Canada Post Cancels Home Delivery? Maybe Not...

Last month, Minister of Transport Lisa Raitt announced that Canada Post will be ceasing all door to door deliveries of mail.  The operations are to be suspended over a 5 year span, as community mailboxes are erected throughout the country.

Conveniently, Ms. Raitt made said announcement days after Parliament ended for the Christmas session, effectively ending any form of debate on the issue.  I suspect, the announcement was also made as close to Christmas as possible, to minimize media coverage as well.  However, it seems as though the Conservative Government under estimated the passion of Canadians for the service.

Deepak Chopra: Mail Scrooge?

Numerous MP's returned to the Parliament for an emergency session, and simultaneously hauled in Deepak Chopra, the CEO of Canada Post to explain his rational for why ending home delivery was necessary.

Chopra came up with a series of fantastic answers to the MP's grilling session.  At one point, he suggested that the feedback he had been receiving from Canadians was positive, and that Canadian seniors have told him they welcome the opportunity for more fresh air and exercise by walking a few blocks each day to retrieve their mail. 

Chopra and Raitt indicated that the end of mail delivery to our doors was necessary, as Canada Post is facing a $100 million deficit for the year, and the projections for the next five years look even worse.  Not surprisingly, Chopra dodged a series of questions in which he was asked point blank if he received a bonus in the last year, and exactly how much his bonus was.  The closest he would get to providing an answer, was to say that his salary is "a matter of public record".

Well I agree!  His salary SHOULD be a matter of public record.  However, it is not.  Most Canadians would never have known that Chopra's salary is nearly $500,000 a year, or that his bonus was paid out at 33% for an additional sum of close to $200,000 unless NDP MP Paul Dewar hadn't stated so during this parliamentary committee meeting.  In fact, in 2012, the Toronto Sun filed an access to information request for a number of bonus payouts to Canada post employees over the previous four years.  They also asked for a breakdown of how much was paid out to 23 members of the executive committee.  All of the individual payment numbers were refused based on "issues of privacy".  What they DID find out was that 7,402 Canada Post employees were paid some sort of bonus during the time period, including all 23 members of the executive board.  Clearly his salary and bonus is not a matter of public record.  It should be noted that Canada Post posted a net loss before taxes of $327 million in 2012.  A significant portion of which came because of a 25 day strike by postal workers.

I find it rather objectionable that anyone received a bonus when the company is bleeding money.  While good personal performance should be rewarded, it should not be done so when the company is hemorrhaging money.

A number of ways Canada Post could increase revenues was suggested by the parliamentary committee, including offering banking services at its branches in remote locations, or small towns where regular bank branches do not exist.  A wise suggestion.  The Swiss Postal service implemented this service several years ago to great success.

While the Conservative Government seems intent on ramming through the end of mail delivery as we know it (the first communities to lose this service are scheduled to be announced this summer), there may be some hope after all.

Thomas Mulcair: Defender of the Post

Thomas Mulcair, leader of the NDP, and Olivia Chow, Transportation Critic are set to introduce a motion in the house tomorrow declaring home mail delivery an invaluable service to Canadians.  They will force a vote on the matter, which should be an interesting political stone to throw.  An election will be held next year.  Forcing MPs to effectively vote for or against mail delivery will no doubt come to haunt some MPs who find themselves in tight electoral races in their own districts.  And you can bet, the NDP will make it very public come campaigning time which Conservatives voted to kill off their constituents delivery.  

It will all play out in the Commons tomorrow, and it should be interesting to see if Stephen Harper cracks the party whip, or if he lets MPs vote on their own.  I would suspect that independent voting will mean that the NDP motion will pass, which will likely see the plan of killing mail delivery dead on the floor.  If the whip is cracked... well... I guess we will see who will survive re-election.

Food Allergy Accommodation: When Is It Enough?

Food allergies are a considerably more talked about ailment these days.  There are a number of reasons why; people are more aware of their own dietary restrictions, specialized menus like gluten and lactose free are frequently advertised at restaurants, numerous high profile law suits have been settled in the last few years due to accidental cross contamination, and schools, airlines and other institution have adopted allergen-free policies.

Certainly it is wise to be educated about food allergens, especially if you suffer from them, and it's a must for anyone in the food service industry.  Everyone deserves a safe place to eat.  But when does accommodation become excessive?  Is it reasonable to expect a school or airline to prohibit any and all foods that are known allergens?

The answer might be simple at first, but lets consider all of the items that are common food allergens.

The most widely known one is peanuts of course (And further on, tree nuts in general).  This includes peanut butter, raw nuts such as almonds, many types of candy bars, pesto or thai sauce, etc.  You will find most companies and schools have policies prohibiting these types of foods, as it is probably the most common allergen, and a potentially fatal one for people that have anaphylactic reactions.

The other most common food allergens include dairy, gluten, eggs, and shellfish.  

It is rare that you will find anywhere in Canada that bans all of these foods, as it covers almost everything in the basic Canadian diet.  No bread for sandwiches, no yogurt or cheese, no omelettes or breakfast items, no shrimp for salads... the list goes on and on.

So when do we draw the line at accommodation?

Recently, a Hamilton, Ontario woman decided to find out where that line was.  Or perhaps to move the line in the sand a little further in her preferred direction.

Lynne Glover is the mother of 6 year old Elodie Glover, a cute blonde haired little girl who attends Holy Name of Jesus Catholic Elementary School.  Elodie is severely allergic to both egg and dairy.  So much so that she has gone into anaphylactic attacks numerous times in the last year.

Lynne was proactive, and spoke with the school board about their food policies, and the school board attempted to be accommodating.  They sent home letters to the parents of the other school children letting them know of Elodie's severe condition.  They replaced pizza day in the cafeteria with Roma Pizza (a non dairy pizza).  They even went so far as to suspend the school's milk program for all of the students to accommodate Elodie.

Unfortunately for Lynne Glover, this was not enough.  The other children were allowed to bring their regular lunches to school, with the exception of peanuts. Holy Name of Jesus already had a peanut ban in place, as many other children were affected by nut allergies.  The children are permitted to eat their lunches at their own desks.  Lynne was terrified of Elodie coming into contact with another child's lunch, so again she went back to the school board asking for something to be done.

The school board reiterated all of the changes they had already made on Elodie's behalf.  Additionally, the school's allergen policy states that schools "cannot guarantee an allergen-free environment", but will make "every reasonable effort" to reduce the risk of exposure for affected children.  The school offered to allow Elodie to eat her lunch in a different room.  Lynne refused, claiming they were segregating her daughter.  

Eventually the school board finally resigned from the conversation, at a loss for what else to do.  They could not tell all the other parents of the school that their children were not allowed to bring any milk products to school, as it is a Canadian staple.  Additionally, the Canada Food Guide and Health Canada already state that children do not get enough dairy in their daily diets.  How do you tell Mr. & Mrs. Smith that Johnny is not allowed to have a cheese sandwich, or yogurt, or a carton of milk in his lunch?  And what do you replace it with?

Lynne was less than pleased.  In addition to removing Elodie from the school, she also filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, claiming the school was being discriminatory against Elodie for not accommodating her further.  The school board won't comment on cases before judgement, so they have not released a public statement.

So when is enough enough?  Is Lynne correct and the school board should have done more to protect her daughter?  Or is Lynne being unreasonable expecting an entire school to sacrifice their dietary programs for the sake of one student?

Canadian Restaurant Etiquette

Canada is one of the world’s most popular destinations for tourism.  And it is really not surprising.  The country is vast, and encompasses more diverse ecosystems than almost anywhere on the planet.  Additionally, there are world famous festivals and events every year across the country.  From Vancouver’s PNE celebration, to the Calgary Stampede and the Edmonton Fringe Festival, and the snow festival and Just For Laughs in Quebec, you can experience anything you can possibly dream of.

And of course, Canada is a big draw for the outdoorsmen, who enjoy world class skiing, hiking, mountain biking, and much more.

This of course means that Canadian restaurants see their fair share of tourists each and every day.

Every nation has a different set of socially acceptable behaviors that one is expected to adhere to while dining.  Also known as “restaurant etiquette”.

I have worked in and managed a number of restaurants, bars and lounges over the years, and feel it’s prudent to share what we consider proper restaurant etiquette.  Behaving accordingly will help ensure you proper service and a pleasant experience.  Failure to comply may lead to a disappointing experience at best.

Arriving At The Establishment

If you are patronizing a bar or pub, it is perfectly acceptable to walk in and seat yourself.  Rarely do you see these types of environments with a host or hostess.  Simply grab a table that you find comfortable.

If you are dining at a midscale or fine dining, it is generally accepted that you wait to be seated.  We like to make things easy in Canada, so almost all of these restaurants will have a sign indicating that you should wait to be seated. Usually within a minute, a smiling host will be happy to take you to a table.  It is ok to wish to sit at a specific type of table, such as a booth, or near a window.  Please ask your host BEFORE being seated if such a table is available.  Sitting down at a table and then moving a few minutes after makes the host(ess) look stupid.  Additionally, it causes extra work for the servers, as they will likely have to sanitize and reset the table you possibly just destroyed.

The above tip is specifically noted for our European guests, many of whom seem to have no problems barreling past a “Please Wait To Be Seated” sign and seating themselves.  These signs are not just to make you wait for fun.  They are there for a multitude of reasons.  It is possible in a particularly slow time of day, that there is only 1 server working, and you can be making her job exceedingly difficult by sitting at the far side of the restaurant, when she already has tables sat elsewhere.  It could be that multiple servers are working, and the management tries to ensure that all servers get a fair number of tables.  Additionally, it ensures that one particular server does not have many tables walking in at the same time into her section.  This would obviously prevent you from getting decent service.

Failing to comply with this simple rule will make you seem rude, or just plain stupid, and does nothing to make your server want to provide you with a good experience.

If there are more than 6 guests in your party, it is expected that you would have made a reservation.  If circumstances prevented you from making a reservation, do not be surprised that there is not a table immediately available for your group.  Very few establishments have tables set up for more than 6 diners.  It may take only a few minutes for the restaurant to set up a table for your group, or, if the restaurant is busy, it may take half an hour or more.  This should not come as a shock or surprise to you.  

Attracting Your Server’s Attention

Almost every single restaurant has an established guideline about how long a guest is allowed to sit before they are greeted by a server.  Please be patient!  This is usually about 2 – 3 minutes, and rarely more than 5 minutes.  If you are waiting longer than 5 minutes, take a look around you.  Is the establishment busy?  If it is, there server will certainly be aware that you are seated, and probably already feels bad that they have not yet had a chance to greet you.  They will be with you in a moment.  If you have been waiting for 5 minutes, and your server is no where in sight, he or she is likely in the kitchen trying to bring out food for another table.  Again, please be patient.

If the clock is closing in on 10 minutes, and you still have not been greeted by a server, then you have a right to become suspicious.  At this point, it is ok to approach the nearest employee and politely inquire about your server.  That’s right.  I said politely.  You do NOT have the right to be rude and abrasive at this point.  Things happen, and it is possible that there is something going on behind the scenes that you are not aware of, such as an issue in the kitchen, or confusion about what server is supposed to be taking care of you.  At this point, you will likely notice a server running out to greet you, and apologizing for the extended wait time.

During your experience, should you need to attract the server’s attention, a polite “excuse me” as he or she is walking by is the polite wait to get their attention.  It is also appropriate to try and make eye contact with the server from across the room.  Believe me, they are always watching there tables no matter where they are, and he or she will notice your gaze.  It is also appropriate to wave politely at them, if you are not able to make eye contact, but this is only in extreme cases.

At NO point, regardless of any possible scenario you think of, is it acceptable to snap your fingers, or whistle at your server to get their attention.  In Canada, this is considered to be one of the rudest behaviors one can display.  In extreme cases, I have seen the server scold a guest, or even ask them to leave after this behavior.  It is also possible the manager will come and speak to you to let you know that this behavior is not tolerated.

Most all pubs and lounges in Canada offer table service, and you will likely be greeted by a server shortly after you sit down.  Most nightclubs in Canada similarly have table service.  However, due to how crowded these venues typically are, it is perfectly acceptable to order from the bartender if you do not want to wait.

Continued Service:  The Quality Check & Beverage Refills

Any restaurant should provide a quality check within a few minutes of receiving your meal.  The server will come back and make sure your meal is as expected.  They will typically also use this time to check and see if you need another beverage or any additional condiments to enjoy your meal.  If something is not correct with your meal, it is certainly ok to let your server know in a polite fashion.  They will be happy to correct any issues.  Unless the issue is serious, most establishments will not give you the item for free, but will usually offer a discount or free item, such as a dessert.  An apology from your server on behalf of the restaurant is also to be expected. 

It is also important to note that if there is a problem with your meal, NOW is the time to say so.  Do not consume the meal and then complain.  Your complaint will be regarded with some suspicion.  If you wait until everyone has finished eating and then complain (even if you did not consume your meal) it makes the server feel stupid, as she does not have an opportunity to fix the problem or provide you with other options as your party likely does not want to wait for another meal to be re-fired.

Most servers will offer you another beverage just before your current one is empty.  If there are more than two people in your party, please order refreshments at the same time!  It is not unreasonable for the server to expect the entire table to reorder beverages if everyone has less than half a glass (or bottle of beer remaining).  If your dining companion orders another beverage, and you have 1/3 of yours remaining, it is considered polite to order a replacement at that time.  Please do not wait until your server returns with your companion’s beverage and then ask for another one yourself.  Your server is busy!  Keeping her running back and forth just for your table, will prevent her from properly servicing her other guests.  Similarly, if you require something during your dining experience, and the server can not get to you because another table is keeping her running like this, you would not be pleased.  Please have courtesy for the other diners.

Bringing Children To Dine

Children.  Always a controversial issue.  Children are welcome in most types of establishments unless the pub or bar has a “no minors” license.  There is the odd pub which technically can allow minors or small children.  This does not mean, however, that it is a good idea to bring them in, unless perhaps there is no where else to dine.  Many people choose to go to pubs and bars because they do not wish to be surrounded by screaming infants, or toddlers running amok around them.  Again, please think of the other diners.

Restaurants that cater to children will often have specialized menus, coloring pages and in some cases toys to keep kids occupied.  These restaurants are often staffed a little more heavily since families with young kids tend to be higher maintenance tables.

However, please be considerate.  Your servers do not wish to spend half an hour cleaning up your table after you leave.  Please do not let your children throw food all over the place.  Do not let them run around the restaurant- it disturbs others, and can endanger your child if they run into servers carrying heavy trays or hot foods.  And for pete’s sake, if your children are misbehaving, shrieking at the top of their lungs or throwing a tantrum, address the issue.  Remove the child from the dining room if you need to.  You do not like it when your children are brats, and neither do complete strangers!

After the meal is complete

When you have completed your meal, your server will collect your empty dishware.  Most restaurants will wait until each diner is finished eating, otherwise it can appear as though they are trying to “rush” the table.

Should you find yourself dining with someone who is nursing their bowl of soup or entrée well after the rest of the party has finished eating, then the server may collect most of the dishes off the table, to free up space and make everyone more comfortable.  This is also a subtle hint to your guest to hurry up, as likely everyone else in your party is probably tired of waiting for them to finish.

During the plate clearing, your server will likely offer you a beverage refill, coffee or dessert.  In a bar or pub setting, it is expected that your party may linger for some time and continue drinking alcoholic beverages.  It is a bit different in a restaurant setting.  Offering you a beverage refill is a courtesy, and one you should feel comfortable to enjoy.  Within reason.  It is not meant to be an invitation for you to occupy your table for another hour.  Your server may actually be waiting for you to finish and pay your bill so she can go home.  If it’s a particularly busy establishment, others may be waiting for your table.  It is also expected that you should verbally thank your server for their efforts around this time.

Paying The Bill and Tipping

Ah, perhaps the most important part.  Yes, TIPPING IS CUSTOMARY.  Most servers in Canada make minimum wage or slightly above.  Depending on where in the country you are visiting, this can be as low as $5 per hour, and is NOT enough to live on.  Servers in Canada are a tip based position.  They do not come to work for the salary – they live on their tips!

It is considered extremely rude to not leave a tip in Canada.  I guarantee you, if you do not tip, your server will definitely comment to his or her coworkers about you.

Certainly, if the service is extraordinarily bad, no tip is required, but this is extreme.  If your meal was cooked inappropriately, or you did not enjoy it, this is NOT an acceptable reason not to tip.  Your server did not cook your meal.  So why punish her?

The absolute minimum tip that is considered in the food & beverage industry in Canada is 10% of the total bill.  There will be arguments amongst industry workers if this means 10% before the taxes or applied or after.  Since taxation rates in Canada vary from 5% to 18% depending on which province you visit, you can make your own judgment call.  If you leave only 10%, it is likely the server will wonder what she did wrong during your visit.  (Or she may just surmise that you are cheap.)  15% is considered a very acceptable and standard tip.  18 – 20% is considered a good tip, and the server will be pleased.  Anything over 20% and you will make your server’s day.

Please keep context in mind.  If you are aware that your table has been high maintenance, or perhaps you were dining with a friend that did not behave in the best manner to your server (and we have ALL been to a restaurant with one of those people), its best to show some additional thanks and tip on the higher end.  If your bill is minimal (say $15 or less) it is customary to leave at least $4 or $5 for a tip, as 10 – 15% is negligible, and you have just occupied a table in your server’s section that she may have been able to make something substantial on.

If you would like a handy pocket guide or cheat sheet of this etiquette guide, here it is:

- Wait to be seated if there is a sign
- Make reservations for parties of 6 or more (unless in a pub or club)
- Please be patient to be greeted
- Do NOT EVER snap fingers or whistle at a server.  Ever.  For anything. Period.
- Alert your servers to issues during their meal quality check
- Try and order extras or refills at the same time as other party members.
- Do not bring children into pubs or clubs unless allowed by law, and only if you have to.
- Clean up after your kids, and keep them under control
- Do not occupy your table for extended periods of time after dining (unless at a pub or club)
- TIP APPROPRIATELY 10 – 20%!

I assure you that if you follow these simple rules, you will have pleasant dining experiences, and will likely get to know some very friendly Canadian servers.  Enjoy your visit to Canada!

USA Debt Drama

Obama Swims in a Sea of Debt

We have all heard a lot about the current debt crisis facing the USA right now. It has become a daily headline. So has all the bickering between the democrats and republicans about how to handle the situation.

A little background information might be in order for some readers. The US is nearing a debt collapse. The amount of debt the US is allowed to hold at any given time is set in law. Currently, by law, the US is allowed to hold $14.3 trillion of debt. With it's current financial situation, the US will reach this debt ceiling by August 2, 2011.

This allows for 3 possible options.

1) The government passes a resolution to allow for an increase to the debt ceiling, allowing the government to borrow more money to keep things status quo,

2) The government drastically cuts spending, and reassigns existing money from other areas of the budget to pay creditors to avoid a default on debt payments

3) The government does neither of the above and defaults on debt payments, (and likely doesn't have enough liquid capital to continue running as is)

Let's examine each of the following options.

In the past, option 1 has always been the most likely course of action. This is by no means the first time that the government has faced the prospect of increasing it's debt ceiling. In fact, in the last few decades, they have actually allowed a debt ceiling increase nearly every year or two. If you look at George W. Bush's administration, the debt ceiling was increased EVERY year he was in office except for 2, going from $5.9 trillion to more than $11 trillion. Bill Clinton actually did a bit better, only raising the ceiling twice in his 8 years in office from $4.9 to $5.9 trillion.

The only difference as to why we have not heard much about this situation in the past, is that the ruling president's political party controlled the house and the senate, practically ensuring the motion for increase passed. Clearly this is not the case this year, as there is a democrat president, and a republican majority in the house. While it is likely both parties will come to an agreement to increase the ceiling prior to the August 2nd deadline, this year there is an added caveat: an increase to the debt ceiling will likely push the American debt ratio to MORE than 100% of GDP. This would be the first time in history where America will essentially owe more than the nation is worth in fiscal terms.

Option 2 would mean that the acting government puts its foot down and does not allow an increase to the allowable amount of debt, essentially forcing it to drastically slash spending on social programs, likely increasing taxes and reassigning funds that have been allocated to future capital projects (ie, roads, libraries etc) to pay off some of the existing debt in the hopes of not hitting the debt ceiling. This is not a pleasant option, as it means the state of the nation will drastically change, most notably on low income and middle class citizens. Social programs will be massively scaled back if not axed all together, and any tax credits or deductions citizens receive will likely be axed.

Option 3 is the most disastrous. This is where the government runs with the status quo until the debt ceiling is reached on August 2nd. At that point, there is no money left to borrow, and all other income is already allocated. This means the government will default on their debts because there is simply no funds to make debt payments left. This has never actually occurred in US history, and what exactly would happen is open to mass speculation. However, over the last year, we have a better indication as this is the scenario that Greece faced last year. The ramifications will be discussed in detail below.

So, the question is which option will the government choose?

I believe the final outcome will be a combination of options 1 and 2. Government representatives WILL increase the debt ceiling prior to the August 2nd date. But, they will also drastically reduce spending (mostly on social programs) and it is likely that there will be some modest tax increases.

Over the past several months, both republicans and democrats have been fighting over what will be cut, by how much and what the tax increases will be and whom will pay them.

The republican position is that only spending cuts will be considered, and tax increases are simply not an option. Democrats maintain that spending cut are needed, but tax increases to the wealthy and large corporations are necessary to add additional funds to replace some of the spending cuts, lest social programs be decimated and devastate the lower class.

John Boehner: Tough Guy

While there has been significant political posturing from Obama, and more so from republican House Speaker John Boehner, eventually they will have to agree to both cuts and taxes. Cuts will probably be more drastic than the democrats want, and small increases to taxes will occur.

The increase to the debt ceiling will calm international markets for the time being, and the spending cuts will reinforce the nation's current credit rating with international agencies like Moody's. However, there will likely be a small slow down in the American economy until a long term fiscal plan can be set out. We have to remember that spending cuts also means that infrastructure projects like road and highway repair will be scrapped, and this will cause layoffs and less disposable income in the economy.

There is, however, always a small chance that democrats and republicans do not come to and agreement, and option 3 occurs - default. It is likely that international markets would take a beating, and every industrialized nation will suffer the fallout. The US is the world's largest economy. The consumerism of 300 million people creates jobs and investment worldwide. China would suffer dramatically since such a large portion of their economy is manufacturing goods exported to North America. Canada, naturally, would suffer considerably since the US is it's largest trading partner. The vast majority of exports from Canada go directly south of the boarder. Additionally, most large European economies would be otherwise affected by harsher scrutiny from ratings agencies like Moody's. After all, if the economic giant the USA is at risk for defaulting on loans, what chance does Germany, France and Britain have when they are also responsible for continuous bailouts to Greece, Ireland, Portugal and possibly Spain and Italy?

Speculation is just that however. But one thing is certain - the current economic situation of the US is not sustainable. US debt has drastically spiked since the Bush administration - presumably largely due to US military operations in the Middle East. I recommend drastic reduction in the operations of the military abroad. Also, closing many of the tax loopholes for large corporations would be a vast source of additional income. US corporate tax law is some of the laxest in the modern world. These corporations would not likely go somewhere else, as the low tax rates are still favourable, but would also force corporations to pay their fair share.

The world can do nothing but wait and see as the clock ticks down to August 2nd.

Subscribe to Thoughts of Rainn

Naheed Nenshi: Poetic Tax Grab

Naheed Nenshi: Paying The Poet

So, here's a little tidbit to outrage the Calgary tax payer.

You may have heard that city council boosted property taxes this year. The funny thing is, council announced a 4.4% tax hike. But guess what? You'll actually be paying an additional 10%.

And it's quite sneaky the way they did it. Here's how:

Each year, city council approves the budget for the next fiscal year. In doing so, council decides what the property tax rate needs to be to create a balanced budget. Through natural inflation and depending on what spending projects are on the books for the next year, this typically includes a tax increase. This is the same for every city in Canada.

Usually, anything more than 4 or 5% increases causes vocal outrage from the public, so council stayed within the "safe zone".

Additionally, the city is responsible for collecting a nominal charge from property taxes and giving it to the Alberta government to pay for province wide education. This creates a situation where the city sometimes has to "guess" what the provincial tax rate will be, since the city's budget is completed before the province's budget. To this effect, city council collects these fees in addition to it's announced tax hikes.

As it turns out this year, council grossly overestimated the amount of money which was needed to pay the province for education. In fact, it collected an additional $42 million from property owners. Roughly $40 for EVERY man, woman and child in the city.

The Alberta government was rather responsible, and told the City of Calgary that the money did not belong to the province, and was not needed for the budget. So, tax payers were expecting to have the money returned on their next property tax assessment.

Not so. Council passed a motion a couple months ago, allowing them to NOT refund the money, and keep it in a separate fund to be used for "capital and infrastructure" projects for the next 30 years.

That's kind of dirty, no? No. What's REALLY dirty, is that this handy little motion that was passed allows the city to do this any year where provincial taxes have been "overestimated" for the next 30 years.

How cleaver! So in addition to the 4.4% tax hike levied on us by the city, we actually paid an additional 6% for the province that was not needed or required, and the city gets to keep it all!

Now the next question would be: how often do we think the city will UNDER estimate the provincial tax rate? My guess is probably never.

Now forgetting all of that, let's look at the most recent bout of stupidity by city council. A Poet Laureate! Naheed Nenshi and council decided that a valuable use of taxpayer dollars would be to hire a full time poet! You know, so that we can have original poetry at hand for special events or city functions.

Clearly, this is a necessary service that the citizens of Calgary cannot live without! And how handy that they now have a $42 million slush fund to pay the piper (ahem... Poet) with.

Subscribe to Thoughts of Rainn

Brian McPherson: Canadian Tire Money Mogul

This week, and Edmonton Man, Brian McPherson fulfilled a 15 year dream to purchase a lawn tractor entirely with Canadian Tire money.

McPherson, 29, had been saving Canadian Tire money for 15 years, since he bought a hockey stick at the iconic Canadian retailer as a teen-ager. At that time, McPherson had received 10 cents in Canadian Tire money for his purchase, and a dream was born.

"I thought it'd be a good idea to save up all the money, and buy what at the time was the most expensive thing in the store, which was a riding lawn mower." said McPherson.

And so save he did. For 15 years, McPherson saved the Canadian Tire money from purchases on gas, household items, and well, anything else one can buy at Canadian Tire.

So a few weeks back, the McPherson family knew they were getting close to hitting their goal, and decided to count their dollars and cents. Sure enough, they had $1053 in Canadian Tire money. They bundled the money and took it to the store in a brief case.

Several local news outlets showed McPherson using his new lawn tractor on his yard. It's not a yard that really needs a lawn tractor, and McPherson does already own a standard push mower. When asked why he didn't choose to buy something else with the money, McPherson thought that would be ridiculous.

"This is one of those things that you set the goal (when you're a kid) and told your friends and family about what you were saving this ridiculous amount of Canadian Tire money for."

The Canadian Tire store manager, Bruce Duvander said he has worked for the company for 20 years, and only ever seen a similar amount of money redeemed once before.

_____________

_____________

Canadian Tire Money Fun Facts:

- Originally introduced in 1958

- The man's face on the front of the notes are a fictional character named "Sandy McTire"

- Over the last 50 years, there have been at least 19 different denominations of Canadian Tire money in circulation. Several of the denominations have been discontinued.

- Was at one time considered a form of legal tender for users of the Canadian E-Bay website, if the seller was willing to accept it.

- In 2004, several customers using an ATM machine at a CIBC branch in Moncton, New Brunswick were dispensed no less than 11 bills of Canadian Tire money instead of actual currency. The bank compensated the customers accordingly.

- In the mid 1990's, a German man was caught with $11,000,000 of counterfeit Canadian Tire money. The fakes were recovered before he was able to fly to Canada to redeem them.

Subscribe to Thoughts of Rainn

Fish Pedicures Banned By BC Health Authority

The BC Health Authority has done an apparent about-face on a decision it made last year, to allow spa owner Dixie Simpson to offer "fish pedicures".

Fish pedicures are a popular procedure in which clients place their feet in pools of water containing Garra Rufa rish. The fish are similar in size to minnows. They do not have teeth, but gulp up dead skin cells off the customer's feet.

The practise was first popularized in Turkey, as a means of alleviating the symptoms of psoriasis and eczema. In more recent years, it has become a popular feature in spas world wide, including France, Japan and the UK.

Dixie Simpson first began offering the service in her spa in Duncan, BC last year. She says she contacted the health authority to ensure everything was above board. The health authority gave her the go ahead.

But, in the last few weeks, the BC Health Authority has changed their mind, stating that the practise is not sanitary, despite the fact that Dixie uses UV filtration systems. The health authority feels there are potential chances for bacterial infections to be passed on from one customer to another, and so, they have since classified the Garra Rufa fish as "tools" of the spa owner. Under BC law, any "tools" used in a spa must be sterilized between customers.

Obviously, since they are live fish, it is impossible to sterilize them without killing them.

Dixie says that she will have no choice but to shut down if she can't use her fish for foot therapy.

The actual real risk is patients is low if not negligible. Why not just insist that the spa operators have customers read and sign a waiver stating the risks and reducing the liability of the spa owner?

Frankly, if your not allowed to dip your feet in a pool with harmless fish that can be found in spas around the world, one has to question the amount of government control being exorcised.

4G Phone? That's What YOU Think.

Think that new 4G smart phone you just bought for an exorbitant amount of money is the latest and greatest in download speeds? You're dead wrong.

For the last few months Sprint, Verizon & T-Mobile has been advertising the power of 4G speed on their networks as the new breakthrough in mobile technology. Telus also followed suit here in Canada, and today it was leaked that Bell Mobility will jump on the 4G advertising bandwagon.

But does anyone really know what the difference is between 3G and 4G connectivity speeds? Apparently there isn't one.

The International Telecommunications Union initially defined 4G as a reference to Long Term Evolution mobile standards (LTE for short). LTE meant a new version of wireless technology that could potentially offer speeds of 100 Mbps. So far, no commercial wireless network on the planet has deployed such a technology. And, as far as I know, no wireless communications company has even managed to develop such a technology that would work in a stable fashion on a consumer level.

The initial definition of LTE (100 Mbps) is considerably faster than the HSPA networks that are currently used by Bell, Telus & Rogers. Their HSPA networks generally tops out at 7.2 Mbps. Even improved HSPA networks known as HSPA+ only reach top speeds of 21 Mbps.

So if Bell, Telus & Rogers all top out at 7.2 Mbps, how can they possibly call themselves 4G?

In December, the International Telecommunications Union have changed the criteria or definition of 3G and 4G. Now 100 Mbps speed is no longer a definition of 4G. 4G is now considered any technology that shows a "substantial level of improvement in performance and capabilities" over existing 3G networks.

As an example, Bell Mobility now refers to 3G as being any speeds slower than 3Mbps. And, since Bell's network can theoretically offer speeds up to 7.2 Mbps, (which IS a significant improvement over 3Mbps) presto! Bell is now a 4G network!

So the interesting part to watch for is how this will play out in the long term. Since all the 3G phones currently on the Bell and Telus network should theoretically be able to use the max network speed of 7.2Mbps (which can be less depending on location or network traffic), will Bell issue "4G" phones that operate in the same way so that everyone still has a phone that works at the same speed, (which would allow them to simply market their entire network as the latest and greatest 4G network) or will they attempt to choke bandwidth to keep existing 3G phones slower to encourage customers to upgrade to new 4G marketed handsets?

There is an old saying "Caveat Emptor". Or in English "let the buyer beware". I don't think there is any other product that this warning is most suited for than Telecomm Services.

London Bridge is Falling Down

Well, not yet anyway.

Thousands of students took to the streets of London today to protest austerity measures enacted by the British Parliament, which will see tuition caps raised from approximately 4,700 pounds a year to nearly 14,000. In other words, tuition will be tripled.

The increase alone would be enough to incite riots, but one particular sore spot is the Coalition Government is currently made up of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. In fact, the deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat, actually signed a pre-election pledge to oppose any tuition hikes.

The Liberal Democrats are typically a popular political party with students, as they have more progressive societal views and tend to lean more heavily for social programs and more universal education.

Today, students made public their thoughts on the government's decision. Sit ins and demonstrations were held across the nation, and central London was flooded with students waving banners, beating on drums and chanting.

The protests turned into riots in some part of the city. Small groups of protesters began throwing flares and paint bombs, tearing down police barricades and scuffling with officers. At one point Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles car was being punched and kicked as they tried to get to a social engagement.

But lets look at the logistics of the British Government's plan. I'm not sure I quite understand it myself.

To be fair, Britain is actually the second UK country to massively increase tuition this year. A few weeks back, Ireland also tripled the cost of post secondary education, as part of their mandated requirements to receive their bailout package from the EU. Harsh to be sure, but when the country is on the verge of veritable insolvency, harsh measures are required.

As for the UK, one of two things has occurred. Either the nation is also on the verge of bankruptcy, and has just done a much better job of keeping it quiet, or the Coalition government has just suffered a moment of colossal stupidity.

If the former is true, then the UK obviously has no intentions on asking the EU for a bailout, or we would have heard about it long before now. I don't think this is a very likely scenario. Which leaves us with, drum roll please, the latter.

Granted I am not an economist. But from what I remember from my business studies, if the economy is in retreat, the best way to correct the problem is to increase the median salary of the nation. Increasing the median salary means people are making more money and also spending more. It also encourages investment and increases the size of income tax contributions directly to federal coffers.

Sounds simple, right?

So what is the best way to increase median salary? Typically this is done by creating more highly trained specialists (who automatically command large salaries) and by increasing the number of entrepreneurs (who in turn pay more taxes and hire lower skilled labor).

And what is the best and easiest way of creating more highly trained specialists and entrepreneurs? Well, by making post secondary education more accessible of course!

So, since the government has chosen the opposite of the above example, what is likely the long term outcome?

Every 10% increase in tuition means less and less people can afford to access education. Since the tuition will go up nearly 300%, this means vastly less people will get the education they need. This provides the government a very small window of time to find other ways to save money and reverse the tuition rates. If the government fails to reverse the tuition costs, within 5 - 10 years, Britain will have a much higher unskilled workforce (who naturally make less money) and a much smaller skilled workforce. Thus creating a downward spiral in their economy for decades to come.

And of course, there is the potential long term damage done by continuing rioting.

The eyes of the world are on the British government now. I urge them to use this as only a temporary measure and come to their senses soon.

WikiLeaks Ally Takes Down Visa, Mastercard

An organization calling itself "Anonymous" has publicly sided with WikiLeaks, and claimed responsibility for a cyberattack on both Visa and Mastercard today.

Both sites in Canada and the US were inaccessible for most of the day.

The attack is supposed to be a form of retribution for both Visa and Mastercard cutting off service with WikiLeaks, which effectively cut off donations to the controversial website.

Mastercard Canada spokesmen have said that the attack has not affected any credit card transactions.

Anonymous has called the attacks "Operation Payback". Early wednesday, Anonymous led media outlets to a video posted on YouTube which explained the objectives of the attacks.

Anonymous released a statement in which they said: "While we don't have much of an affiliation with WikiLeaks, we fight for the same reasons. We want transparency and we counter censorship... This is why we intend to utilize our resources to raise awareness, attack those against, and support those who are helping lead our world to freedom and democracy."

The US government has put intense pressure on both the business community and political world to condemn and cut ties with WikiLeaks. Earlier this week, Amazon.com cut ties with WikiLeaks, which was using Amazon.com's servers, due to political pressure from Washington to do so.

Washington has also put pressure on France to shut down mirror websites that are hosting WikiLeaks information in the stead of WikiLeaks own webpages being shut down. Currently the French government has been stalled by their court system while trying to comply.

WikiLeaks first garnered attention in the spring when it posted a US military video which showed US troops in Iraq shooting down two unarmed Reuters journalists. The video was apparently taken by US army helicopters.

Since that video, WikiLeaks has published nearly half a million classified US documents from Iraq and Afghanistan. WikiLeaks feels the public has a basic right to know what their Military and Governments are doing.

I understand that governments have a right to secrecy when it comes to armed forces potentially being in danger, and can understand why the US has reservations to seeing these documents in the public. However, I do feel the public has the right to know if their governments or military forces are doing unsavory things, intentional or not. This includes incidents of Friendly Fire, such as the Reuters journalists or other hidden agendas that may infringe on anyone's basic human rights or freedoms.

Censorship is a dangerous concept, and governments would do well to remember that one way or another in some point in time, the truth ALWAYS comes out.

Shaw Cable: The Grinch Who Made Christmas More Expensive

Shaw's Yule Log: Is it worth your money?

Shaw Cable announced that their popular Yule Log broadcast, which has been a free service every December since 1986, will now cost you 99 cents for every two hours of enjoyment.

The video, which was made in 1985, showed a crackling fire on a looping broadcast. Occasionally an arm would reach towards the fireplace and add another log to the fire.

Each year, many families who don't have their own fireplace would enjoy the video as part of their holiday celebrations. It used to air on basic cable for all Shaw Cable subscribers.

Shaw has decided to move the video to their Video On Demand Service (which also means basic cable subscribers who don't have a digital cable box will not be able to purchase the service) and charge 99 cents for a 1 hour and 55 minute broadcast. Shaw claims revenue raised by the video will be donated to charity.

Their are a few problems with this in my opinion. Firstly, Shaw Cable has so far not responded to calls from the media for interviews regarding their decision, and as of yet, there has been no clarification on how much of the revenue will be donated to charity.

Also, lower income families who do not have expansive cable packages will no longer have the opportunity to get the service at all.

The biggest issue in my opinion is Shaw's decision to charge 99 cents for each play of the video. The free service on TV showed the video as a continuous loop for the entire month of December. Even when you purchase a regular movie or show on Video on Demand, you are allowed to play the film as much as you want for a 24 hour period. So why charge for every play of the Yule Log, rather than a single charge for a 24 hour period?

If you really want to get down to the nitty gritty, lets remember that Shaw Cable is a billion dollar company, who gets to write off charity donations. I think Shaw can afford to reach into their own pockets for a holiday donation, rather than siphon it off from their consumers.

Bah Humbug to Shaw Cable.