What if the NDP wins

There are three things that can happen when you throw a pass, and two of them are bad.
attributed to Woody Hayes

I should say that in this blog the phrase "Socialist Horders" or "Red Menace" will not appear.

Since last weekend, we have witnessed an incredible surge of support for the NDP. I'm not talking up to 20%, we talking at least the Official Opposition or even, dare we say it, Government. Will we really say "Prime Minister Jack Layton" after the 2nd of May? Some have dismissed the surge as an invention of media in an attempt to spice up an otherwise dull election. Whether this is true or not remains to be seen, still there is something happening; even the Toronto Star has come out in support of the NDP. Now that is a shock, the Official Organ of the Liberal Party of Canada comes out to support the third party. Impending sign of the apocalypse I am sure.

So what will happen if the NDP wins on Monday night. I want to suggest there are three possibilities, as as the quote from Woody Hayes says, two of them are bad

Scenario #1 The NDP decides to go ahead and as a party of principle and implement as much of their election platform as possible. Some of them include giving Quebec a guarantee 25% of the seats in the House of Commons. Even though the province is home to 23% they will be weighed a bit more then the rest of Canada. I believe was part of the Meech Lake Accord, which as memory serves, was rejected by Canadians, sorry that was the equally maligned Charlottetown Accord. Then there is the cap and trade, or the cash and grab, which fills government coffers with money and establishes a new market of trading carbon credits- think corruption. Of course the idea will be to punish the major polluters and force them to pay, which they will immediately pass on to the consumers, so we get almost no reduction of carbon and higher prices, a sure win-win scenario. You can read my thoughts about cap and trade in the blog before this one, remember I'm a supporter of the Green Party. Other promises will cost money and while laudable, it has to be realized, its costly to get more doctors and nurses. While the Star comment talks about the fiscal responsibility of many provincial NDP premiers, one name is oddly absent and that is little Bobby Rae, the NDP Premier of Ontario. Anyone want to remember Rae Days?

Then there is the issue of a lot of neophytes in the place of power, hopefully the party is full of quick learners because they will need to be. The problem is as a party of ideology, there may be many who will refuse to compromise and will go ahead with their agenda irregardless of the consequences. An important part of politics is compromise and will this be a skill many in the NDP can exercise, especially when given the reins of power?

Scenario #2

The NDP comes to power having excited a new portion of the electorate. They are inspired by the vision given by Jack Layton and the Platform. There are videos on YouTube from inspired people, think "Yes We Can" by Will.I.Am. They win and then the cold light of reality shines its bright cold ray upon the platform. The party leadership realizes it can't keep the promises, even right now there is some backpedalling. The question is, what happens when it becomes prominent. I think we have the example of this when we look down south. I noticed the NDP has tried to hitch their wagon to President Obama, but look at his track record, the US is still stuck in Afghanistan with no exit strategy, Gitmo is still open and doing a booming business and the health care, IE Obamacare is the dog's breakfast. The result is a lot of supporters of Obama, especially those of the fabled 'Generation O' are disappointed and will probably not bother to come out in the next election. I want to suggest that if the Republican Party could nominate a candidate that is intelligent, articulate and a war hero, such as, oh I don't know, Colin Powell, instead of freak shows such as Sarah Palin and Donald Trump, they would be in control of the White House after November 2012. Even when it carries out promises, it ends hurting rather then helping. Consider the cap and trade, it will effect the major polluters, those same polluters are corporations that employ a lot of the core supporters of the NDP, such as the Auto Industry, it gets hammered and the companies either inform the unions of huge lay offs or demand major concessions, its like the 90's all over again.

Scenario #3

On May 3rd the Dominion wakes to the reality of Prime Minister Layton and for some reason the Sun decides to rise in the East. The party under the wise leadership of Jack Layton is able to maintain a nice balance of compromise and remaining true to core beliefs. Even though the markets react at first badly, over the course of months they realize Canada is stronger for the NDP and things improve. People are supported and overall there are some increase in taxes but a lot of the social programs generally protect people. Seniors are protected and the health care system finally has the funds to provide people with a first rate system. Yes there are some hiccups along the way but the overall strength of Canada is such that the early teething problems of the government are soon forgotten. The Party becomes a moderate social democratic party and all is made stronger.

So those are some of my thoughts for this evening.

Cap and Trade

Much is now being made on the promise of the NDP to institute a 'cap and trade' to deal with carbon emissions in Canada. There are a number of voices that are speaking out against this plan stating it is a bit of madness and will only hurt the economy and do nothing for the environment.

That's not my problem with the scheme. If that was the only issue, that is was opposed by those on the right I would not feel against it. I know that I'm standing against a lot of green political philosophy, but I feel I am correct in this.

My main problem with cap and trade is that I'm not at all confident that it will actually do anything to solve the problem. The number one problem is that it keeps the carbon based economy in place, yes it wants to lower carbon emissions, or does it. The idea is that governments will set the cap that it will allow all industry to release into the environment. The belief is that the governments of the world will set the cap lower and lower with each passing year. Those industries that are above the 'cap' will be penalized by a 'tax'. Some call it a carbon tax, I realize that's not for the entire project, but it exists as part of the plan. Of course there is always a loophole and that is the second part of the phrase 'trade'. If company 'A' is a large polluter they could always buy the credits from a energy efficient and a clean energy company, so company 'A' can keep on polluting because its not doing anything to harm the overall cap of carbon. To make sure this happens, there's got to be a way to buy the credits and of course there are various markets that will do just that.

There is a very interesting documentary called "The Story of Cap and Trade", there is a teaser:



There is a few other problems and here are my thoughts,

the moment you make a tax on a thing you effective remove any incentive to get rid of it. This is especially true with governments, for so many years governments have told us that taxation is a way to change attitude and behaviour. The primary is the so called 'sin tax', this is special taxes and levies on things such as cigarettes and alcohol. After all the taxes on these items I am sure you will agree the taxes have worked, consumption of both have decreased dramatically. The actual answer is 'not at all'. Governments know that no matter how high they put the tax, they make more money, in fact the few that decide to quit don't put a chink in the armour of money made through these taxes. In fact, it is in the vested interest of government for people to keep smoking and drinking because they get more money. Yes put the taxes up too high and it will encourage smuggling- think the smoke shacks on the Six Nations Reserve. However for the most part, people will keep buying cigarettes. It is in the best interest of governments, therefore, for people to smoke and keep smoking. As for alcohol, think of how the Liquor Stores have changed from places to restrain the purchase of alcohol to the fun places to go to buy your spirits. They want to encourage the sale of alcohol because the more sold means more money and more for the coffers of the government. Now take this same mindset and turn it into carbon taxes, it is in the interest of governments to perhaps tinker with the amounts of carbon emissions on an annual basis but it will maintain a carbon economy because the money is there to be made. Let's get back to cigarettes, everyone agrees smoking is bad for your health, this is given. It is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt- to the point of, is the government was truly serious and this is a suggest I heard a long time ago, they should declare cigarettes dangerous products and not for consumption by people. A person who said this suggested that for those who simply can't quit smoking and the government should make quit smoking strategies free to those who need them, would be to make them available through a prescription. I know there would be those who would argue that smuggling would go through the roof, well, let it be. One of the purpose of governments is to protect society and there are a lot of things that are declared dangerous to human consumption. We don't allow arsenic our food, we don't take those foods that contain arsenic because its that dangerous.

So now the government catches onto a huge source of money, cap and trade. It makes them money- which ultimately comes from all of us, since corporations pass on their cost to us. What incentive is there to get rid of carbon emissions, none, because it brings in revenue. Who knows, will we see statements such as 'Pollute Responsibly'? After all, that's the notice in Casinos and Liquor Store, there is no attempt to stop, rather enjoy so you don't harm yourself and others.

There is nothing to inspire the work to get the planet off the Carbon Economy. Forget cap and trade, we need to re-think how we run this planet. What is the dynamite energy source that is clean and green? I know some may think or say, that is the purpose of cap and trade, providing funds for future inventions. Yeah. Right. We need to kick this diet of fossil fuel and find the next source of energy.

Do we need cap and trade? In my mind is no, it is only a masquerade that looks good but in the end hides what always has been and changes nothing.

One Week to Go

That's all there is, one week until election day. You can almost sense the excitement in the air. People are talking about nothing else then the election, providing you count 'when are they finished?' as election conversation.

Still I thought about the leaders of the various parties and wondered what they think of this final week. So here's some thoughts:

Stephen Harper- since the last election he developed a layer of Teflon in that nothing sticks to him at all; contempt of parliament, please; G20 scandal, big yawn, big honking fighter jets, yawn yawn yawn. I think he wants to get through this final week with as little pain as possible. He has been running a flawless campaign, no major gaffes, no comments about culture that cost him Quebec. It's looking like he might get his majority after all. If he wins, he will spend time in his secret lair with his pals from the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group. As leader of them all, he plans to control the world and it starts in Canada.

Michael Ignatieff- less then one week and the nightmare ends. The pain will stop and he can go back to doing whatever he does when he's not trying to run for Prime Minister of Canada. The question is when will he resign? I suspect there will be discussions with Liberal leadership and all the people who want his job. No doubt they will promise not to stab him too much if he leaves right now.

Jack Layton- hasn't this past weekend been interesting for the NDP. I've often written that Jack who is very popular with Canadians was never able to have a halo effect, well was I wrong. It seems the party has come from its usual doldrums of 13-16% to nearly tied with the Liberals. If that wasn't exciting enough, he's leader of the pack in Quebec. I believe he hopes the week ends with the momentum either growing or consolidating. He's also hoping it ends before he has to renege on any more campaign promises and people start asking too many hard questions, like 'where's the money coming from'? He's already starting to gut his green policies. Could be interesting.

Gilles Doucette- he's going to have a tough week because he's actually going to have to campaign. With the surging NDP on his home turf he's got to give people a reason to actually vote for him. I mean usually by now he's crabbing about how rotten the rest of Canada is to Quebec, which is usually how he starts the campaign. This is good enough, but now he's got some competition. It's new territory for him, will be interesting to see how he reacts.

Elizabeth May- it's time to win at least your seat and maybe a couple more.

The Electorate. In a week we will decide the outcome of the election. We will enter that little polling station and receive a small piece of paper. With pencil in hand we shall vote for the person to represent our riding. If enough from one party win, that party will form the government and the party leader will be prime minister. If one party gains a majority then we will enjoy the fact that as much as they will ignore us, we can ignore them. Politicians are like all officials, they do their best work when we don't notice them, for when we notice them, it means they screwed up.

Don't forget to Vote

The Race for Second

There's still a lot of electioneering to happen and a lot of things can go right and or wrong for the various political parties, but as I look around the Dominion today I think there are a few truisms taking form; the next government will be formed by the Conservatives under the leadership of Stephen Harper, the campaign is rather boring and the real race is starting to heat up. You may ask what race is that? The race for the position of Official Opposition.

I've noticed recently a few changes in the advertisement that is filling up my television screen, mainly the Conservatives are positioning themselves as looking governmental and Harper as Prime Ministerial. The Liberals, almost non-existent and the NDP has now got Ignatieff in their sights. It's interesting how the latter has happened. For the last few elections, the Liberals have been trying to take votes away from the NDP- after all it is the compassionate progressive party, not the NDP that's for sure- they're a bunch of dirty commies, after all. However, things have changed, the debate gave Layton, whom a lot of Canadians like an opportunity to shine and shine he did. What he did was go after Iggy. I know some could suggest that is an easy target, but that makes me think they, the NDP know something that there is an opportunity for breakthrough. Just today I got in my email some mail from Jack- he's going after a breakthrough in Newfoundland & Labrador.

Could it be we see the NDP take both votes and seats from the Liberals. This will be a great assistance for the Conservatives because if the Centre-Left is split it will guarantee the Conservatives picking up a few seats, perhaps enough to form a majority government? Let's remember that the Chretien era back to back majorities was marked by a split of the right. It wasn't that Canadians loved the Poutine, its just he rode a split in the opposition. So we could witness Harper reaching his dream of a majority on the basis of a surging and strong NDP.

I haven't said anything about the Green Party so far, let me correct it- they have a great platform. In fact I would put their platform up with any party. To give a few examples: regarding the Internet and Net Neutrality

The Internet has become an essential tool in knowledge storage and the free flow of informationbetween citizens. It is playing a critical role in democratizing communications and society as a whole. There are corporations that want to control the content of information on the internet and alter the free flow of information by giving preferential treatment to those who pay extra for faster service.
The Green Party of Canada is committed to the original design principle of the internet - network neutrality: the idea that a maximally useful public information network treats all content, sites, and platforms equally, thus allowing the network to carry every form of information and support every kind of application.

Then there is this comment on public transporation:

Urban sprawl means commuters crawl. More roads don’t solve the problem; they make it worse. Gridlock means more air pollution and more greenhouse gas emissions. A transition to efficient light rail transit and coordinated buses will take cars off our roads, breaking the cycle of an increasing number of cars on increasingly-crowded roads to make our cities more livable.
We must build our way out of the problem of clogged roads and smog-choked cities, not by building more roads and bridges and more distant suburbs, but by building “smart growth” infrastructure.
Excellent public transit and efficient housing in high-density nodes along existing transit corridors will make cities more livable and people-friendly. The federal government must take the lead in funding the “greening” of Canada’s cities. (see Section 1.14 Infrastructure and Communities for more on federal municipal
relations.)

I think its time for Canada to vote in a Green MP. If Australia and the UK could do it and survive, so can Canada. It is time for a fifth party.

Much Depends upon the NDP

A couple of articles in two different newspapers brought some interesting and different points of view. The first comes from the National Post, the headline read; "Tories, NDP get top marks for national campaigns". On the same day, the Toronto Star, the in-house organ of the Bloc Toronto (aka Liberal Party of Canada) declares: "NDP fortunes falling fast in latest poll"

Of course, the National Post is a rather right leaning newspaper that would be rather sympathetic to the claims of the Conservative Party of Canada and Stephen Harper. Consider the election strategy of the two main parties, for the Liberals, the best way to ensure election victory would be for the NDP to implode. They believe that if they can catch the votes of disgrunted or disillusioned NDP'ers, then they stand a chance to win, if not a majority then at least a minority government. They need the NDP to go away. You might remember Buzz Hargrove, he joined the Liberal team and told his, I suppose, his former NDP friends to vote Liberal. So the Star has to have headlines that state support of the NDP is collapsing, they want those now disappointed NDP'ers to vote Liberal. They know there is no way for NDP'ers to ever think of voting Conservative. Never going to happen. The startegy is to get them to think the Liberals are the next best thing and the place to put their vote.

As for the Conservatives, they need a strong NDP. Now let me say this, they know there is no way disgrunted Conservatives will go that far to the left. Conservatives will not vote NDP just as NDP'ers will not vote Conservatives. I don't think their thoughts is that Liberals will go over to the NDP, although I supposed more left leaning Liberals will go NDP. But, the votes can't go the other way. The supporters of the Conservatives need a split on the Centre-Left vote. Much like during the days of Chretien, the right was split between Conservatives and Reformed/Alliance group. Chretien was able to coast to a few majorities because of the split. Now the shoe is on the other foot, with a strong party left of the Liberals, that vote won't go to the Liberals.

It wouldn't surprise me if some with the Conservatives think it might be a good idea to completely ignore the Liberals and concentrate on the NDP. They need a strong NDP and a weak Liberal Party.

Should be interesting.

Branding Terrorism

I was coming to the end of the book Zero History by William Gibson, when I read this quote from one of the people involved in the story. It was during a discussion when Garreth says:

Terrorism was almost exclusively about branding.

First of all, let me say, Zero History is an excellent book. It has been considered the third and final book in the Bigend Cycle, which started with the book "Pattern Recognition". Let me say, there is, near the end of the book the introduction of a character that was important in the first book. I'll say no more because I don't want to spoil the story. In fact the purpose of this blog is not to review the book, except to say, it's an enjoyable read. So either buy it or borrow it from your local library.

The quote is what interested me, in fact I stopped reading to write it down. This way I could think about it. It has been in the mind of other readers as well; during my research for this blog I came across this interview with William Gibson. He is asked about the comment and gives this:

If you’re a terrorist (or a national hero, depending on who’s looking at you), there are relatively few of you and relatively a lot of the big guys you’re up against. Terrorism is about branding because a brand is most of what you have as a terrorist. Terrorists have virtually no resources. I don’t even like using the word terrorism. It’s not an accurate descriptor of what’s going on.

Terrorists are now, if you believe that quote and comment is more interested in developing brand awareness and branding rather then the overthrow of whatever government or interest the terrorist is attacking. If this is true, then this is quite a change, I remember years ago being involved in a discussion about terrorists. To give you the time, terrorists were groups such as the Red Brigade and the Baader-Meinhof Group. The story discussed was called, the Wasp. It dealt with a wasp that had flown into a car and was bothering the driver. The driver would react and attempt to swat the wasp, in doing so, brought about a car crash. This was the purpose of terrorism, to overthrow the state. It was involved in bombings, suicide as means to this end. Now with Mr. Gibson, terrorism is on the same level as Tommy Hilfiger, Old Navy or Nike. As I typed those names, I could see each of them being the template for modern day terrorism. It is all about getting into the public eye. Oddly enough, terrorists probably wear Nikes, Old Navy and Tommy Hilfiger shoes and clothing.

As we look at the major terrorist organization, al-Qaeda, it becomes fascinating to change the mindset. It seems no longer involved in directly overthrowing or destroying the enemy. In fact the article from Wikipedia gives the five strategies of the group:

1. Provoke the United States into invading a Muslim country.
2. Incite local resistance to occupying forces.
3. Expand the conflict to neighboring countries, and engage the U.S. in a long war of attrition.
4. Convert Al-Qaeda into an ideology and set of operating principles that can be loosely franchised in other countries without requiring direct command and control, and via these franchises incite attacks against countries allied with the U.S. until they withdraw from the conflict, as happened with the 2004 Madrid train bombings, but which did not have the same effect with the 7 July 2005 London bombings.
5. The U.S. economy will finally collapse under the strain of too many engagements in too many places, similarly to the Soviet war in Afghanistan, Arab regimes supported by the U.S. will collapse, and a Wahhabi Caliphate will be installed across the region.

Interesting how ideology does not enter the equation until step 4, prior ideology was the motivator for the terrorists. Terrorism was either extreme left or extreme right, all for overthrowing the government. Now it is more interested in developing franchises and regions, more like McDonald's then the successor to anarchists groups.

This brings to the thought, is all this a relevant for global events or a lot of spacious writing. This is the crux of the matter as well, by reading the strategy there is no attempt to turn the US or the West for that matter into a part a new and global Islamic Empire, they just want them out of their area. So all they have is the desire to keep the heat up and their names in the media.

If all this is the case, then terrorist acts are part of brand awareness and a suicide bomber is more a marketer or a cool brander.

Election? Election!

All right, the Budget has come down and the Opposition Parties are in a right froth over it. All claim it is doing nothing for the average Canadian. Although some would say there is going to be some nice savings for the average Canadian. One article stated there are no new taxes for the average Canadian. It's amazing how much ink is split dealing with the average Canadian. In fact we are usually the best treated part of society, until reality hits and its usually the middle class that gets hit.

I wondered though, with all the opposition if this wasn't a ploy by the Conservatives. They've got the nastiness of the contempt of Parliament charges, which will not be good.

Yet, I wondered, then I thought about the reasons for the election. The Liberals probably figure it will be a good way to get rid of Iggy, without the messiness of a palace coup. Best that on election night, he simply stands up and concedes the election and announces he is stepping down as leader of the Liberal Party. While the Liberals have no problems knifing people in the back, it's far better and cleaner this way.

The BQ, well, they're never happy.

The NDP, again, this is the enigmatic party of Canadian politics. Jack Layton is personable, respected and likeable, but he can't break the 18% mark, in fact I believe the last poll put the party at 13%. What can they get out of an election, perhaps the chance to break through to Leader of the Opposition. If the Liberal strategy consists of getting rid of Iggy, then the centre-left is open for them to manoeuvre.

So unless people come to their senses and realize they are being exploited by Stephen Harper, we're going to have an election.

Should be fun.

Tapped: The Movie

This is one of the reasons why I enjoy watching, if 'enjoy' is the right word, documentaries. There are times I find them annoying, since they tend to be strident, preachy and always going on about how bad things are, and how they are going from bad to worse.

Yet for all that, one of the great purposes of documentaries, besides being ways of challenging our thinking is to teach us a few things. My last blog was about Bottled Water Free Day, a movement that wants to liberate people from the scourge of bottled water. I have been aware that many municipalities are interested in enacting by-laws that would ban either the sale of bottled water in the community, or at least ensuring the municipality would not purchase bottled water for the every day operations of the city.

There's a lot of good reasons for this, one is of course, the bottled water industry is built upon one massive sham. The sham is simple, that this is the safest and best water you can have.

The movie Tapped wants to blow that concept right out of the water. The producers demonstrate a few things, the first is bottled water is a multi-billion dollar industry, so naturally, there is a lot of money being used to make sure people understand this and are filled with the sights of healthy active people drinking the product. To get people to drink it, they have to convince us all of one major fact, that tap water is evil. Of course the movie has a few interviews of prominent people in the industry claiming that tap water is not the enemy, and why should they, most of the water in bottles is tap water. The only difference is that bottled water has gone through a few more processes. What is a bit interesting is that most companies will never produce reports as to the safety of their product. I suspect they would claim such things as being company secrets. The film makers point out that municipal water is checked multiple times during the day.

Here in Ontario, we have the "Clean Water Act", which has as its stated purpose:

he purpose of this Act is to protect existing and future sources of drinking water.

This may be the clearest, most straightforward purpose ever given to any government act in the history of government acts. It is there to protect all sources of drinking water. The Province does continue and gives a website that looks at the safety of drinking water in Ontario. Besides reading a few things, you can go and learn how safe your water truly is, there is a page that gives the percentage of tests that met government standards, in Brantford, its 99.77%. In other words, it meets government standards all the time. I know the people who are doing the tests are very diligent, hey I've got to trust my own brother on this thing. Yes he is a provincial tester of water. He also drinks water. Got to trust someone who does all that.

Seriously, since Walkerton, Ontario has taken safe water very seriously. The group that watches our water is the Ontario Clean Water Agency, its mission to monitor our water.

With all this documentation available, including annual reports, we must ask ourselves why is private industry so reticent to give us their annual reports and their water study reports.

Of course, the documentary doesn't just deal with water, it considers the industry as a whole, including the packaging, which is the ubiquitous plastic bottle. They consider the source of the plastic, which is, of course, petroleum and does a study as to the various toxins which make up the plastic. One of the nastiest, and this only appears in hard plastic bottles is BPA. It appears in a lot of places and its so bad that it has been declared a toxic substance, which is probably why there are new style of plastic bottles available out there. Notice how the industry doesn't tell us anything about it. If it wasn't for government occasionally watching out for us, this could be worse. Actually I can't complain, for all we say, our governments do a pretty good job looking after our interests.

Besides this, the question continues, where does all those plastic bottles go? We like to think we all do our part and recycle, but again, it pointed out in most cases bottled water is a point of sale, one way product, you buy it, you drink it and you toss it. If there is some sort of recycling receptacle, it will go there, if not then its straight in the trash, or it will be tossed to the curb, wayside, ditch, park or where ever we find ourselves. In other words, it's not recycled and that's another problem. It now enters the ecosystem and causes even greater havoc. That's why we see them floating around. With 29 billion bottles used each year in the US and probably some sort of proportion in Canada, let alone the rest of the world, that's a lot of plastic that ends up somewhere. If its in the water, it goes into the lakes and from there, the oceans and from there, well, that's another problem altogether.

The water industry is mining water from anywhere they want, but its usually a few places and they honestly don't care about the local people or the local environment.

It's a movie worth watching. I picked up my copy from the local library and I suspect a lot of local libraries will have the same DVD. So go out, rent it, check it out and watch it. I think one result will be you will never buy another bottle of water again. Which could be a good thing. If you get thirsty the best thing to do is become friends with a local water fountain and if that's not possible, bring your own water, from your own tap, with your own reuseable bottle.

Bottled Water Freedom Day

I suppose it would be easy to dismiss this day as one of those 'trendier then thou' movement amongst the liberals that surround us and want to go out of their way to ban everything. However, it's an issue that may be very important to us all.

I would say one of the main problems of bottled water is that it is based upon some deception and subterfuge. The premise of bottled water is that our tap water is horribly dangerous and when we drink it, we are filling our bodies with poison. Things like chlorine and fluoride, the latter is, of course either a commie plot or an act of terrorism.

A few have pointed out that the bottled water industry was totally an invention of marketing and because of this, we are told how much we need to invest in bottled water. I came across a blog that had at its title: "Myths, Lies, & Freedom: 5 Reasons Bottled Water Is Superior To Tap Water".

While tongue in cheek, there is a lot of interesting facts, and we should consider a few of them. Perhaps the chief one is the fact that there is a lot of plastic already in our environment and truly do we need more? The convenience of carrying water is of course important for people who exercise, walk about for some shopping outside, or just enjoying the outside world. Since we need to drink 8 8oz glasses of water every day to stay hydrated, carrying it around is good. After all, can we trust drinking fountains? Actually we can.

The main site Bottled Water Free Day, gives us some examples as to why bottled water exist:

Just a decade ago bottled water was a novelty. Now, bottled water is seen as a necessity as water fountains have disappeared and multi-million dollar marketing campaigns have convinced us that bottled water is the only safe way to consume water.

This comes despite the fact that the bottled water industry is less regulated than municipal water systems, consumes more energy and releases more harmful toxins into the environment than tap water.

When we begin to accept that the only way to get drinking water is to buy it in a packaged form, it is easy to accept that water--whether from a tap or from a bottle--is a commodity to be bought and. A system is emerging where we will have two water systems: one for the world's wealthy and one for everyone else.

In recent years, citizens have started to fight back against the false claims and manipulation of the bottled water industry, who are are being forced under a public microscope as people question:
.
The safety of bottled water.
.
The growing corporate control of water resources
. The use of misleading bottled water marketing .
.

The heavy social and ecological toll that the commodification of water has had around the world.

The good news is that anyone can help stop the corporate control of water by joining the movement to ban bottled water and secure access to public water by creating Bottled Water Free Zones and getting your community to kick the bottle and back the tap!

The movement against bottled water is growing, many municipalities are considering banning sale, or at least having them around.

One of the scariest part of this entire argument has to do with the privatization of water; while water is still in the control of municipalities and it is doubtful any city or county would consider selling water control to, say, Coke or Pepsi, but its the reality in the third world. Water distribution is in the hands of multinationals and it is having negative effects on the communities of those nations.

Commodifying and privatizing water contributes to a divide between those who can and cannot pay for water. Examples of water privatization in the Global South provide evidence in support of this concern.

The bottled water industry affirms water as a commodity; privately owned, bought and sold for a profit. Cultivating consumers' willingness to pay more for a litre of bottled water than for a litre of gas helps set the stage for the public acceptance of the privatization of water services.

We are living through one of the most alarming and critical issues of our times: the global water crisis. Evidence abounds of the beginnings of an environmental catastrophe. Aquifers, rivers and lakes are drying up an alarming rate. This is due to overexploitation, and the pollution and contamination of fresh water systems and watersheds. Bottled water is a big part of the problem.

Bottled water companies have targeted their marketing towards convincing the public that the only safe water to drink, is that which comes in a bottle. This has contributed to diminished confidence in public water systems, which threatens to make badly needed investments in public water infrastructure less of a priority for government.

Serious questions and concerns are raised where water is privatized. Should the ability to pay define who can access clean water? What are the impacts of this kind of price value? Should profit guide the use of finite water resources that are essential to life itself? Water service cut-offs and pre-paid water metres are examples of how privatizing water can cause barriers to accessing it. When this happens, health can deteriorate, household tasks become more burdensome and people go thirsty. Inequalities between people of different class, race and gender confound these effects.

Water is rightfully considered part of the ‘commons’ and managed for the benefit of all people. This is based on the understanding that there are some areas that should not be left to the whims of the market, but rather should be managed as a social good.and that water resource management is environmentally sustainable.

In addition, once water supplies become open to the market, free trade agreements open them up even further, making it far more difficult for countries to later restrict their trade.

I guess it comes down to whether this is a huge issue or not to you. At work I have access to drinking fountains, I also fill up a bike bottle from home and bring it with me. Is this just as bad? I'm not buying anymore plastic, it is re-usable and I'm not paying the big dollars for a bottle of water.

So tomorrow it will be the same for me, I'm bringing my own water.

Starbucks at 40

As I entered my favourite Starbucks this evening, to enjoy my cup of Awake tea and to work on my blog, I spied the display, Starbucks is 40. This is quite a anniversary when you think about it. I suppose I should say something like "from humble beginnings, it has become the friendly behemoth, changing the coffee tastes of not only North America, but around the globe". I can say it has changed my coffee tastes, namely that it has given me a coffee taste.

I would like to say I had my first espresso drink at a Starbucks, but that would not be correct, it actually happened at this small coffee bar on Grandview Avenue in Vancouver. I was surprised to see how small an espresso drink is, until I tasted it, and wondered why I didn't sleep that night.

Starbucks and me go back a few years, to Vancouver. I remember when Starbucks attempted to open a store on Grandview Avenue (aka Java Drive), there was the usually anti-huge corporation vitriol, including a few paint bomb attacks to the logos. Yet it opened and survived, just as all the other coffee shops, including the roaster across the street. I have sat in the store in Vancouver where you could look across the street and see another Starbucks.

I have sat outside enjoying the warm February afternoon with a Cappuccino with my good friend Ed. I still have the photograph some place.

I have sat in the Pike Place Market Store, Starbucks #1 and enjoyed a coffee there.

Now thanks to Starbucks, I have a regular coffee every Saturday morning. It's as much a part of that routine as waffles and listening to NPR on XM radio. It's the only place I can listen to Car Talk and Wait, wait don't tell me.

As I write this, I'm wondering if there is any other anniversary things I could or should buy. I already own two mugs. I really shouldn't buy any more, since I tend to complain when others buy an abundance of mugs. Now if only they had a tee shirt, but then again I've been told to cull my tee shirt collection. Still I won't give up my collection of Starbucks gift cards.

South Side Y

After lunch, I had a few errands to walk to in the downtown, so I did them and strolled over to the Laurier Carnegie Building. The reason for this walk, wasn't so much for the exercise, however it was a nice walk, but to get information about the new Y-Laurier complex that is going to be built in Brantford. While there, I took out my cellphone and took a few pictures of the work that was portrayed.

Unfortunately I missed any opening remarks, so I just took the pictures and then this evening did the reading.


Right off the bat, the concept drawings are quite impressive. It is going to be a fantastic structure on the south side, right across the street from Harmony Square. I imagine the plan and hope is to have both facilities draw off from each other to create a truly harmonic part of the downtown.

What is also interesting is the fact that part of the roof will be even with Colborne Street, thus creating a plaza that is easily accessible from the downtown, and while there is going to be activity on the roof, it will also be a place to relax and enjoy the view of the city.

Part of the local paper gave this quote from the spokesperson of the company that designed the concept:

Plans call for the 115,000-square-foot building to include: a double gym with retractable bleachers; a multi-purpose gym; a six-lane, 25-metre pool; and an aquatic "teach tank" with moveable floor.

There also would be a student lounge, yoga studio, and open green areas that could incorporate indigenous plants and public art.

Space would be reserved for a possible third gym, said Ross Carter-Wingrove, associate vice-president of Cannon Design.

"It is an extremely unique site. It's almost an escarpment. (The designs) nestle the building into the surroundings with terraced landscaping."

Sounds great, it is good the designers decided to incorporate what they have to work with, rather then forcing something to fit. It will be a boon to the downtown to have a nice place to exercise and enjoy the outdoors, especially in the warm weather.

The article goes on to state that it will be a 115,000 sq foot building. The price tag for it will be $50,000,000- fifty million dollars.

However there is one major problem for this project, and it is the same problem that has dogged it almost from the beginning- its all dependent on the various levels of government pitching in. One of the photographs shows the logo for the Canadian Economic Action Plan, the program of the federal government to provide stimulus funding to get the local economies going again after the recession. The question is, the logo, is it wishful thinking, or was it for the concept development only, or is there a chance that a cheque will be cut to pay for a fair percentage of the project.

The vice-president of facility development at the Y said it clearly:

It all hinges on funding. We will be going to all levels of government and the community for support. It's going to take all of us to do this.

In other words, no money, no Y, without funding it remains simply very nice drawings.

This could be a problem. To date funding has not been coming, in fact funding for projects that has to do with the University has been slow; the Academic and Research Centre was only started when funding finally came through, for a time it was simply a very large hole in the ground along Dalhousie. Is there any guarantees? Perhaps if Phil McColeman and Dave Levac could do another one of their 'bringing big cheques' together there is hope. Then again with at least one election coming up, the provincial, and another on the way, maybe, the federal, it will be a nice backdrop for both of them. I think if they could do this, they will guarantee each other's re-election for many years to come.

It does sound and look fantastic. However it is the question of funding that is the sticker isn't it. While it will cover, if the article is correct about half of the south side, what can be developed with the rest of the land?

There are still a lot of questions that will be asked and hopefully a few answers will come our way.

The Dignity Project- Class Warfare

Some may wonder what the Dignity Project has to do with Class Warfare, but it is a document that articulates the fact Class Warfare exists and is doing very well in Canada, thank you so much. To re-iterate, the overall comments towards those who live in poverty is negative. It is usually their fault they are poor- either through bad choices, addiction and substance abuse or the catchall category, lazy.

To give the definition:

Class conflict refers to the concept of underlying tensions or antagonisms which exist in society due to conflicting interests that arise from different socioeconomic positions and dispositions. Class conflict is thought to play a pivotal role in history of class societies (such as capitalism and feudalism) by Marxists[1] who refer to its overt manifestations as class war, a struggle whose resolution in favor of the working class is viewed by them as inevitable under capitalism.

It's usually the term used by the underclasses and their political representatives to inspire them to overthrow the overlords. Things have changed, now we expect the underclasses to mind their position and take the abuse.

I was standing in line at the local social service office, I had to drop off some information to one of the executive, I was not applying. As I stood there, this young woman, I'm going to say probably early 20's came storming out of the back part of the office, cursing and swearing. No idea what her problem was but I`m going to think she didn`t receive the answer or help she was looking for or requesting. She continued her tirade and kicked a few doors as she left the place. I want to suggest here is another soldier or perhaps one of the `walking wounded` in the class war. For some reason she now has to be dependent on the welfare system, it may be for a few years or that through the auspices of Ontario Works, some sort of educational program could be implemented.

It seems the system, which is constructed to help people such as herself, is so overworked and over burdened that there are cracks and people are reacting in less then helpful ways. I am certain the local workers at Ontario Workers are not callous individuals who are indifferent to the concerns of their fellow humans, it just the system is such that humanity and humanism is stripped out and tossed out. This is class warfare.

So what can be done? The Dignity Project has made a manifesto:

I believe that:

* Everyone should have access to life’s basic necessities
* Poverty is a scourge on society that puts dignity out of reach
* People’s lives change when they are treated with dignity
* Everyone has a right to a sense of dignity
* The fight against poverty deserves my personal attention

By the way, as a bit of history, this is not the first manifesto from The Salvation Army, William Booth in his book: In Darkest England and the Way Out came up with the Cab Horse Manifesto or Charter:

It is the standard of the London Cab Horse. When in the streets of London a Cab Horse, weary or careless or stupid, trips and falls and lies stretched out in the midst of the traffic there is no question of debating how he came to stumble before we try to get him on his legs again. The Cab Horse is a very real illustration of poor broken-down humanity; he usually falls down because of overwork and underfeeding. If you put him on his feet without altering his conditions, it would only be to give him another dose of agony; but first of all you'll have to pick him up again. It may have been through overwork or underfeeding, or it may have been all his own fault that he has broken his knees and smashed the shafts, but that does not matter. If not for his own sake, then merely in order to prevent an obstruction of the traffic, all attention is concentrated upon the question of how we are to get him on his legs again. Tin load is taken off, the harness is unbuckled, or, if need be, cut, and everything is done to help him up. Then he is put in the shafts again and once more restored to his regular round of work. That is the first point. The second is that every Cab Horse in London has three things; a shelter for the night, food for its stomach, and work allotted to it by which it can earn its corn.

These are the two points of the Cab Horse's Charter. When he is down he is helped up, and while he lives he has food, shelter and work. That, although a humble standard, is at present absolutely unattainable by millions—literally by millions—of our fellow-men and women in this country. Can the Cab Horse Charter be gained for human beings? I answer, yes.

Today the class warfare that exists against the submerged tenth, to quote General Booth must end and end today. The attitudes that are so common and popular need to be replaced with a sense of compassion and care. Certainly there needs to be challenges to some people so that they stop the nonsense, but that can only happen when the hand up is offered and not the slap to the face.

Retired General John Gowans had it right when he declared the mission of The Salvation Army to be:

to save souls, grow saints and serve suffering humanity

I think I`ll end with that comment.

The Dignity Project is Launched

Today, the Salvation Army launched the "Dignity Project", an attempt to educate and make Canadians aware of the needs of the very less fortunate in our society. It started with the fundamentals, what do Canadians think about poverty and those who are poor. It would be nice to think we are a very compassionate bunch, however, the numbers, and this was a true survey and not some lame Internet/Facebook thing. It appears Canadians take a very dim view of those who are poor. Some of the results are:

* Nearly 50 percent of Canadians feel that a family of four could get by on $10,000 – $30,000 per year or less
* Nearly half of all Canadians feel that if poor people really want to work, they can always find a job
* Nearly 40 percent believe people who live in poverty in Canada “still have it pretty good”
* 41 percent believe that the poor would “take advantage” of any assistance given and “do nothing” with support provided
* About a quarter of Canadians believe that people are poor because they are lazy and have lower moral values than average
* 96 percent of Canadians believe that everyone deserves a sense of dignity, but only 65 percent believe that being poor can rob you of dignity

Quite the interesting set of statistics, if the report does anything it should give us all pause as to what are our attitudes to the less fortunate. A quick read of some comment sections point out that these are not just people on a bad day, but a reality. I was at the Yahoo Page and the comments were running about 50-50, half were berating poor people as being responsible for their state of being because of the actions they had done, such as, leaving school early, or getting involved in an addiction. While people ranted, the realization is this is not to do with the cause of poverty, that may be for another report.

Of course, I thought the last statement, the belief in dignity may be one of those, 'I better answer the way they want me to answer'. So sure I believe that people should have dignity in their lives, but just because those on welfare are living better then I do, well, that's the real crime.

I wondered why there was this negative feeling, I mean its not a total surprised, there is nothing people have been crabbing about for years. I heard people talk about those in a subsidized housing project yelling at some automakers "keeping working guys, I need the money to buy beer". I did suggest the tale was rather apocalyptic, but it fits the stereotype.

This made me wonder why the prevalence and then I got another document to study, this time in the mail It is called "The Three Cities within Toronto". It's an examination on the development of Income Polarization in Toronto, from 1970-2005. It came with this issue of Spacing Magazine. To give the quick view, Toronto is becoming a very polarized city between the very rich and very poor. While the population of people who are rich has remained stable 15-18%, those who would be considered poor has increased 178% from 19% of population to 54. Meanwhile the Middle class has decreased by 56%, to 29% of the population. While this is sadly not abnormal, I think it may give the basis of the opinion, the Middle class is an endangered species. The adage that people are living pay cheque to pay cheque is not an adage but the truth. The Middle Class is going because the source of the middle class economics and income is disappearing. The Manufacturing Industry is leaving and the service industry is growing. It could be said the age of the $20/hour job is gone, now the $12-15 range is the new reality and new good paying jobs. Couple this with the fact that taxes and everything else is going through the roof. The former middle class is battered to extinction. They are angry but where to release the anger, yes to the government that imposes taxes and seems to squander what people worked hard earn on self-serving projects. But usually the money involved in mind boggling. How do you understand a billion dollar boondoggle. You can't, but if you see a headline that states that it costs governments $55,000/year to house a homeless person, then it becomes personal. That guy on the corner with the sign and the hat bugging you for loose change is costing more then you make. Now understand the front line is probably about $13,000/year but when you put in the nice offices for Ontario Works, well, it begins to add up. Those new business cards cost money after all.

Plus add the fact the recession that is supposed to be a recovery is very fragile, if it exists and you have a very cranky populace.

They can't yell at the Premier, because he's surrounded by security and the only time he comes out is in well stages, well rehearsed 'spontaneous' meeting with the common folk, usually those who are long time supporters of the governing party. Is he approachable, yeah if you don't mind getting tasered if you get too close. So who symbolizes all the waste, the guy in public housing, the mother with a couple of kids trying to live high on the hog on a thousand a month. It's the people who have to go to the food bank each month, hoping there is something new and not the same old stuff. Again, the recession has affected even donations to food banks so people who need the extra food can't get that.

As an aside, I sent an email to Andrew Burditt, asking him if he was surprised at the findings, to date, he has not returned a reply.

It would be easy to blame the people with the negative thoughts, but more important, we need to examine a lot of things, the first thing is the entitlement that seems to flow towards those who are in power with the government or have the very cushy government jobs.

hasta la victoria, siempre!

Freedom of Expression is Messy (Pt 2)

I commenced the thought that of all the rights and freedoms a person can have this one is the messiest. Probably because this has more to do with us as ourselves then any other right. After all, the freedom of religion and assembly, do come from the same source as the expression, and do speak of our true nature, although they tend to do with where we gather and what truth we have accepted. As for freedom of the press, that is good, but for the most part, we enjoy this right, we don't participate.

I considered the words of Rene Descartes: Je pense donc je suis. The idea is that if we are capable of thought, we exist. We are real, this is not a dream existence. I'm wondering if there may be another interpretation, it is in thinking and our expression plus our thoughts that reveal our true selves. Our thoughts are who we are. Now again, that is very messy, because there are a number of times we say or think things which we are probably not proud of possessing as thought. However, it is in our thinking and reasoning, or some times, the lack thereof, that we find our true selves.

Whether we or others like it or not, we come up with thoughts, sometimes totally independent of what the social norms are and what is considered proper for polite company, or as in the case of a dictatorship, what the leader wants you to think. While in some countries, you are simply told what you are to believe, and you had better not sway, but deep down inside, there is something totally different.

Perhaps this is why dictatorships and tyrannies always end up, eventually on the losing end, because people know what is the truth. They know when they are being fed a bunch of garbage, and while they can along with it for years, there will come a point when they say ' I'm not putting up with this nonsense any more'. Vacel Havel wrote in his essay "Power of the Powerless":

Let us now imagine that one day something in our greengrocer snaps and he stops putting up the slogans merely to ingratiate himself. He stops voting in elections he knows are a farce. He begins to say what he really thinks at political meetings. And he even finds the strength in himself to express solidarity with those whom his conscience commands him to support. In this revolt the greengrocer steps out of living within the lie. He rejects the ritual and breaks the rules of the game. He discovers once more his suppressed identity and dignity. He gives his freedom a concrete significance. His revolt is an attempt to live within the truth. . . .

It would be far simplier for the greengrocer to continue to display what he knows is a lie. He would be able to live a life that is relatively safe within the confines of his society and culture if he votes as instructed. Many people do, even though they see through the farce. But then there is the reality of existence, I think, therefore I am... or to reverse, I am, therefore I think... and he throws the sign away. Then the first cracks appear in the system.

This is why governments are so quick to suppress this right. Its perfectly fine if you continue to think as you should, because its safe. Even in a democracy such as Canada, bad things won't happen to you if you think bad thoughts. Although some may think what you believe falls under the category of a hate crime, then you will a few problems. Of course, the definition of hate crime has a tendency to expand and not remain static. It's not just new groups that are now protected from hate, its that the definition expands. Before it might be encouraging violence against a specific group, now it could be said if you hold a negative view towards another group then you are involved in hate crime. Or you are a victim of such.

I came across an article that stated, hate crime is on the rise in Canada. The question is, real increase or just more people are getting angry and reporting it. That is the big question. What becomes fascinating is how many actual crimes there are, 892 or so. Almost non-existent in a way.

Let me say hate crimes are never right. One should never espouse the death of a specific group in a society. If there is any limits on freedom of expression I will accept its that, that's the area of the government. It is often the role of government to tell us who to hate. It's called 'war'.

Still people do hold those thoughts, it is who they are. The problem of suppression is when one attempts to suppress anything, it goes underground. It does not go away, in fact it might be the basis of a whole new level of hate. Now a person thinks, they are unfairly 'protected' by the government. This leads to the bizarre conspiracy theories.

What do I suggest, with a few exceptions, let them express themselves as long as its not threatening or not destructive. For if you open your mouth to express your opinion, you invite me to open mine. If you are going to be a total jerk, I should have the right to point out what a jerk you are, it is only fair.

Still, this is where it all gets messy, all these not correct thoughts be express. It's noisy, it makes people upset. Yet, it is our humanity in full and some times, ugly display.

I think I've got a few more things to say.

Freedom of Expression is Messy

As we have all been following, the Arab world seems to be in a state in amazing flux. A few of the long running autocracies have fallen and a few more seem to be coming to their expiry dates. This seems to be especially true for Libya. The nation is in uproar, people are now sick of the 42 year reign of Muammar Gaddafi and want things like democracy, freedom of expression and economic freedom that is free from the restrictions placed by the government. Over the last number of years, Gaddafi has favoured one part of the country over the other. The East seems to have suffered, although many will say the West isn't exactly the land of milk and honey. For a nation rich in resources, there has been an amazing economic screw=up by the government. Well, let's be honest, its been a one man show, because of it, the problems have to rest in the incompetence of the Mr. Gaddafi. He's called the shots and he is the one that messed everything up.

I was reading the Constitution of Libya, its something I like to do and as is the case of most constitutions of dictatorship, it has some wonderful language. For example the Preamble has this:

The Revolutionary Command Council, in the name of the Arab people in Libya, who pledged to restore their freedom, enjoy the wealth of their land, live in a society in which every loyal citizen has the right to prosperity and well-being, who are determined to break the restraints which impede their growth and their development, who will stand with their brothers from all parts of the Arab Nation in the struggle for the restoration of every inch of Arab land desecrated by imperialism and for the elimination of all obstacles which prevent Arab unity from the Gulf to the Ocean.

Prosperity for the citizenry and a vision of a Pan-Arab world in which all nations of the Arab world will join to bring unity and prosperity through that region. As nice as it sounds, it seems the reality is totally different.

The odd thing is after 42 years of such wonderful rhetoric, the people seem totally sick of it all. With the relatively bloodless regime change to their neighbours, it only seems right for the Libyan people to do the same. Sadly it hasn't been true, where there has been peaceful protest, the government has cracked down with violence and bloodshed. However, never underestimate the resolve of people to seek a better life, they are still at it. In fact as I write this, Benghazi has been liberated by the protesters and Tripoli is now feeling the same power of protest.

I noticed the speech of his son, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi has already announced his father is preparing to fight for the defence of Tripoli. I'm not sure but that could be code for "he's already on the first plane to Saudi Arabia to join his friend the deposed President of Tunisia" or "we've just shot him and now we're in charge, we're just not ready to dispose the body yet".

This is not the theme of today's blog, I also went over the constitution and found these words:

Freedom of Opinion is guaranteed within the limits of public interest and the principles of the Revolution.

In other words, freedom of expression is allowed as long as it agrees with the Brotherly Leader and Guide of the Revolution. If you want an opinion Gaddafi will give you one, disagree and things will not be nice.

Here's the thing, people like Gaddafi, in fact the leaders of almost every nation realizes this fact, freedom of expression is messy. If you let people have the freedom of opinion or expression they will do just that. In fact they will probably not agree with the opinion of the leader and government. This is why most people who are foolish enough to take things such as Article 13 at face value end up in jail. This is why the people of Libya are now facing down mercenaries who are well armed, and are willing to die. They believe the words of their constitution are no longer pretty sounding on a piece of paper but should have a place in their lives. Of course dictators can't think that point, they look at the people and wonder what is wrong with the rabble and because they can't fathom it all, they think that shoot enough of them, it will all go away. If history has proven anything, there's not enough bullets to get rid of a people who want to be free. Dictators will always in the battles, but they will never win the war, because they are facing a people who believe in an ideal- it's called freedom.

Of course, to further fail the point, leaders promise "constitutional dialogue". People are fed up with it all, the want freedom, they want the prosperity that has been promised, they want to be a free people.

Chicken Tartare Anyone?

Recently the CBC program Marketplace revealed the ugly truth about the chicken we eat, it's full of bacteria. If that wasn't bad enough, it's full of bacteria that is resistant to various antibiotics. The problem is, according to the program is the fact that poultry farmers jack up the amount of antibiotics they fill their birds. A great deal of this, the argument goes, because the birds live in horrific conditions, filled with disease and dirt. The birds are suffering greatly and the only way to keep them with some semblance of health until they reach the abattoir is to have them filled with antibiotics. So its no wonder the birds have these super bugs on them, because the environment and the overexposure of the drugs makes it possible.

Needless to say, Chicken Farmers are not impressed with the news. In fact their federation sent off a letter to the CBC to give their side of the story. As well, one of Canada's largest food chains had a reaction to the show, Loblaws sent this email to the CBC:

he use of antibiotics is not permitted in the production of President's Choice® Free From™ Chicken. We have rigorous processes and controls in place to ensure that all of our Free From™ Chicken is produced to the exacting standards that we specify meeting all Canadian Food Inspection Agency regulatory requirements for such products. It's probable that if microbes were isolated on chicken that there could be resistant isolates amongst them. Any such isolation of bacteria displaying antimicrobial resistance to antibiotics are part of the general microbial population, which over time have had the natural ability to resist certain antibiotics and not necessarily the result of direct exposure to antibiotics. As expected within the microbial ecosystem, which is part of our environment, products can become naturally exposed to strains of anti-microbial resistant bacteria. This is simply a characteristic of the endemic microbial population and has no relationship at all to the Free From™ Chicken Program.

I suppose at the end of the program the question needs to be ask, is our food truly that contaminated? Are people dropping dead or ending up in the hospital because of contaminated food? On one hand the answer is 'no', on the other, is it something we should be concerned about? As we learned during the various Mad Cow infections, our food is not perfect, nor are the modern agricultural methods. Certainly in the day and age in which we consumers demand good food that is good, plentiful and relatively inexpensive, the only way to meet this is by making things happen faster then allowing nature to take its course.

If I can go back, the Chicken Farmers of Canada have an entire page on their website to deal with Antibiotics.

There was one point in the article from the CBC that does need reminding:

While thorough cooking kills bacteria — including superbugs — most contamination happens before the chicken is cooked through improper handling. If there's contamination by superbugs, the worry is that consumers could ingest illness-causing bugs that are then resistant to much of the available spectrum of traditional antibiotic therapy.

It seems there is still one thing that will kill the bacteria and that's cooking the chicken completely. Seems they resist everything but heat. So keep it at 350 for 45 minutes. Everything will be fine. As well, there is the reminder to keep cutting boards and other kitchen surfaces clean to ensure there is no cross contamination. This is good advice that we do need to remember. Plus to wash our hands, got to keep those hands washed. This seems to be the number one way of keeping germs from being spread.

Of course, to get back to the poultry industry, do we need to crack down on the use of antibiotics, probably we do, we do want safe food and we want to know it is ultimately safe for us. Perhaps we need to ask ourselves if we like the concept of the factory farm for poultry or any other farm animal. Or is this the cost to keep us with the variety of food at the prices we like. This is the issue we need to keep in our minds. Or is there middle ground that can be achieved.

FourSquare

It's not enough we share our sitting around the house in our beanbag chairs, eating popcorn, in 140 characters or less. Or that we friend people and have others poke us, now we can tell people exactly where we are, by checking in to Foursquare.
What Foursquare does is allow you to announce your location to your friends through the web. What of us doesn't want others to know exactly where we are at any one time or another. Of course what it does is prove we don't actually live very interesting lives, at least from my perspective of myself. If you go to my Foursquare page you will discover I spend a fair bit of time at the gym. This is followed by probably Zehr's and a few other places. You can check my homepage on Foursquare and discover the exciting life that I lead.

What makes it an interesting place is the fact it has rewards, for example you can get badges which denote different things you've done. If you really are interested, you can also buy those badges to wear to prove you are indeed the great person you are, or the sad sort of person that collects badges. As well, if you show up to the same place enough times you can claim the Mayorship of the location. Besides the ego stroking that entails, the plan has been to have retailers give special things to Mayors, who can prove they are the Mayor of the location.

To give the basics, to quote another blog:

Foursquare doesn’t just broadcast your location to your selected friends; it also serves as a game, pairing virtual rewards with real activities.

Users earn badges as they visit different spots. Visit one location enough times and you become the mayor. You can use Foursquare to meet new friends, find out who else is in your area or compete against other people in your city.

“Elizabeth Fisher just checked in at the Algonquin Hotel.” This message is now famous as a supposed shout out to Foursquare, which popularized the phrase “check-in” on the deliciously tech-savvy show, “Gossip Girls.” Even Crowley couldn’t resist and took to Twitter to post, “Check-ins on Gossip Girl?”

As of March 2010, Foursquare has 500,000 users and 1.4 million venues according to Tech Crunch, keeping Gowalla at a solid second place. Why are more people checking out Foursquare, leaving Loopt and Gowalla in the dust? It’s simple.

You can read more by going to Social Media Examiner.

Another thing you can do is add locations. If the place you are at isn't listed, you can add it to the places to go.

It's obviously an interesting place, since recently it was acknowledged it had grown by 3400% over the past year. It now has 6 million users.

I've been using it for the last number of months and its been fun. However, I've noticed a change; it started when I noticed a loss of mayorships. They were places that I had thought I wrapped up, including the Fit4Less. This was horrible, even though I had a super Mayor badge, there was a distinct deterioration.

I noticed a message on my phone, there was a change in the way things operated; from now on, if I use a web based phone rather then a smart phone with one of their apps then nothing I can do will count for mayorships. This is horrible. Not only can't I become a mayor, but as i witness I will lose mayorships. I know what you're thinking "Oh the Humanity". I can understand them wanting to get people to use their apps, it makes sense, but don't forget the rest of us. I'm sure I speak for a lot of people who don't have the required Smartphones.

If they are going to penalize us, then develop apps.

That's all I got to say.

For the record, I've checked into Fit4Less 47 times, and I'm not the Mayor.

University Gone Wild


You would think after all the controversy regarding the demolition of the 41 properties along the south side of Colborne Street, the last thing anyone would suggest is demolition another building that may have heritage implications in the downtown core. Apparently we need to all think again. It appears one more property is on the block for a date with the wrecking ball. The property is 105 Wellington and the purpose of the demolition is to provide a parking space for Laurier Brantford. I want to thank Leis Marie Jansen for the link of the Report. The document makes for a compelling read, on one hand, you have the recommendation of proceeding with the demolition, and on the other, you have the Heritage Committee calling for its preservation. So you have two dynamic forces at work, the University and its wish to expand to develop the downtown campus and to further enhance the downtown core, and those in the heritage committee who want to preserve something of Heritage Brantford. I suppose if there is any good news to come out of this is the fact people are talking about preservation. Last year you might recall only a few "cranks" spoke out for the preservation and renovation of the South Side of Colborne. Interesting to note, I was talking to a person regarding this very issue, he suggested that any building can be preserved and restored. Knowing this individual's background I think he is in the know, pity no one talked to him.

If you read the document you will note, the building is not necessarily a heritage structure, but is part of a landscape of buildings from the same time period, as well it is part of the housing stock for the downtown. The concern of the Heritage Committee is:

The Heritage Committee, at its meeting, January 18, 2011, discussed the proposed demolition of the building at 105 Wellington Street.
Members of the Committee recognize the university’s need to expand, planning for future growth and the demand for additional parking. However, the Committee noted that the property at 105 Wellington Street is part of a group of buildings that form a small, cohesive streetscape of early 20th century architecture and the proposed demolition of this building would result in a vacant gap along this streetscape.
Members of the Committee stated that the property would provide a limited number of parking spaces. The Committee would encourage the university to utilize the building until such time as it is required for a larger redevelopment of the area.
The Heritage Committee made the following recommendation:
THAT although the Heritage Committee supports Wilfrid Laurier University’s plan for growth, the proposed demolition permit application for 105 Wellington Street BE NOT APPROVED as this building forms part of a cohesive architectural grouping of an early 1900’s streetscape.”

So you ruin the cohesiveness of the block and place an empty space where a house once stood. I suppose it will only be temporary since you tear down one house, what's to stop the demolition of the entire block? After all, more parking is needed, even though there is a lot approximately two blocks south which in the most recent survey is only 40% utilized. I know its a bit of a walk, but walking is good for us.

I don't want to get on the "the University is Bad" bandwagon, because the University is a good thing, but there should be some understanding and consideration. The first is, is there any under-used property in the area that could be used by the University, that may have the infrastructure in place for parking, or perhaps is close enough to existing parking spaces?

The area of the downtown is a Demolition Control Area, meaning that Council needs to approve any requests for demolition. From reading the local news, it seems there is some resistance to the idea of the University talking this property and turning it into a parking lot. This is a good thing, I mean its one thing to simply say, have the University and the Heritage Committee meet to establish the proper protocol for demolition of property in this zone, which means, well, what? How do you establish a protocol for a bulldozer knocking down a house? I know it means more then that, its just- can there be expansion without destruction. The University should be praised for the work of restoration and revitalization that has already taken place in the Downtown Core. However it needs to do make it does not lose its lustre and start tearing things down for its own needs.

Just as an aside, while the bylaw required all requests of demolition to go to Council, it appears Council doesn't have a problem approving demolition requests in the zone.

2011: the Year of the Tablet

In my reading of computer magazine and various tech sites, plus technology articles in major newspapers, the message is clear- this is the year of the Tablet. Ever since the iPad burst onto the scene, people have been wondering when other computer manufacturers would decide to follow suit and challenge what seems to be the run-away success story and the template of such devises. One can read about commentators defining what will be the iPad killer. When in actual fact, there is probably no such thing.

It has gotten to the point that even PCWorld Magazine has articles stating that my next PC will be a tablet. The article begins by stating the obvious, but it is a good place to start:

The world of computing is at a crossroads. The primary computer for most users today is not a PC; it's a phone. While the PC sits on a desk at the office or on a coffee table at home, smartphones go everywhere with us and integrate into every part of our lives. But despite getting smarter and smarter, phones are too small to replace PCs completely. We need a device that bridges the gap between what PCs do and what mobile phones do. That device has arrived. Welcome to the age of the tablet.

This is very true, the evolution of the cellphone, from brick to smartphone has seen the devise transform from a telephone to an always connected mini computer. With our phones, we text, we take pictures and videos, we email, we surf the web. In fact the last thing we probably do is take phone calls. Go to your last bill and count the minutes you've used in telephone calls, I'm going to suspect its very small. Then look at the usage on your data plan, or the number of text messages you've sent out.

However, the problem with all phones is this, they are too small, the form factor still demands it to be a telephone first and everything else second. Which is why the tablet PC, or plain tablet is now the talk of everybody. From what I can see, the tablet is making inroads into everyday life. I was at Starbucks a few weeks ago, which is always the place to discover what technology is making a difference and there was a couple with an iPad. Mind you I've sat at Starbucks and the local library with my little tablet as well, doing the surfing thing and putting upgrades to Twitter or Facebook, because that's what we do. PCWorld also had an article on my devise, the little iPad Knockoff from China. Personally, I still use it, it's a good thing to have around when all I want to do is look up my email or that sort of thing, and I don't want to start the laptop.


It still has good functionality, and for all that talk about it being an Android tablet, it's comfortable to use. I do recognize that its only one hundred dollars so its not top of the line. It falls under the catagory you get what you pay for, it's 1/4th of an IPad, so I can't expect it to function like an IPad.

What is impressive is the long list of companies producing or promising to produce a tablet. I've been looking at the Samsung Galaxy Tab and must say I've been very impressed with its functions


It has a nice function and does look good, my problem is the price, its quite expensive and one needs a data plan from the various cell companies to get it going. I know it has wifi, but probably the always on function needs 3G to operate successfully. I at one time, did balk at the whole idea of getting onto the 3G network, something about giving Rogers even more of my money, but I do understand why this is necessary, after all, why have a devise that needs to, or at least works well when connect to the Internet when you aren't always guaranteed a hotspot. I still dislike the idea of giving Rogers more money though.

What is going to be interesting is the Blackberry Playbook. This might be interesting in that RIM is already a success and has a whole bunch of users who might be happy to move over to the Playbook. They are comfortable with the form and function of the Blackberry and understand the OS. From talking with someone who works at RIM, he spoke of the fact that it is impressive. Couple this with the fact that there's a bit of a war going on between Apple and RIM, I asked if Steve Job's comments aren't on the bulletin board at work, he said it features around the place, then that tells me that things are going to be interesting.



If you go to the main page, there is a link to the comparison between it and the IPad, which is going to be for every devise I have to believe. I also have to believe its going to be the thing all the crackberry users are going to buy and use. Which is probably a good thing to have such a loyal market already. It should be interesting to watch how the Playbook does in the opening weeks of its introduction. I know people will make comment if its not as good as the IPad, which probably won't be fair, but that's how some people operate.

One of the devises I'm looking forward to is the new Dell Streak 7. Of course as you know I'm a bit of a Dell fan, I've owned to Dell laptops, plus a few of their Axim's, so when they announce this devise, I've got my ears up to read more and learn more about it:



If I have any concern about the tabs, and some of them are answering this concern, is the fact that they are a consumer devise only. I like the idea that many of them are featuring slots for SD or miniSD cards, after all if the camera is going to be on them all, you got someplace to store the pictures, and you might as well use them to edit the photographs as well. I've tried taking pictures with the 7" and I can see it is possible to grow onto it, even thought at first it feels a bit awkward. I can't imagine having a camera on a 10" IPad, that is going to feel funny and probably look funny as well.

So will 2011 be the year of the Tablet, it will be an important part. Will it take over, probably not since they are still limited an limiting. Will I get one? Have to save my pennies for that answer.