despite some ignorant comments to the contrary.

Hmmmmmmmm I don't remember all roses and sunshine under the other Gary's (Filmon) thumb either........

It is kinda difficult to compare regimes over a generation though. Hell Evil Doer still points to things that allegedly happened 12 years ago for things that happen today. That's ludicrous. He has had a dozen years to fix any perceived wrong...

You are 100% correct Grumpy! I don't know if you were here or in Toronto when we switched powers but Doer claimed it would take I think it was 18 months maximum to end hallway medicine, undo Filmon's mistakes, etc etc. He promised us the moon and gave us dirt instead.Anyone remember "Filmon Fridays"? I think that was one of the best cost cutting measures a government ever did! It was a tad inconvenient having government offices closed on Fridays but we did just fine.

Not only that, but healthcare was better under Filmon. And by now, we would have a prosperous private system as an alternate. Doer won't change because of ideology.

Most of the nursing shortages can be laid at Garys feet as he cut them and Doctor enrollment at U OF M . we are still paying for that .

filmon fridays and the like caused me to have to pay for my kids to stay at school at lunch time.

Triniman wrote:Not only that, but healthcare was better under Filmon. And by now, we would have a prosperous private system as an alternate. Doer won't change because of ideology.

LMFAO! Cause we all see how great private healthcare works in the US eh? No thanks. I'd rather my doctor decides what treatment iI get...not my HMO!

Pavolo wrote:Most of the nursing shortages can be laid at Garys feet as he cut them and Doctor enrollment at U OF M . we are still paying for that .

How many years have the NDP been in power in Manitoba ?
How many years does it take for a nurse to get through University ?

It seems we read about a lot of nurses graduating every year in Manitoba.
I wonder where they end up working?

grumpyrom wrote:

Triniman wrote:Not only that, but healthcare was better under Filmon. And by now, we would have a prosperous private system as an alternate. Doer won't change because of ideology.

LMFAO! Cause we all see how great private healthcare works in the US eh? No thanks. I'd rather my doctor decides what treatment iI get...not my HMO!

I don't think you get it. Having a two-tier medical system gives us choice. Choice means less waiting time, for example. I'm not in favour of private-only system. What are thoughts about a two-tier system? We'd have it if the Tories were in power.

Or it gives doctors choice, choice to work in the public or private sector. Most would probably prefer to work for the higher paying one...more than likely the private sector. This would only weaken the public healthcare system further.

grumpyrom wrote:Or it gives doctors choice, choice to work in the public or private sector. Most would probably prefer to work for the higher paying one...more than likely the private sector. This would only weaken the public healthcare system further.

The market for private health care is finite, therefore it can only absorb so many doctors.

Public health care gets better when fewer people line up for it, due to an alternative, don't you think?

like today's private schools that fought for and recieved funding, would the pay for portion of two tier recieve a share of money as well?

That's another one of my pet peeves Dean, if it's private school why are they recieving ANY public funds at all. That's complete and total BS. If you want to pay for private school for you kids go ahead but don't expect any public funds to subsidize your costs.

grumpyrom wrote:That's another one of my pet peeves Dean, if it's private school why are they recieving ANY public funds at all. That's complete and total BS. If you want to pay for private school for you kids go ahead but don't expect any public funds to subsidize your costs.

If the private schools are truly private (meaning no government interference)...then I agree 100%...but I think the argument is the private schools still have to follow "public guidelines"...so by all means...get some public funding.

A true private school should/would be able to create their own curriculum. If that does not truly prepare a student for life "outside" the school...then they won't have students for very long...so why does the government INSIST on sticking their nose in and telling the school what to teach, and when?

Does it really matter if a student learns about Shakespeare in Grade 9 or Grade 12? Or Chemistry in Grade 8 or Grade 10?

Maybe introducing Physics to an 8th Grader isn't unreasonable?

But, as long as the government is willing to step in and try to control what the school is allowed to teach, and even moreso dictate what's REQUIRED to be taught...then the Private Schools deserve whatever funding they can get their hands on.

grumpyrom wrote:That's another one of my pet peeves Dean, if it's private school why are they recieving ANY public funds at all. That's complete and total BS. If you want to pay for private school for you kids go ahead but don't expect any public funds to subsidize your costs.

History should straighten out your perception of this "private' business. Catholic Schools were to be funded as were Protestant Schools, but that has still not happened.

Not all 'private schools' are like Ravenscourt btw.

"Catholic Schools were to be funded as were Protestant Schools, but that has still not happened."

what are you talking about? since when are the religous school not funded?

oo.... I see you mean the ones that refuse to follow the MB standards...
http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/schools/ind/non_fund_ind.html

I believe the funding is less than the amount that is allocated per student for the public schools...it's abot 80% I believe.

JTF wrote:I believe the funding is less than the amount that is allocated per student for the public schools...it's abot 80% I believe.

yeah but the point being... if you choose to ignore the PUBLIC one, why should you get any money? ( we are talking education and health care here ) and no dont start with the if I dont use it, I should not have to contribute taxes...

That's not the way it is set up in this province.

I dont understand what you mean

I took a look at the web site that was referenced and most of the listed schools are colony schools or church/baptist schools (not all). As a group that chooses not to follow the public schools act, they do not have to follow the curriculum nor do they have to hire qualified teachers who are licensed by the provincial government. BUT in order for the students to go on to a post secondary institution (such as University of Manitoba) in any province, they must take an equivalency test similar to the GED. Without that they can't go any further than the school's graduating grade, whatever that may be. The funding that they do receive is for materials (text books, etc).
Right now a private school receives 80% of the funding that a public school receives per fiscal year. What is different and what annoys me to no end, is private schools do not have to accept children who they do not want, for example, special needs students who are either physically challenged or have a learning disability. So if this is the case, the private school system should get ZERO of the tax payers dollars.

agreed

Agreed. They can turn away any student they want but yet recieve public funds, how does that make any sense?

Deank wrote:I dont understand what you mean

Back when Christ was a baby, it was determined that there would be two school systems, a Protestant (public) and a Catholic (private); both to be funded by the government and equally. The equally part has never been honoured.

Does that answer the question of why they can do what they please...pay the other 20% and then speak I reckon.