need more roundabouts

Given all the advantages of roundabouts, why does city hall still create traffic-light controlled intersections?

from polls to the next dark age

90% of people polled said the government should rely on polls in making decisions of importance for this country.

Apparently that 90% feels making decisions based on public concerns is more important that professional assessments or scientific studies that actually measure the severity of the real threat and the probability of it occurring.

From that I conclude that the direct economic impact of the fear is more important than the physical and psychological impact on our health and safety (indirect economic impact).

I suppose right-wing nuts would argue the direct economic impact of the fear affects people's ability to buy the things they need to protect and defend themselves. That may be convenient for marketing folk across the country, but given the environmental consequences on our emotions, our society and our planet, doesn't that seem at least a little shortsighted?

Further, doesn't the complacency and conformism created by this over-confidence increase the magnitude of spectacle required for people who desperately want attention to adjust popular attitudes? Like greenhouse gases accelerating global warming and causing more frequent and violent storms, I predict the economic path we are on will lead to a significant increase in frequency and severity of social violence. With the associated increase in fear (spurred on by the media of course), people will sooner or later lose all remaining faith in their governments and turn first to their religious leaders for reassurance, and then to their local warlords to defend what little resources they have left.

We are plunging headfirst into the next dark age but are too obsessed with our ability to make, sell and buy useless toys to know it.

(PS. The sample size of this poll was 0 so is statistically meaningless, as most polls are for things of real importance.)

RE: Thomas Jefferson's Blog

The following disproof of the contents of Thomas Jefferson's blog (and TJ lore in general) ties in rather nicely with a conversation I had with a colleague yesterday regarding the stock market, as (outward) success (get rich/famous/etc) depends on a higher intelligence not easily measured: the ability to predict and manipulate people's emotions despite all the evidence to the contrary.

The bane of us rational hard-working types the world over.

So, how exactly does one subordinate basic facts and inconvenient truths and rise to a position of emotional influence? Is there a noticeable point at which someone's story sheds it's factual skin and become legend?

No need to answer, I'll just watch the news and learn it from Harper.

An interesting diversion.

Some things about Jefferson I have learned never to forget:
Lots of Founding Fathers had slaves, although some freed them while living (e.g., Franklin) and others freed them in their wills (e.g., Washington). Jefferson had them, kept them, and fathered children with them. It's gotta say something about the man's soul.

Jefferson did not write the legendary words ascribed to him, and which place him at the pinnacle of the philosophers who crafted the nation. Specifically, he did NOT write "I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal... " What he wrote was "I hold these truths to be sacred and inviolatable..." It was Franklin who changed the words (his bold cross-outs on the original draft remain extant, as do his explanations for the changes). First, Franklin recognized that the word "sacred" was too religious for so secular a document, particularly given its pledge to separate church and state. And "inviolatable" struck Dr. Franklin as unnecessarily obtuse and difficult (which it is). So, those words were neither original (they were borrowed from the French philosophes), they were pretty crappy as written by Jefferson (the credit should go to Franklin, the old codger), and they were a lie (as Jefferson personally kept slaves and considered Native Americans less than fully equal).

Jefferson was extraordinarily ill-disciplined, especially with his own money. He was a known wasteful spender -- a flawed character trait noted not only by infamous tight-wads like John Adams, but also by infamous gregarious Benjamin Franklin. (Unlike Jefferson, both Adams and Franklin practiced what they preached, tho they preached very different sermons, indeed). Jefferson was known to buy enormous quanitites of books with money he did not have, and then compounded his excessive spending by dabbling in architecure and landscaping, once again spending enormous sums that he did not have. He would also tinker with designs for columns for his estate instead of working on matters of import for which he was elected.

Jefferson did not obtain the Louisiana Purchase through some great effort or insight or foresight or planning, as is sometimes taught in American schools. Rather, the United States doubled in size because Jefferson had the good fortune of being president at precisely the time Napoleon desperately needed money to raise, equip, train and feed his enormous armies and navies for the wars in Europe -- and because the best way for Napoleon to do that was to sell 1/3 of North America to the Americans at cut-rate prices. True, Jefferson had the intelligence to say "yes" when Napoleon offered to sell the land -- but the offered price was so rediculously low that even George W. Bush could not possibly have screwed that one up.

Jefferson was no military genius, either. In one notorious episode (although one I personally find understandable), he fled just ahead of a superior British force in Virginia during the American Revolution, rather than do the honorable thing like defend himself and his charges. He did not fight in the war. And he later supported the War of 1812, famously announcing that the capture of Canada would be "a mere matter of marching." Thirteen cross-border campaigns later, not one inch of Canada went to the Americans. Last time I checked, Canada is still there.

As a politician, Jefferson was utterly ruthless, backing (even encouraging) some of the worst mud-slinging in the history of the free democratic press anywhere in the world, excoriating rivals such as John Adams in ways that make today's politics seem downright bland.

And although he looks impressive in marble, Jefferson had a high-pitched voice that apparently sounded like his britches were tied too tight. In other words, he would not get elected in today's world -- not manly enough, or so it would seem. In fact, without slaves around anymore, the man worshipped as one of the greatest Founding Fathers might even have trouble getting laid.

another shortfall of democracy

It's a damn shame how we live, work and play in a society in which people do not want to pay for what they need, but will pay anything for what they want.
I think I'll start calling it "Hedonopolis" and read Ayn Rand (apparently objectivism is the opposite of hedonism).

water management

That dumbass TV commercial that asks "why drink toilet water?" pisses me off.
I just hope it backfires on them and makes people reconsider flushing with drinking water instead.
I believe it is essential for the current system of city water supply to continue being used as it is, so that it continue to be carefully managed and maintained. If people don't use it, it sits in the pipes and any bacteria left after purification can flourish, and the municipality would have to increase the concentration of "poisons" it uses to keep them under control. If either happens, people's faith in their water supply will falter and will use it even less, increasing the chances of bacteria occuring at hazardous levels. The whole system would soon collapse, and we'd see an explosion of in-home water filtering stations. Sounds like a great capitalist idea, doesn't it? Soon you'll be bombarded with in-home water filtration system ads (even more than today), there will be a quantum increase in waste (used packaging) heading to city dumps and, worse, in energy consumption (waste from the manufacturing and transportation of consumer-sized filtration systems and supplies, plus lower-efficiency associated with the operation of small scale filtration systems).
Meanwhile, those who cannot afford to buy bottled water will get sick and spread diseases before filling up the hospitals that are already bursting at the seams.
I'm all in favour of paying for city services and encouraging consumption of municipal water supply.
If anything needs to be changed, it should be the local storage and use of rainwater to water native lawns and flowerbeds, but there's no profit margin to be made in that, is there?

art is the lie that tells the truth

If we applied this other quote from Picasso to Canadian politics, I'd have to hand to Harper and his spiel of accountability and things that matter to "Real Canadians" - but I'd worry about what truth it would tell about us.

intelligence vs art

"There are painters who transform the sun to a yellow spot, but there are others who with the help of their art and their intelligence, transform a yellow spot into the sun."
-Pablo Picasso

Question is, how do you find the right canvas to hone your art?

the power of blogging

Blogging is an interesting phenomenon.
At first I thought the net impact would be negligible: any facilitation of coordination would be offset by the opportunity it gave people to get a load off their chest and move on to other things, but then I realized that concept wasn't quite complete, because people who have expressed themselves have taken the opportunity to clearly formulate and take ownership of their positions, and this investment makes them that much more effective at implementing change when they hear the call for action.
Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it (at least for now).

squeeky wheel gets the grease

There is something wrong with a system that encourages noisy segments of the population to dictate how the government can spend its precious little money.
The Chretien-Martin debt-reduction policy of the 1990's forced provincial governments to review their programs and cut their spending. The Quebec legislature decided it would drastically reduce and postpone road maintenance. This resulted in a surge in profits in the auto maintenance/repair industry, particularly the suspension, alignment, rim and tire segments, a requirement for complete overhauls of roads now beyond repair, and the occasional chunk of concrete killing innocent people.
Meanwhile, the only social programmes being restored were those getting airtime because people who were fed up (and either desperate or had nothing much better to do) organized rallies and major protests.
The buying of votes for the appearance of accomplishment and contentment of the mindless masses is exactly why I believe the democratic will is not always a competent decision-making authority and cannot be trusted as sole social custodian.

I wonder if the families of the recently deceased and injured realize they were robbed by all those who still benefit from the extremely low tuition rates in Quebec?

Fwd: FW: A Street Sign In Germany

tee hee, well it's not that funny, well maybe.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Subject: A Street Sign In Germany
I get the feeling that the Germans
don't like King George II either....

Any reason we could NOT have the same sign in the USA???

sad beauty

Manufactured Landscapes looks like another excellent documentary that quietly captures the sad beauty of our self-destruction.

what's the government waiting for?

We need economic incentives in place to get technologies in place to reduce, capture and sequester CO2 emissions, right now.
I don't know how much longer Canada's "new" government can go on critiquing the former government for waffling on the little things, before Canadians start realizing the Tories are waffling on such fundamental big-picture long-term issues as greenhouse gases and social well-being.

dirty party tricks

Ref: La Presse's coverage of the latest government environmental audit
They say a best defence is a good offense...

Les conclusions du rapport [...] seront sûrement reprises par les conservateurs qui utiliseront les passages qui leur plaisent pour justifier leurs actions et attaquer les libéraux.
Ce n'est donc pas une coïncidence si le rapport a fait l'objet de fuites avant son dépôt au Parlement, obligeant les libéraux à se mettre en mode réduction des dégâts dès mercredi.

...but I'm not comfortable with the Conservatives thinking this is all just a game.

«Les changements climatiques sont une réalité et peu importe la façon de voir les choses, les enjeux sont de taille pour le Canada», a déclaré la commissaire qui, sans le nommer, cible son message au gouvernement conservateur. «Il est impératif que le gouvernement adopte un plan réaliste, clair et crédible visant à réduire de façon significative les émissions de gaz à effet de serre», poursuit-elle.

Update: as expected, the tories have jumped on this opportunity like little children desperate to say "I told you so" for anything.

20-foot chasm

Apparently there's this American proverb that says:

It makes no sense to cross a 20-foot chasm with two 10-foot leaps.

In my view, this is exactly what's wrong with Harper's approach to Senate reform.

"Fight for what you have" or "Sell out now" ?

Canada's so-called "new" government has made a number of budget cuts to non-mainstream (read: vote insignificant) sectors, reinforcing my doubts as to their intentions. Below are some of their latest victims and the potential impact:

• Court Challenges Program. Makes it harder for non-mainstream Canadians to fight for language and equality rights.
• Pine Beetle Program. Population is out of control because the winters are warmer due to global warming. First goes the Kyoto commitment, then the efforts to deal with the mess. What`s next?
• Adult literacy and work skill development programs. Right, since when is an educated workforce good for the economy? Rather than helping them, they'll be squeezed onto the Welfare list and have to work under the table for peanuts. But at least they won't appear on the unemployment stats! I suspect this may also be a covert attempt at reintroducing slavery...
• Youth employment program. Right, why give these kids hope and skills for the future when we could be locking them away in a tougher stance on crime!
• Status of Women Canada. Ok, this has been around for a long time and has probably achieved its goals (well, at least by Tory standards who seem to be willing to settle for the 70% solution...)
• 12 fewer cabinet ministers. Right, who needs all this bickering around the table? why should the workload be spread across that many MPs and leave them time to deal with the bothersome needs of their constituents? Besides, too many people involved makes it harder to control any leaks.
• Public Safety also takes a $75M loss - uhm, what about that whole thing about making Canada a safer place to live?

All I see in these announcements and their actions are discrete but effective attempts to erode the social structures that make this country the peaceful, orderly place that it is, while replacing it with a more direct, confrontational and exclusive/divisive attitude typical of the United States. This budget is a well-calculated Trojan Horse that will very likely influence mainstream voters to vote in a majority conservative government so they can unleash the next round of borg-like assimilation.

Which conveniently brings me back to my subject line: In a world that is increasingly polarized, should we be fighting against all odds to preserve the progress (rights and priviledges) that we (and our forefathers) have fought for and earned, acting as a beacon of resistance and hope for future generations and others around the world, or should we give it all up and head full speed down the drain to stake out our place and welcome the rest of the world, since that's where we're all headed anyway?

Bell Sympatico incompetence

Would you believe it took Bell 4 weeks to conclude that my intermittent connection to their high-speed DSL service was due to the faulty new modem that they shipped me?
The whole time I had to endure thinly veiled accusations from their technical support that it was a user error (e.g., filtering the modem line, or not entering the right user ID), or my computer not having the right drivers (even though I've been with them for 6 years and know that no software is required because it was working fine before switching local phone companies), after which they resorted to claiming it must be an internal wiring problem (even after I told them i isolated that line and installed a whole new jack directly at the demarc).

After escalating my calls three times to a Level 2 Technician, somebody (whose mother tongue actually is English) from the Test Centre finally called me back and confirmed the complete line test checked out ok, and we scheduled a service call to my house. After 45 minutes of testing my wiring (which was perfect, no signal loss, cross-over or bleedthrough), the lineman finally had enough of the manager (who had "come along for the ride") insisting it must be the wiring somewhere, went to the truck and got me a new modem. I hooked it up, and voila, connected instantly. They were even surprised I was getting the speeds I could get given I had done my own wiring and had no Access Manager or drivers. They stuck around to make sure I could re-establish the connection through my router, and of course it picked up right away.

What a bunch of (expletives deleted). As soon as I get cable internet up and running reliably, they're history. At least they've confirmed that my wiring was irreproachable. The lineman even asked me what high-tech company I worked for, which brings me to another pet peeve of mine: Why is it people generally arrogantly extend credibility only to someone who has specialized in the subject at hand, whatever it may be? But I'll keep that discussion of educational prejudice for another day.

Anyway, I'm glad to be back online, even if it is with Sympatico.

Affairs of State

The Governor General has made some comments that were less than warmly received by separatists. I have not been able to find a reference article in English, but Radio-Canada.ca covers some of the reactions.

One of the opening comments to the article is that "[She] costs us a fortune."
RDI last night presented an article on the same subject and followed it with a single background-info slide, showing how the GG's budget almost doubled from 1995 to 2005.
This is a recurring complaint, smacks both of ignorance and of desperation to impress Joe Canadian with big numbers, and I feel a little context should be provided.

The GG represents Canada as head of state to the world, maintaining diplomatic and cultural relationships with other heads of state. She just recently welcomed the President of Latvia and will be receiving the king and queen of Sweden next month.
As she represents us to the world, she also represents, in a way, our world image to us. I very much respect the comments she makes and her desire to break the barriers between the "two solitudes." She's fighting self-obsession at the provincial level (she's not only picking on one province) so as to unlock the potential this country has to offer the world.

As for her "expenses": Rideau Hall is managed and maintained (rather shoddily I might add) by Public Works (as they do with all the official government residences), and Foreign Affairs dictates her agenda and organizes her trips. Personally I think its very convenient for this country to have two people to play the very different roles of good cop/bad cop when it comes to international diplomacy, and I see no reason why anybody should reproach her for doing the same with domestic diplomacy.

socially-irresponsible crock

MSN editors recommended an article that says now is the time to buy an SUV.

How can it claim that a $12,643 Durango is "cheaper" than the "more expensive" Honda at $12,000???

Promoting gas-guzzlers so unabashedly leaves me wondering if the author isn't trying to pump his investment portfolio overly heavy on oil and Big 3 stocks. Furthermore, barely skimming the environmental impact is unpardonably irresponsible.

I submitted feedback strongly suggesting the editors reconsider their support for this article. If you feel the way I do, I urge you to do the same; if you feel otherwise, please explain why to me as clearly I'm missing that point.

significant environmental impact

Re: Car-Free day in Qc
More green streets please!

inquiring minds want to know

Two of my colleagues, alerted to the fact I use them as source material for this blog, are on a mission now to find this blog
(insert Mission Impossible theme song here).