justcaws.com

Those protesting against internet piracy and copyright laws must remember that protecting individuals who create new materials spurs innovation and creativity. The internet and countless other inventions and innovations occur most often in countries that reward and protect those who come first.

It is by no accident that countries like the U.S. who aggressively enforce their strict anti-piracy and patent laws, are world leaders in innovation. While countries like China lead the world in copy cat production because of weak patent enforcement.

Obviously the current versions of SOPA and PIPA have to be tweaked, but it is wrong to claim that they have no place in protecting creators in cyber space.

Coming up with a fair and balanced approach of how to do this on the internet may take time. But it should not include the abandoning of any piracy regulation. That would be an outdated response that pushes us back not forward.

American media is sure trying to convince people that there is a GOP nomination race when there really isn’t. The eventual coronation of Mitt Romney is a foregone conclusion, but the media is hungry for any type of story that will draw this out and make the case that the race is compelling.

Don’t get sucked in – when all is said is done – the hard line tea party crowd will hold their nose and endorse Romney because their distaste for him pales in comparison to their dread of another four years of Obama. So expect Republicans to milk this for all they can and then fall behind their man Romney.

If you want your kids to go to school with all of society – public schools are slowly no longer serving that need. Publicly funded speciality schools and programs are popping up everywhere and are breaking the system into fragments.

When public money dries up for these programs, and it will. The case for public education will be lost since the benefit of gaining perspective from being educated with children of all backgrounds will be gone. Chartered schools will spring up with cash strapped governments more than happy to reduce their education funding.

The loss of a strong public education system that has been a cornerstone of a progressive Ontario would be a shame. The irony is that it is being brought about by people wanting exclusivity in their public education system, but who are unable to afford the private option. This same demographic will be hurt the most – when these public programs get cut and parents come crawling back to a universal public system that many stakeholders have since abandoned.

With RIM’s stock continuing to tank – the blackberry maker continues to be a lightening rod for business discussion and speculation.

What has been missing from the chatter is what makes RIM different from most businesses that are takeover targets.

Governments and corporations around the world continue to use blackberry as their mobile devices. The amount of sensitive data that transmits through RIM is enormous. The high level encryption and security standards continue to be RIM’s competitive advantage in holding its enterprise customer base – recent service interruptions notwithstanding .

If another company or individual tried to acquire RIM, the government of Canada would be under immense pressure to scrutinise the deal in order to ensure international security risks were addressed.

Whether a deal could or would ever be approved is mired in the certainty of uncertainty. This may be why no takeover attempt has been made to this point – even though it seems ripe for the taking. No company is going to bother making such a move if it knows it has no hope of getting government approval.

If anyone was looking to takeover or control RIM it could be the Canadian government. Yes, I know that may sound absurd, but if a state government such as the U.S. were concerned that RIM was being managed in such a way that could potentially lead to sensitive data transfers being compromised, it could push Canadian authorities to heavily regulate or even control RIM.

This of course is predicated upon RIM
remaining the gold standard for secure mobile communication. If this is compromised or duplicated then all bets are off. The talk and rumours surrounding RIM will disappear – along likely with RIM itself.

So what does the future of RIM hold. I suspect it will remain in its current form for quite sometime as long as its leading position in data encryption remains secure. There seems to be no marketing geniuses over there so it all comes down to the product.

It is for this reason I would be reluctant to throw Co-Ceo Mike Lazzaridis aside in any management shake up. He is the man that holds all the keys in keeping RIM secure and possibly coming up with anything new.

The Supreme Courts approval of safe injection sites has been cheered by supporters of victims of drug abuse. While I certainly support this decision (it saves lives) it should be remembered that this program is a band-aid solution,

The program is better than doing nothing however – and that is why I believe the Supreme Court allows it to continue. What I was hoping to hear is more from the federal government of what they would do to replace safe – injections sites. Drug prevention is fine, but what initiatives are in place to help current drug users overcome their addiction.

Reducing drug overdoses and disease
are needed, but I believe there would be less opposition to these programs popping up across the country if they promoted their success rates of eventually getting people off drugs. It is hard to embrace a program that is seen by some as allowing people to perpetually tread water rather than teaching them how to swim to shore.

Classic example of this comes from the ban Wal-Mart crowd. Many of the people who would ban Wal-mart to protect jobs, never shop there. Yet they would deprive low-income families in their community from benefiting from the low-cost products made available.

When it comes to solutions we have seen what works. Strong universal public systems (health and education) that provide an equality of opportunity have proven to be effective. Welfare programs that try and correct inequity have not.

Individuals with mental illness and substance abuse issues are a top public health concern. Economic solutions, however do not work with this group because policy success here depends on people acting in a rational manner. While those suffering need support, it needs to come from the healthcare system. Yes more resources will be needed but a compassionate society needs to take care of people who can’t take care of themselves.

Understanding the plight of the sane and sober who live in poverty through no fault of their own need is a first step. Only then can we look at developing targeted public policy for poverty reduction.

But let’s not confuse the working poor with someone with a drug or mental condition. Both groups suffer, but the solutions to prevent their situation and ultimately get them to overcome are very different.

Some possible solutions to follow.

No need for a great introspection into why the Ontario Tories lost the election. You can’t expect voters to take you seriously when you tell them that you will spend as much as the Liberals, cut taxes but that you worry about rising debt levels.

It is no wonder the party was not endorsed by traditional backers like the Toronto Sun or the Globe and Mail.

A policy of lowering revenue while increasing spending is a fiscal disaster waiting to happen. Voters from both sides of the political spectrum quickly assessed that this political math won’t add up.

Hey Guelph City Hall would you mind storing my daughter’s soiled diapers for an extra week?

Apparently you believe it’s not too much of an inconvenience to parents of young children. Maybe it’s time you did your part for the environment.

Picking up smelly trash once a week use to be a basic service you could count on your local municipality to do. No longer here in Guelph.

This past month the city cut back the collection of many items including diapers and sanitary products to every other week from the regular weekly collection.

This might be understandable if the city was in a budget hole or the tax base was eroding. Not so here in Guelph. Budgets are increasing each year along with our perennial property tax hike.

The problem lies in this city not making their core services a funding priority. Environmental rebate programs and recycling centres can have a place for city that wants to label itself “Green”. But they can’t be funded at the expense of core services.

Without an understanding of what its priorities should be – I guess I should not be surprised when the city announces funding for an advanced toilet training pilot program for newborns.

Potty humour aside – getting it wrong happens. But on this issue the city is demonstrating irresponsibility and contempt for many Guelph residents.

The Ontario Liberals plan to to provide employers with a tax credit of up to $10,000, in return for hiring skilled, recent immigrants is a divisive job creation scheme. Governments should create across the board tax and regulatory reforms that will allow business to flourish and create economic prosperity for all. 

No one disputes that skilled immigrants should be in jobs they are qualified to do. Nobody wants a  skilled Doctor driving a taxi cab. But this problem is caused more by regulatory obstacles than a lack of will by employers to hire qualified individuals.

Criticize this plan and Liberals will label you anti-immigrant. Fortunately, I believe many independent voters won’t fall for this obvious trap. They will see this plan for what it is – another misguided Dalton job creation scheme that pits winners vs. losers.  A change of leadership is needed in this province that understands that you listen to the needs of everyone and provide economic opportunity for all.

Yes, I know I am not shy about sharing my beefs with City Hall, but I also like to offer and discuss possible solutions. Yes, I am against the City of Guelph giving people tax funded rebates to replace their large tank toilets.  My main complaint is that I don’t believe people are or should be motivated by a city rebate to throw their old toilet into the landfill. Motivation should come from the desire to reduce their water consumption to help out the environment and their wallet.   Much to wife’s chagrin, I will tell you that we have an old, giant tank toilet.  Years ago, my water guilt took over and I placed a large inflated water bag in the tank to greatly reduce the amount of water required for the toilet to properly operate.  

If the City is hell bent on spending money on conservation initiatives it would seem providing a free water tank displacement bag would be a much cheaper way of reducing water use. It also will stop perfectly good toilets from being needlessly thrown into landfills.

Recently, I tweeted about my displeasure that my child’s diapers are now going to be picked up once every two weeks starting in September 2011. This is unacceptable. I understand the desire from the City to avoid diapers and other sanitary products from “contaminating” the compost found in green bags. But leaving residents to hold soiled diapers for two weeks is unfair. If you think I am whiner on this – then you hold on to my diaper bags during the heat of the summer. All this plan is going to do is cause more illegal dumping that nobody wants.

If sanitary products can be bagged separately from bio-degradable waste at source, surely the garbage trucks could be fitted to accommodate.  Otherwise weekly clear pick up outside the winter months will be required.  

Yes, my accommodation could cost more, but the City could use the money saved from scrapping its rebate program.  I don’t have all the answers, but either does City Hall, so let’s hear some of your cost effective solutions.

Remember, it takes engaged citizens to make a city great.    

Glad to see Warren Buffett step up with his recent comments.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-15/buffett-urges-congress-to-raise-taxes-on-coddled-billionaires.html.

While I do believe in tax cuts directed to the middle class here in Canada, the tax system in my birth country has become completely out of whack.

It is heartening to see such a prominent business leader clearly explain using his own tax situation as an example of how disproportionate the American tax burden has become.

Don’t throw me in with the Robin Hood tax the rich crowd either though. I believe in a balanced,
progressive approach, where sufficient funds are raised for the good of society while still providing incentive for wealth accumulation.

Striking that balance requires trust. It is lost when tax dollars are not spent in a judicious manner and are directed toward items that are no longer seen by the majority as being in the public good. A lack of trust on behalf of the electorate that money will be spent wisely causes a natural knee jerk reaction to cut taxes.

What voters need to do is look beyond the rhetoric and see what programs they want and what they are willing to spend to run them. Those jurisdictions that have spent beyond their means and accumulated debt, most also factor repayment in their equation.

As Canadians we shouldn’t be too smug about our fiscal situation compared to the U.S.. Ours is certainly better at the moment. But at least the U.S. is finally starting to have an adult conversation about what they want to pay for and how much they are willing to spend. 2012 should be an election of significant consequence in America’s future.

When was the last time we had one of those in Canada?

While playing with my two boys recently, I realized why the U.S. elects a national Republican Government more often than not.  When my youngest doesn’t get his way playing in the backyard he throws a fit and holds up the game until his older brother or I cave in and he gets his way.  Usually, I will just tell him ”tough” and end the game. But sometimes I must admit due to the enjoyment of playing the game and the time it can take to set up, the desire for peace wins out over justice. Unfortunately, caving only emboldens my five year old to choose chaos over compromise.

I notice this same approach seems to work for the Republican party. If it doesn’t get its way and win power, they go into full suck mode and will go against any move that might make the governing Democrats look good. Even if that means going against what is in the best interest of the country. That is of no concern to them.  The only thing that does matter is getting back in power. If that means following  their scorched earth playbook to the end – so be it.

Look at this debt crisis – the Democrats under Obama – put entitlement spending on the block,  and came off their position for the good of the country.  The Republicans wouldn’t even budge on tax reform to close loopholes in a tax system that all parties agree, is out dated, unfair, and inefficient. It is clear they wanted no deal – they wanted Rome to burn.  Now with the S&P downgrade – its burning baby.  Republicans are like the back -up quarterback who is thrilled to watch his team’s offense tank under the first stringer, hoping it gets him off the bench.  

It pains me to paint all Republicans with this negative brush, but I am still waiting for a sane member of that party to break ranks for the good of their country.  I respect discipline, but destructive stubbornness is a whole other matter.  Every prudent observer has urged that a balanced approach is needed for the U.S. to solve its fiscal mess.  The tax levels in that country are low – really low. The United States is one of the least-taxed countries in the developed world. They pay much lower taxes than any other G7 country. You don’t have to give up your Conservative principles to see that balance has been lost. You do however have to believe that government still plays an important role in a democractic, progressive society.

Now the G.O.P. has made a scene and stopped the game and everyone is taking notice.  But don’t expect Republicans to be punished in 2012. Most of the American public sees their nonsense for what it is, but lacks the will to punish them because they want to get back to playing the”game” of getting the economy back on track. That means putting the Democrats where they usually sit as the as the reasonable opposition who when push comes to shove will do what is best for the country.

It isn’t the fair thing to do, but unless the American public makes a sharp left turn ideologically – it is how the U.S. may eventually move forward from this mess.

A system of checks and balances only works with reasonable elected officials who have the country’s best interest at heart. If that has now become an antiquated notion, than so are two year election cycles.

One of the reasons property taxes in Guelph keep going up at alarming rates is that City staff are never going to recommend to Council that they can do more for less. It’s in their self interest to ask Council for department budget increases for more staff and resources. Since they are full-time experts and handle the day to day management of their programs – part-time City Council members usually go along with their requests. It’s tough to go against what City Staff recommends because the choice is usually presented to Council in a very one sided manner where you would be labelled uninformed if you dared to go against the “experts” wishes.

GREGORY CAWSEY

As I did my federal taxes this past week, I was happy to see a modest decline in my taxes this past year.

The ‘Harper hundred’ given every month for each of my boys under six has helped — even though it is taxable — and the fitness credit was of some benefit.

Of course this little tax relief at the federal level is more than eaten at the local level, which has been the case for sometime now no matter what party is in office.

Lately, my federal taxes continue to go down, the provincial taxes stay the same and my municipal taxes keep going up. No wonder my issue is with the level of government that keeps taking more of my money.

Now let me say I’m not one of these ultra right- wing zealots who scream every time a local politician spends more of their money. I am well aware of the downloading of services that the municipality now needs to pay for. I also believe in some income redistribution to meet city goals for the greater good.

But with that also comes the expectation that I want to see my elected officials being cognizant that they have to spend within their means.

I’m not sure if that has been the case here locally, but that’s the great thing about living here in Guelph. I don’t need to feel guilty if I’m not doing enough for the environment or contributing enough to community-based social services. All I have to do is remind myself that I pay Guelph property taxes and reflect on how much I have given and will continue to give.

Debating the merits of where our property tax dollar goes however, is not my current focus of concern.

What bugs me is the new rationalization for the annual property tax increase — that it has to be raised to keep up with inflation.

I heard this from the mayor of Toronto, David Miller, who wrongly indicated there would be no property tax increases in that city, only a cost of living increase.

I have heard that same argument given here, but the last time I checked, the annual cost of living has been running much lower than annual property tax increases.

What makes things worse is that every time they reassess my property it goes up in value, so I am getting hammered on both ends of this calculation.

I’m sure my situation isn’t unique. In fact, I haven’t heard of anyone who has had their home reassessed at a lower price.

So if the tax pie keeps getting bigger each year, why the annual tax hikes at a greater rate than inflation?

Some say it’s needed to pay for all of the city’s growth, but growth if managed properly should pay for itself.

So the only possible conclusions that can be drawn are that our local politicians have managed our city’s rapid growth poorly or they are unable to say no when it comes to increased spending.

My guess is that it has been a combination of the two.

But before we look to criticize our local government, we do need to look in the mirror.

Voter turnout and media attention is greatest for a federal election and lowest for municipal. Yet, the issues that will affect us most in our day-to -day lives are decided at our local city hall. If we don’t take our local politics more seriously and urge each other to get involved, then the branch of government that is growing in importance and taxing us more and more suffers.

Whether it is on Parliament Hill or your local city hall — the best thing and the worst thing about democracy is that people get what they deserve.

I am hopeful the recent shootings in Tucson, Arizona will generate a ground swell of support for increased restrictions on the use of assault weapons in the U.S. where I was born. While I could easily go along with a complete ban of all guns – I know politically that will never happen. Too many argue that law-abiding citizens have the “right” to own a gun. While I do not agree with this viewpoint, I can and do respect the position. If people want to use guns for sport or believe they must carry a weapon for the protection of themselves or their families – I get that.

What I don’t get, is the opposition to reasonable limits placed on easy access to guns – specifically automatic weapons. No matter where you fall on the political spectrum surely we can find common ground in keeping guns and automatic weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill. The shooter in Tucson was kicked out of College and needed a mental health clearance to get back in. Yet he can go to a Sportsman Warehouse and buy a semi-automatic Glock 19 handgun with ease. Does the right of an American to own a gun supersede the right to an education? The answer is no, but a background check system full of loopholes and an ineffective database have made access to dangerous weapons all too easy for the mentally ill.

To join the U.S. Army you need to go through an exhaustive process that the Tucson killer did not pass. I would like a similar process that includes a condition of mental health, before any civilian is cleared to carry any assault weapon. Of course, you may question any civilian’s sanity who wants to carry an Uzi. In all seriousness, rather than focusing on banning guns we need to strengthen the requirements of ownership.

Gun control measures have been muted by the gun lobby who oppose any restrictions that interfere with their right to bear arms. Democracies, however, place restrictions on behaviour all the time for the safety and well being of society. Illegal drugs are a perfect example where we have laws in place to restrict a dangerous product from being used by otherwise law-abiding citizens. We also don’t hand out driver’s liscences to those who pass a background check – we test for competence.

For me, I see the pro-gun crowd and the pro-pot activists as one in the same. While they probably would not have each other as facebook friends, they do share very similar libertarian beliefs. They both want the “state” to leave them alone and not interfere with what they believe are their inalienable right to their product. It’s the role of the moderate and rationale majority to keep these two groups in check. In the U.S., one has to wonder – where are those people who pursue efforts for the common good?

Yes, I have heard the argument that increased gun control laws won’t have any impact because guns are readily available on the “street”. That maybe true, but that doesn’t mean society should allow easy, legal access to a dangerous product. We don’t do it for illegal drugs such as cocaine – so how is it perfectly legal to sell semi-automatic weapons to anyone walking off the street? Keep in mind also, that the recent high profile multiple gun murders in the U.S. (Tucson, Virginia Tech) are ones where the killer(s) didn’t get their guns and ammo on the street, but at legitimate retail outlets.

It is true that no matter what restrictions you place on weapons that people can never be completely safe from unbalanced individuals bent on killing their fellow man. The recent tragic incident of a Toronto police officer who was killed by a mentally ill man driving a snow plough proves this. But at least in this case his rage only caused the loss of one courageous soul and not multiple victims. Few things bring greater carnage than a crazed killer with an automatic weapon spraying rounds of ammo into a crowded area.

I love my country of birth. But its gun culture and a lack of political will to enact common sense regulation to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill undermine its standing in the eyes of the world.

It also makes me very glad that I have dual citizenship and can call Canada my home.

I have never hidden the fact in past posts and comments that I am big supporter and admirer of U.S. President Barack Obama.

I find him an inspirational figure whose politics and viewpoints are for the most part in line with my own.

Many might find that surprising since in Canada I consider myself a Conservative (in Ontario anyway) and tend to hold many right of centre views. People who have lived in the States or follow its politics are not surprised however.

The reason is that the political spectrum in the U.S. is much further shifted to the right than in Canada. Or Canada is shifted more to the left. Take your pick.
On major issues from healthcare to gun control there is major difference to where the middle ground falls in these two countries.

This reality makes it perfectly understandable for a person to be a viewed as a right-wing Conservative in Canada and a bleeding heart liberal in the U.S..

Reading and hearing from far too many liberals that Obama has turned his back on his party and that he hasn’t done enough while in power.  So let’s look at some of his notable accomplishments:

• Appointed two moderate women to the U.S. Supreme Court
• Passed Health-Care Reform
• Set up New Banking Reform and Consumer Protection
• Repeal of Military’s Don’t ask Don’t Tell

Some president’s haven’t done as much in eight years as Obama has done in two. Liberals may have expected more and young people new to politics will be dissapointed with the concept of compromise, but Obama has made great progress.  Democrats can scream at him all they want for making a deal to extend tax-cuts for the rich, but it was a wise move for his long-term political survival.  What his party needs to do now is stand with their leader and stop the Democratic practice of eating one of their own.  

Afghanistan is not going to be this President’s Vietnam.  The cold, political reality is that  it would be economic suicide to scale back the U.S. war machine and send troops home for them to join the back of the unemployment line.  The war effort among other things, is a stimulus program.  But this one is funded by a blank cheque signed by the political right.   

The key issue as always is the economy, and yes you would be stupid to think otherwise. Retaining the White House during this economic mess is going to take one hell of political sell job, but Obama after early stumbles is starting to get his legs under him again.  The recent tax-deal was proof of that and Democrats would be wise to get behind a President whose political instincts are getting sharper by the day.

Obama will get his second-term even with an election campaign that is going to be all about the deficit and restoring America’s place in the world economy.  How will it happen?

The economy will show modest improvement during the next two years and Obama’s credibility will rise with it.  Whoever his opponent will be won’t have the clout or the experience to stop a promised movement and a following that wants to see their movie all the way to the end.  

I didn’t bet against Obama early on in the Democratic primaries and I am not about to go against him now. He’s been counted out before, but his political instincts, timing and charisma will see him through again.