We saw a clear example of why governments fail to do the right things this week in the United States.
The position of the Obama Administration was clear: The Bush tax cuts should not be allowed to continue on for wealthy Americans earning more than USD 250,000 a year. This would be irresponsible as it would nearly a trillion dolllars to the national debt over the next decade at a time when the federal government is bleeding red at unprecedented levels. However in a time of economic stagnation, unemployment benefits should be extended such that workers could be guaranteed up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits.
The position of the Republicans was also clear: The unemployment benefits should not be extended at a time when the federal government is bleeding red at unprecedented levels. However in a time of economic stagnation, taxes needed to stay lower for all Americans including the wealthiest.
These two seemingly irreconcilable views led to an agreement that has now passed both Houses of Congress. The package will extend the tax cuts for everyone (including the wealthy) and extend unemployment benefits to 99 weeks. Neither side seems to worry too much about the impact on the levels of red ink that the government is showing.
This was a game of chicken in which both sides blinked and it led to an irresponsible deal. The Bush tax cuts should have been allowed to expire.......on everyone. The unemployment benefits should not have been extended. Especially irresponsible was a cut to Social Security payroll taxes. The SS system is headed for bankruptcy which will require higher taxes and a delayed retirement age.....why cut the contribution rate now?
It is true that recessions are not the best time to raise taxes but is there ever a really good time to raise taxes? If these hard choices are not made now, then there is a heightened risk that a much more draconian budget would have to come in when the bond markets flee US Treasuries as they have done to various eurozone countries.
Remember that the accumulated national debt is simply a way of passing on our credit card bills to our children. It's wrong. It's immoral. Elected officials should know better.
Ask the Irish and the Greeks whether they wish they had made these hard choices a few years ago.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Resurgent Republicans
So now that the mid term elections are done and President Obama faces a decidedly less friendly Congress, it has been shown again that political prognostication is a very tricky game.
Two years ago a surge of new voters propelled Barack Obama into the White House and his party had large majorities in both houses of Congress. The GOP's epitaph was being written and the talk was of a permanent Democratic majority. A scant 18 months later, a Republican Speaker will be third in line for the Presidency.
Much attention has been directed towards the Tea Party and some of their more dubious candidates and views. Yet for all the rallies and anger they expressed, their most effective action has been the simple democratic exercise of voting at the primary and election levels.
Their voices would have amounted to nought if the Obama surge voters of 2008 showed up at the polls in 2010. The reason why the Democrats lost by such a big margin is quite simply that their own voters either did not show up to vote or switched sides when they got to the ballot box.
The question of how the Obama administration managed to simultaneously energize the opposition and dispirit their own supporters is one that many pundits are chewing over. A recurring theme is Obama's seeming aloofness and professorial demeanor. He doesn't come across like someone rolling up his sleeves to do the work. Both Presidents Bush caught a lot of flak for fishing or golfing too much. CNN reports that Obama has golfed more in his two years in office that George W Bush did in 8 years.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/SPORT/golf/04/20/golf.obama.bush/index.html
The pundits appear unanimous in saying that this mid term election result means nothing for his re-election prospects in two years. Two years is a long time in politics and they should be careful about drawing too many comparisons to Clinton's mid term losses of 94 coupled with his re-election 2 years later.
This is a very different situation for a number of reasons:
Two years ago a surge of new voters propelled Barack Obama into the White House and his party had large majorities in both houses of Congress. The GOP's epitaph was being written and the talk was of a permanent Democratic majority. A scant 18 months later, a Republican Speaker will be third in line for the Presidency.
Much attention has been directed towards the Tea Party and some of their more dubious candidates and views. Yet for all the rallies and anger they expressed, their most effective action has been the simple democratic exercise of voting at the primary and election levels.
Their voices would have amounted to nought if the Obama surge voters of 2008 showed up at the polls in 2010. The reason why the Democrats lost by such a big margin is quite simply that their own voters either did not show up to vote or switched sides when they got to the ballot box.
The question of how the Obama administration managed to simultaneously energize the opposition and dispirit their own supporters is one that many pundits are chewing over. A recurring theme is Obama's seeming aloofness and professorial demeanor. He doesn't come across like someone rolling up his sleeves to do the work. Both Presidents Bush caught a lot of flak for fishing or golfing too much. CNN reports that Obama has golfed more in his two years in office that George W Bush did in 8 years.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/SPORT/golf/04/20/golf.obama.bush/index.html
The pundits appear unanimous in saying that this mid term election result means nothing for his re-election prospects in two years. Two years is a long time in politics and they should be careful about drawing too many comparisons to Clinton's mid term losses of 94 coupled with his re-election 2 years later.
This is a very different situation for a number of reasons:
- Speaker elect John Boehner is not Newt Gingrich. Gingrich came up as a grenade thrower with sharp rhetoric that offended many. John Boehner comes across like a grown up.
- The Republicans do not have a majority in the Senate. As a result, many of the more extreme elements of the party face some checks and balances within the Legislative branch. A government shutdown is not likely.
- This is a very different Republican party than the one that ascended in 94. Amongst their new class of Congressman are two African Americans representing majority white districts. They are the first black Republicans in Congress since JC Watts retired in 2002. Additionally two of their State Governors (Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Nikki Haley of South Carolina) are Indian. One of their most prominent figures is Sara Palin.
- These Republicans are different in their outlook and approach as well. On election night Speaker elect Boehner stated that there would be no celebrations while so many Americans are unemployed. This was very smart politics. I also heard one Republican speaking to CNN who said that the Republicans deserved to be voted out of office before as they did not stick to their principles. He referred to this election result as a second chance. There is a far more mature outlook and a responsible attitude to the power they now wield.
President Obama does indeed need to follow Clinton's lead by working with the Republicans. He had such large majorities that he did not need to do so. The people decided that they didn't much like the results. By contrast Clinton's administration had some of their signature achievements while working with Republicans. It was Republican votes that ensured passage of Welfare Reform and NAFTA. The people liked that so much they re-elected Clinton and kept the Republicans in control in Congress.
So far, Obama has shown little evidence that he gets it. The Economist wrote an editorial in the aftermath called "Obama's Tin Ear."
His aloofness will soon start to come across as arrogance. At that point, he assures himself a legacy as a single term President.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
US Mid Term Election Prediction - II
A lot has changed in the 3 weeks since i made my predictions about Tuesday's US mid term elections.
If you listen to the pundits, the Republican wave has been building. Some (such as Dick Morris) speak of 100 Democrat congressional seats being in play. Recent polls have shown a marginal improvement for
Democrats as some races that were toss ups have moved to leaning Democrat.
Democrats as some races that were toss ups have moved to leaning Democrat.
Strangely, the recent election of Rob Ford as Mayor of Toronto leads me to think that I may have been wrong to predict a narrow Republican victory. Rob Ford's candidacy was similar to many of the so called "Tea party" candidates that have shocked the two party establishment by knocking off incumbent Republicans in primaries (such as Senator Bennett of Utah and Murkowski of Alaska. Tea party candidates were often unconventional and politically incorrect. They are not polished and come across as more than a little amateurish......yet they have won some races that they really shouldn't have.
The phenomenon that put Rob Ford in the Mayor's office and Scott Brown into Ted Kennedy's Senate seat is an expression of widespread voter anger. Many of the establishment politicians seem to have been a little slow in recognizing (and harnessing) this anger. The voters are angry and the anger will generate high turnout amongst the most aggrieved.
The people should be angry. They have seen their tax dollars go to bailing out auto workers who earn much more than the average American or Canadian. They have seen their taxes bailing out Wall Street bankers....nuff said on that one.
If current trends hold then the Republicans should sweep into power in the House and perhaps even the Senate. The GOP leadership should be careful in what they wish for. If they are thinking ahead to 2012, then it might be better for them if they don't take the Senate. When the GOP took over both houses in 1994, the subsequent conflicts raised the standing of Bill Clinton and helped him get re-elected a short 2 years later.
If Obama loses the ability to push his projects through Congress, then he will be left to make speeches. Obama's is a great speaker and the more speeches he gives (combined with fewer policy initiatives, the more likely his re-election.
Obama was not particularly good at managing the public perception of his policies:
- The right hated Health Care reform and the left was furious that he took the public option off the table so early.
- The left doesn't like the fact that he is 'surging' another 30,000 troops into Afghanistan while the right complained that he took 8 months to make that decision.
Bill Clinton was actually liberated by the loss of Congress in 1994. When the Liberal base was in the minority, he made deals with Gingrich and his gang to pass welfare reform and NAFTA. These became his signature accomplishments.
The GOP should count their blessings if they don't get the Senate and the House had best get to work on pushing substantive legislation rather than another shutdown of the Federal government. If they are smart, they will coopt many Democratic agenda items such as Climate Change and Health Care reform.
Conservatives don't favour pollution and they don't like the idea of people dying for lack of Health Care. There is a lot of fertile ground for them to make real proposals. They should do so with haste.
Final Prediction
GOP wins north of 50 seats in the House and the Senate is a 50-50 saw off.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Mayor Rob Ford
So now it appears that Toronto has elected Councillor Rob Ford as Mayor in a landslide.
I wrote about the Mayoral election on Aug 23rd when it appeared that Ford was the clear frontrunner in a field of poor candidates. Since that time former Deputy Premier George Smitherman has been endorsed by the Toronto Star (predictable) and the Globe and Mail (sadly also predictable). The editorial boards and columnists have been agog at the possibility that the people might elect Councillor Ford.
Heather Mallick of the Toronto Star wrote on Sept 20 that Rob Ford was an "angry, pink faced man with an oversized head." She also described his supporters as a "monstrous regiment of angry, old, white, male voters." She compared voting for Ford to "sleeping with someone to get revenge on your spouse."
Really does Heather Mallick call herself a journalist? Those comments are not reporting and they are not fit for the editorial page either. She is just plain offensive....much like Rob Ford!
The self appointed intellects all hated the idea of Rob Ford as Mayor. I can't stand Rob Ford. I do think he is a buffoon....a worthy successor to the legacy of Mel Lastman and frankly a worthy successor to the polished intellectual buffoon David Miller.
I can't speak for anyone else but I found the media attacks against Rob Ford offensive and patronizing to the voters. It might have pushed some more voters into the Ford column....the media onslaught certainly didn't seem to have helped the former front runner George Smitherman.
Democracy is flawed. Whether you voted for Bob Rae or Mike Harris, you have reason to agree after those two gentlemen were elected Premier of Ontario.
I wrote about the Mayoral election on Aug 23rd when it appeared that Ford was the clear frontrunner in a field of poor candidates. Since that time former Deputy Premier George Smitherman has been endorsed by the Toronto Star (predictable) and the Globe and Mail (sadly also predictable). The editorial boards and columnists have been agog at the possibility that the people might elect Councillor Ford.
Heather Mallick of the Toronto Star wrote on Sept 20 that Rob Ford was an "angry, pink faced man with an oversized head." She also described his supporters as a "monstrous regiment of angry, old, white, male voters." She compared voting for Ford to "sleeping with someone to get revenge on your spouse."
Really does Heather Mallick call herself a journalist? Those comments are not reporting and they are not fit for the editorial page either. She is just plain offensive....much like Rob Ford!
The self appointed intellects all hated the idea of Rob Ford as Mayor. I can't stand Rob Ford. I do think he is a buffoon....a worthy successor to the legacy of Mel Lastman and frankly a worthy successor to the polished intellectual buffoon David Miller.
I can't speak for anyone else but I found the media attacks against Rob Ford offensive and patronizing to the voters. It might have pushed some more voters into the Ford column....the media onslaught certainly didn't seem to have helped the former front runner George Smitherman.
Democracy is flawed. Whether you voted for Bob Rae or Mike Harris, you have reason to agree after those two gentlemen were elected Premier of Ontario.
Monday, October 11, 2010
US November Election Predictions
Now that there are mere weeks to go before American voters get to pass a midterm judgment on the Obama Presidency, I will make some predictions.
First some observations.
I am still amazed that the nation that calls itself the Leader of the Free World still has so many shortcomings in the practice of Democracy. In the last midterms of 2006, 34 members of Congress ran unopposed by a major party candidate. People like to say that it is a two party system......well in that case i would expect at least two candidates in each district. 34 members ran unopposed, far more ran with only token opposition.
Gerrymandering (both racial and simply partisan) have created a wealth of safe districts where the incumbent only ever faces a threat in the party primary. George Will called this the ultimate perversion of Democracy....a system where politicians choose their voters rather than the voters choosing their politician.
A Republican tide has been predicted by most commentators. Most predictions call for gains that exceed those of the 1994 election that ended 44 years of Democratic majority rule in the House. In 1994 not a single incumbent Republican Congressman, Senator or Governor was defeated.
However some key differences are worth noting. While many pundits are saying that Obama and Clinton both overreached in the first two years of their mandate, Clinton was elected with 43% of the popular vote. Obama won 52%. This is a key difference since the Perot voters did not have a candidate in the race in 94. Obama voters do.
In 1994, the Republican landslide was a shock to everyone. Virtually nobody saw it coming. In 1994 the Speaker of the House lost his own district. The Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee also got voted out along with several incumbents who did not even commission polls because they thought that they were so safe. This time, Democrats are putting resources into races where defeat was previously unthinkable....such as Representative Barney Franks of Massachusetts.
This year everyone sees the wave coming and so the Democrats have time to batten down the hatches.
I am surprised and perplexed at the Democrats for their lack of message. The signature achievement of the first two years of Obama's term is Health Care Reform. A complex measure like this has many good and bad points. Everybody knows that the Democrats passed it with only token Republican support. Why are they running away from it rather than emphasizing the good points? By ceding the fight, they have allowed the Republicans to paint Health Care reform as 'unpopular'.....and by doing so it becomes a huge negative. A plethora of news stories point out that Dems are not even mentioning health care in their campaigns. People...you passed it now take the credit for the good points!!! If they were going to act like they needed to hang their heads in shame upon passing it then they shouldn't have voted for it.
The President's party loses seats in the midterms generally speaking. George W Bush bucked this trend in 2002 in the wake of 9-11 but it generally holds true.
My prediction:
1) The Republicans will gain control of the House by a slim margin.....they will not win the 100 seats that some are predicting.
2) The Republicans will gain 9 Senate seats to create an evenly balanced Senate. VP Joe Biden breaks ties so this means that Dems effectively maintain control.
Most of the Democrats who are voted out will be Conservative Democrats and as such the agenda for Congress will not change much. The more interesting thing to watch for is whether this new crop of Republicans will actually produce someone who is a viable Presidential candidate. Nobody had heard of Barack Obama until he won election to the Senate in 2004.
The Republicans had best hope so because none of Sara Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or Newt Gingrich are electable.
Of course i could be very very wrong. Considering that there was not a single African American Congressman who represented a majority white district......I didn't think that America was capable of electing a black man to be President.
First some observations.
I am still amazed that the nation that calls itself the Leader of the Free World still has so many shortcomings in the practice of Democracy. In the last midterms of 2006, 34 members of Congress ran unopposed by a major party candidate. People like to say that it is a two party system......well in that case i would expect at least two candidates in each district. 34 members ran unopposed, far more ran with only token opposition.
Gerrymandering (both racial and simply partisan) have created a wealth of safe districts where the incumbent only ever faces a threat in the party primary. George Will called this the ultimate perversion of Democracy....a system where politicians choose their voters rather than the voters choosing their politician.
A Republican tide has been predicted by most commentators. Most predictions call for gains that exceed those of the 1994 election that ended 44 years of Democratic majority rule in the House. In 1994 not a single incumbent Republican Congressman, Senator or Governor was defeated.
However some key differences are worth noting. While many pundits are saying that Obama and Clinton both overreached in the first two years of their mandate, Clinton was elected with 43% of the popular vote. Obama won 52%. This is a key difference since the Perot voters did not have a candidate in the race in 94. Obama voters do.
In 1994, the Republican landslide was a shock to everyone. Virtually nobody saw it coming. In 1994 the Speaker of the House lost his own district. The Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee also got voted out along with several incumbents who did not even commission polls because they thought that they were so safe. This time, Democrats are putting resources into races where defeat was previously unthinkable....such as Representative Barney Franks of Massachusetts.
This year everyone sees the wave coming and so the Democrats have time to batten down the hatches.
I am surprised and perplexed at the Democrats for their lack of message. The signature achievement of the first two years of Obama's term is Health Care Reform. A complex measure like this has many good and bad points. Everybody knows that the Democrats passed it with only token Republican support. Why are they running away from it rather than emphasizing the good points? By ceding the fight, they have allowed the Republicans to paint Health Care reform as 'unpopular'.....and by doing so it becomes a huge negative. A plethora of news stories point out that Dems are not even mentioning health care in their campaigns. People...you passed it now take the credit for the good points!!! If they were going to act like they needed to hang their heads in shame upon passing it then they shouldn't have voted for it.
The President's party loses seats in the midterms generally speaking. George W Bush bucked this trend in 2002 in the wake of 9-11 but it generally holds true.
My prediction:
1) The Republicans will gain control of the House by a slim margin.....they will not win the 100 seats that some are predicting.
2) The Republicans will gain 9 Senate seats to create an evenly balanced Senate. VP Joe Biden breaks ties so this means that Dems effectively maintain control.
Most of the Democrats who are voted out will be Conservative Democrats and as such the agenda for Congress will not change much. The more interesting thing to watch for is whether this new crop of Republicans will actually produce someone who is a viable Presidential candidate. Nobody had heard of Barack Obama until he won election to the Senate in 2004.
The Republicans had best hope so because none of Sara Palin, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee or Newt Gingrich are electable.
Of course i could be very very wrong. Considering that there was not a single African American Congressman who represented a majority white district......I didn't think that America was capable of electing a black man to be President.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Nobel Peace Prize Part II
The Chinese government has reacted to the Nobel Peace prize award by placing Liu Xiaobo's wife under house arrest. Her 'crime' was informing her husband that he had won the Nobel Peace Prize.
While the newspapers have reported these facts, the international outrage has been muted. Once this news cycle ends, this story is likely to be forgotten.
Some of us are old enough to remember the cultural, economic and diplomatic boycotts imposed against a nation that repressed 80% of their citizens due to the colour of their skin. The boycotts worked and South Africa emerged as a democratic nation that has the highest living standard in sub-saharan Africa.
Why is a nation that represses nearly 100% of its citizens less deserving of outrage and condemnation? Is it that important to keep getting cheap stuff at Walmart?
Twenty five years ago Artists United Against Apartheid released the following video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjWENNe29qc
Today, Hollywood's silence is matched by the diplomatic corps to say nothing of the corporate world and the IOC.
While the newspapers have reported these facts, the international outrage has been muted. Once this news cycle ends, this story is likely to be forgotten.
Some of us are old enough to remember the cultural, economic and diplomatic boycotts imposed against a nation that repressed 80% of their citizens due to the colour of their skin. The boycotts worked and South Africa emerged as a democratic nation that has the highest living standard in sub-saharan Africa.
Why is a nation that represses nearly 100% of its citizens less deserving of outrage and condemnation? Is it that important to keep getting cheap stuff at Walmart?
Twenty five years ago Artists United Against Apartheid released the following video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjWENNe29qc
Today, Hollywood's silence is matched by the diplomatic corps to say nothing of the corporate world and the IOC.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Nobel Peace Prize Regains its Noble Purpose
Today the Nobel Committee awarded the Peace Prize to a jailed Chinese dissident who had the audacity to call for multi-party democracy in China. As a younger man, he was a leader of the Tiananmen Square uprising. He shepharded many students out of Tiananmen Square just prior to the tanks rolling in.
Liu Xiaobo is in jail and is unaware of the honour that he has received. In fact most of China is unaware as State censors scrambled broadcasts of the ceremony as it was carried live by CNN and the BBC.
With this award, the Nobel Peace Prize regains much of the lustre that it had lost in recent years as unworthy recipients such as Barack Obama and Al Gore were honoured.
Mr Liu is a worthy addition to the pantheon that includes people such as Bishop Desmond Tutu and Mother Theresa who worked tirelessly to lift people out of oppression and poverty. The Nobel Committee displayed great wisdom in honouring FW De Clerk alongside Nelson Mandela for jointly leading South Africa beyond Apartheid. Many others were inspiring leaders for peace and justice who richly deserved their place.
The wisdom of this choice can be seen in the reaction of the Chinese government. First they tried to preempt the award by threatening the government of Norway by calling it a hostile action. After it was announced, they decried the awarding of such an honour upon a 'criminal.' Humanity would be well served if only more such 'criminals' existed in our midst.
The world has moved on since Tiananmen Square and that is a stain upon humanity. The Chinese nation suffers from less material poverty but threatens more of their neighbours militarily and more of the world economically. Even the United States treads carefully lest they offend such a valuable trading partner.
The images of tanks rolling over students were horrifying to the world. How soon they forget.
The most indelible image for me is of a lone student standing before the tanks. His courage and defiance should be remembered today.
Liu Xiaobo is in jail and is unaware of the honour that he has received. In fact most of China is unaware as State censors scrambled broadcasts of the ceremony as it was carried live by CNN and the BBC.
With this award, the Nobel Peace Prize regains much of the lustre that it had lost in recent years as unworthy recipients such as Barack Obama and Al Gore were honoured.
Mr Liu is a worthy addition to the pantheon that includes people such as Bishop Desmond Tutu and Mother Theresa who worked tirelessly to lift people out of oppression and poverty. The Nobel Committee displayed great wisdom in honouring FW De Clerk alongside Nelson Mandela for jointly leading South Africa beyond Apartheid. Many others were inspiring leaders for peace and justice who richly deserved their place.
The wisdom of this choice can be seen in the reaction of the Chinese government. First they tried to preempt the award by threatening the government of Norway by calling it a hostile action. After it was announced, they decried the awarding of such an honour upon a 'criminal.' Humanity would be well served if only more such 'criminals' existed in our midst.
The world has moved on since Tiananmen Square and that is a stain upon humanity. The Chinese nation suffers from less material poverty but threatens more of their neighbours militarily and more of the world economically. Even the United States treads carefully lest they offend such a valuable trading partner.
The images of tanks rolling over students were horrifying to the world. How soon they forget.
The most indelible image for me is of a lone student standing before the tanks. His courage and defiance should be remembered today.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Captain Robert Semrau - Update
Captain Semrau was found guilty of Disgraceful Conduct and today his sentence was handed down. He was reduced in rank to 2nd Lieutenant and dismissed from the Armed Forces.
This was the right and just result. From the evidence presented at trial he did not have murder on the mind. The prosecution's own evidence indicated that it was a mercy killing.
It was still wrong but it was not murder.
Now Robert Semrau can go about rebuilding his life as a civilian. His case should serve as a lesson to serving members of the military. Doing the right thing is difficult. As an officer he needed to follow orders which did not include killing a wounded combatant....even as an act of mercy.
It is especially important that the difficult issues that this case presented did not cause the system to take a pass on rendering judgment.
Good luck to Robert Semrau as he gets on with life. His actions may yet serve to make the Canadian military a better place.
This was the right and just result. From the evidence presented at trial he did not have murder on the mind. The prosecution's own evidence indicated that it was a mercy killing.
It was still wrong but it was not murder.
Now Robert Semrau can go about rebuilding his life as a civilian. His case should serve as a lesson to serving members of the military. Doing the right thing is difficult. As an officer he needed to follow orders which did not include killing a wounded combatant....even as an act of mercy.
It is especially important that the difficult issues that this case presented did not cause the system to take a pass on rendering judgment.
Good luck to Robert Semrau as he gets on with life. His actions may yet serve to make the Canadian military a better place.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
A Change of Pace
Today I decided to take a break from my usual ranting about the latest annoyance and talk about something that isn't talked about enough....friendships.
The past couple of years have seen enormous changes in my life. I went from living in Britain with an expectant wife to living in Canada and then going through a difficult divorce.
Most of my friends have heard the gory details and I won't go into them in detail here. Besides, that would miss the point really.
While I went through this most difficult phase of my life, I experienced many emotions. I experienced fear, anger, despair, righteous indignation and a bunch of other not so nice feelings. However through it all I was also experiencing feelings of gratitude. This was due to the love and support that I received from my many friends.
During the time leading up to the court battle, I was feeling especially vulnerable. Being falsely accused of plotting your wife's murder can have that effect. Those of you who haven't stood before a judge to answer such allegations will just have to take my word for it. It sucks!!! LOL
Even after it became clear that those allegations were not going to carry any weight, I was still faced with the prospect of picking up my son 6 times a week. What else would I be accused of when there were no witnesses around?
Into this unpleasant situation, 35 different friends of mine stepped forward to accompany me during transitions to ensure that I was not alone. This went on for over a year and I had somebody accompany me for all but 2 transitions. Looking back, this was truly remarkable. Some of these friends drove from long distances to help me for a 5 minute transition. I find it amazing that not a single friend started finding themselves 'busy' on repeated occasions until I no longer asked. It would have been completely understandable if they had because it was onerous. Yet they didn't.
In addition, there were numerous occasions where my friends spent time with Krishna and myself. I found myself turning invitations down because there simply aren't enough hours in enough days. I am truly blessed!
It is too soon to say whether this story ultimately has a great ending or not. I have joint custody of my son and we spend a lot of time together. In fact, I get more time with him than many dads who live near their children. Krishna is an amazingly happy and well adjusted little boy.....and extraordinarily handsome too!
I have the means to fly over to see him regularly. Not every guy in my situation could do that. I am blessed!
When I visit in Britain, one of my good friends and her husband welcome us into their home every time. Even when I visit for weekends in Britain, Krishna has a consistent bed to sleep in and a place to leave his toys and clothes. I am blessed!
When he visits Canada, again the invitations are more numerous than we can accept.
Divorce is not something that I recommend. It is extremely destructive and some people never get their balance back after going through it. It would be foolish for me to pretend that I haven't been damaged by the experience, but it would be truly ignorant to fail to see the good side that it brought out in so many of my friends. Their loyalty and support were more than I could ever hope to repay. But I suppose that is the whole point of such true friends....they don't expect anything for what they give. Still I owe them a debt and I will be working to repay that debt.
I am not an easy person to get along with. I am opinionated, mouthy and often ill mannered. I am headstrong and, often, don't listen well. I don't deserve the great friends that I have and so I treasure them.
Before Krishna moved away, a friend from church gave Krishna a gift and wrote inside that he should take good care of his mommy. This was truly heartwarming.
I hope that Krishna grows up to take good care of his mommy. He is a great kid and I don't deserve such a great son. I am blessed.
Nobody is naive enough to believe that I don't have some residual negative feelings. But I am human. Time is working its magic in healing those wounds.
All I can say at this point is that I couldn't have made it through this nasty process without my friends. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have a lot of money....but I can't imagine them being richer than me..thanks to the wealth of friends that I have.
For that I am truly blessed!
The past couple of years have seen enormous changes in my life. I went from living in Britain with an expectant wife to living in Canada and then going through a difficult divorce.
Most of my friends have heard the gory details and I won't go into them in detail here. Besides, that would miss the point really.
While I went through this most difficult phase of my life, I experienced many emotions. I experienced fear, anger, despair, righteous indignation and a bunch of other not so nice feelings. However through it all I was also experiencing feelings of gratitude. This was due to the love and support that I received from my many friends.
During the time leading up to the court battle, I was feeling especially vulnerable. Being falsely accused of plotting your wife's murder can have that effect. Those of you who haven't stood before a judge to answer such allegations will just have to take my word for it. It sucks!!! LOL
Even after it became clear that those allegations were not going to carry any weight, I was still faced with the prospect of picking up my son 6 times a week. What else would I be accused of when there were no witnesses around?
Into this unpleasant situation, 35 different friends of mine stepped forward to accompany me during transitions to ensure that I was not alone. This went on for over a year and I had somebody accompany me for all but 2 transitions. Looking back, this was truly remarkable. Some of these friends drove from long distances to help me for a 5 minute transition. I find it amazing that not a single friend started finding themselves 'busy' on repeated occasions until I no longer asked. It would have been completely understandable if they had because it was onerous. Yet they didn't.
In addition, there were numerous occasions where my friends spent time with Krishna and myself. I found myself turning invitations down because there simply aren't enough hours in enough days. I am truly blessed!
It is too soon to say whether this story ultimately has a great ending or not. I have joint custody of my son and we spend a lot of time together. In fact, I get more time with him than many dads who live near their children. Krishna is an amazingly happy and well adjusted little boy.....and extraordinarily handsome too!
I have the means to fly over to see him regularly. Not every guy in my situation could do that. I am blessed!
When I visit in Britain, one of my good friends and her husband welcome us into their home every time. Even when I visit for weekends in Britain, Krishna has a consistent bed to sleep in and a place to leave his toys and clothes. I am blessed!
When he visits Canada, again the invitations are more numerous than we can accept.
Divorce is not something that I recommend. It is extremely destructive and some people never get their balance back after going through it. It would be foolish for me to pretend that I haven't been damaged by the experience, but it would be truly ignorant to fail to see the good side that it brought out in so many of my friends. Their loyalty and support were more than I could ever hope to repay. But I suppose that is the whole point of such true friends....they don't expect anything for what they give. Still I owe them a debt and I will be working to repay that debt.
I am not an easy person to get along with. I am opinionated, mouthy and often ill mannered. I am headstrong and, often, don't listen well. I don't deserve the great friends that I have and so I treasure them.
Before Krishna moved away, a friend from church gave Krishna a gift and wrote inside that he should take good care of his mommy. This was truly heartwarming.
I hope that Krishna grows up to take good care of his mommy. He is a great kid and I don't deserve such a great son. I am blessed.
Nobody is naive enough to believe that I don't have some residual negative feelings. But I am human. Time is working its magic in healing those wounds.
All I can say at this point is that I couldn't have made it through this nasty process without my friends. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have a lot of money....but I can't imagine them being richer than me..thanks to the wealth of friends that I have.
For that I am truly blessed!
Monday, August 23, 2010
Toronto's Next Mayor
I find politics fascinating. I remember watching the 1976 Presidential debates between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. Since I was merely 6 years old my memories are scant. From the 1980 election onwards, my interest level grew and my memories remain vivid.
Canadian politics has produced fewer larger than life figures than our neighbours to the south. In part that may simply be a result of the fact that we don't tend to mythologize our leaders as Americans do. We don't have a Mount Rushmore. A Canadian Prime Minister rarely uses Teddy Roosevelt's "Bully Pulpit" to the extent American Presidents do. Ronald Reagan often went on the airwaves to ask the citizens to call their Congressman if he wasn't getting his priorities through. A Prime Minister has no need to engage in such banal pursuits. The Right Honourable one can simply order his caucus to vote as he pleases.....no need to involve the citizens.
It is a little known fact that the person in Canada who has the largest direct voter mandate is in fact the Mayor of Toronto. The Prime Minister is merely a Member of Parliament representing one riding while the Mayor of Toronto is directly voted in by citizens of 22 Federal ridings. It is also not very well known that from a Constitutional standpoint, there is no such thing as a municipal level of Government. The City of Toronto is incorporated under the laws of the Province of Ontario.
Leaving small technicalities like the Constitution aside, it is a fact that more people vote directly for the Mayor of Toronto than any other office in the land. It is the current Mayor's race that has me more baffled and amused than any other recent election.
Councillor Rob Ford is the clear front runner. He is 11 points ahead of former Deputy Premier of Ontario George Smitherman....according to a poll released today. The mind boggles.
Now it must be said that the amalgamated mega city of Toronto has not been around very long. Toronto has had but two mayors. The first was Mel Lastman who made Toronto a laughing stock by calling in the army after a bad snowstorm and telling a reporter that he didn't want to go to Africa because he hates snakes and might end up in a boiling pot of water with natives dancing around. (If Lastman had spent any time in some of Toronto's parks, he might have seen snakes nearer to home).
After two terms of Mel Lastman's buffoonery (the fine citizens of Toronto re-elected him with 80% of the vote for a second term), the people turned to an American born, British raised Harvard graduate named David Miller. Mayor Miller was a very smart man whose standing as mayor was torpedoed after engaging the unions in a long garbage strike only to give in at the end. People understandably asked what the point of forcing the strike was when he just ended up backtracking anyway.
So now along comes Rob Ford with a record as a right winger in a left wing city. He had a DUI conviction which he was apparently not very forthcoming about. He allegedly had to stop coaching high school football after roughing up a player. He has stated that Toronto should not welcome any more immigrants. He has said that AIDS is preventable as long you don't do drugs and aren't gay.
Despite all of his bluster and revelations about his past, he continues to lead the field. I can't explain it.
Perhaps the people are tired of charming politicians who hide behind a facade. Perhaps they like the fact that a buffoonish Rob Ford is more of an average citizen than some other candidates. Perhaps they feel that he is so bad that he can't possibly be hiding something worse (nowhere to go but up?).
I don't really know how Rob Ford can be the frontrunner in this race. I am no longer a Toronto resident and as such I can't vote. If I could, I really don't know who amongst this sad lot I would vote for. Perhaps therein lies the answer? Perhaps a paucity of good candidates means that the people are choosing between various degrees of bad. How sad that the race for the largest direct voter mandate in Canada might be won by default.
Canadian politics has produced fewer larger than life figures than our neighbours to the south. In part that may simply be a result of the fact that we don't tend to mythologize our leaders as Americans do. We don't have a Mount Rushmore. A Canadian Prime Minister rarely uses Teddy Roosevelt's "Bully Pulpit" to the extent American Presidents do. Ronald Reagan often went on the airwaves to ask the citizens to call their Congressman if he wasn't getting his priorities through. A Prime Minister has no need to engage in such banal pursuits. The Right Honourable one can simply order his caucus to vote as he pleases.....no need to involve the citizens.
It is a little known fact that the person in Canada who has the largest direct voter mandate is in fact the Mayor of Toronto. The Prime Minister is merely a Member of Parliament representing one riding while the Mayor of Toronto is directly voted in by citizens of 22 Federal ridings. It is also not very well known that from a Constitutional standpoint, there is no such thing as a municipal level of Government. The City of Toronto is incorporated under the laws of the Province of Ontario.
Leaving small technicalities like the Constitution aside, it is a fact that more people vote directly for the Mayor of Toronto than any other office in the land. It is the current Mayor's race that has me more baffled and amused than any other recent election.
Councillor Rob Ford is the clear front runner. He is 11 points ahead of former Deputy Premier of Ontario George Smitherman....according to a poll released today. The mind boggles.
Now it must be said that the amalgamated mega city of Toronto has not been around very long. Toronto has had but two mayors. The first was Mel Lastman who made Toronto a laughing stock by calling in the army after a bad snowstorm and telling a reporter that he didn't want to go to Africa because he hates snakes and might end up in a boiling pot of water with natives dancing around. (If Lastman had spent any time in some of Toronto's parks, he might have seen snakes nearer to home).
After two terms of Mel Lastman's buffoonery (the fine citizens of Toronto re-elected him with 80% of the vote for a second term), the people turned to an American born, British raised Harvard graduate named David Miller. Mayor Miller was a very smart man whose standing as mayor was torpedoed after engaging the unions in a long garbage strike only to give in at the end. People understandably asked what the point of forcing the strike was when he just ended up backtracking anyway.
So now along comes Rob Ford with a record as a right winger in a left wing city. He had a DUI conviction which he was apparently not very forthcoming about. He allegedly had to stop coaching high school football after roughing up a player. He has stated that Toronto should not welcome any more immigrants. He has said that AIDS is preventable as long you don't do drugs and aren't gay.
Despite all of his bluster and revelations about his past, he continues to lead the field. I can't explain it.
Perhaps the people are tired of charming politicians who hide behind a facade. Perhaps they like the fact that a buffoonish Rob Ford is more of an average citizen than some other candidates. Perhaps they feel that he is so bad that he can't possibly be hiding something worse (nowhere to go but up?).
I don't really know how Rob Ford can be the frontrunner in this race. I am no longer a Toronto resident and as such I can't vote. If I could, I really don't know who amongst this sad lot I would vote for. Perhaps therein lies the answer? Perhaps a paucity of good candidates means that the people are choosing between various degrees of bad. How sad that the race for the largest direct voter mandate in Canada might be won by default.
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Lottery Fever
The Toronto Star reports that the government of Ontario is considering legalized online gambling.
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/844961--ontario-set-to-bet-on-legalized-online-gambling?bn=1
Ontario would be joining a trend towards expansion of government run gambling. The government approach to many vices seems to follow a trend of initial prohibition followed by monopolization. It is true of gambling and in certain places (Ontario) it is true of the distribution of alcohol. One wonders if they will follow that approach to marijuana and prostitution if they should ever be made fully legal?
The arguments in favour of increased gambling rely mainly upon the fact that it is very lucrative for governments around the world. Additionally, the age of the internet means that a jurisdiction that practices prohibition still sees their citizens gambling online through internet sites that are domiciled in more permissive jursidictions.
I did a google search on the demographics of lottery players. I found a plethora of studies that found that lottery players tended to be less educated and have less disposable income. It naturally follows (and several studies confirmed) that those who were of an ethnic group who were economically disadvantaged were also more likely to buy lottery tickets and to spend more.
This makes sense since lotteries offer hope. It is natural that those who are poor and/or lacking in hope would grasp at a straw offering that hope. I do see the good that comes from that. It may be too much to lecture the poor that they should just save the $5 that they spend on lotteries weekly and put it into a savings account. That kind of sensible advice is better received by those who don't need it as much.
Still I cannot help but feel that a lottery is an insidious form of taxation. The profits flow to the government from the people. No tangible product is given in exchange for the cost of the lottery ticket.....it is strictly the possibility of a win that is being sold. A losing ticket (which just very slightly outnumber the winning tickets) leaves the holder of that ticket without hope and without $5. Government run gambling operations appeal mostly to those who are poor, desperate or stupid. I recognize that there are some who spend a few dollars just to have some fun, however that is not where the bulk of the revenue comes from.
It is an insidious tax because it is regressive in its application. It disproportionately affects those who can afford it the least. It is particularly insidious because it is a form of taxation that generates less anger. There were protests in the streets when the GST was introduced and more when the HST came in. Both of these were measures that were more efficient and progressive in their application than a lottery. Obviously income taxes are also unpopular and more progressive in application. Yet lotteries are often greeted with cheers and long lineups.
I know that other jurisdictions are becoming more permissive. However, this is a moral issue. If gambling is such a vice that it ought to be banned, then the government shouldn't be running it as a monopoly. It is harmful and dumb. Simply because other places exploit the poor and hopeless doesn't mean that we should act like lemmings and do the same thing. By that rationale we should legalize a host of more obviously offensive activities such that dollars aren't flowing to some far away places where anything goes.
Say no to more gambling.
http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/844961--ontario-set-to-bet-on-legalized-online-gambling?bn=1
Ontario would be joining a trend towards expansion of government run gambling. The government approach to many vices seems to follow a trend of initial prohibition followed by monopolization. It is true of gambling and in certain places (Ontario) it is true of the distribution of alcohol. One wonders if they will follow that approach to marijuana and prostitution if they should ever be made fully legal?
The arguments in favour of increased gambling rely mainly upon the fact that it is very lucrative for governments around the world. Additionally, the age of the internet means that a jurisdiction that practices prohibition still sees their citizens gambling online through internet sites that are domiciled in more permissive jursidictions.
I did a google search on the demographics of lottery players. I found a plethora of studies that found that lottery players tended to be less educated and have less disposable income. It naturally follows (and several studies confirmed) that those who were of an ethnic group who were economically disadvantaged were also more likely to buy lottery tickets and to spend more.
This makes sense since lotteries offer hope. It is natural that those who are poor and/or lacking in hope would grasp at a straw offering that hope. I do see the good that comes from that. It may be too much to lecture the poor that they should just save the $5 that they spend on lotteries weekly and put it into a savings account. That kind of sensible advice is better received by those who don't need it as much.
Still I cannot help but feel that a lottery is an insidious form of taxation. The profits flow to the government from the people. No tangible product is given in exchange for the cost of the lottery ticket.....it is strictly the possibility of a win that is being sold. A losing ticket (which just very slightly outnumber the winning tickets) leaves the holder of that ticket without hope and without $5. Government run gambling operations appeal mostly to those who are poor, desperate or stupid. I recognize that there are some who spend a few dollars just to have some fun, however that is not where the bulk of the revenue comes from.
It is an insidious tax because it is regressive in its application. It disproportionately affects those who can afford it the least. It is particularly insidious because it is a form of taxation that generates less anger. There were protests in the streets when the GST was introduced and more when the HST came in. Both of these were measures that were more efficient and progressive in their application than a lottery. Obviously income taxes are also unpopular and more progressive in application. Yet lotteries are often greeted with cheers and long lineups.
I know that other jurisdictions are becoming more permissive. However, this is a moral issue. If gambling is such a vice that it ought to be banned, then the government shouldn't be running it as a monopoly. It is harmful and dumb. Simply because other places exploit the poor and hopeless doesn't mean that we should act like lemmings and do the same thing. By that rationale we should legalize a host of more obviously offensive activities such that dollars aren't flowing to some far away places where anything goes.
Say no to more gambling.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Stimulus and Recession in Simple Terms
I studied Economics in University, though my marks would indicate that I didn't attend many classes or read much of the material. Nonetheless I find myself reading economic reports on a daily basis as a part of my job. I often wait with bated breath for various reports that are released at 830 am.
This brief issued by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office makes for some sober reading.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/116xx/doc11659/07-27_Debt_FiscalCrisis_Brief.pdf
To make a long story short, soaring deficits may cause debt to reach crisis levels.
At this point I think that its helpful to simplify things so that the dimmer lights who occupy all parts of the political spectrum can understand.
If we borrow $100 to 'stimulate' the economy through tax cuts, infrastructure spending, etc, etc.......there comes a time when we need to pay it back. If it's in one year then we will need to pay back about $102. If its in 5 years we will need to pay back $110. (I have assumed away compounding to keep it simple, and assumed an interest rate of 2%). Paying that back means increasing taxes by $110 or cutting infrastructure spending by $110 or reducing social services by $110.....or some combination thereof.
The math is very simple.....to "stimulate" the economy with a $100 deficit means reversing the stimulus by more than $100 since we will need to pay interest.
This example makes some very poor assumptions that are helpful to the arguments for deficit stimulus spending.
This brief issued by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office makes for some sober reading.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/116xx/doc11659/07-27_Debt_FiscalCrisis_Brief.pdf
To make a long story short, soaring deficits may cause debt to reach crisis levels.
At this point I think that its helpful to simplify things so that the dimmer lights who occupy all parts of the political spectrum can understand.
If we borrow $100 to 'stimulate' the economy through tax cuts, infrastructure spending, etc, etc.......there comes a time when we need to pay it back. If it's in one year then we will need to pay back about $102. If its in 5 years we will need to pay back $110. (I have assumed away compounding to keep it simple, and assumed an interest rate of 2%). Paying that back means increasing taxes by $110 or cutting infrastructure spending by $110 or reducing social services by $110.....or some combination thereof.
The math is very simple.....to "stimulate" the economy with a $100 deficit means reversing the stimulus by more than $100 since we will need to pay interest.
This example makes some very poor assumptions that are helpful to the arguments for deficit stimulus spending.
- I have made the bad assumption that $100 of stimulus will actually result in $100 of 'value' and that none will be lost due to inefficient allocation. This is a very poor assumption.
- I have made the ridiculous assumption that there is no compounding of interest. The reversal of stimulus would be much greater if interest is compounded.
- I have made the assumption (nay fantasy) that the deficit will be repaid in 5 years.....an appalling bad assumption. Just how bad would the pro-deficit argument look if we assume that it takes 30 years to pay it back? Even 30 years is a very rosy assumption.
- I have made the assumption that there is no "crowding out" effect where government spending incents the private sector to spend less.
- I have made the assumption that the expansion of the government into a greater share of GDP does not result in inefficiencies.
Despite all of these very rosy assumptions that are helpful to the pro-deficit view, we are left with the simple math that says that $100 of stimulus will result in a reversal of $110 of negative stimulus over the next 5 years.
I have ignored one giant elephant in the room and that is the multiplier effect. It is the idea that when the economy is stimulated by $100, it actually results in increased economic activity of a number greater than $100....say $160. If this is uniformly true then the argument for stimulus is stronger.......except that I have never understood why the multiplier effect doesn't also work in reverse when the stimulus is withdrawn.
I once heard a saying that the only role of Economic Projections is to make Astrology look respectable. (I would provide the citation if I could remember where I saw it.) If we can't accurately predict the path of GDP, then I don't understand how we could possibly predict a secondary derivative like a multiplier effect.
If the multiplier effect is valid, I also don't understand why we don't favour ever higher deficits as the path to endless prosperity.
To borrow a phrase from George H.W. Bush....a lot of this is Voodoo Economics. The truth is that our current deficits are just a way to pay for the standard of living to which we have become accustomed by raiding our children's education fund.
Our leaders have failed to speak some basic truths to the people. Hard times are necessary. Recessions are bad and so is death......but both are necessities in the grand scheme of things. No society has ever achieved 100% employment and no society ever will and it's not necessarily a good thing to strive for.
After 9-11, George W. Bush implored people to go shopping and enjoy life because otherwise Al Quada wins. I can't recall another time in history when a nation went to war and simultaneously went out for dinner and a movie. That attitude still permeates society.
Hard times build character. I treasure the memories of a childhood without material excess. I recall eating a piece of (what I now know was terrible) cheese on a plane as we immigrated from Korea. I realize now that our diet in Korea must have been very very low in fat. I declared that cheese the best thing I had ever tasted!!
I couldn't possibly bring myself to impose a false poverty on my son so that he can learn about what life is like for so many. However I do feel sad that he will probably never have such experiences. Although if we keep spending money we don't have, then he and many other children of today will have those experiences in reverse...and that would be tragic and represent a failure on our part.
Friday, July 23, 2010
GM Again
Today GM announced that it was going to spend $3.5 billion to purchase a sub-prime car lender. CEO Ed Whitacre said that the lack of a financing arm (since GMAC was sold off in 2007) put GM at a competitive disadvantage with buyers who had trouble getting credit.
I've read over the stories a few times and am completely stunned. A few points to consider:
I've read over the stories a few times and am completely stunned. A few points to consider:
- GM seems to have trouble producing cars good enough to sell at a profit. Since they've shown that they are a car company that is not very good at producing cars, what makes them think that they are going to be so good at evaluating the creditworthiness of those who have been deemed to be not worthy of credit....and hence are subprime borrowers?
- What will happen if the economy turns south again and these sub prime car borrowers stop making payments? Will GM suffer losses that will require another bailout?
- If GM has $3.5 billion kicking around in the bank, perhaps they should pay back some of the $40 billion that is still outstanding to the taxpayers?
- Was there another buyer for this sub prime lender? If so why is a taxpayer owned entity trumping a private sector bid? If not, then isn't this just another bailout one step removed?
We will soon see another absurdity. The government will divest itself of GM via, what may be, the largest public offering of stock in history. To do this GM will engage several banks (some of which have been bailed out by the taxpayers). GM will pay an underwriting fee to the Investment banks. So the car company that got bailed out by the taxpayers will be paying an enormous fee to the banks that got bailed out by the taxpayers.
The depressing thing about this whole thing is that it just seems to keep getting more absurd. The seeds for the credit crunch were sown during the Clinton Administration. George W Bush became a tax and spend Conservative who created a moral hazard with an orgy of bailouts. Barack Obama has followed in their footsteps. At each step the policy decisions seem to get worse and worse.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Captain Robert Semrau
By all accounts Captain Semrau is a good soldier, a family man and friend to many. He has been convicted of Disgraceful Conduct and faces 5 years in jail. He is the first Canadian soldier ever convicted due to the act of shooting an unarmed combatant.
Many have called his act of killing a wounded Taliban fighter an act of mercy and in keeping with the soldier's code to end the suffering of a combatant. The facts as presented by the prosecution state that after a Taliban ambush, a wounded insurgent was found with severe wounds that were too severe to treat in situ. There are accounts that state that the situation was too hostile for a medevac. One of his legs was blown off, the other nearly severed and his entrails were hanging out. The consensus view is that this insurgent would surely have died anyways and that it was only a question of how long he suffered before succumbing to his wounds. Apparently, Captain Semrau eliminated the question by shooting the man twice.
I recall an episode of Law and Order where the point was made that if a man jumps off a tall building and is plummeting to a certain death, the act of shooting him in mid air is still an act of murder as it hastened his death. This is consistent with a discussion in a Criminal law class I attended however it is really Ivory Tower mental masturbation.
Obviously I was not in court to hear the evidence but it seems to me that he did the humane thing by ending the suffering of this wounded human being. The fact that he was an enemy combatant and a member of the Taliban does not negate his status as a human being deserving of compassion.
Capt Semrau's motivations then are to be commended. However the jury was right to convict him of Disgraceful Conduct.
The Geneva Conventions state that a wounded enemy combatant ought to receive the same standard of care as a wounded friendly combatant. I don't know if Captain Semrau would have committed the same act of mercy if the wounded man were a member of his Regiment (which is also my old Regiment). However that is irrelevant really. The Geneva Conventions are always inconvenient and at times impractical. In coming to the conclusion that I did, I ignored the Geneva Conventions.
The problem I have with his act of mercy is that allowing it as an exception would set a precedent that could too easily be abused. When thousands of soldiers die on the battlefield, a coroner does not conduct autopsies on each corpse to determine the cause of death and the likelihood of survival after the fact. In many cases (including this one) the body is simply unavailable.
It is a myth that soldiers are trained and disciplined to such an extent that their emotions do not factor into their reactions. If soldiers were merely such automatons, the words "troop morale" would scarcely be uttered. The truth is that soldiers in battle experience intense feelings of fear, rage and hatred. How would you feel if your buddy was killed in an ambush? How would you react if you had a chance to exact some revenge? Allowing an individual soldier to pass sentence and allow "mercy" to be a defence that could result in exoneration is a loophole that many body bags would pass through.
As an officer he needs to maintain good order and discipline. His actions were prejudicial to good order and discipline. However, I still feel nothing but sympathy for Captain Semrau. He served in Afghanistan in the British Army and then with the Canadian army. He was a volunteer who was serving his country. Most of us never encounter a situation that presents such moral dilemmas and so we can sit back in our comfortable chairs and pass judgment on this man who risked life and limb to serve in a faraway land. The truth is that I feel sick to my stomach for saying that what he did was wrong. What he did was right in so many ways.
I think that Captain Semrau is a better person than most . What he did might have been humane and deserving of some praise but he must now accept that he must accept punishment. Perverse as it may seem, it might be the case that he was right to do what he did and it is right that he was judged guilty of a crime.
Many have called his act of killing a wounded Taliban fighter an act of mercy and in keeping with the soldier's code to end the suffering of a combatant. The facts as presented by the prosecution state that after a Taliban ambush, a wounded insurgent was found with severe wounds that were too severe to treat in situ. There are accounts that state that the situation was too hostile for a medevac. One of his legs was blown off, the other nearly severed and his entrails were hanging out. The consensus view is that this insurgent would surely have died anyways and that it was only a question of how long he suffered before succumbing to his wounds. Apparently, Captain Semrau eliminated the question by shooting the man twice.
I recall an episode of Law and Order where the point was made that if a man jumps off a tall building and is plummeting to a certain death, the act of shooting him in mid air is still an act of murder as it hastened his death. This is consistent with a discussion in a Criminal law class I attended however it is really Ivory Tower mental masturbation.
Obviously I was not in court to hear the evidence but it seems to me that he did the humane thing by ending the suffering of this wounded human being. The fact that he was an enemy combatant and a member of the Taliban does not negate his status as a human being deserving of compassion.
Capt Semrau's motivations then are to be commended. However the jury was right to convict him of Disgraceful Conduct.
The Geneva Conventions state that a wounded enemy combatant ought to receive the same standard of care as a wounded friendly combatant. I don't know if Captain Semrau would have committed the same act of mercy if the wounded man were a member of his Regiment (which is also my old Regiment). However that is irrelevant really. The Geneva Conventions are always inconvenient and at times impractical. In coming to the conclusion that I did, I ignored the Geneva Conventions.
The problem I have with his act of mercy is that allowing it as an exception would set a precedent that could too easily be abused. When thousands of soldiers die on the battlefield, a coroner does not conduct autopsies on each corpse to determine the cause of death and the likelihood of survival after the fact. In many cases (including this one) the body is simply unavailable.
It is a myth that soldiers are trained and disciplined to such an extent that their emotions do not factor into their reactions. If soldiers were merely such automatons, the words "troop morale" would scarcely be uttered. The truth is that soldiers in battle experience intense feelings of fear, rage and hatred. How would you feel if your buddy was killed in an ambush? How would you react if you had a chance to exact some revenge? Allowing an individual soldier to pass sentence and allow "mercy" to be a defence that could result in exoneration is a loophole that many body bags would pass through.
As an officer he needs to maintain good order and discipline. His actions were prejudicial to good order and discipline. However, I still feel nothing but sympathy for Captain Semrau. He served in Afghanistan in the British Army and then with the Canadian army. He was a volunteer who was serving his country. Most of us never encounter a situation that presents such moral dilemmas and so we can sit back in our comfortable chairs and pass judgment on this man who risked life and limb to serve in a faraway land. The truth is that I feel sick to my stomach for saying that what he did was wrong. What he did was right in so many ways.
I think that Captain Semrau is a better person than most . What he did might have been humane and deserving of some praise but he must now accept that he must accept punishment. Perverse as it may seem, it might be the case that he was right to do what he did and it is right that he was judged guilty of a crime.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
King Lebron, CB4 and Dwayne
Much of the North American sporting world spent the middle of this week digesting the most important news since the resurrection of Christ.(or so it seemed). The three big name free agents in the NBA chose a team. Lebron James of Cleveland, Chris Bosh of Toronto and Dwayne Wade have all agreed to sign with the Miami Heat.
Sportswriters (has there ever been a more useless profession?) have been yakking up the airwaves expressing their views of whether Miami can win the NBA Championship.
To the cacophony of voices, I shall add my own.
Miami will NOT win the NBA Championship. Right now its not even clear if they would make the finals. Boston's big three might be as good as Miami's and they have a better supporting cast. The LA Lakers had a big four when Karl Malone and Gary Payton joined Shaquille Oneal and Kobe Bryant in LA 8 years ago. They did not win.
The Miami Heat have instantly become the most hated team in the NBA with their arrogance and predictions of championships. Still it is a team game and their egos will clash and they will be knocked out by a team with fewer stars who play as a team.
Sportswriters (has there ever been a more useless profession?) have been yakking up the airwaves expressing their views of whether Miami can win the NBA Championship.
To the cacophony of voices, I shall add my own.
Miami will NOT win the NBA Championship. Right now its not even clear if they would make the finals. Boston's big three might be as good as Miami's and they have a better supporting cast. The LA Lakers had a big four when Karl Malone and Gary Payton joined Shaquille Oneal and Kobe Bryant in LA 8 years ago. They did not win.
The Miami Heat have instantly become the most hated team in the NBA with their arrogance and predictions of championships. Still it is a team game and their egos will clash and they will be knocked out by a team with fewer stars who play as a team.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Lake Toews
This Sunday, the Manitoba Legislature will have a ceremony to name a lake north of Flin Flon after Jonathan Toews.
So what did this 22 year old do to earn this special recognition? Well in his third season in the National Hockey League, he played for the Stanley Cup winning Chicago Blackhawks. Apparently he is also an avid fisherman.
Premier Greg Selinger says that the young Mr Toews has earned the right to have a lake named after him like the many war heroes who earned this recognition posthumously.
I'm not sure where to begin. Shall I begin with the waste of tax dollars in holding a ceremony in the Legislature? Shall I wonder whether Premier Selinger has weightier matters to attend to? Shall I wonder if the lake will be renamed if Jonathan Toews should become an athlete at the centre of a scandal? (a remote possibility given the stellar rap sheets of other millionaire athletes.
This one is too dumb to spend too much time on. A team of 20, or so, individuals wins the Stanley Cup every spring. Each year 20 young men achieve something worthy of the consideration of a Provincial Legislature.
Should Wayne Gretzky have a lake named after him for each of his four Stanley Cups? For that matter perhaps Larry Murphy should have four lakes named after him. Larry who?
The truth of the matter is that Jonathan Toews is a great young hockey player. Each and every paramedic or emergency room doctor in Manitoba is more deserving of an honour like this than the young Mr Toews. Each and every soldier serving in Afghanistan is more deserving. The average citizen in a run of the mill job is as deserving of Jonathan Toews.
I hope that Jonathan Toews goes on to live a great life filled with many accomplishments. I hope he does so that he can point to Lake Toews with pride and not embarrassment.
So what did this 22 year old do to earn this special recognition? Well in his third season in the National Hockey League, he played for the Stanley Cup winning Chicago Blackhawks. Apparently he is also an avid fisherman.
Premier Greg Selinger says that the young Mr Toews has earned the right to have a lake named after him like the many war heroes who earned this recognition posthumously.
I'm not sure where to begin. Shall I begin with the waste of tax dollars in holding a ceremony in the Legislature? Shall I wonder whether Premier Selinger has weightier matters to attend to? Shall I wonder if the lake will be renamed if Jonathan Toews should become an athlete at the centre of a scandal? (a remote possibility given the stellar rap sheets of other millionaire athletes.
This one is too dumb to spend too much time on. A team of 20, or so, individuals wins the Stanley Cup every spring. Each year 20 young men achieve something worthy of the consideration of a Provincial Legislature.
Should Wayne Gretzky have a lake named after him for each of his four Stanley Cups? For that matter perhaps Larry Murphy should have four lakes named after him. Larry who?
The truth of the matter is that Jonathan Toews is a great young hockey player. Each and every paramedic or emergency room doctor in Manitoba is more deserving of an honour like this than the young Mr Toews. Each and every soldier serving in Afghanistan is more deserving. The average citizen in a run of the mill job is as deserving of Jonathan Toews.
I hope that Jonathan Toews goes on to live a great life filled with many accomplishments. I hope he does so that he can point to Lake Toews with pride and not embarrassment.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
60 Years Ago today the Cold War turned Hot in Korea
Russian trained communist troops poured across the 38th parallel to invade South Korea. This was a pivotal moment for the Cold War as Communist expansion took a more aggressive turn.
It was a shining moment for the United Nations as the Security Council condemned the invasion and authorized member nations to supply troops to repel the invasion. It was the last shining moment for the United Nations. It was only made possible because the Soviet Union had boycotted the Security Council and hence did not use their veto.(a mistake they would not repeat) One lasting legacy of the Korean war were the endless vetoes that prevented the Security Council from becoming anything more than a debating society.
Member nations (led by the United States) poured troops into South Korea and held the North Korean advance around the southern port of Pusan. The Pusan perimeter held until General McArthur outflanked the enemy by landing at Inchon and cutting off supply lines. The North Koreans collapsed and the Allies pushed the remaining communist troops to the Yalu river. At this point Communist China entered the war and pushed the allies back to the present DMZ. Stalemate ensued for 2 years before an armistice was signed.
It was during this war that my mother's family escaped the north. My grandmother fled the north with my mother and uncle. She was separated from my grandfather at the time. Unlike so many other families who were never reunited, the found each other after the war and settled in Seoul. However like so many families, my grandmother left behind 6 brothers in the north. She lived the rest of her life never knowing what happened to them.
It is a strange feeling watching the North Korean team at the World Cup. I can't cheer for them but it has occurred to me that one of my cousins could be playing for the North.
During a visit to Wolseley barrack in London, Ontario, I read the Honour Roll of members of the Royal Canadian Regiment who fell in Korea. I was deeply moved that they gave their lives in a far away land for a people they did not know. I enrolled shortly thereafter.
It is always controversial when troops are sent to fight in foreign wars. Many have forgotten that conscription to fight Hitler nearly tore Canada apart as English Canada voted to send troops to Europe while Quebec voted against. The ultimate worth of the sacrifice of our young men is often not readily apparent. I'm sure that it was not universally popular amongst Canadians to send our soldiers to Korea.
I don't know if its enough that Korea is now the world's 8th largest economy and a vibrant trading partner for Canada. Korea hasn't always been a truly democratic nation in the aftermath of the war but is now so. I don't know if that is enough to justify the sacrifice.
Koreans sent troops to Vietnam to assist in a very similar struggle. The President of Korea wrote an op ed piece today expressing gratitude for the sacrifice of 60 years ago.
The truth is that the worth of a sacrifice cannot (should not) be measured in balance of trade figures. Ultimately history will judge whether the struggle was worthy or not. History's yardstick is not always consistent and may use different standards.
All I can say now is that i'm grateful that the world stood up against aggression and restored freedom to a small and insignificant country far away from here. The people who were liberated live in prosperity and freedom today. The people who lived north of the 38th parallel live lives filled with desperation and starvation.
Though the war ended in stalemate resulting in divided families and a nation torn asunder, the contrast is unmistakable and may provide the greater lesson to history:
Communism is an evil ideology and fighting it was worthwhile.
It was a shining moment for the United Nations as the Security Council condemned the invasion and authorized member nations to supply troops to repel the invasion. It was the last shining moment for the United Nations. It was only made possible because the Soviet Union had boycotted the Security Council and hence did not use their veto.(a mistake they would not repeat) One lasting legacy of the Korean war were the endless vetoes that prevented the Security Council from becoming anything more than a debating society.
Member nations (led by the United States) poured troops into South Korea and held the North Korean advance around the southern port of Pusan. The Pusan perimeter held until General McArthur outflanked the enemy by landing at Inchon and cutting off supply lines. The North Koreans collapsed and the Allies pushed the remaining communist troops to the Yalu river. At this point Communist China entered the war and pushed the allies back to the present DMZ. Stalemate ensued for 2 years before an armistice was signed.
It was during this war that my mother's family escaped the north. My grandmother fled the north with my mother and uncle. She was separated from my grandfather at the time. Unlike so many other families who were never reunited, the found each other after the war and settled in Seoul. However like so many families, my grandmother left behind 6 brothers in the north. She lived the rest of her life never knowing what happened to them.
It is a strange feeling watching the North Korean team at the World Cup. I can't cheer for them but it has occurred to me that one of my cousins could be playing for the North.
During a visit to Wolseley barrack in London, Ontario, I read the Honour Roll of members of the Royal Canadian Regiment who fell in Korea. I was deeply moved that they gave their lives in a far away land for a people they did not know. I enrolled shortly thereafter.
It is always controversial when troops are sent to fight in foreign wars. Many have forgotten that conscription to fight Hitler nearly tore Canada apart as English Canada voted to send troops to Europe while Quebec voted against. The ultimate worth of the sacrifice of our young men is often not readily apparent. I'm sure that it was not universally popular amongst Canadians to send our soldiers to Korea.
I don't know if its enough that Korea is now the world's 8th largest economy and a vibrant trading partner for Canada. Korea hasn't always been a truly democratic nation in the aftermath of the war but is now so. I don't know if that is enough to justify the sacrifice.
Koreans sent troops to Vietnam to assist in a very similar struggle. The President of Korea wrote an op ed piece today expressing gratitude for the sacrifice of 60 years ago.
The truth is that the worth of a sacrifice cannot (should not) be measured in balance of trade figures. Ultimately history will judge whether the struggle was worthy or not. History's yardstick is not always consistent and may use different standards.
All I can say now is that i'm grateful that the world stood up against aggression and restored freedom to a small and insignificant country far away from here. The people who were liberated live in prosperity and freedom today. The people who lived north of the 38th parallel live lives filled with desperation and starvation.
Though the war ended in stalemate resulting in divided families and a nation torn asunder, the contrast is unmistakable and may provide the greater lesson to history:
Communism is an evil ideology and fighting it was worthwhile.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
BP's Gusher
The latest twist is that a collision with an underwater submersible has damaged the cap that BP installed on their underwater gusher. That means that oil is now flowing into open water at a rate of 5,000 barrels per day.....oh wait no its 10,000 barrels a day.....oh wait no, its between 60,000 and 100,000 barrels a day. However they don't really know.
Every one of BP's bandaids that have been applied to this spill have now failed and oil is flowing into he gulf unchecked. We are told that this could continue until BP drills 4 'relief well' in August.
I am not an engineer with specialized knowledge of deep sea drilling. I have no expertise on anything to do with anything here. However it doesn't take any specialized knowledge to know that every one of BP's approaches has resulted in abject failures. Has it occurred to anyone that if drilling four new holes in the ocean floor is as successful as all other attempts to stop this spill, then we could be looking at even more oil in the gulf?
Like i say i don't know the technical details of what a relief well means. I'm sure that it will be done very safely and the odds of them opening up another gusher a mile below the surface are absurdly low. Does anyone really blame me for being so cynical?
Every one of BP's bandaids that have been applied to this spill have now failed and oil is flowing into he gulf unchecked. We are told that this could continue until BP drills 4 'relief well' in August.
I am not an engineer with specialized knowledge of deep sea drilling. I have no expertise on anything to do with anything here. However it doesn't take any specialized knowledge to know that every one of BP's approaches has resulted in abject failures. Has it occurred to anyone that if drilling four new holes in the ocean floor is as successful as all other attempts to stop this spill, then we could be looking at even more oil in the gulf?
Like i say i don't know the technical details of what a relief well means. I'm sure that it will be done very safely and the odds of them opening up another gusher a mile below the surface are absurdly low. Does anyone really blame me for being so cynical?
General McChrystal`s Big Mistake....and Obama`s
General Stanley McChrystal made a big mistake. He says so, his Commander in Chief says so as well as the Defence Secretary and Joint Chiefs of Staff.
He and his staff should not have allowed Rolling Stone Magazine such unfettered access in a time of war. Having done so, he compounded the mistake by speaking too freely.
Many of the individual criticisms made by he and his staff have merit and have been spoken by many in Congress and the media. It doesn`t matter whether he was right on the merits of the criticisms or not. Arguably it is worse that his comments have merit because they are more destabilizing.
As the man in charge of the Afghanistan theatre, General McChrystal is responsible for motivating the troops and getting them ready to do the job. If he felt that his hands were being tied by politicians in Washington, then he has a responsibility to resign.....not to pop off to Rolling Stone magazine.
McChrystal must go. His actions reflect poor judgment and border on insubordination. This is clear.
So then why are Obama, Defence Secretary Gates and various members of the Chain of Command issuing statements of disappointment in the General? Why are they all talking to the press about McChrystal's "error in judgment."
Obama should have fired McChrystal and ordered him home immediately. The rest of them should have shut up. Sadly, this kind of public vacillation supports some of McChrystal's complaints about indecivenesss.
It's ironic and very troubling.
Does Obama have it in him to make the hard (or even the easy) decisions? This is starting to look like a second term for the Carter administration.
He and his staff should not have allowed Rolling Stone Magazine such unfettered access in a time of war. Having done so, he compounded the mistake by speaking too freely.
Many of the individual criticisms made by he and his staff have merit and have been spoken by many in Congress and the media. It doesn`t matter whether he was right on the merits of the criticisms or not. Arguably it is worse that his comments have merit because they are more destabilizing.
As the man in charge of the Afghanistan theatre, General McChrystal is responsible for motivating the troops and getting them ready to do the job. If he felt that his hands were being tied by politicians in Washington, then he has a responsibility to resign.....not to pop off to Rolling Stone magazine.
McChrystal must go. His actions reflect poor judgment and border on insubordination. This is clear.
So then why are Obama, Defence Secretary Gates and various members of the Chain of Command issuing statements of disappointment in the General? Why are they all talking to the press about McChrystal's "error in judgment."
Obama should have fired McChrystal and ordered him home immediately. The rest of them should have shut up. Sadly, this kind of public vacillation supports some of McChrystal's complaints about indecivenesss.
It's ironic and very troubling.
Does Obama have it in him to make the hard (or even the easy) decisions? This is starting to look like a second term for the Carter administration.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
World Cup so far
The group stage of the World Cup is nearing a close.
Congratulations are in order to the South Africans. They did not advance but they finished 1-1-1 by beating France. This was a very respectable result of which they can be proud.
Greece has won their first World Cup match ever. This was helped by scoring their first goal ever at this tournament.
Along with the many minnows who have upset the big nations there have been frequent (far too frequent) displays of diving and feigning of injuries. This is cheating and is the biggest blight upon this event. The same statement can be made every 4 years. When will FIFA do something about this culture of diving?
As much as sports teaches us about the right way to do things, it also teaches us that cheaters often do prosper. Who can forget Diego Maradona winning the World Cup after scoring with a handball?
This year Thierry Henry's handball put France into this tournament at Ireland's expense. Irish hearts were broken and polls showed that the French population were embarrassed at their team's entry. This was set right today when France bowed out going winless amidst recriminations and infighting.
France is a great football nation. They will be back and will do themselves proud. However at this World Cup they went out as they should have because they did not deserve to be there.
Congratulations are in order to the South Africans. They did not advance but they finished 1-1-1 by beating France. This was a very respectable result of which they can be proud.
Greece has won their first World Cup match ever. This was helped by scoring their first goal ever at this tournament.
Along with the many minnows who have upset the big nations there have been frequent (far too frequent) displays of diving and feigning of injuries. This is cheating and is the biggest blight upon this event. The same statement can be made every 4 years. When will FIFA do something about this culture of diving?
As much as sports teaches us about the right way to do things, it also teaches us that cheaters often do prosper. Who can forget Diego Maradona winning the World Cup after scoring with a handball?
This year Thierry Henry's handball put France into this tournament at Ireland's expense. Irish hearts were broken and polls showed that the French population were embarrassed at their team's entry. This was set right today when France bowed out going winless amidst recriminations and infighting.
France is a great football nation. They will be back and will do themselves proud. However at this World Cup they went out as they should have because they did not deserve to be there.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Aid and Comfort to the Enemy
US Law prohibits the "material support or resources" of foreign organizations designated by the State Department to be terrorist organizations.
In the case of the Attorney General v. Humanitarian Law project, The Supreme Court upheld the law in the face of arguments by Humanitarian Law that this prohibition infringed upon their First Amendment rights.
The majority decision correctly held that any American had a First Amendment right to express support for the aims of an organization no matter how odious. They ruled that this did not apply to the provision of material, expert training or personnel to the organization.
To put it into layman's terms, it is fine for any American to say that the Taliban represented a golden age for Afghanistan but it is illegal to provide personnel, material or expert advice as support for the Taliban.
The remarkable thing about this ruling is that the 6-3 majority brought the 5 conservative justices together with the dean of the liberal wing, Justice John Paul Stevens. That justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayor would uphold a "right" to supply terrorists with material and personnel as a free speech right is shocking and offensive.
Voices of dissent in times of war are often shouted down with accusations that the dissenters are giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy. That accusation is often used as an unfair and over the top bullying effort to silence dissent. How remarkable that 3 justices of the Supreme Court would allow for actual aid and comfort to be supplied to the enemy.
It is rare that I applaud Justice Stevens for being on the right side of a SCOTUS ruling. His presence on the right side of this ruling makes it something other than the usual left-right split on the Supreme Court. The 3 dissenting justices are left looking ridiculous.
In the case of the Attorney General v. Humanitarian Law project, The Supreme Court upheld the law in the face of arguments by Humanitarian Law that this prohibition infringed upon their First Amendment rights.
The majority decision correctly held that any American had a First Amendment right to express support for the aims of an organization no matter how odious. They ruled that this did not apply to the provision of material, expert training or personnel to the organization.
To put it into layman's terms, it is fine for any American to say that the Taliban represented a golden age for Afghanistan but it is illegal to provide personnel, material or expert advice as support for the Taliban.
The remarkable thing about this ruling is that the 6-3 majority brought the 5 conservative justices together with the dean of the liberal wing, Justice John Paul Stevens. That justices Breyer, Ginsburg and Sotomayor would uphold a "right" to supply terrorists with material and personnel as a free speech right is shocking and offensive.
Voices of dissent in times of war are often shouted down with accusations that the dissenters are giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy. That accusation is often used as an unfair and over the top bullying effort to silence dissent. How remarkable that 3 justices of the Supreme Court would allow for actual aid and comfort to be supplied to the enemy.
It is rare that I applaud Justice Stevens for being on the right side of a SCOTUS ruling. His presence on the right side of this ruling makes it something other than the usual left-right split on the Supreme Court. The 3 dissenting justices are left looking ridiculous.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
World Cup 2010
I often write about the beauty of sport. There are so many life lessons that can be learned through participaton (even as a spectator) in sports. Different life lessons are often learned through individual sports vs team sports however both are important.
Among my favourites:
1) David can slay Goliath when one compensates for a lack of talent with superior effort.
2) Contests are more often won in practice. (admittedly a variation on Sun Tzu)
3) Life isn't always fair. Sometimes the good guys don't win. Sometimes cheaters prosper. You should still display sportsmanship.
The first world cup of soccer to be held on the continent of Africa is currently being held in South Africa. Soccer is probably the most global of all sports in participation and appeal. North America has been a laggard on this front until very recently.
That South Africa has emerged from Apartheid as a leading African nation is a wonderful thing. Living standards across Africa are poor but less so in South Africa. Hosting the World Cup after so many years of being banned from most sporting competitions sends a powerful message.
South Africa scored the first goal of the tournament in their 1-1 draw with Mexico. The symbolism and spirit cannot be denied. This World Cup might be more momentous than the 2002 World Cup in Japan/korea in terms of the effect upon the host nation.
However much i appreciate sports, it's also true that too many people overestimate the impact of sport in an economic sense. Many taxpayer dollars have been squandered in its pursuit.
Montreal's Olympic Stadium now sits mostly empty as a white elephant to the folly of the 1976 games. It was finally paid for 30 years after the Olympics at a total cost of 1.6 billion dollars.
So what will South Africa do with 10 similar stadiums?
Several first round games have been played in front of sparse crowds. So how many bums will fill the seats when the World Cup is not being hosted?
Perhaps i'm being overly negative but while sports provides important life lessons, it usually doesn't truly change the nature of a city hosting it. While Winnipeg's social pride was wounded when they lost the Jets of the NHL, getting an NHL team back will not result in a sea change. Winnipeg will still not be Toronto even if they end up having a better hockey team.
I hope i'm wrong but i just don't see how several of these stadums will pay for themselves once the Wordl Cup is done. South Africa may just end up with a billion dollar hangover when this is all done.
They are still a poor country...perhaps the money could have been better spent/
Among my favourites:
1) David can slay Goliath when one compensates for a lack of talent with superior effort.
2) Contests are more often won in practice. (admittedly a variation on Sun Tzu)
3) Life isn't always fair. Sometimes the good guys don't win. Sometimes cheaters prosper. You should still display sportsmanship.
The first world cup of soccer to be held on the continent of Africa is currently being held in South Africa. Soccer is probably the most global of all sports in participation and appeal. North America has been a laggard on this front until very recently.
That South Africa has emerged from Apartheid as a leading African nation is a wonderful thing. Living standards across Africa are poor but less so in South Africa. Hosting the World Cup after so many years of being banned from most sporting competitions sends a powerful message.
South Africa scored the first goal of the tournament in their 1-1 draw with Mexico. The symbolism and spirit cannot be denied. This World Cup might be more momentous than the 2002 World Cup in Japan/korea in terms of the effect upon the host nation.
However much i appreciate sports, it's also true that too many people overestimate the impact of sport in an economic sense. Many taxpayer dollars have been squandered in its pursuit.
Montreal's Olympic Stadium now sits mostly empty as a white elephant to the folly of the 1976 games. It was finally paid for 30 years after the Olympics at a total cost of 1.6 billion dollars.
So what will South Africa do with 10 similar stadiums?
Several first round games have been played in front of sparse crowds. So how many bums will fill the seats when the World Cup is not being hosted?
Perhaps i'm being overly negative but while sports provides important life lessons, it usually doesn't truly change the nature of a city hosting it. While Winnipeg's social pride was wounded when they lost the Jets of the NHL, getting an NHL team back will not result in a sea change. Winnipeg will still not be Toronto even if they end up having a better hockey team.
I hope i'm wrong but i just don't see how several of these stadums will pay for themselves once the Wordl Cup is done. South Africa may just end up with a billion dollar hangover when this is all done.
They are still a poor country...perhaps the money could have been better spent/
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Congratulations to the Chicago Blackhawks.....poor Leafs fans!
The New York Rangers ended a 50 year streak of futility when they captured the Stanley Cup in 1994.
Tonight the Chicago Blackhawks won Lord Stanley's mug to end a 49 year streak of futility.
This leaves the Toronto Maple Leafs with the longest drought at 43 years. During that period of time, 23 Cups have been won by teams that did not even exist when Toronto last celebrated. Included in that list are such notable hockey hotbeds such as Carolina, Anaheim and Tampa Bay.
No point really.....other than the LEAFS SUCK!!!
Congrats to Chicago!
Tonight the Chicago Blackhawks won Lord Stanley's mug to end a 49 year streak of futility.
This leaves the Toronto Maple Leafs with the longest drought at 43 years. During that period of time, 23 Cups have been won by teams that did not even exist when Toronto last celebrated. Included in that list are such notable hockey hotbeds such as Carolina, Anaheim and Tampa Bay.
No point really.....other than the LEAFS SUCK!!!
Congrats to Chicago!
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
The Helen Thomas Era Ends
Helen Thomas's career has been long and distinguished. She began covering President elect Kennedy in 1960 and has covered every President since. It was well known that she was no friend of Republicans and no friend of Israel, still admiration for her was nearly universal. Her seat in the press gallery was directly in front of the President and she was a formidable adversary for any politician.
The end of her career was a rather sad spectacle. At the age of 89 she attended the White House celebration of Jewish Heritage month and inexplicably told a rabbi that the Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home." She suggested that they return to Poland, Germany and America.
Germany and Poland were countries in which many Jews were born and raised for generations. It is also the case that the most notorious Nazi death camps were also situated there.
Helen Thomas was a teenager during Kristallnacht. She was an adult when Hitler invaded Poland. Throughout her entire life (and before) Jews lived in Palestine. During her long life, Jews ceased to be a significant part of the population of many Arab countries.
It could be said that these facts should lead to her condemnation as she should have really known better. However it is also the basis for some forgiveness. What she said was very offensive. However she is almost 90 now. I couldn't help but feel some sympathy for her as Ari Fleischer (Bush Administration) and Lanny Davis (Clinton Administration) eviscerated her publicly and disavowed their past friendship and respect.
If you were lucky enough to have a grandmother who was deep into her 80's, would you be embarrassed if she said something off colour or would you smile knowing that she has lived a life worthy of respect?
I once attended a military dinner where a number of retired officers attended. An old man barked at me and asked me if i was Japanese. I smiled and said "No sir, I'm Korean. We were fighting the Japanese behind the lines." A somewhat less old man came up to me and apologized for the old major's tone with me. I told him that no apologies were necessary. That "old man" was a decorated veteran of the Italian campaign and deserved respect. Sure he might have gone a little batty but I chose to cut him some slack. He had earned it.
Helen Thomas was right to retire. She probably should have done so earlier. Lanny Davis and Ari Fleischer should stand down. There is no valour in beating up on an old woman. They should throw her a big party to celebrate her retirement and honour her life. She deserves it.
The end of her career was a rather sad spectacle. At the age of 89 she attended the White House celebration of Jewish Heritage month and inexplicably told a rabbi that the Jews should "get the hell out of Palestine" and "go home." She suggested that they return to Poland, Germany and America.
Germany and Poland were countries in which many Jews were born and raised for generations. It is also the case that the most notorious Nazi death camps were also situated there.
Helen Thomas was a teenager during Kristallnacht. She was an adult when Hitler invaded Poland. Throughout her entire life (and before) Jews lived in Palestine. During her long life, Jews ceased to be a significant part of the population of many Arab countries.
It could be said that these facts should lead to her condemnation as she should have really known better. However it is also the basis for some forgiveness. What she said was very offensive. However she is almost 90 now. I couldn't help but feel some sympathy for her as Ari Fleischer (Bush Administration) and Lanny Davis (Clinton Administration) eviscerated her publicly and disavowed their past friendship and respect.
If you were lucky enough to have a grandmother who was deep into her 80's, would you be embarrassed if she said something off colour or would you smile knowing that she has lived a life worthy of respect?
I once attended a military dinner where a number of retired officers attended. An old man barked at me and asked me if i was Japanese. I smiled and said "No sir, I'm Korean. We were fighting the Japanese behind the lines." A somewhat less old man came up to me and apologized for the old major's tone with me. I told him that no apologies were necessary. That "old man" was a decorated veteran of the Italian campaign and deserved respect. Sure he might have gone a little batty but I chose to cut him some slack. He had earned it.
Helen Thomas was right to retire. She probably should have done so earlier. Lanny Davis and Ari Fleischer should stand down. There is no valour in beating up on an old woman. They should throw her a big party to celebrate her retirement and honour her life. She deserves it.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Serving your Country....again
In these times of (relative) peace, serving your country often means playing a sport for your national team. Players often talk about the honour of "playing for their country" in tones that would make it appear that they were sacrificing life and limb to do so.
It is rare that a sporting federation (with a vested interest in promoting the commercial appeal of the game) would be the one giving us some perspective.
http://www.iihf.com/nc/home-of-hockey/news/news-singleview/article/saying-no-to-your-country.html
Szymon Szemberg has drawn criticism for naming and shaming players who declined the call to represent their country at the Hockey World Championships and the lame excuses they give. He is right to do so.
Among his best observations:
"How can a player who is 22 or 25 or 27, and who was just eliminated from the playoffs be tired? Tired is a miner who works in a damp pit in Miktivka, in the Donetz Plateau in Ukraine, who never sees daylight and who provides living for a family of five in a modest two-room apartment. That is tired."
"Tired is a divorced mother with two young kids who double shifts as a nurse assistant and cleaning lady to make ends meet."
"Why is a 22-year-old Sidney Crosby tired when a 34-year-old Ryan Smyth is answering the bell for his country despite having represented Canada at the Worlds already on eight occasions?"
Professional athletes live a privileged life. They should remember that when they make such lame excuses.
It is rare that a sporting federation (with a vested interest in promoting the commercial appeal of the game) would be the one giving us some perspective.
http://www.iihf.com/nc/home-of-hockey/news/news-singleview/article/saying-no-to-your-country.html
Szymon Szemberg has drawn criticism for naming and shaming players who declined the call to represent their country at the Hockey World Championships and the lame excuses they give. He is right to do so.
Among his best observations:
"How can a player who is 22 or 25 or 27, and who was just eliminated from the playoffs be tired? Tired is a miner who works in a damp pit in Miktivka, in the Donetz Plateau in Ukraine, who never sees daylight and who provides living for a family of five in a modest two-room apartment. That is tired."
"Tired is a divorced mother with two young kids who double shifts as a nurse assistant and cleaning lady to make ends meet."
"Why is a 22-year-old Sidney Crosby tired when a 34-year-old Ryan Smyth is answering the bell for his country despite having represented Canada at the Worlds already on eight occasions?"
Professional athletes live a privileged life. They should remember that when they make such lame excuses.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Honouring those who served
Two news items have struck a chord with me today.
In Afghanistan, Colonel Geoff Parker of the Royal Canadian Regiment (my old Regiment) became the highest ranking casualty amongst Canadians who have served in Afghanistan.
In Conneticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is in the news over revelations that he had spoken of his time serving in Vietnam and of how painful it was to be spat at upon his return. Only problem is that he never served in Vietnam. He received 5 deferments and then joined the Marine reserves to avoid combat.
AG Blumenthal's spoken words are powerful and right on their merits. It was inexcusable that young boys who were conscripted into a war received such treatment upon their return. America has spent a long time coming to terms with how wrong that was.
Richard Blumenthal's pathetic atttempts to curry favour while campaigning in front of Veterans groups only serve to aggravate that injustice. Before this he was the overwhelming favourite to replace Senator Chris Dodd as United States Senator from Conneticut.
His military history is not that different from mine. I served as a reservist and never served in combat. The idea of falsely claiming to have served in combat dishonours those who did serve and is so offensive that Blumenthal would be lucky not to get a punch in the jaw from a veteran who did serve.
For those who see this story in partisan tones, I would ask how they would feel if it had come to light that Governor George W Bush had claimed to have served in Vietnam while campaigning for higher office. How much would your blood boil?
Col Parker attended basic training in Gagetown at the same time i did but i did not know him. A close friend of mine reported directly to him when he started his service in the Regular Forces.
These two news stories from either side of the border highlight the best and worst of our society. There are those who serve nobly and make the ultimate sacrifice and there are those who lay claim to an honour they did not earn. I will be attending Col Parker's memorial service. Richard Blumenthal will drop out of the race if he has any honour at all.
He is unfit for the office he seeks.
Prayers for Col Parker's family and his young children.
In Afghanistan, Colonel Geoff Parker of the Royal Canadian Regiment (my old Regiment) became the highest ranking casualty amongst Canadians who have served in Afghanistan.
In Conneticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is in the news over revelations that he had spoken of his time serving in Vietnam and of how painful it was to be spat at upon his return. Only problem is that he never served in Vietnam. He received 5 deferments and then joined the Marine reserves to avoid combat.
AG Blumenthal's spoken words are powerful and right on their merits. It was inexcusable that young boys who were conscripted into a war received such treatment upon their return. America has spent a long time coming to terms with how wrong that was.
Richard Blumenthal's pathetic atttempts to curry favour while campaigning in front of Veterans groups only serve to aggravate that injustice. Before this he was the overwhelming favourite to replace Senator Chris Dodd as United States Senator from Conneticut.
His military history is not that different from mine. I served as a reservist and never served in combat. The idea of falsely claiming to have served in combat dishonours those who did serve and is so offensive that Blumenthal would be lucky not to get a punch in the jaw from a veteran who did serve.
For those who see this story in partisan tones, I would ask how they would feel if it had come to light that Governor George W Bush had claimed to have served in Vietnam while campaigning for higher office. How much would your blood boil?
Col Parker attended basic training in Gagetown at the same time i did but i did not know him. A close friend of mine reported directly to him when he started his service in the Regular Forces.
These two news stories from either side of the border highlight the best and worst of our society. There are those who serve nobly and make the ultimate sacrifice and there are those who lay claim to an honour they did not earn. I will be attending Col Parker's memorial service. Richard Blumenthal will drop out of the race if he has any honour at all.
He is unfit for the office he seeks.
Prayers for Col Parker's family and his young children.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Times Square Bomber
The story is still unfolding but here is what we know so far.....based on news reports.
Faisal Shahzad drove an SUV that was filled with propane canisters, solid fertilizer and some firecrackers to Times Square. It appears that he meant for this to create a large explosion.
Upon being arrested he has been forthcoming (according to reports) and he has claimed that he trained in camps in West Pakistan.
It is not often that there is mirth to be found in attempted terrorist actions but some rather humourous thoughts come to mind.
1) How is it that the terror camps of Pakistan can turn out fighters that have become so adept at creating IED's that disable tanks and kill coalition soldiers can also turn out a guy who thinks that any fertilizer can be made to explode? Really a box of manure won't blow up?
2) Propane canisters could be very deadly if they exploded throwing shrapnel in all directions. However it would require more heat than some firecrackers and burning fertilizer.
3) If he really trained at a camp in Pakistan, did he flunk out?
One wonders if this person is really someone who is mentally disturbed with some visions of grandeur. If this is the quality of terrorists being churned out of Pakistan, then there wouldn't be very much to worry about.
Faisal Shahzad drove an SUV that was filled with propane canisters, solid fertilizer and some firecrackers to Times Square. It appears that he meant for this to create a large explosion.
Upon being arrested he has been forthcoming (according to reports) and he has claimed that he trained in camps in West Pakistan.
It is not often that there is mirth to be found in attempted terrorist actions but some rather humourous thoughts come to mind.
1) How is it that the terror camps of Pakistan can turn out fighters that have become so adept at creating IED's that disable tanks and kill coalition soldiers can also turn out a guy who thinks that any fertilizer can be made to explode? Really a box of manure won't blow up?
2) Propane canisters could be very deadly if they exploded throwing shrapnel in all directions. However it would require more heat than some firecrackers and burning fertilizer.
3) If he really trained at a camp in Pakistan, did he flunk out?
One wonders if this person is really someone who is mentally disturbed with some visions of grandeur. If this is the quality of terrorists being churned out of Pakistan, then there wouldn't be very much to worry about.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Wither Journalism
On August 10, 2009 the Globe and Mail published an article by Jane Taber that carried the headline "Can a busy female politician give reliable evidence? A judge says no."
The article goes on to reprint comments from many individuals slamming the judge's sexist comments. There is only one problem with this article....the judge didn't say that.
MPP Lisa McLeod was giving evidence in the influence peddling trial of Ottawa mayor Larry O'brien. In her evidence SHE claimed that she could not remember some details accurately due to her busy schedule. She impugned her own testimony and the judge properly rejected her evidence.
The Ontario Press Council upheld a ruling against the Globe for publishing an opinion piece without labelling it as an editorial piece. They were right to do so since it was clearly an expression of opinion. However they should have gone further because this article did not report the facts, it reported falsehoods and then fashioned an opinion based on untruths. It failed basic standards of decency let alone journalism.
The Globe reported the Press Council's ruling in the middle of page 8. They should have put it on the front page. This kind of shoddy reporting/editorializing will only accelerate the decline of print media. They should be ashamed of themselves.
The article goes on to reprint comments from many individuals slamming the judge's sexist comments. There is only one problem with this article....the judge didn't say that.
MPP Lisa McLeod was giving evidence in the influence peddling trial of Ottawa mayor Larry O'brien. In her evidence SHE claimed that she could not remember some details accurately due to her busy schedule. She impugned her own testimony and the judge properly rejected her evidence.
The Ontario Press Council upheld a ruling against the Globe for publishing an opinion piece without labelling it as an editorial piece. They were right to do so since it was clearly an expression of opinion. However they should have gone further because this article did not report the facts, it reported falsehoods and then fashioned an opinion based on untruths. It failed basic standards of decency let alone journalism.
The Globe reported the Press Council's ruling in the middle of page 8. They should have put it on the front page. This kind of shoddy reporting/editorializing will only accelerate the decline of print media. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
General Motors
CEO Ed Whitacre can be seen on commercials on both sides of the border proudly declaring that he GM has paid back government loans with interest 5 years ahead of schedule.
A reality check is in order. GM paid back $8 billion worth of loans. This is true enough. However this is nothing more than a whopper of a lie by omission. GM was bailed out with a combination of loans and equity. The equity portion was $50 billion. GM no longer has any public shareholders....it is entirely owned by the taxpayers and unions.
The commercial gives the impression that the taxpayers have been paid back and that GM is on the rebound. Time will tell whether GM will recover or not. The truth is that GM is not worth anywhere close to $50 billion and the taxpayers are sitting on a huge loss on their equity investment.
Spending money to advertise a lie of omission just shows, once again, that GM is clueless. This was not a good deal for taxpayers and some truth in advertising would be a welcome change.
A reality check is in order. GM paid back $8 billion worth of loans. This is true enough. However this is nothing more than a whopper of a lie by omission. GM was bailed out with a combination of loans and equity. The equity portion was $50 billion. GM no longer has any public shareholders....it is entirely owned by the taxpayers and unions.
The commercial gives the impression that the taxpayers have been paid back and that GM is on the rebound. Time will tell whether GM will recover or not. The truth is that GM is not worth anywhere close to $50 billion and the taxpayers are sitting on a huge loss on their equity investment.
Spending money to advertise a lie of omission just shows, once again, that GM is clueless. This was not a good deal for taxpayers and some truth in advertising would be a welcome change.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Public Transit Bee in my Bonnet
Those who live on the Lakeshore GO line have been enduring months of construction and upgrades to the tracks and platforms.
In my case, Clarkson has seen the addition of an extra track (now 3 tracks) and the installation of elevators on the platform.
Most people say that they can't wait for the improvements to be completed so that there will be more express trains and there is hope that off peak trains might run more than hourly.
This makes sense. More trains during the rush hours and more frequent off peak trains will surely motivate more people to take the train rather than drive.
There is only one small problem with this: They haven't added any more parking to the GO stations.
I have had the experience of taking off peak trains. When i used to drive to the station, I couldn't park once the morning crowd had arrived. Every day i see dozens of cars parked illegally at my station as every legal spot is filled. GO officers dutifully ticket those cars.
GO transit states that the lakeshore line carries an average of 80 people on off peak trains.....which is just slightly below the capacity of 1200 per train.
I wonder how many more people would eschew the drive into the city in favour of the near empty GO trains if only they could find parking?
In my case, Clarkson has seen the addition of an extra track (now 3 tracks) and the installation of elevators on the platform.
Most people say that they can't wait for the improvements to be completed so that there will be more express trains and there is hope that off peak trains might run more than hourly.
This makes sense. More trains during the rush hours and more frequent off peak trains will surely motivate more people to take the train rather than drive.
There is only one small problem with this: They haven't added any more parking to the GO stations.
I have had the experience of taking off peak trains. When i used to drive to the station, I couldn't park once the morning crowd had arrived. Every day i see dozens of cars parked illegally at my station as every legal spot is filled. GO officers dutifully ticket those cars.
GO transit states that the lakeshore line carries an average of 80 people on off peak trains.....which is just slightly below the capacity of 1200 per train.
I wonder how many more people would eschew the drive into the city in favour of the near empty GO trains if only they could find parking?
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Tiger Woods
The entire world knows that Tiger Woods had a sex scandal. Many people who've never watched golf and wouldn't know which end of a 9 iron to use when putting off the tee know all about Eldrick Woods's marriage.
He has earned close to a billion dollars in endorsements by pushing his image as the best golfer in the world with a stunning wife, beautiful children and multi-racial background. He has invented his own ethnic designation by calling himself "Cablinasian" which incorporates his caucausian, black, indian and asian backgrounds.
In short, Tiger Woods sold his image to the core.
In the aftermath of the scandal, he entered a treatment program and then held a press conference where he apologized to those he had disappointed but asked for privacy and that his family be left alone.
Then the day before he returns to play at the Masters (the most prestigious golf tournament in the world), we see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FjYMwPirrI
A new ad by Nike with Tiger staring blankly into the camera while the voice of his late father asks "what have you learned."
I'm not sure what his father thinks of this voice over. Obviously its impractical to ask him.
Here is some advice for Tiger: If you want to guard your family's privacy, stop using them for publicity stunts like this. Shut up and play golf, that's what you are good at and if that is all you did, then people would leave you alone.
He has earned close to a billion dollars in endorsements by pushing his image as the best golfer in the world with a stunning wife, beautiful children and multi-racial background. He has invented his own ethnic designation by calling himself "Cablinasian" which incorporates his caucausian, black, indian and asian backgrounds.
In short, Tiger Woods sold his image to the core.
In the aftermath of the scandal, he entered a treatment program and then held a press conference where he apologized to those he had disappointed but asked for privacy and that his family be left alone.
Then the day before he returns to play at the Masters (the most prestigious golf tournament in the world), we see this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FjYMwPirrI
A new ad by Nike with Tiger staring blankly into the camera while the voice of his late father asks "what have you learned."
I'm not sure what his father thinks of this voice over. Obviously its impractical to ask him.
Here is some advice for Tiger: If you want to guard your family's privacy, stop using them for publicity stunts like this. Shut up and play golf, that's what you are good at and if that is all you did, then people would leave you alone.
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Graham James
The pardon system in Canada is something of an unknown to me. Frankly i probably know more about the American system of Presidential pardons than i do about the Canadian system.
Today's news that convicted pedophile Graham James was pardoned three years ago is illuminating.
According to the Canadian Press
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ex-coach-graham-james-pardoned-for-sex-abuse-that-rocked-nhl/article1522464/
the parole board "does not generally take into account the nature of the crime"
This is surprising to say the least. Why doesn't the seriousness of a crime matter when seeking a pardon?
Apparently the 2006-7 year saw 14,581 applications for pardon. (7672 were for lesser offences and the other 7076 were for indictable offences) of which only 103 were declined. Even assuming that all of the denied applications were for serious offences, this implies a 98.5% success rate amongst those seeking a pardon.
The mind boggles. Sheldon Kennedy and Theo Fleury are two of Graham James's victims. They need to live with their pain for the rest of their lives.
How is it that the criminal who betrayed their trust, and abused his position of authority to sexually abuse them as kids, is able to effectively clean his record of these crimes? How is it that convicted criminals can have such a high success rate at obtaining a whitewash of their records?
It is bad enough that he was sentenced to only 3 and a half years for his crimes. That he is now walking free with a pardon behind him is offensive to the core. What am i missing here?
Today's news that convicted pedophile Graham James was pardoned three years ago is illuminating.
According to the Canadian Press
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ex-coach-graham-james-pardoned-for-sex-abuse-that-rocked-nhl/article1522464/
the parole board "does not generally take into account the nature of the crime"
This is surprising to say the least. Why doesn't the seriousness of a crime matter when seeking a pardon?
Apparently the 2006-7 year saw 14,581 applications for pardon. (7672 were for lesser offences and the other 7076 were for indictable offences) of which only 103 were declined. Even assuming that all of the denied applications were for serious offences, this implies a 98.5% success rate amongst those seeking a pardon.
The mind boggles. Sheldon Kennedy and Theo Fleury are two of Graham James's victims. They need to live with their pain for the rest of their lives.
How is it that the criminal who betrayed their trust, and abused his position of authority to sexually abuse them as kids, is able to effectively clean his record of these crimes? How is it that convicted criminals can have such a high success rate at obtaining a whitewash of their records?
It is bad enough that he was sentenced to only 3 and a half years for his crimes. That he is now walking free with a pardon behind him is offensive to the core. What am i missing here?
Friday, April 2, 2010
Closing the barn door after the SUV is gone
The American love affair with big cars is well known. Less well known is the fact that SUV's (with their appalling mileage) were not subject to the same emission standards and mileage regulations as other passenger vehicles because they were classified as trucks.
So now the Obama administration has finally ended this absurdity....as of 2016!!! As of that model year SUV's will be subject to much more stringent regulations. The minimum mileage requirement of 29 MPG is three times that of the Hummer.
This move is a welcome change and is long overdue. However it is so long overdue that it is practically unnecessary. High oil prices have sent SUV sales figures plunging. People who drive these monstrous vehicles are met with dirty looks and open scorn. People aren't buying them anymore.
The point has been made that the government funded bailouts of GM and Chrysler gave them the leverage needed to force through these regulations. I wonder if it is lost on many that had these regulations been in place 10 years ago, GM might have been producing smaller cars sooner and may not have needed the bailouts when their profitable SUV divisions began bleeding red??
The SUV classification as light trucks survived the administration of a Texas oil President as well as that of a Bubba from Arkansas. A cynic might suggest that the Obama administration made this "courageous" decision at a time when the SUV voters are fewer than ever.
Don't get me wrong.....i'm glad the classification was changed. However any economic and environmental benefits have already largely been accrued by higher oil prices. This change will have minimal effect. The Feds have closed the barn door long after the horse is gone.
So now the Obama administration has finally ended this absurdity....as of 2016!!! As of that model year SUV's will be subject to much more stringent regulations. The minimum mileage requirement of 29 MPG is three times that of the Hummer.
This move is a welcome change and is long overdue. However it is so long overdue that it is practically unnecessary. High oil prices have sent SUV sales figures plunging. People who drive these monstrous vehicles are met with dirty looks and open scorn. People aren't buying them anymore.
The point has been made that the government funded bailouts of GM and Chrysler gave them the leverage needed to force through these regulations. I wonder if it is lost on many that had these regulations been in place 10 years ago, GM might have been producing smaller cars sooner and may not have needed the bailouts when their profitable SUV divisions began bleeding red??
The SUV classification as light trucks survived the administration of a Texas oil President as well as that of a Bubba from Arkansas. A cynic might suggest that the Obama administration made this "courageous" decision at a time when the SUV voters are fewer than ever.
Don't get me wrong.....i'm glad the classification was changed. However any economic and environmental benefits have already largely been accrued by higher oil prices. This change will have minimal effect. The Feds have closed the barn door long after the horse is gone.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Ann Coulter
I find many of Ann Coulter's writings offensive. Despite my Conservative leanings I don't like many of the things that she says. She is a little too "way out there." I find Michael Moore offensive for similar reasons. I think that they are flip sides of the same coin in that most Conservatives and Liberals will agree that both of these individuals are offensive and play fast and loose with the truth too often.
That being said, the cancellation of Ann Coulter's speech at the U of Ottawa has inspired editorials denouncing the intimidation tactics used against her. She has received more publicity than her hostile rantings deserve. The milquetoast Globe and Mail wrote a strongly worded opinion piece in support of her right to speak.
Usually i cringe at her writings. Have a look at her latest post titled "O'Canada":
http://www.anncoulter.com/
I cringed at this one because i agreed with so much of what she said (for a change).
She gained more notoriety and a greater platform for her views. That is the ultimate result of the University of Ottawa's attempts to silence her. They should be ashamed of themselves.
That being said, the cancellation of Ann Coulter's speech at the U of Ottawa has inspired editorials denouncing the intimidation tactics used against her. She has received more publicity than her hostile rantings deserve. The milquetoast Globe and Mail wrote a strongly worded opinion piece in support of her right to speak.
Usually i cringe at her writings. Have a look at her latest post titled "O'Canada":
http://www.anncoulter.com/
I cringed at this one because i agreed with so much of what she said (for a change).
She gained more notoriety and a greater platform for her views. That is the ultimate result of the University of Ottawa's attempts to silence her. They should be ashamed of themselves.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Chris Chelios
Any fan of hockey knows who Chris Chelios is. I was still in my teens when he broke into the NHL in 1984. I thought he was a dirty player who took a lot of cheap shots.
Flyer fans will never forgive him for his hit on Brian Propp that knocked him out with a concussion. He was not an easy player to like and i most certainly did not like him. He always played on teams i cheered against and his style of play was infuriating to the opposition.
However today, he is an inspiration to me. After being cut by the Detroit Red Wings in the off season, he could not land another NHL job. He did what any true hockey player would do......he found a team where he could play.
It was a minor league team but that didn't matter. Chris Chelios would rather do anything than not play hockey.
Today he was called up by the Atlanta Thrashers and will play in the NHL once again......this time at age 48!!
That Chris Chelios is still good enough to play with kids less than half his age in the most competitive hockey league in the world is inspiring. I don't think he'll last long enough to break Gordie Howe's record age of 52.....but i won't bet the farm that he won't make it.
Flyer fans will never forgive him for his hit on Brian Propp that knocked him out with a concussion. He was not an easy player to like and i most certainly did not like him. He always played on teams i cheered against and his style of play was infuriating to the opposition.
However today, he is an inspiration to me. After being cut by the Detroit Red Wings in the off season, he could not land another NHL job. He did what any true hockey player would do......he found a team where he could play.
It was a minor league team but that didn't matter. Chris Chelios would rather do anything than not play hockey.
Today he was called up by the Atlanta Thrashers and will play in the NHL once again......this time at age 48!!
That Chris Chelios is still good enough to play with kids less than half his age in the most competitive hockey league in the world is inspiring. I don't think he'll last long enough to break Gordie Howe's record age of 52.....but i won't bet the farm that he won't make it.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
The Honourable Rahim Jaffer
Rahim Jaffer was first elected to the House of Commons as a 25 year old Reform party member. He was considered a rising star by a Reform party eager to appeal to minority constitutents.
Mr Jaffer was different than most Reform/Canadian Alliance/Conservative MP's. He was an immigrant, dark skinned and muslim. It was good that a person of such a background could feel comfortable in those parties. It would have been better if he had been more of a grownup.....but that may be a bit much to ask of a 25 year old.
He is no longer a Member of Parliament, having been voted out in 2008. However he is very much in the news due to his arrest and subsequent events. He was charged with speeding, exceeding the blood alcohol limit and cocaine possession. The plea bargain resulted in a $500 dollar fine along with a guilty plea of careless driving. The other charges were dropped.
The presiding judge acknowledged in his comments that Mr Jaffer had caught a "break".
As a private citizen, Mr Jaffer's obligations are different. He doesn't need to speak publicly about what happened. Nonetheless, some Canadians have some understandable questions.
1) Did he receive special treatment as a former Parliamentarion? It was a provincial judge appointed by Ontario's Attorney General Jim Flaherty. Mr Flaherty is now Finance Minister.
2) What happened to the cocaine possession charge. Why was this dropped?
Mr Jaffer may not have to answer publicly but the people are understandably concerned. If the cocaine possession evidence was suppressed due to police misconduct, then there is a public interest in knowing.
Some members of the Ontario Government should be speaking up now. This does smell and looks like a privileged person getting special treatment. It would be in the pubic interest to disabuse the public of such an impression......if indeed the facts support that view.
Mr Jaffer was different than most Reform/Canadian Alliance/Conservative MP's. He was an immigrant, dark skinned and muslim. It was good that a person of such a background could feel comfortable in those parties. It would have been better if he had been more of a grownup.....but that may be a bit much to ask of a 25 year old.
He is no longer a Member of Parliament, having been voted out in 2008. However he is very much in the news due to his arrest and subsequent events. He was charged with speeding, exceeding the blood alcohol limit and cocaine possession. The plea bargain resulted in a $500 dollar fine along with a guilty plea of careless driving. The other charges were dropped.
The presiding judge acknowledged in his comments that Mr Jaffer had caught a "break".
As a private citizen, Mr Jaffer's obligations are different. He doesn't need to speak publicly about what happened. Nonetheless, some Canadians have some understandable questions.
1) Did he receive special treatment as a former Parliamentarion? It was a provincial judge appointed by Ontario's Attorney General Jim Flaherty. Mr Flaherty is now Finance Minister.
2) What happened to the cocaine possession charge. Why was this dropped?
Mr Jaffer may not have to answer publicly but the people are understandably concerned. If the cocaine possession evidence was suppressed due to police misconduct, then there is a public interest in knowing.
Some members of the Ontario Government should be speaking up now. This does smell and looks like a privileged person getting special treatment. It would be in the pubic interest to disabuse the public of such an impression......if indeed the facts support that view.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Bailout Folly
The runaway freight train of Government bailouts is nearing its logical conclusion. Unfortunately, it will climax before returning to a point of sanity.
Over the last couple of years we witnessed the spectacle of taxpayer funds being used to prop up car companies building cars that the consumer did not want to buy.....or certainly not in sufficient numbers to keep the automakers in the black.
Equally obscene was the bailout of banks who were seemingly incapable of managing money.
Isn't a bank supposed to be good at managing money above all else? Shouldn't the world's largest car company know how to build a car and make a profit at the same time?
The 'moral hazard' is coming home to roost in a most spectacular fashion as several entire countries are now on the verge of needing bailouts. In the European Union, the so called PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain) are said to be in dire straits and will soon need bailouts. Greece is in the worst shape and could default in a matter of weeks if they are not bailed out.
Now here is where the bailouts go from bad policy to downright offensive. Greece has a mandatory retirement age of 63. Any bailout of Greece would have to be spearheaded by Germany....mandatory retirement age of 67. The German people are rightly asking why they are being asked to work to 67 in order to finance retirement for Greeks beginning at age 63. The argument may oversimplify but is valid.
Some may have forgotten but the bailouts of the banks and GM/Chrysler have a similar problem. The average assembly line worker at GM earns more and has better health care coverage than the average American by a significant margin. Bank employees....nuff said.
So the question is this: If you are a single working mom earning something close to the national average, how do you feel about some of your taxes going to safeguard the jobs of bankers and autoworkers who earn a lot more than you? If that doesn't make you angry enough, then consider that since the bailouts were funded with deficit financing, so that your son/daughter will be paying for these bailouts in the future.
Over the last couple of years we witnessed the spectacle of taxpayer funds being used to prop up car companies building cars that the consumer did not want to buy.....or certainly not in sufficient numbers to keep the automakers in the black.
Equally obscene was the bailout of banks who were seemingly incapable of managing money.
Isn't a bank supposed to be good at managing money above all else? Shouldn't the world's largest car company know how to build a car and make a profit at the same time?
The 'moral hazard' is coming home to roost in a most spectacular fashion as several entire countries are now on the verge of needing bailouts. In the European Union, the so called PIIGS (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain) are said to be in dire straits and will soon need bailouts. Greece is in the worst shape and could default in a matter of weeks if they are not bailed out.
Now here is where the bailouts go from bad policy to downright offensive. Greece has a mandatory retirement age of 63. Any bailout of Greece would have to be spearheaded by Germany....mandatory retirement age of 67. The German people are rightly asking why they are being asked to work to 67 in order to finance retirement for Greeks beginning at age 63. The argument may oversimplify but is valid.
Some may have forgotten but the bailouts of the banks and GM/Chrysler have a similar problem. The average assembly line worker at GM earns more and has better health care coverage than the average American by a significant margin. Bank employees....nuff said.
So the question is this: If you are a single working mom earning something close to the national average, how do you feel about some of your taxes going to safeguard the jobs of bankers and autoworkers who earn a lot more than you? If that doesn't make you angry enough, then consider that since the bailouts were funded with deficit financing, so that your son/daughter will be paying for these bailouts in the future.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Miracle on Ice 2010
At the start of the preliminary round men's hockey game between Team Canada and Team USA, a Canadian fan held up a sign invoking Al Michaels' famous call at the end of the USA-Russia game at Lake Placid in 1980.
He asked "Do you believe in miracles" as the team of collegiate American boys defeated the Big Red Machine.
The sign asked "Do you believe in miracles". Just below, it answered itself with a "NO".
For me Olympic hockey has lost much of its lustre since watching that famous upset at Lake Placid. Canada won gold at Salt Lake City and as a Canadian I was happy. However, there is something strangely uninspiring about the best team with the best players winning the tournament.
The USA defeated Canada in that round robin game 5-3. However that fan was still right. This was no miracle. A solid Team USA filled with NHL players beat a star studded Team Canada filled with ......NHL players. The Canadians were favoured but it was no shock and no disgrace to lose to this American team.
They will play again in the Gold Medal Game on Sunday. These are the two best teams playing for the Gold and one of them will lose to a worthy opponent. It will be no miracle either way.
For me the great sporting moment of these Olympics was captured by Joannie Rochette. As many already know, her mother died of a heart attack shortly after arriving in Vancouver to watch her daughter skate in the Olympics.
A very emotional Rochette skated on and was third after the short program. She burst into tears at the end of her program undoubtedly thinking of her mother. After the long program she did not move up but she skated well and captured the Bronze medal.
Joannie Rochette's bronze medal was the miracle on ice this time. Watching her family and friends bursting with tears of pride as she stood on the podium it was clear that the colour of the medal did not matter. In fact, I'm sure they would have been just as proud had she not won a medal at all.
A team of millionaire professional Canadian hockey players will win either a silver or gold on Sunday. Our nation will weep if they fail to win gold and thump our collective chests if should succeed.
In a sporting sense, none of that will matter more than Joannie Rochette who reminded us that it's not whether you win or lose......it's how you play the game. She won simply by playing on.
Bravo Joannie!!!
He asked "Do you believe in miracles" as the team of collegiate American boys defeated the Big Red Machine.
The sign asked "Do you believe in miracles". Just below, it answered itself with a "NO".
For me Olympic hockey has lost much of its lustre since watching that famous upset at Lake Placid. Canada won gold at Salt Lake City and as a Canadian I was happy. However, there is something strangely uninspiring about the best team with the best players winning the tournament.
The USA defeated Canada in that round robin game 5-3. However that fan was still right. This was no miracle. A solid Team USA filled with NHL players beat a star studded Team Canada filled with ......NHL players. The Canadians were favoured but it was no shock and no disgrace to lose to this American team.
They will play again in the Gold Medal Game on Sunday. These are the two best teams playing for the Gold and one of them will lose to a worthy opponent. It will be no miracle either way.
For me the great sporting moment of these Olympics was captured by Joannie Rochette. As many already know, her mother died of a heart attack shortly after arriving in Vancouver to watch her daughter skate in the Olympics.
A very emotional Rochette skated on and was third after the short program. She burst into tears at the end of her program undoubtedly thinking of her mother. After the long program she did not move up but she skated well and captured the Bronze medal.
Joannie Rochette's bronze medal was the miracle on ice this time. Watching her family and friends bursting with tears of pride as she stood on the podium it was clear that the colour of the medal did not matter. In fact, I'm sure they would have been just as proud had she not won a medal at all.
A team of millionaire professional Canadian hockey players will win either a silver or gold on Sunday. Our nation will weep if they fail to win gold and thump our collective chests if should succeed.
In a sporting sense, none of that will matter more than Joannie Rochette who reminded us that it's not whether you win or lose......it's how you play the game. She won simply by playing on.
Bravo Joannie!!!
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Voodoo Economics
During the Republican primaries leading up to the election of 1980, Ronald Reagan's economic plan was famously called "Voodoo economics" by his chief rival George H.W. Bush.
One of the central tenets of Reagan's plan was that tax cuts would raise the deficit in the short term but the resulting economic boom would eliminate the deficit as the economy outgrew the deficit. It worked.....well kinda. Economic growth was substantial but the deficit persisted. What Reagan hadn't counted on was the boom in spending on entitlements. The growth in entitlements was such a factor that the President who authored one of the biggest tax cuts in history ended up signing one of the biggest tax hikes in history to ensure that Social Security remained solvent.
Fast forward 30 years and President Obama has proposed a budget that totals 3.6 trillion dollars in spending. This outflow of dollars exceeds the money coming in by a staggering 1.6 trillion dollars. Putting this into terms that one can relate to, imagine a family with $50,000 in take home pay spending $90,000 per year.
Obama's budget proposal claims to cut the deficit from 11% of GDP to 4% of GDP in 4 years. This is largely based upon rosy projections for economic growth. In fact, economic growth accounts for 6 of the 7% that the deficit is forecast to decline. Note however that his own projections show the deficits climbing ever higher towards the end of his second term as baby boomers retire and start drawing Social Security.
Such deficits are not only unsustainable, they are immoral. Deficits represent a legacy of debt being passed onto our children and grandchildren. We are impoverishing future generations in order to safeguard our standard of living.
So what should be done? First off, do away with rosy economic projections. Assume a recession or two. Why are politicians always surprised that recessions come along? Second make some hard choices on taxes and spending. Raise taxes across the board. Raise the age at which one qualifies for Social Security. (The age of 65 for eligibility was introduced when the average lifespan was 67 years. Now that the average lifespan is pushing 80, upping the retirement age is warranted.)
A balanced budget amendment should be introduced. It could have some flexibility built in so that some stimulus can be introduced at times, however it should be a condition that stimulus spending can only come from past surpluses. In other words, the government should put away for a rainy day. I would ask proponents of the idea that governments should spend during recessions and run surpluses in boom times why we can't reverse the order. Governments should first save money and then spend it during a recession. When that money runs out, so should the stimulus.
These are very simple common sense ideas. They are not likely to see the light of day in Washington or Ottawa.
One of the central tenets of Reagan's plan was that tax cuts would raise the deficit in the short term but the resulting economic boom would eliminate the deficit as the economy outgrew the deficit. It worked.....well kinda. Economic growth was substantial but the deficit persisted. What Reagan hadn't counted on was the boom in spending on entitlements. The growth in entitlements was such a factor that the President who authored one of the biggest tax cuts in history ended up signing one of the biggest tax hikes in history to ensure that Social Security remained solvent.
Fast forward 30 years and President Obama has proposed a budget that totals 3.6 trillion dollars in spending. This outflow of dollars exceeds the money coming in by a staggering 1.6 trillion dollars. Putting this into terms that one can relate to, imagine a family with $50,000 in take home pay spending $90,000 per year.
Obama's budget proposal claims to cut the deficit from 11% of GDP to 4% of GDP in 4 years. This is largely based upon rosy projections for economic growth. In fact, economic growth accounts for 6 of the 7% that the deficit is forecast to decline. Note however that his own projections show the deficits climbing ever higher towards the end of his second term as baby boomers retire and start drawing Social Security.
Such deficits are not only unsustainable, they are immoral. Deficits represent a legacy of debt being passed onto our children and grandchildren. We are impoverishing future generations in order to safeguard our standard of living.
So what should be done? First off, do away with rosy economic projections. Assume a recession or two. Why are politicians always surprised that recessions come along? Second make some hard choices on taxes and spending. Raise taxes across the board. Raise the age at which one qualifies for Social Security. (The age of 65 for eligibility was introduced when the average lifespan was 67 years. Now that the average lifespan is pushing 80, upping the retirement age is warranted.)
A balanced budget amendment should be introduced. It could have some flexibility built in so that some stimulus can be introduced at times, however it should be a condition that stimulus spending can only come from past surpluses. In other words, the government should put away for a rainy day. I would ask proponents of the idea that governments should spend during recessions and run surpluses in boom times why we can't reverse the order. Governments should first save money and then spend it during a recession. When that money runs out, so should the stimulus.
These are very simple common sense ideas. They are not likely to see the light of day in Washington or Ottawa.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Canada's Fiscal Deficit
Canada stands alone amongst G7 nations as the only nation that did not bail out its banks during the recent financial crisis. It was not because our banks did not get hurt by the Sub-Prime meltdown. Several billion dollars in charges were taken by our banks and indirect effects hurt them as well. However they were strong enough to withstand the storm without going cap in hand to the taxpayers. Canadians should be proud.
Canada also went into the recent downturn with a history of budget surpluses. Many proponents of Keynesian economics favour deficit spending during recessions coupled with surpluses during periods of growth. Canada is the only member of the G7 to have practiced this. The other nations all had deficits during the growth years.
Now that we are past the worst of the recession (according to some), it is time to ask how we dig ourselves out of this deficit so that we can start paying down our national debt before the next crisis hits.
Obviously stimulus spending will end. However that is not enough. The current government has cut the GST twice since taking office to 5%. This was always a triumph of politics over sound policy.
There are only two ways to get the deficit back into surplus. 1) Cut spending massively 2) Raise taxes.
Spending will simply not be cut enough to make this happen. Taxes must go up. The question then is what taxes should go up.
On this point there is simply no debate as a matter of policy. The GST is a consumption tax that is applied fairly and evenly. It does not create disincentives to work and is most efficient in administration....especially since so many provinces have harmonized.
If the Tories want to show that they are reliable stewards of the nation's finances, they will bite the political bullet and raise the GST back to 7%. It's the right thing to do. Somehow i am doubtful that this will happen.
Canada also went into the recent downturn with a history of budget surpluses. Many proponents of Keynesian economics favour deficit spending during recessions coupled with surpluses during periods of growth. Canada is the only member of the G7 to have practiced this. The other nations all had deficits during the growth years.
Now that we are past the worst of the recession (according to some), it is time to ask how we dig ourselves out of this deficit so that we can start paying down our national debt before the next crisis hits.
Obviously stimulus spending will end. However that is not enough. The current government has cut the GST twice since taking office to 5%. This was always a triumph of politics over sound policy.
There are only two ways to get the deficit back into surplus. 1) Cut spending massively 2) Raise taxes.
Spending will simply not be cut enough to make this happen. Taxes must go up. The question then is what taxes should go up.
On this point there is simply no debate as a matter of policy. The GST is a consumption tax that is applied fairly and evenly. It does not create disincentives to work and is most efficient in administration....especially since so many provinces have harmonized.
If the Tories want to show that they are reliable stewards of the nation's finances, they will bite the political bullet and raise the GST back to 7%. It's the right thing to do. Somehow i am doubtful that this will happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
