Ignorance is not an excuse

Diane Finley has put the bill to rob low-income seniors of their ability to support themselves on hold for this time. She stated:

“I was very concerned by what was reported,” Ms. Finley said when Liberal MP Gerry Byrne asked about the issue in the House of Commons. “That is why I have instructed departmental officials to immediately put a hold on this policy while we review it completely.”

I am not sure why the concern over this issues only arose when someone made note that this was abhorrent. She must have seen the file since this is a concern of her ministry. If she did not, then why even have a minister for such things. It seems more likely that this woman was willing to let it slide as long as no one was interested in looking to closely at the file. She only shows outrage after the fact because there was no outrage before someone was poking their nose into it.

I also like her response "That is why I have instructed departmental officials to immediately put a hold on this policy while we review it completely." She does not even suggest she will put an end to the motion, rather she puts it on hold. Why would she do this? It may be simply the conservative strategy of tabling it until everyone forgets. They can then push it through quietly while the people are focused on the next travesty.

They have now targeted veterans and seniors, I wonder who the next group of people we plan to screw is. I wonder if it will be children or some visible minority. I guess we will just have to wait and see. This also gives a new definition of senior abuse.

Climate change? What climate?

Well Harper has maintained his predictable set of behaviors. When something he does not support goes out of his control he just breaks another one of myriad of promises he made to voters when trying to get a majority. This time he has destroyed a climate change bill C-311 through the SENATE. I did not even know the Senate had that kind of power in our system. How can an unelected body, appointed by the Prime Minister, side track a bill passed by the House of Commons, filled with elected members? And what kind of many promises not to use such tactics to win votes then turns to it when everything else has failed. The kind of man who is more interested in his vision then with the collective vision of the majority of the population (even if you count just those who vote). Bruce Hyer said it best when he stated:

"I'm still reeling from the shock, but after no debate, no consideration at all, all of a sudden in another ambush move by Stephen Harper, the Senate voted yesterday to kill the climate change [bill] without debate,"

Way to go Steve you may actually succeed in creating a three party system in this country. All you need is a little help from Iggy, if he looks anymore like a con the NDP should soar in the next elections. Heck even the Green's might win a seat.

Moral Musings

I am currently reading a book called Freakenomics by very distinct and interesting individuals. We often believe that economy is seperate from morality, but any aspect of human life is touched by the belief in the way we should behave. He provided an example of a business man who brought in bagles to local offices, left them in the staff room, and left the money box beside it. People were asked to pay for taking the bagles, but no one was really watching if they did it. The result was that he made a tidy profit and the majority of people actually did pay. He also found that in smaller offices, with fewer employees the pay rate and theft rate were markedly smaller. His argument is that in smaller offices more people would know who you are and you would like to maintain appearance so you steal less.

This touches on my own observation of individuals. I would argue that there are few truly "evil" or "good" people. Instead people are driven by insentives. This means that a corrupt society would produce a larger number of corrupt individuals, because the incentives to be corrupt are more prevalent. Moralist tend to have problems with this arguement because it means people respond to incentives rather then an imperative to act in a "good" manner. If on the other hand you assume people are not evil or good, but rather simply are, then I see it as a hopeful situation. If moralists are correct then those born good are good and those born bad are bad, no real room to change. If a moralist would turn to you and say that of course people can change, then they are not fundamentally anything. If they then say that people are naturally good and evil is a product of society, then how did good people develop such an evil society. Moralist cannot provide conclusive evidence about human nature, because there are to many variables to being human.

If they can't provide evidence, then why do I think I can? Rest assured that I cannot provide conclusive evidence either, just a convincing argument. There are countless examples of humans acting in their own self-interest and (despite what many pessimist might suggest) there are many examples of altruistic behavior. This suggests to me that people have the capacity for both types of behavior. It also suggest that they are enclined to neither moral extreme. To put a quick end to a long thought I would say we must get out of this idea of right and wrong for they are metaphysical concerns, rather worry about mundane, earthly matters for those are the things that will kill us.

My word is as good as quicksand

I guess I can understand why Mr. Harper seems to think that it is up to himself and his cronies to choose if troops stay overseas, away from their family and loved ones. He is after all carying out Gods divine will on earth so how could we besmirch him for making such simple decisions without the consent of those for whom he is deciding.

Honestly I am very sick of all this crap. when harper says

“My position is if you’re going to put troops into combat, into a war situation, I do think for the sake of legitimacy, I do think the government does require the support of Parliament,” he said. “But when we’re talking simply about technical or training missions, I think that is something the executive can do on its own.”

what I hear is this.

"The interests of our allies and our business relations far out weight the interests of the men and women who will be put into dangerous situations and taken away from their family and friends for long periods of time. If they were stupid enough to join the army, they will not play their proper role as pawns of the state to serve my interest."

Now ofcourse no PM with half a mind would actually come out and say that, and I am in no way a qualified expert to impose my interpretation on a speaker or the public, but I wonder how many people get the same of a similar feeling from the above mentioned statement.

A sinking feeling

Welcome to North America, the greatest place on Earth. We have a well fed citizenship, suffering only from a global recession set off by...well, rich men from the first world (primarily North America). Welcome to the great nations of aging populations (with the exception of immigrants of course) and young over educated idiots (I use it in it's ancient Greek sense). In Canada we are lucky to have such a strong economy. I know ours is strong because our Minister of Finance has assured us that it is, and he must qualified if the prime minister felt he deserved that appointment.

We, the lucky inhabitants of this continent, are sailing on the worlds largest ship of dreams; we are the new Titanic. Our voyage has started out so well and we have properly separated the classes of individuals from one another, to avoid the rich mingling with the poor and getting dirty or infected. We have successfully travelled these dangerous waters, wallowing in the luxury of being the biggest and the best for decades. In recent years though we have been hearing noise coming from the captain and his mates. There seems to be an issue with our direction and the speed in which we are travelling in that direction. Luckily we are reassured by the soft voices of the crew that all is fine and that we should stay in our section of the ship. Meanwhile those upper class members, who have been enjoying the exclusive lounge, the fine champagne, and the best food are heading for the life boats, just a drill says a crewman to me. When asked where all these people would go if a disaster occurred on this ship it was hinted that many would go to Asia, it seems like the place to be now.

As I observe this "drill" taking place I have come to the start realization that if there every was a catastrophe, there would not even be a tenth of the boats or other safety precautions necessary to protect even a 10th of the people on this voyage. It is starting to seem like those who built this ship and set us on course never considered that we would hit a rough patch. Even if this was considered it appears that after decades of successfully sailing the oceans of success and prosperity we felt so comfortable and sure, and have picked up so many new passengers that we have done away with safety to make room for everyone to fit. With the final stages of the "drill" being carried out, I notice that they are actually lower these "VIPs" down into the ocean and our ship seems to be gaining a slight tilt. I don't know about you but I am starting to have a sinking feeling about this, if only I could remember what happened to the first Titanic, maybe that would give me the answer I so desperately need to understand the situation we are in now.

Health Care

I have finally experienced the congestive heart failure that is occurring in our health care system. At one point I used to think that waiting for 3 or 4 hours was a long time to sit in a waiting room, but my significant other manage to spend close to 15 hours waiting to simply be seen by a doctor. Mind you it appears it was only a moderate allergic reaction, not life threatening, but also not something that could be treated without cortical steroids.

My significant other was relatively luck, but beside us was a teenager in a wheelchair. He was wearing his work uniform, the local grocery store, and was in that wheelchair because he had managed to hurt his foot rather badly and could not walk on it. His toe had been cut deeply and was wrapped in gauze, but after the first 7 hours it apparently started to soak through. This made me begin to wonder, "what, in our area, is considered an emergency serious enough to see a doctor in a reasonable amount of time?" The only answers I came up with were heart attack, stroke, car accident (sever one), severed limb (i hope), or trouble breathing. Basically if you are not dying you do not want to wait to see a doctor, unfortunately there are many reasons why you may need to see a doctor.

I guess as Canadians we need to consider creating incentives for doctors to stay in Canada. Rural areas are in special demand and will need to find a way to create extra incentives to attract and keep doctors. The problem with all these suggestions is that there is a large monetary cost that goes along with them. As a Canadian I am concerned, but I do not have the answer. I welcome any suggestions others may have.

The Blog

Hello to all interested and intrigued individuals. This was originally designed as an outlet for political commentary and discussion. I still wish it to hold that primary goal, but I plan to add to this site, commentary on a topic which touches my heart greatly; the education of our population. One cannot distinguish between a meaningfully active citizen and and educated individual. This is not to say that all people who are educated are academics, professors, teachers, politicians, doctors, or lawyers. Instead this suggest that people who have been taught how to think critically, be it a welder, plumber, telemarketer, mechanic, politician, academic, or lawyer, will be able to decipher and formulate conclusions making them capable of meaningful participation in the political life of their nation. It will be this aspect of education which will appear occasionally in my observations and opinions presented on this page. The questions of how to foster critical thought in youths and adults alike is a great concern of mine and of anyone who wishes to have a powerful democratic nation.