Jump to content
Jambands.ca

phishtaper

Members
  • Posts

    6,351
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by phishtaper

  1. saw this in the Globe a couple days ago ...

    Little auto price gap seen in Canada v. U.S.

    GREG KEENAN

    September 18, 2007

    Buying vehicles in the United States with a Canadian dollar that is almost at par will not generate massive savings for most car buyers, says a study of prices in Canada and the U.S. compiled by industry analyst Dennis DesRosiers. Vehicle pricing has become a hot issue with the rise in value of the Canadian dollar, the president of DesRosiers Automotive Consultants Inc. noted yesterday, but "in all of our 'popular' segments ... the price gap between Canada and the U.S. narrowed in 2007." Those segments are subcompact and compact cars, compact sport utility vehicles, minivans and full-sized pickup trucks which, combined, represent two-thirds of the vehicles Canadians buy annually. In compact cars, the largest market segment in Canada, the difference in price between the average car in the two countries is $221, he said. There are, Mr. DesRosiers acknowledges, still major gaps in some categories, including luxury sports cars, where a trip to a U.S. dealer will save a Canadian buyer almost $14,000 on average.

    im not sure if the study used exchange rates that have been adjusted since the loony has soared, though.

  2. Dear X (phishtaper),

    I appreciate the fact that you wrote.

    First I should say that the decision to do the debate with only three leaders was a decision of the seven networks involved in the debate, not just CBC.

    And the decision is not based only on the fact that the Greens don't have a seat. I know there is a widespread assumption that all a party needs is one seat, and it's in. But that's not so. (What if that seat were held by a member elected for another party, but then crossed the floor? Would that count?)

    There is no rigid set of critieria for inclusion in the debate.

    Generally, we look at four major questions:

    Not in any particular order they are:

    1 - Does the party have seats in the legislature?

    2 - Where is the party in recent polls?

    3 - How many candidates is the party running, and how many of those candidates are considered at all likely to win a seat?

    4 - How much of a presence does the party have between elections?

    We have set no specific level the party has to reach on any of these criteria, but we look at the entire picture and then use our best judgment to decide if a party should be sharing the precious debate time.

    The issue of how many candidates for example, taken in a federal context, would eliminate the BQ if we simply said, 75 candidates in more than 300 ridings... not much. We don't do that. We look at what impact they will likely have on election night.

    Sometimes a party can run candidates in every riding, but we evaluate their chances of winning any, some, many... and what that would do to the overall results.

    Polling is another judgment. Some parties poll at a certain level just before or during a campaign, but history tells us they don't reach that level on election night.

    To be clear, I'm not saying the Greens failed or passed on any of these questions - we have not set a standard for passing or failing.

    I'm saying that looking at the entire picture, informed by these four major criteria, the editorial judgment of the TV networks, was that the people of Ontario would be better served hearing from three leaders in this debate.

    The fact that cbc.ca includes the Green Party in its profiles is evidence that our news organization (and to be fair, the others) has not said that the Greens should be ignored. The party will be covered in our newscasts and current affairs programs and on our web sites. But the broadcast debate is limited to the three leaders for whom the vast majority of people will vote.

    CBC Executive

    I have removed personal information, but this is what I heard back from a CBC Executive yesterday after I wrote to ask why de Jong is not included. His phrasing is casual, given the context of my email to him, and I dont think this is a form letter, but parts of it may be standard response. I do know that the networks have received a great deal of feedback on this issue, wondering why the Green Party is not represented.

  3. ...make sure your agent isn't an idiot.My last one was and while suing him is kind of fun...it's not that fun.

    oh, do tell.

    we had an agent several years ago that would show us properties that were exactly what we didnt want (and they were often ones for which she was the listing agent - double commission, cha-ching) or she would send us emails with listings that "just hit the market" but we'd already seen them on line two weeks prior. we got rid of her.

    yes, a good agent is hugely important.

  4. good advice, brad. Ollie, scan the www.mls.ca listings on a regular basis so you will be able to determine what a good deal is in specific areas of town. get an agent now and make sure you have all of your ducks in order when you do go to buy, because the best deals will often be had quickly. submitting an offer the day of listing is sometimes an effective strategy, but you have to be prepared to do that. dont expect prices to drop. at best, they will not increase. the market is still quite healthy in most of Ontario.

  5. participants in federal election debates are determined by a group representing the media covering the event, if my memory serves correctly.

    i think so too, I didnt think elections ontario was running this. so, if the media decide who is to be part of the debate, then why is de Jong not included? true, the Greens do not currently have a seat (and that's the official cop-out excuse), but most of these media outlets have either explictly included the Green Party among their profiles of the top four parties, or de Jong and the Greens get sufficient coverage so as to imply these media outlets believe they are an important factor in the election (for many reasons, including: green issues, impact on the party of the referendum, ever increasing voter support of the party, etc.).

    im not suggesting a covert agenda or anything conspiratorial, im just saying that de Jong and the Greens are sufficiently important in the political landscape of Ontario now (and will become increasingly so) that they should be represented in this event.

  6. so, can you tell me why Frank de Jong of the Green Party isn't invited to the Ontario Leaders debate tomorrow night?

    sure, the Green Party has no seats now, but they did receive a decent vote tally in both the last federal and provincial elections (enough to win at least 1 List Member seat under MMP). the Green Party actually has some long-term momentum and it is shut out of this mainstream event. pretty sad, I think.

  7. now lobbing grapefruit at performers is a much more sure-fire method of getting a band off a stage

    not so ...

    Joan Jett, CNE Stadium, Friday the 13th, August 1982 (Police Picnic)

    pelted so badly, in fact, with dozens of Florida's other fruit (many injected with vodka, no doubt) that they stopped the show, the Q107 announcer came out and called us all assholes, and then joan did come back out to do a polite couple more songs ... and we behaved.

    ah, those were the days when you could bring a cooler into to a concert. :D

    s19820813-poster.jpg

    (not shown, but surprise, last minute addition ... Talking Heads)

×
×
  • Create New...