Expropriation-a Necessity or a can of worms ?

No need to take over properties, owners say Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION

The city says its bid to expropriate the south side of downtown Colborne Street is a "reasonably necessary" move to end three decades of inaction by the private sector.

But some of the aff ected property owners say the municipality has yet to demonstrate a need to take over their land.

Those were the main competing themes at city hall during Thursday's hearing of necessity under the Expropriation Act. Three property owners and one tenant are objecting to council's decision in February to expropriate 41 properties on the south side of Colborne to clear the way for redevelopment.

Hearing chairman Victor Freidin is expected to deliver his report this summer.

Testimony and evidence Thursday reveal an interesting glimpse of the politics and business dealings swirling around the stretch of disputed properties.

Chris Tsekas of Weir Foulds, the law firm representing Brantford, said the city's downtown revitalization program has had "some traction." But the south side of Colborne with its increasingly decrepit and often vacant buildings has not had a "spark" that would spur the private sector in the past three decades, he said.

"It is an area that is affected by blight and it is an area that needs redevelopment," he said. "The city is tired of waiting for the private sector. All you have to do is walk by all those storefronts to realize that something is wrong."

He and associate Constance Lantaigne led a succession of senior city officials through evidence and testimony on the history of the downtown's decline, and the city's efforts to revitalize it in the past decade with a community improvement plan approved by the provincial government, a grants program and other policies.

It culminated in a detailed examination of a downtown master plan approved by council late last year to carry the goal to its conclusion, with the south side of Colborne as the No. 1 priority.

Coun. Mark Littell is chairman of the South Side of Colborne Task Force, which was formed last year to act as a political facilitator between property owners and Laurier Brantford, Nipissing University, Mohawk College and the YMCA.

He said the task force turned to expropriation after it became clear that one developer, Jack Lechcier-Kimel of Torontobased Summit Glen, was unable to assemble land he had optioned from businessman Steve Kun and other owners and meet deadlines to get proposals moving.

One project being watching closely, said Littell, is a $40-million joint athletic and recreation complex proposed for the south side of Colborne by Laurier and the Y.

Steve Kun, who owns 20 properties in the stretch, remained an objector to expropriation, and did not withdraw as was reported Thurdsay in The Expositor.

Some city officials misinterpreted a letter from Kun's lawyer that he had withdrawn. In fact, the letter merely declared that the lawyer himself had been instructed to withdraw from the hearing. Kun intended to represent himself.

In his testimony, Kun said he is not opposed to the city's redevelopment drive on south Colborne, only to council's method.

He said that his business goal was to purchase downtown properties to facilitate big projects.

He said he has sold blocks, when requested. For example, a group of eight properties on north Colborne were sold to the city, and later became part of the Harmony Square development. Another group of properties was turned into Laurier Brantford's Heritage Block project.

He also participated in a series of failed proposals to give the YMCA a new permanent home.

But he is adamant that the city did not talk seriously with him about the south side of Colborne. And he was never officially asked to attend any meetings of the task force, which met with other property owners.

In testimony, Kun recounted that city manager John Brown had asked him to a meeting last Jan. 8 to talk about south Colborne and the properties he had optioned to Lechcier- Kimel.

Kun said he told Brown that the options had been extended to the end of February because Lechcier-Kimel was having trouble with financing to close the major purchase. If it didn't work out, Kun said the city could buy his properties on the same deal given to Lechcier-Kimel.

He said Brown told him "the city is definitely not interested in any purchase of properties on the south side of Colborne."

The next month, council approved expropriation, a move that made it impossible for Lechcier-Kimel to get the necessary financing to buy the properties, said Kun.

"In all fairness to the developer (Lechchier-Kimel), the city did not give him the cooperation he needed," said Kun, accusing city officials of "duplicity" in their dealings.

"The city has not acted in good faith. I don't think it's fair, I don't think it's sound and I don't think it's necessary to expropriate in this way. There are willing sellers and willing buyers."

Dick Waterous, principal in Tutela Properties Ltd., argued the city could not demonstrate it needs to expropriate a vacant property his company owns at the western end of Colborne, near Icomm Drive.

He pointed out sections in the downtown master plan, which identify the property as a "gateway," but did not recommend immediate action because more technical information was needed about its condition.

"What do you think of the prudence of purchasing land without that information?" he asked Ross Burnett, a consultant who helped write the downtown master plan.

Paul Scargall, a lawyer for Donald Fines, whose company of the same name owns a large building at 35-39 Colborne, also argued the city has no compelling case to take over his client's property.

He pointed out that the building is occupied and has heritage significance, which would suggest it be left alone.

Waterous and Scargall both kept pressing the message that the city is trying to expropriate a large section of properties with no immediate purpose to show, other than the Laurier-Y project, which needs only a portion of the area.

Tzekas countered that it may be an "unusual expropriation" but the city has the power under Section 28 of the Expropriations Act to acquire land for provincially approved community improvement programs, which could have wider purposes.

"Cities can do that," he said.


Do not do it without the real facts or a real plan -an expropriation caution to taxpayers - Haste makes for potential waste - TAXPAYER Comment

Expropriation is a Property rights game. If this was a legitimate game -win or lose on the merits -the city lost the game big time in the Necessity hearings and proceedings Listening to the testimony of the " city staff experts and witnesses" only re-enforced why the City should not be in the development business partiularly with " with free" taxpayer money and the bully power(Section 28 of the Expropriations Act ) to do it . Having a real plan- not a warm good feel fuzzy dream driven by political expediency, with real information about the properties and the remediation costs certainly would have helped save the day .

Which 200 stakeholders did they consult to justify this potential next Eaton ICOMM type unsinkable titanic clone project? Which Stakeholders did they consult? The stakeholder definition given by the embattled consultant was people with an economic interest or stake in the program- specifically a list of approved names given to him by the City. It is most unfortunate that the property owners, or Taxpayers for that matter, where not deemed worthy stakeholders entitled to provide input. In this case the property owner input was compelling and should be heard.

Everyone in Brant, should worry what this dream will cost Brantford and the precedent it sets for the future. The pleasant dream of dynamic ,academic growth,prosperity and a new tax base could turn into a expensive gateway nightmare if not properly planned and executed on the real facts or economic merits. S. HOLLE

Old car reduction incentive

The incentives proposed could be a win -win for the auto industry and the taxpayer-by providing a stimulus to reduce the estimated 2 year new car inventory. PR

Waterfront mike

Homebuilder, council face off again
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION

Brantford homebuilder and former city councilor Mike Quattrociocchi will find out tonight if council will approve his application for a site plan agreement governing the third phase of his controversial housing project on Grand River Avenue.

The application failed on a tie vote two weeks ago, but it is on tonight's council agenda for consideration.

At first, Quattrociocchi held out hope that he may still win, because Coun. Vince Bucci was absent on the first vote, and was believed to support his application. But when he found out the Mayor Mike Hancock, who did support it the first time, is away on business, he began lobbying other councillors over the weekend.

"I still hope to get enough support," he said.

mistakes lead to success

"For though a righteous man falls seven times, he rises again…."1

Many years ago, in much younger days, I used to work in construction. On a construction site in which I was in charge I made what to me was a whopping error and was scared to death to tell my boss. Fortunately for me when I did tell him, he simply said, "Dick, the man who never made a mistake never made anything!"

What a relief it was to know my "error" was forgiven! Then we set about to correct my mistake.

I think it was Robert Schuller who said, "A high jumper never knows how high he can jump until he reaches a failure point." That's a good point, for we too will never know how high we can reach in fulfilling our personal goals until we also reach a failure point.

In fact, we probably learn a lot more through our failures than we do through our successes. The important thing when we fail is to get up, learn from our mistake, and go on to achieve better things. As another has said, "Not failure, but low aim is crime."

mistakes lead to success

"For though a righteous man falls seven times, he rises again…."1

Many years ago, in much younger days, I used to work in construction. On a construction site in which I was in charge I made what to me was a whopping error and was scared to death to tell my boss. Fortunately for me when I did tell him, he simply said, "Dick, the man who never made a mistake never made anything!"

What a relief it was to know my "error" was forgiven! Then we set about to correct my mistake.

I think it was Robert Schuller who said, "A high jumper never knows how high he can jump until he reaches a failure point." That's a good point, for we too will never know how high we can reach in fulfilling our personal goals until we also reach a failure point.

In fact, we probably learn a lot more through our failures than we do through our successes. The important thing when we fail is to get up, learn from our mistake, and go on to achieve better things. As another has said, "Not failure, but low aim is crime."

Brantford.com -

Brantford.com -: "The return of Lloyd St. Amand
Last Updated: Wed, 17 Jun 2009

BRANTFORD (BCN) - Lloyd St. Amand, who lost his federal seat in Brant to Phil McColeman in the last election, will be back to lead the local Liberals next time around. He was acclaimed last night in front of about 80 members of his party at the Polish Hall at 126 Albion Street. He won the two previous local federal battles in 2004 and 2006, but lost by over 3,000 votes to McColeman in 2008."

Lloyd St. Amand is a good choice who did an honest credible worthy job in the past. He is a quality contender for the post. PR

Whose Ego is Bigger?

Ignatieff, Harper in duel of egos
Posted By GREG WESTON
Posted 3 hours ago


This week's sabre-rattling between Michael Ignatieff and Stephen Harper over a summer election has all the makings of an epic battle over which leader has the biggest, um, sword.

Forget the worst economic crash in decades, the collapsing industries, the thousands of Canadians losing their their jobs, their savings, their pensions, their homes.

If the political jousting between Iggy and the PM is any indication, the country is at risk of being dragged out of the pool and off to the polls in July over duelling egos.

Harper, of course, is no slouch in the larger-than-life department, having spent the past three years successfully muzzling his ministers, and generally trying to put an iron grip on everyone and everything government.

Today, the Conservative administration remains predominantly all Harper all the time.

But make no mistake, there's a new ego-slinger in town with the potential to make "l'etat c'est moi" an understatement in both official languages.

As the Commons headed into its final week before the scheduled (and long overdue) summer break, Ignatieff held a press conference to set out the Liberal party's four conditions for not voting the country into a mid-summer's nightmare election.

For the first 15 minutes, Ignatieff spoke from a written text about what his party and fellow MPs were expecting from the Harper government.

But as soon as Ignatieff left his prepared text and went to questions from reporters, the political situation at hand was suddenly all about him.

By our rough count, in less than 20 minutes of answering reporters, Ignatieff used one word over 100 times -- "I."

For example, one of the Liberal demands on the Harper government to avoid an election vote at the end of this week is some enriched proposals for employment insurance (EI).

"I have said that I'm looking for co-operation," Ignatieff said.

"I will judge the proposals that I'm calling for . . . I require he (the PM) come forward with proposals now, not in the fall . . . I am pragmatic. I am prepared to make compromises."

Ignatieff was asked about leaving Harper an easy way out of a summer election.

"I know Canadians aren't crazy about an election, especially eight months after the last one . . . I accept the results of that election, and I'm just trying to work with government.

"I voted for the (January) budget even though I had some questions about it because I thought it was better for Canadians than the opposite. So that's why I did it."

And so it went for the entire press conference. As it happens, Ignatieff's proposed changes to EI

have caused divisions within his own caucus and party, just as there is among Canadian voters.

No surprise there -- the Liberals are proposing to change EI to provide a full year of payments to anyone who works a minimum 360 hours -- what the Conservatives accurately call a 45-day working year.

Asked if the Liberals would bend to a compromise from the Conservatives, Iggy said he would consider proposals from Harper, and "I will determine whether he's helping out the unemployed."

One of the Conservatives' latest attack ads aimed at Ignatieff claims the Liberal leader is in national politics for himself: "It's not about you; it's just about him."

While there seems to have been mixed reaction to the ads among average Canadian voters, Liberal MPs must be wondering if the Conservatives have a point.

Adding a crisis to a crisis is not impressive - lets get people working stop making useless points at our taxpayers expense PR

With Win -Win Standards The Indians win , Canadians win

National Post editorial board: Report, then reform reserves
Posted: June 16, 2009, 8:00 AM by NP Editor


We have long been advocates of more independence and responsibility for First Nations governments; not just more money and power — the typical demands of national Aboriginal politicians — but more transparency and accountability to those governed by band councils, too.


That is why we applaud the efforts of Winnipeg’s Frontier Centre for Public Policy. Last week the FCPP released its third annual ranking of the effectiveness of administration on Prairie reserves based on five criteria: impartiality of elections, effectiveness of band administration, respect for human rights, transparency of band business and success at generating economic activity.
Many non-Aboriginal communities would have trouble scoring well, measured against those yardsticks. Happily, a good number of First Nations did very well. Ten of the 68 reserves measured in the study received scores of 65% or higher. Based on more than 5,000 surveys conducted with band councillors and ordinary band residents, the FCPP results paint a reliable picture of the state of Aboriginal local governance. As the centre points out, while it found some examples of abysmal reserve administration, there was also plenty of “positive news.” Many bands who have been surveyed all three years now are using the results to encourage internal reforms, while others with high rankings have used their scores to attract non-Aboriginal business investment.

Not all Prairie reserves participate in the FCPP assessment, so it would be inaccurate to insist the survey necessarily identifies the very best or worst bands. But to the extent it forces band leaders and members to examine what they are doing right and wrong, it is more than just a useful exercise. The FCPP survey could be a catalyst for better governance on reserves.
As the authors point out, “good governance is crucial” as a precursor to self-government and prosperity. The Frontier Centre survey, then, may be a useful step toward those goals.

It is true to say that without measurable standards there is waste and chaos -good for the Frontier Centre in leading the way PR

Fed-up homebuilder sets sights on mayor's job - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Fed-up homebuilder sets sights on mayor's job - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Local homebuilder Mike Quattrociocchi says he's so fed up with the "shenanigans" that city staff and council are carrying on over his controversial Grand River Avenue housing project that he is running for mayor in the next municipal election in November 2010.

"I couldn't stand anymore the shenanigans of the last few months that I have every intention of running for mayor and getting elected," Quattrociocchi, owner of Mayberry Homes and a former city councillor, said in an interview Wednesday.

He accused "several members of council" of trying to stall a housing project he has been building in stages by imposing periodic bureaucratic and political "roadblocks" against it.

"Look at this council. Some members can't get along with each other, some are being obstructionist and some are using their position for personal agendas," he said.

Bailout waste -auto - reality check

Yet despite the stabilization of U.S. sales, not to mention the taxpayer-funded bailouts of GM and Chrysler, there is very little chance the Canadian sector will ever top its 157,130 peak employment in 2001 — when total North American sales of cars and light trucks were around 20 million. According to Statistics Canada, auto manufacturing jobs in this country crashed by about 20%, reaching 99,684 in the three-month period ending March 31. But the Q1 figures do not account for the recent downsizing of GM and Chrysler operations, so that number will go even lower. As well, the recently increased value of the loonie might already have wiped out most, if not all, of the cost savings GM and Chrysler gained from concessions made by the Canadian Auto Workers, when the troubled Detroit duo renegotiated contracts to try to make local operations more competitive.

Meanwhile, DesRosiers and other industry watchers say aggressive competition from solvent automakers, not to mention government involvement in product planning and plantlocation decisions, could seriously hinder attempts by GM and Chrysler to stabilize their operations. That would probably lead them back to the public trough — especially given the way private-sector lenders have been treated by Washington and Ottawa during the restructuring process. And every bailout dollar handed to these industry dogs hurts the stronger North American operations of offshore-based players while making it more likely that Ford will eventually hit a wall.

In short, relatively few Canadian jobs have been saved, and a lot more bailing may be required to keep the shrinking Big Three from running off the cliff again.

What a waste - good job intentions does not make good economic or market sense Pr

Invitation to view sieg's Picasa Web Album - Knights -street hockey tournament -june 09

You are invited to view sieg's photo album: Knights -street hockey tournament -june 09 Knights -street hockey tournament -june 09 Apr 1, 2007 by sieg quality 24/7 elder care community View Album Play slideshow Message from sieg: This was a fun event which everyone enjoyed. All councils participated and we thank those who participated in making this a success. Sieg Holle Grand Knight 9262 If you are having problems viewing this email, copy and paste the following into your browser: http://picasaweb.google.ca/lh/sredir?uname=BTECaregivers&target=ALBUM&id=5344962894576583457&authkey=Gv1sRgCLLW3ebTmqrmEg&invite=CIHmr8EF&feat=email To share your photos or receive notification when your friends share photos, get your own free Picasa Web Albums account.

Venusian Issues: PROVINCE SLOWLY SQUEEZING US DRY - Chatham Daily News - Ontario, CA#postbox#links

Venusian Issues: PROVINCE SLOWLY SQUEEZING US DRY - Chatham Daily News - Ontario, CA#postbox#links

Councillors eye ditching integrity complaints - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Councillors eye ditching integrity complaints - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Why not let the electors decide this . Stop the self serving nonsense and pre-electioneering let them resign and call a ward election Brantford deserves better PR

Higher council conduct standards, not lower standards, needed please

Why are City council rules of conduct and performance standards so
important to the taxpayers? Objective, visible standards can improve
accountability and results to and for the customers, the taxpayers and
the public. Standards protect Taxpayer interests.

The recent call to reduce objective standards of conduct at City hall
is disturbing. Using the Taxpayers as a tool or validation for this
proposed action is unacceptable to many

In the guise of saving the City taxpayers, $18, 000 plus in fees for
the independent commission findings, or similar oversight costs in the
future, the city councillors would like to change or reduce their
rules of conduct. The councillors', who oversee a $100 million plus
budget, are concerned that future independent oversight commissions
might overtax or overburden the budget. This reasoning comes from
those that appear to be promoting an increase in the public
funding/spending burn rate on their pet projects. The proposed
reduction in public standards by this council is transparently
foolish, self-serving and considered by many to be outright
hypocritical. .

Why have public standards? Every business, group, individuals has or
should have standards. ( Read the City Mission statements). A proven
fact is that the higher the standard, the higher the performance, and
the higher the results measured against an objective benchmark. Rules
of conduct improve performance.

Why then should we reduce our proven city standards, be in contempt of
the independent and paid for commission findings? Ask the Auditor
General or the Gormley Commission if an apology is enough to condone
bad behaviour or lapses in public interest judgement.

In sports, penalties are based on rules of engagement.. There are
consequences if they are not followed. You may be suspended from the
play or game if you cannot follow the basic rules. This is often to
the detriment of your team mates. There is a real incentive .to play
fair. Why should we settle for less from our councillors?

Here are some constructive suggestions to improve the integrity of
this important process. Do not change the conduct rules, follow the
rules fairly, and enforce the penalties as defined by the independent
commission-or have the offending councillors resign and let the voters
decide. We need higher not lower public standards that are executed in
a timely manner. If the outside legal oversight cost is deemed too
high, why not use the paid for city legal staff to handle future
breaches of ethical conduct?

Brantford deserves professionalism and good conduct from their
representatives-reducing the standard of conduct is not the answer.
and appears to be self-serving and counter productive
--

The Taxpayers also commend Councilor Martins attempt at following the
integrity commissioners ruling and keeping the process fair by
enforcing the given 90 day salary penalty, We, the ratepayers second
the motion ,even though the other councilors did not. Perhaps an Media
poll on this issue would clear the fog on this important issue.

Sieg Holle
Brant Taxpayers Coalition

FAIR testifies to Listeriosis inquiry

CCWG agrees

FAIR Newsletter                                                           2 June 2009 FAIR testifies to Listeriosis inquiry Ottawa - Executive Director David Hutton testified yesterday to the Food Safety Subcommittee, which was set up to investigate last year's Listeriosis outbreak. Hutton stated that: "Unless we create effective whistleblower protection for people working in the food industry - from the public servants who make policy and oversee the industry, to the managers and workers on the production lines - Canadians will continue to die needlessly because of avoidable failures within the food supply." The full testimony (including video) can be seen at the FAIR website: Testimony to SFSA subcommittee and in French: Témoignage au sous-comité sur la salubrité des aliments FAIR (Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform) http:fairwhistleblower .ca Federal Accountability Initiative for Reform (FAIR) promotes integrity and accountability within government by empowering employees to speak out without fear of reprisal when they encounter wrongdoing. Our aim is to support legislation and management practices that will provide effective protection for whistleblowers and hence occupational free speech in the workplace. FAIR is a registered Canadian charity. http:fairwhistleblower .ca

--

Back to Eden communities
Sunridge -261 Oakhill Drive, Brantford
New Beginnings -23 Richards Ridgetown

backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
www.backtoeden.bravehost.com
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care

Fwd: NoBailouts.ca: Dollars could be flushed away

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Canadian Taxpayers Federation <taxaction@taxpayer.com>
Date: Fri, May 29, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Subject: NoBailouts.ca: Dollars could be flushed away

Thank you for adding your voice to www.NoBailouts.ca. We've been busy making the case against bailouts to the media. But now is a crucial time for you to speak to parliamentarians.

 

The Globe and Mail reports that Canada's contribution to the bailout of General Motors and Chrysler could soar to more than $13-billion. GM moved a giant step closer to filing for bankruptcy protection as its bond holders refused to swallow their debt in exchange for equity in the company.

 

This means the $3 billion committed in "repayable loans" to GM Canada could increase to $10 billion. So far, GM has only borrowed about $500 million from Ontario and Ottawa so far. The governments are also providing $3.8 billion to Chrysler. Canadian Taxpayers took a 2 per cent ownership stake in Chrysler and may take a 10 per cent stake in GM.

 

Who stands up for taxpayers? While opinion polls show a majority of Canadians oppose auto bailouts, all federal political parties support them. Win, lose or draw your generous contribution in support of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation ensures taxpayers' voices are heard!

 

The federal government has admitted some of its loans have already been written off, and the same might happen again. The expected federal deficit has gone from $34 billion up to $50 billion and counting. Strangely, the Harper government says that much of the increase is due to money set aside in case the car companies can't pay the anticipated loans.

 

Before the federal government knowingly flushes your tax dollars down the proverbial toilet, let them know you do not approve! Click the following links to contact Prime Minister Harper, Industry Minister Tony Clement, and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Contact info for your MP is available at www.parl.gc.ca.

 

Finally, continue to forward www.nobailouts.ca to everyone concerned about proper financial management of our country.  There is strength in numbers.  Our voices will be heard!

  

This message was sent from Canadian Taxpayers Federation to backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com. It was sent from: Canadian Taxpayers Federation, 105 - 438 Victoria Ave E., Regina, SK S4N 0N7, Canada. You can modify/update your subscription via the link below. Email Marketing by

Manage your subscription

--

Back to Eden communities
Sunridge -261 Oakhill Drive, Brantford
New Beginnings -23 Richards Ridgetown

backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
www.backtoeden.bravehost.com
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care

Downtown dream Helpful ideas needed, gets closer to reality not political hysteria - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Downtown dream Helpful ideas needed, gets closer to reality not political hysteria - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA: "Downtown dream Helpful ideas needed, gets closer to reality not political hysteria
n point ofview"



worth reading PR

City staff told they can't delay - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

City staff told they can't delay - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA: "City staff told they can't delay
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION
Posted 2 hours ago


A city council group overseeing redevelopment on the decrepit south side of Colborne Street wants a plan ready to relocate tenants and demolish all buildings as soon as a $10.5-million bid to expropriate a stretch of 41 properties gets final approval.
The South Side of Colborne Task Force authorized a senior staff team on Thursday to prepare a step-by-step procedure for expropriation. The task force wants direction for administrators and council on how various departments are supposed to assist in the relocation of businesses and tenants living in the mostly rundown buildings. And it wants a detailed plan ready to carry out the demolition."


"A action plan would be a good thing in this massive undertaking" Pr

It is time to stop the chaos on council

It is time to stop the chaos on council

Who really spammed the Brantford taxpayers this week ? Levac/Charest where not allowed to speak due to righteous council decorum.

So is Brantford open for business or not?

You would think that if our senior public representative ie  MPP Levac- a channel of our funds at Queens park and a developer /major taxpayer of major land holdings wish to present something to council in public (not behind closed doors) that the councillors would give them the courtesy to be heard? What reality or world are they, our councillors,  living in ? It should be about creating real jobs, a viable new tax base   not talking about it,studying it - or spending more of our tax money in behind closed door pet schemes or paying more money to their friends,or people that they are supposed to lead, control or direct.

They could not spare 20 minutes to listen to a future big picture solution. Why not? - Well the integrity report and the juicy Carpenter Callahan soap opera was more interesting of course. Even then councillors could not listen and follow the basic recommendations of the independent commissioner. Could penalizing their own council members for bad or inappropriate conduct set a terrible potential accountability precedent ? Is contempt of impartial independent commissioner findings   permitted? Stay tuned to find out as the drama with our "righteous council " unfolds.  Sad -thankfully  an election is coming soon . Maybe some professionalism , public ward representation not special interest representation ,common sense and financial sanity can then be re-established

S.Holle
--

Back to Eden communities
Sunridge -261 Oakhill Drive, Brantford
New Beginnings -23 Richards Ridgetown

backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
www.backtoeden.bravehost.com
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care

Summary or lessons learned from Gladwell's David beats Goliath by S Holle

Gladwell's David beats Goliath is a excellent review of a winning strategy for the underdogs or the David's of the world. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/05/11/090511fa_fact_gladwell?

My summary and key lessons learned are as follows

Leadership stance and deportment is important. "He would speak calmly and softly, and convince the players of the wisdom of his approach with appeals to reason and common sense".

Winning is not about egos and playing conventionally were the opponent has all advantages. Why, then, did weak teams play in a way that made it easy for good teams to do the very things that made them so good?

• When underdogs choose not to play by Goliath’s rules, they win,Arreguín-Toft concluded, “even when everything we think we know about power says they shouldn’t.”

The political scientist Ivan Arreguín-Toft recently looked at every war fought in the past two hundred years between strong and weak combatants. The Goliaths, he found, won in 71.5 per cent of the cases. That is a remarkable fact.

Arreguín-Toft was analyzing conflicts in which one side was at least ten times as powerful—in terms of armed might and population—as its opponent, and even in those lopsided contests the underdog won almost a third of the time.

When an underdog fought like David, he usually won. But most of the time underdogs didn’t fight like David. Of the two hundred and two lopsided conflicts in Arreguín-Toft’s database, the underdog chose to go toe to toe with Goliath the conventional way a hundred and fifty-two times—and lost a hundred and nineteen times. In 1809, the Peruvians fought the Spanish straight up and lost; in 1816, the Georgians fought the Russians straight up and lost; in 1817, the Pindaris fought the British straight up and lost; in the Kandyan rebellion of 1817, the Sri Lankans fought the British straight up and lost; in 1823, the Burmese chose to fight the British straight up and lost. The list of failures was endless. In the nineteen-forties, the Communist insurgency in Vietnam bedevilled the French until, in 1951,the Viet Minh strategist Vo Nguyen Giap switched to conventionalwarfare—and promptly suffered a series of defeats. George Washington did the same in the American Revolution, abandoning the guerrilla tactics that had served the colonists so well in the conflict’s early stages. “As quickly as he could,”William Polk writes in “Violent Politics,” a history of unconventional warfare, Washington “devoted his energies to creating a British-type army, the Continental Line. As a result, he was defeated time after time and almost lost the war.”

Winning Strategy,tactics and tips for the underdogs, change agents or idea insurgents

DAVIDS

Play the whole field and use the rules unconventionally to your advantage , “he should wage war over the broadest territory possible”. Lawrence of Arabia

• Attack the Turks (Goliaths} where they were or are weak

• Understand your resources and people “Our cards were speed and time, not hitting power,” Lawrence wrote. “Our largest available resources were the tribesmen, men quite unused to formal warfare, whose assets were movement, endurance, individual intelligence, knowledge of the country, courage.”
  

• Effort wins over skill. We tell ourselves that skill is the precious resource and effort is the commodity. It’s the other way around. “Effort can trump ability—legs, in Saxe’s formulation, can overpower arms—because relentless effort is in fact something rarer than the ability to engage in some finely tuned act of motor coordination.”

• Try harder – right attitude teach them skills in that short period of time, and so all we did was make sure they were fit and had some basic understanding of the game.

• That’s why attitude plays such a big role in this, because you’re going to get tired.” He turned to Craig. “What was our cheer again?”The two men thought for a moment, then shouted out happily, in unison, “One, two, three, ATTITUDE!”

Operate in real time not lag time and win through endurance

“Insurgents,though, operate in real time. Lawrence hit the Turks, in that stretch in the spring of 1917, nearly every day, because he knew that the more he accelerated the pace of combat the more the war became a battle of endurance—and endurance battles favors the insurgent. “And it happened as the Philistine arose and was drawing near David that David hastened and ran out from the lines toward the Philistine,” the Bible says. “And he reached his hand into the pouch and took from there a stone and slung it and struck the Philistine in his forehead.” The second sentence—the slingshot part—is what made David famous. But the first sentence matters just as much. David broke the rhythm of the encounter. He speeded it up. “The sudden astonishment when David sprints forward must have frozen Goliath, making him a better target,”

Goliaths

Know their weakness and power and use it to your advantage

• Staying power-The prospect of playing by David’s rules was too daunting. They would rather lose.

• Contempt and arrogance -The price that the outsider pays for being so heedless of custom is, of course, the disapproval of the insider.Goliath does not simply dwarf David. He brings the full force of social convention against him; he has contempt for David.

• Power levers and time -They will change the rules so that they can win.”It’s wrong to sink your own ships, they believed. And they were right. But let’s remember who made that rule: Goliath. And let’s remember why Goliath made that rule: when the world has to play on Goliath’s terms, Goliath wins.”

• Poor mobility to act independently- Time lag, the batch universe with multi lines of authority and approvals means poor response times.

• Engagement rules. They are regimented by their own insider rules. “The other gamers were people steeped in military strategy and history.They were the sort who could tell you how Wellington had outfoxed Napoleon at Waterloo, or what exactly happened at Antietam. They had been raised on Dungeons and Dragons. They were insiders. Eurisko, on the other hand, knew nothing but the rule book. It had no common sense.”

• Decision Lag Effect
  “Such people are powerfully invested in the notion of the Fed as a Solomonic body: that pause of five or eight weeks between economic adjustments seems central to the process of deliberation. This“deliberation”just prettifies the difficulties created by lag.
  

  How to win- that becomes the pivotal question?
  

  Historically David’s win through effort and when they follow their own rules of engagement , out do, overwhelm or overpower their opposition in unconventional ways. They have the mobility of action, staying power,and advantage in real time scenarios and can use Goliath weaknesses to their advantage.
  

  David can more then equalize and win in the playing field against Goliath if he plays by his own winning rules.
  

  
  

  S.Holle -a Goliath turned David through necessity

  
  

  Your comments, input and examples please. Sieg Holle
  

  
  

Carpenter should resign

So what ? Having a loose cannon on council who is a proven divesive and unprincipled element reduces the effectiveness of council. Carpenter should resign . He has no integrity and that is now a proven fact. We need leaders not children handling our public affairs - PR

Carpenter broke code, so what?
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION

City Coun. James Calnan says he will "carry on and hope for the best" after colleagues declined to punish his wardmate for violations of the code of conduct identified in an integrity commissioners' report.

"From my point of view all I ever asked for was an apology," Calnan said in an interview Monday after council voted to receive a report by commissioner Aida Gatfield.

The London-based lawyer was appointed integrity commissioner to investigate a complaint by Calnan six months ago concerning an alleged pattern of behaviour by Carpenter toward him last year.

In her report, Gatfield found that "on the balance of the probabilities" Carpenter violated sections of the city's municipal Code of Conduct with a series of coments concerning Calnan. The code prohibits "patronizing or condescending behaviour, written or verbal abuse or threats."

She said council could formally reprimand Carpenter or suspend his council pay for up to 90 days, but she made no recommendation.

Councillors chose to do neither. With almost no discussion, they voted to receive the report and release it to the public.


They quickly adjourned the meeting and all, including Carpenter, left the room with only Calnan remaining with reporters.

"In the absence of an apology from my wardmate, I'll just have to carry on and hope for the best," he told reporters.

"It's very clear that I have had had a less than cordial relationship with my wardmate," Calnan p>He noted that he filed his complaint against Carpenter "as a last resort."

Although no action is being taken, "we now have a report that has resulted in a change of behaviour," Calnan added.

Carpenter declined to comment on the report or council's decision.

Gatfield investigated a series of incidents and comments dating back to 1996. At the time, Calnan wasn't on council but he said the incidents displayed a pattern of unprofessional behaviour by Carpenter.

In an interview with Gatfield, Calnan presented news clippings from an incident in 1996 in which it is alleged that Carpenter attacked a fellow councillor. She ruled that incident was so long ago that she considered it staledated.

She also dismissed another incident during the 2003 election campaign involving a dispute over signage between Carpenter, then an incumbent, and Calnan as a candidate.

But Gatfield ruled that more recent incidents in 2008 constituted breaches in sections of the code.

During a Nov. 3 closed-door meeting about how council should deal with challenges from a Six Nations Confederacy organization called the Haudenosaunee Development Institute, Calnan said he advised his colleagues to refrain from engaging in divisive behaviour.

He claimed Carpenter stated: "You are the divisive element on council," and added: "You shouldn't even be on this council."

In his interview, Carpenter denied having called Calnan "divisive," or saying that his wardmate shouldn't be on council.

But Gatfield cited testimony from some other councillors who recalled Carpenter making comments to Calnan about his fitness to sit on council.

Carpenter did agree that he did call Calnan a "backstabber" in the press. That was when Calnan began breaking publicly from council's position on the native land claims dispute, and its policy to have Mayor Mike Hancock serve as the sole spokesman on such issues.

Gatfield wrote that Carpenter agreed his comment was emotional and not respectful.

The report cites testimony from other councilors, who stated that Carpenter treats them in the same manner, making personal attacks.

In her conclusion, Gatfield said Carpenter's comments toward his wardmate were not justified, but found the context in which the comments were made to be a mitigating factor.

"The First nations issue is an emotionally charged matter," she wrote. "Council had unanimously agreed to a course of action, which the complainant subsequently publicly rejected without prior notification to council."

Although council appears to have put the complaint against Carpenter to bed, it is due to consider again in two weeks another report identifying Calnan as an information leak regarding an in-camera discussion about a document important to progress on the native land claims dispute.

In an interview, Calnan noted that his complaint took six months to investigate, while the investigation into the leak began later and took less than half the time.

He said he is still consulting legal counsel on his response.

Reel life situation makes waves - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA

Reel life situation makes waves - Brantford Expositor - Ontario, CA: "Reel life situation makes waves
Posted By GREG WESTON

Today's tour of federal absurdity takes us to Canada's rivers, streams and other rich fish habitats where the biggest environmental threat to aquatic life may well be the government agencies protecting it.
In a damning report released yesterday, Canada's environmental watchdog chews out the federal fisheries department for all but leaving the nation's freshwater ecosystems up a creek without a protector.
Environment Commissioner Scott Vaughan reported bluntly: 'We found that efforts to protect fish habitat have been inadequate.'"

"A worthwhile assessment of the federal fisheries department, with a burn rate of 70 million , what does this department do other then fill its own pockets - who cares about our fish. Accountability is a joke here . PR"

know your rights -do your homework -useful resources

Free Online Legal Advice That You Can Trust... In Plain English, Too

Albin Renauer, JD

LegalConsumer.com

any law-related Web sites offer little guidance beyond "call a lawyer" -- often because they actually are marketing tools for law firms. Others are written in hard-to-understand legalese. But a few sites do provide reliable, understandable legal information for laypeople. Top sites now...

GENERAL LEGAL TOPICS

Lawyers.com. From the publishers of the Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, this site offers solid legal guidance on a wide range of topics, including civil rights, consumer protection, criminal law, employment, family law, immigration, malpractice, personal injury, real estate and Social Security. You can post specific legal questions on the site's message board, and they will be answered by practicing lawyers. You also can search for a lawyer in your area.

Other sites that provide solid information in plain English on a wide range of legal topics...

Public.FindLaw.com. The most heavily visited legal-information Web site, FindLaw covers matters ranging from accidents and divorce to real estate and taxes.

Nolo.com. Nolo is the nation's leading publisher of plain-English law books, and it offers information online for free.

STATE LAWS

If you need to learn about a law specific to your state, check your state government's Web site. Most can be found at "www." followed by the state's postal abbreviation, then ".gov." Example: www.ny.gov for New York. Or type your state's name followed by "government Web site" into an Internet search engine, such as Google.

Most state sites have a section related to law, the courts or the judiciary.

If you can't find what you need, try typing your state's name and "laws" or "attorney general" into a search engine -- many attorneys general provide information for consumers online.

You also can enter the state's name plus key words related to the specific topic, such as "small-claims court" or "consumer protection."

DEBTOR'S RIGHTS AND BANKRUPTCY LAW

Bankruptcy in Brief. This Web site, developed by Moran Law Group based in Mountain View, California, provides a road map for the bankruptcy process. www.moranlaw.net.

LegalConsumer.com. My site offers information on bankruptcy -- how to file, links to federal forms, state bankruptcy exemption laws and a free "means-test" calculator to determine eligibility.

ELDER LAW AND ESTATE PLANNING

The American Bar Association site has a section on wills, probate and trusts that offers a good, if somewhat lawyerly, outline of estate-planning law. www.abanet.org/rppt/public/home.html.

ElderLawAnswers.com. Information about legal issues facing seniors, including Medicare, long-term-care insurance, Social Security, disability planning and more, provided by a nationwide network of elder-law attorneys.

The Estate Planning Links Web site has links to articles and Web sites related to estate planning. www.estateplanninglinks.com.

MSN MoneyCentral's Retirement and Wills page offers hundreds of articles related to estate planning. moneycentral.msn.com/retire/home.asp.

---

Have a good day, be well and take care
" a simple natural lifestyle and a chuckle a day keeps the doctor away'

- additional interactive resources are at our Back to Eden site-

---

---

Internet Explorer 8 makes surfing easier. Get it now!

Child Care Choice for Mother's Day - Frontier Online

"Choice is always the perfect gift" pr


The Perfect Gift for Mother's Day: Child Care Choice

Provincial child care policies vary widely across the Prairies. In particular, Saskatchewan and Manitoba actively discourage for-profit child care centres by denying them access to government subsidies and grants. Alberta treats both for-profit and non-profit centres equally. Because of these policies, Saskatchewan has just one commercial daycare in the entire province. Only five percent of the child care centres in Manitoba are for-profit. Alberta has a majority of for-profit centres. Saskatchewan also has the lowest level of child care coverage in the country. Manitoba and Alberta are both near the national average. Evidence suggests that Alberta has been better able to meet rising demand for new child care spaces than either Saskatchewan or Manitoba. Further evidence suggests that Alberta is more efficient in turning government funding into new daycare spaces. Alberta is able to create twice as many spots per $1,000 in government expenditure than Manitoba, and three-times as many spots as Saskatchewan.

Media Release for Little Crèche on the Prairies - a new Policy Series Paper by Research Associate Peter Shawn Taylor

Fwd: Food for thought - see the Austrian model on government intervention

Can you spend your way out of a depression ? Is the new deal (Government pump priming) really a bad deal? This is a provocative and apparent politically incorrect view of lessons that could or should be learned from the past   Sieg

If Keynesian and monetarist theories cannot cope with the historical evidence, does the Austrian theory fare better? In the Austrian view, depressions come about because expansion of bank credit results in malinvestments. Because these need to be liquidated, the government should follow a "do nothing" policy that allows the market to return to normal conditions. When this policy was followed, recovery from depression took no more than a few years, in the 1873 depression, in contrast to the total failure to recover during the New Deal. The results were even better in the 1920–1921 depression, when both Wilson and Harding slashed government spending: "the 1920–1921 depression was so short-lived that most Americans today are unaware of its existence." (p. 71)

Did FDR Make the Depression Great?

Mises Daily by David Gordon | Posted on 5/5/2009 12:00:00 AM

[The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal. By Robert P. Murphy. Regnery, 2009. 199 pages.]

Robert Murphy demonstrates in this excellent book a penetrating ability to explain the essence of fallacious economic doctrines. As he notes, three theories offer competing explanations of the Great Depression: the Keynesian account, which stresses a lack of aggregate demand; Milton Friedman's monetarism, which ascribes the severity of the early years of the Depression to a drastic cut in the money supply by the Fed; and, of course, the Austrian theory that Murphy himself favors.

Herbert Hoover, though not under Keynes's influence, defended a version of the first theory. If wages were not kept high, purchasing power would be insufficient to restore prosperity. Accordingly, Hoover encouraged businesses to refrain from wage cuts.

Murphy quickly exposes the fallacy of this view:

High wages do not cause prosperity, they are rather an indication of prosperity. Ultimately, it doesn't matter how many green pieces of paper employers hand out to workers. Unless workers first physically produced the goods (and services), there will be nothing on the store shelves for them to buy when they attempt to spend their big fat paychecks. (p. 35, emphasis in original)

But, it may be countered, is not the level of production and employment determined by aggregate demand? Granted that prosperity requires real goods, will not businessmen decide how much to produce based on what they think they will be able to sell? If so, is not the problem in a depression that, forecasting that future demand will be low, they cut back production?

Murphy once more locates the fundamental fallacy. The problem in a depression is not that production is in general too low; it is rather that resources have not been put to their best uses and need to be shifted:

By focusing on aggregate monetary conditions such as "total wage payments," Hoover completely overlooked the fact that real, physical resources had to be rearranged in order to correct the imbalances in the economy. It wasn't that "business" was producing too much, but rather that some sectors were producing too much, while other sectors were producing too little, in light of the economy's supplies of resources, the skills and desires of its workers, and the tastes of its consumers. (p. 37)

Once more, Murphy holds that we need to concentrate on the physical goods rather than on total monetary demand.

The only way to rectify the situation — to transform the economy into a sustainable configuration — was to shuffle workers and resources. Some enterprises had to be shut down immediately, releasing their workers and freeing up the raw materials they would have consumed had they remained in business… But in a market economy, workers are free to choose their occupations, and the owners of raw materials can sell their property to whomever they desire. Yet with that freedom comes the unfortunate necessity of prolonged spells of unemployment and "idle resources," when the workers and raw materials are searching for a new home in the complex economy. (pp. 37–8)

Murphy dispatches the monetarist view with similar directness and ease. Here, if anything, his remarks are of even more vital significance, since Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke firmly embraces the monetarist account of the Great Depression.

He finds a simple way to illustrate the fallacy of the mainstream analysis of deflation. According to this view, if people anticipate falling prices, they will refrain from spending. Because they expect prices to fall, they think that that will do better to consume later. But this drop in consumption causes a further price fall, and the whole cycle repeats. Prices may spiral uncontrollably downward.

Murphy responds in this way:

One could construct an analogous argument for the computer industry, in which the government passes regulation to slow down improvements in operating systems and processing speed. After all, how can computer manufacturers possibly remain viable if consumers are always waiting for a faster model to become available? … The solution to this paradox, of course, is that consumers do decide to bite the bullet and buy a computer, knowing full well that they would be able to buy the same performance for less money, if they were willing to wait… (There's no point in holding out for lower prices but never actually buying!) (pp. 68–9)

Murphy's ingenious response can also be applied to combat George Akerlof's famous lemons model of the used-car market. Akerlof argued that because of asymmetric information, owners of good used cars would tend to be driven from the market. But, contrary to what his model suggests, good used cars do get sold. In like fashion to Murphy, one can say that just because owners of good cars may not be able to obtain as high a price as they would like, it does not follow that they will refuse to sell at all.

It might be helpful to add the "real balance effect" to Murphy's account. As prices fall, the value of money rises. People's demand to hold money can then be satisfied with less money. This in part explains why people will eventually spend, even when they expect prices to continue to fall.

Keynesians will object that even if spending does eventually revive, the process takes too long. People cannot be expected to wait until the market rights itself. But this is to ignore Murphy's vital point. The process of adjustment is just what is needed: a depression is exactly a situation in which bad investments are liquidated and resources moved elsewhere.

Murphy uncovers another flaw in the conventional assault on deflation. Money that is not spent need not be hoarded, as the opponents of deflation implicitly assume:

Many analysts who are terrified of deflation stress that in an environment of falling prices, cash stuffed under the mattress earns a positive return. This observation is certainly true, but nonetheless cash lent out earns an even greater return. Falling prices, then, encourage consumers to devote more of their income to savings, which in turn lowers interest rates and allows businesses to borrow and invest more. (p. 69)

As the author abundantly shows, historical evidence strikes decisive blows against both the Keynesian and monetarist theories. On the Keynesian account, increased spending, by reviving aggregate demand, will restore good times. If so, why did Hoover and Roosevelt's massive spending leave America mired in depression? To call Hoover a big spender may surprise many readers, but Murphy notes that there is no room for doubt:

Hoover's response to the stock market crash was an enormous increase in government spending, with the budget exploding by 42 percent over his first two years … it is true that Hoover blinked and tried to tame the unprecedented (at the time) peacetime deficits. But this was only after the "stimulus" approach failed horribly. (p. 48)

Keynesians will reply that government spending should have been even greater; but this is to add an epicycle to shore up a failed theory.

Murphy turns the tables on Milton Friedman, who emphasized statistical evidence, by showing that monetarism fails to explain the data.

So we see that immediately following the stock market crash, the Fed began flooding the market with liquidity and in fact brought its rates down to record lows…. If the ostensible cause of the Great Depression — the one factor that set it apart from all previous depressions — was the Fed's unwillingness to provide sufficient liquidity, then how could it possibly be that the Fed's record rate cuts proved inadequate to solve "the problem?" (pp. 76–7)

Even if this is true, though, could not Friedman still say that the massive decline in the money supply in the early 1930s exacerbated the severity of the depression? Murphy, following Murray Rothbard, denies this:

Between 1839 and 1843 the money supply fell by 34 percent and wholesale prices fell by 42 percent. If the monetarists are right, and it was the Fed's refusal to counteract the falling money supply in the early 1930s that gave us the Great Depression, then the 1839–1843 period should have been devastating. Yet Murray Rothbard (relying on Peter Temin's historical research) reports otherwise. (p. 71)

If Keynesian and monetarist theories cannot cope with the historical evidence, does the Austrian theory fare better? In the Austrian view, depressions come about because expansion of bank credit results in malinvestments. Because these need to be liquidated, the government should follow a "do nothing" policy that allows the market to return to normal conditions. When this policy was followed, recovery from depression took no more than a few years, in the 1873 depression, in contrast to the total failure to recover during the New Deal. The results were even better in the 1920–1921 depression, when both Wilson and Harding slashed government spending: "the 1920–1921 depression was so short-lived that most Americans today are unaware of its existence." (p. 71)

Murphy treats in thorough fashion the multifarious New Deal measures and their manifest failures. I shall confine myself to noting his searing condemnation of Roosevelt's gold policy.

Ordering the public to turn over its gold — under penalty of a $10,000 fine and up to ten years in prison — was a clear-cut robbery.… Yet insidious as the explicit confiscation was, the cancellation of gold clauses in contracts was in a way a more fundamental violation of property rights … the private sector had no choice but to use unbacked green pieces of paper as the foundations of its transactions. Americans were now entirely at the mercy of those controlling the printing press. (pp. 128–29)

Murphy carries forward his discussion to the World War II period. Here he has been greatly influenced by Robert Higgs's challenge to the conventional view that the war ended the Depression. (He also makes excellent use of Higgs's "regime uncertainty" in his account of New Deal failure.) He contends that the follies of central planning extend to the conduct of war. Private enterprise could have handled production of military goods better than controls actually did.

It is a simple fact of engineering that the enormous production of tanks, airplanes, and other wartime goods in the 1940s necessitated a sharp curtailment in civilian consumption. Even so, the government did not need to impose direct rationing and other controls on the home front. Instead, the government could have simply raised taxes and issued new bonds in order to purchase its desired products from military contractors and other firms… Individual businesses, seeking only to maximize profit, would have been led by an Invisible Hand to retool away from civilian production and cater instead to the overall war effort. (pp. 158–59).

Murphy's argument recalls Mises's suggestion that the French would have fared much better in the war had they relied on private firms to procure armaments.[1]

In these days of massive government bailouts and intervention, the lessons of the Great Depression and New Deal have much more than historical significance. Murphy concludes on a melancholy note:

President Obama's stimulus package and other "remedies" will not cure our economic woes any more than the New Deal cured the Great Depression. The real question is whether Barack Obama's New Deal, building on the old one, will finally sink the American economy into the sands. (p. 177).

If enough people read Murphy's hard-hitting book, we can strangle in its cradle Obama's prescription for economic disaster.

David Gordon covers new books in economics, politics, philosophy, and law for The Mises Review, the quarterly review of literature in the social sciences, published since 1995 by the Mises Institute. He is author of The Essential Rothbard, available in the Mises Store. Send him mail. See his article archives. Comment on the blog.

You can subscribe to future articles by this author via this RSS feed.

--


backtoeden.ontario@gmail.com
www.backtoeden.bravehost.com
"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care

"Building elder peer communities that are cozy,caring and comfortable" -quality 24/7 care

land claims and just more Bull

What a unprofessional waste of resources - score 0 for the taxpayers, 0 for the Indians, and millions for the lawyers running this charade PR

"It's a witch hunt" Calnan says he did not leak confidential information
Posted By Michael-Allan Marion Expositor Staff Posted 8 hours ago


City Coun. James Calnan says those branding him as an information leaker are part of a "witch hunt" to make him a scapegoat for a failed strategy to deal with the fallout of unresolved native land claim issues.

"It's a witch hunt. You decide who the witch is and burn him," Calnan, accompanied by peace advocate Jan Vandersteldt, said Tuesday in a hastily called news conference at the foot of the monument to Joseph Brant in Victoria Park.

He said opponents who are after him would rather attack him with an investigation into an alleged leak from a closed-door council meeting more than two months ago than admit that an expensive legal fight by the city to obtain an injunction against Six Nations activists is doomed to failure.

In the news conference, Calnan related his anger over attacks against him from council colleagues and others as the dispute over land claims and native protests drags on.

"I've been taking kicks on this for the last year," he said of his opposition to the "collective idiocy" behind the city's confrontational position and its marginalization of him.

"I'm tired of this bullshit."

Ontario's New tax hike

Nothing is as it seems -doing something about it counts -enough is enough   

pass it on- awareness is the beginning of real accountability 

  You are about to become the victim of the largest tax hike in our 
        history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
        that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
        your family.

-----

 Ontario's new tax hike

        As a concerned taxpayer I feel it is important to have you all
        understand what the new HST or "blended tax?"means to Ontarians. It
        amazes me that this announcement has slipped by without a ripple, and
        yet when I tell people about the impact to them they are all shocked.

        The intended purpose is to blend the GST and the PST into one tax.This
        will cut down the paperwork burden for Ontario businesses and, in
        theory, lessen staff by merging both departments. This could be a noble
        attempt to cut costs. There is just one problem. Rather than just
        blending the products and services that now charge both taxes, the
        provincial government has decided that it will apply this new tax to
        almost all goods and services that you do not pay PST on now!

        You are about to become the victim of the largest tax hike in our 
        history. How will this affect you? Let?s start with just a few things
        that are to be charged the extra 8% and see if it will affect you or
        your family.

        Gasoline
        Home heating fuel
        Water
        Hydro
        Used cars
        Government and city services
        Any service you now use for your home or business such as repairs,
        professional services of any kind, construction materials etc.
        
        These are just a few.

        See this article about how the 1000.00 BRIBE they are offering will not
        even cover ½ of the increased cost to the average family. This tax hits
        Ontarians hard, but ESPECIALLY the low income ones! They will have an 8%
        increase in everyday life, and yet you will not see their benefits or
        salaries rise.

        http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/269917


        Actually almost everything currently without PST in your life except
        children's clothing, prescriptions, diapers, and feminine hygiene
        products will now cost you 8% more. Oh and here is a kicker. The fuel
        tax will slide with the increasing cost of that fuel.

        Our premier is counting on taxpayers to do what they always do when a
        new tax is added. Nothing! It is very important that you start to
        research and discuss this with your friends and family. It is not too
        late to stop this if you are willing to do something as send an email to
        the premier asking him either to a) stop the tax grab all together or b)
        do what was originally intended and blend the tax on the products that
        now have both taxes and not to extend the new tax to everything else. If
        you just sit there remember you lose the right to complain about taxes
        ever again. Get UP and start telling everyone about this injustice and
        we can stop this today. Don't think your email will not count. Most MP's
        get 10 emails, they consider it a catastrophe!

        Send your objection to:


        www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp
        <http://www.premier.gov.on.ca/feedback/feedback.asp

Today, smack dab in the middle of a tsunami of horrible economic news, the Ontario provincial Liberal government has introduced what many will see as a massive tax grab, just when we all can least afford it.

On Canada Day, July 1st, 2010, Ontarians can not only celebrate the birth of their nation, they can also celebrate a new harmonized sales tax system that will pump up the coffers of our provincial government and empty out the pockets of taxpayers. 

But don't worry people ... we have elected a compassionate and magnanimous crew down at Queen's Park. They've announced that over a two year period, you'll be receiving three rebate cheques that will total $1,000 as a hand up from your elected officials to help offset the costs you "might" incur due to the sales tax harmonization. 

What, pray tell, might those extra costs that you "might" incur be on? That KFC Wrapper you pick up for lunch; your morning cup 'o joe at Timmy's; that newspaper you read; that vet bill you willingly pay for your beloved pet; your prescription drugs; the gas you put in your car; the oil or gas you have delivered to your home to keep you and your family warm; etc. etc. 

$166 a year to drink coffee and eat snacks at work; 
$156 a year to drive your car; 
$72 a year extra to heat your home; 
$55 a year to get your hair cut, go out and see a movie and send your clothes to the cleaners; 
$33 a year to read The Star; 
$50 a year to to prevent pregnancy (The Pill); 

These are but a few that I've worked out as a starting point. As you can see, in year 1, we're already over $500 (remember the bribe the Liberals are giving us, that $1,000 rebate cheque spread over two years). As I said, this is only just a starting point and I've used very conservative figures like $20 a month for haircuts, $20 a month for dry cleaning and $10 a month for movies. 

Thinking about selling your home? Add about $2,000 to your closing costs. 

Thinking about buying a new one? In 2008, the Toronto Real Estate Board said that the average house price was about $404,000. If you were thinking about buying a newly built home for about that much (by the way, best of luck finding one for that price!) you would pay an additional $8,000 in taxes. If you had the gall to up the ante and buy a brand spanking new home for $500,000, instead of it costing you $500K that brand new home would cost you $540,000. In other words, you'd have to pay the full 8% PST, or an additional $40,000. 

So tell me, why aren't you bowing down and scrapping your forehead off the floor at the feet of Dalton McGuinty et al thanking them so much for that extra $1,000 rebate cheque (which, by the way also is only for the first two years after implementation, after that its all gravy for the government)? I know my forehead will be clean, and come Oct. 2011 when the next provincial government election happens, I will remember this and remind as many other Ontario voters as I can, thank you very much.

This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com:

Councillors zero in on '10 budget

CITY HALL: Cap on spending, salary hikes proposed
Posted By MICHAEL-ALLAN MARION, EXPOSITOR STAFF

City councillors say they must act now to protect taxpayers through a deepening recession by ordering staff to bring in a 2010 budget with no tax increase.

They are also giving administrators marching orders to win collective agreements from unions that carry no wage increases throughout the life of any contract.

Union leaders have been told that negotiations about to begin have been postponed until council has its strategy in place.

Councillors agreed on those directives Thursday evening while they huddled with senior staff in a special finance committee session in the public library, and plotted a strategy to combat recessionary pressures on next year's budget.

As they alternated between open and closed-door sessions, several councillors said they are under no illusions that it will be tough to keep the lid on a cauldron of public demands that normally increase budgets.

They also conceded they have an enormous task on their hands to persuade public sector unions to fall in line on salaries.

"This should not be seen as a punitive measure," said Mayor Mike Hancock, anticipating an early angry response from the unions to council's strategy.

Good start to the process lets help them with their resolve Pr