Comment 42719

By A Smith (anonymous) | Posted July 02, 2010 at 01:01:53

JonC >> never responded to the answers provided

In the last post, I responded to three of Kiely's points. If there was one I didn't that you would like me too, tell me which one it is and I will.

>> use your same shitty logic to compare Burlington to Toronto

sigh.

>> Two data sets at two points is in no way, shape or form proof of anything

Okay, then you shouldn't be upset if the government cut health care spending to 1% of it's current level. If the amount of health care spending is just one data point amongst many, using your logic, there is no way to prove that this change would be harmful to people's health.

>> Ryan's articles tend to be about recent studies or news articles and well reasoned.

I have never heard Ryan explain why downtown Hamilton, which has the highest concentration of transit in the entire city and more than Burlington and Oakville, is also the poorest amongst those areas. If he can't do that, why should anyone believe that more subsidized transit will improve the situation?

In contrast, one could make the argument that lower tax rates, which Ancaster, Burlington and Oakville all have in comparison to Hamilton, may have something to do with their greater prosperity. If not proof, at least it is a positive correlation, unlike the transit theory, which is negative.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds