Walk a Kb or Two in my Moccasins- Nobody 'splained it to me like that!

Simple answers to Complex Questions and Complex Answers to Simple Questions. In real life, I'm a Greater-Toronto (Canada) Realtor with RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Ltd, Brokerage. I first joined RE/MAX in 1983 and was first Registered to Trade in Real Estate in Ontario in 1974. Formerly known as "Two-Finger Ramblings of a Forensic Acuitant turned Community Synthesizer"

My Photo
Name:

- Realtor (2nd or 3rd best you'll likely run into)
- Philosopher King of Real Estate Business in Ontario (self-assessed)
- Likes Public Policy & Governance Discussions
- Likes discussion on being an "Attestant" and First-Century Ecclesias(aka 'primitive congregations)

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Confronting the Truth (that we don't know, we don't know)

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Restoring a "Century Home" called Canada":

I've read your campaign literature for the LNC by-electicion(sic), and website, and still have no idea what you're talking about.Why not put your ideas in a simple form for the non-political science major? ie. the vast majority of votes.

Perhaps s/he is right. If s/he indeed read my material and cannot understand where I'm coming from and why, then it is my poor communication skills that have left him/her in the dark.

Perhaps s/he's afraid to say what many others are thinking?
-Mr Ede, I know you know something that I don't know, but I don't get it!!

Or it is because s/he belongs to a "generation lost in space" (Bye, Bye, American Pie song lyric) that does not have the grounding in history, civics, and political-economics to know the points I am addressing.

I've written many times on nescience, a word that means 'no knowledge'. In the past I've preferred to use "nescience" in place of "ignorance" because of the negative connotation that accompanies the later.

But perhaps I'm being too nice, too non-confrontational, too generous. Ignorance involves "ignoring" i.e. purposefully not paying attention, not being bothered to dig in, not being involved or committed or interested.

My experience in London (reputedly the statistical quintessence of Canada for test-marketing purposes) during the London North Centre by-election shows me beyond a doubt that Canadians (as represented by Londoners) are NOT engaged in civics, economics or public policy.

I'd hoped that this micro-election - no leaders' tours, no leaders' debates, no national advertising campaigns - could be about the 7 candidates on the ballot, who they were and what they represent. The party platforms could be trotted out if a question beyond the ken of an individual was posed, but surely each of the 7 had his/her own opinions, visions of Canada and its destiny, solutions to its problems at home and abroad.

But instead the candidates were asked about specific policies, programs or government funding priorities that one MP could never be able to solve or correct. Child poverty, funding for colleges and universities, clean water for cities, homelessness, more $$ for amelioration of this disadvantaged group or that program that was created to "solve" another group or regional problem.

We Canadians are only politically-engaged in getting something more from government (preferably with some other person/group/corporation paying for it, natch) ... and we're now starting our generation of Canadians with that mindset.

So, in answer to Mr/Ms anonymous' request ... if my campaign had accomplished what I'd hoped ... had engaged candidates and voters in discussing my 11 foundational points we might have had discussion on

1) Canada- who owns it? Who is the Big Boss? Legally the Crown owns Canada. Legally the Government is only accountable to the Crown (elections are just about fooling the people one more time on this point).
Sadly HRH is not hands-on much anymore and I wouldn't dare suggest that Ms CBC#2 GovGen be given control of the Constitutional veto her office holds. Also sadly the Senate has been de-legitimized by the House (why would they want competition, esp a House with superior constitutional position and power). So the PMO/PCO is now thought of as the Crown. Opposite of the original intention. The human beings controlling the PMO cannot be trusted to be accountable only to themselves - absolute power corrupts absolutely ...

We must transfer the "title" of Crown to the citizens of Canada. Eventually in writing but now, starting today in our attitude and participation.

2)Canadians act like 'subjects of the Crown' not owners. Like tenants crying for the Landlord to fix a dripping tap. We'd be crazy to give Canada to these subject/tenants. They'll destroy the place faster than a government housing complex gets destroyed.
We must restore old fashioned values in Canadians and demand the same from newcomers.
Suggestion -let the North American Autochthonous Peoples 10 Commandments be our Credo

Remain close to the Great Spirit.
Show Great respect for your fellow beings.
Give assistance and kindness wherever needed.
Be truthful and honest at all times.
Do what you know to be right.
Look after the well-being of mind and body.
Treat the Earth and all that dwell thereon with respect.
Take full responsibility for your actions.
Dedicate a share of your efforts to the greater good.
Work together for the benefit of all mankind.
version 2
version 3

Why are we 10+3+31 million solitudes warring & bickering in the bosom of a single state. because we stay conquered easier in small groups and we have no common thread of morality or ethics to "manage back to"

3) What is the best way to include the 603 First Nations/Indian Act Bands in Canada?
-as territories like Nunavut?
-Ad Hoc band/by band/ nation/by nation? there's a mess if you ever wanted to create one!
-settling with individuals or with the Band Council?
-settling with the 1924-established (corrupt) Band Councils or with the traditional Chiefs? (this is what Caledonia is ACTUALLY about)

4)Canada's provinces are blatantly unequal - to even-out the inequality, make some more.
Make them more equal - at least in population or wealth or size or something, not like now.

Governing Canada is about controlling the tax money and all the tax money is in the Income Tax - only provinces (and the Feds) have the income tax. Cities and regions NEED the income tax that THEIR local people furnish, make cities & regions new provinces (or territories if you want)

Allow the GTA/Toronto to be the first. Celebrate regional/watershed-boundary-based governance models of local and private relevance. Ontario is too big, Quebec is too big, Alberta is too big, Saskatchewan and Manitoba too - they all have dense populations in a few centres and a widespread low-density population for most of the land - BOTH with different needs and BOTH having to put up with provisions ONLY suitable to the other.


5)Canada was planned to have an ideal governance system. Designed to prevent the 'democratic element' from getting too big for it's britches and making too many mistakes due to it's built-in, short-term, gotta get re-elected mentality.
The idea was to have 4 levels of checks and balances Queen on top with ultimate veto, GovGen with all the Queens power and the power to veto or put on 'hold' any Bill or measure.

The Governor General is not alone -S/He has a Privy Council of independent Canadian advisors to pre-check the Cabinet's activities (ie Treasury Board is supervisor of the Finance Dept) and then advise the GG on what the Senate & Commons have proposed, on its merits not on its value in the next election.

Then an Upper House of Taxpayers (only office in Canada with a property and net-wealth qualification, written as $4,000 inflation makes that $200-300K today) and finally the Commons the voice of all the people. Now reduced to trained seals spouting (pre-approved) slight variations on but 5-6 voices.

Switch back to the 'as-written text' or institute a 66.67% threshold of majority ... 50%+1 is NOT good enough.

6)Shall we continue a tax code that is so complicated that no one can understand it?
Shall we continue with criss-cross- subsidization of every province, industry, age group, city, program, etc etc or try to simplify it - first by making sure that the level of gov't that provides a service, also taxes its citizens for that service (and nobody else)

7) Canada has a $601 Billion interest bearing debt (plus $250-300K at the provincial level and who knows how much municipally).
Every little is being paid off each yr because the debt is financed with interest-only bonds.
Federally the debt is being repaid $1-13billion/yr - an approach that mathematically says it'll be paid off in 117-167 years PLUS whatever happens provincially & municipally AND THEY are all crying broke (except Alberta)
I say consolidate all the provincial debt, like was done in 1867 on the same kind of formula as then
PUT ALL GOVERNMENTS ON A PUBLISHED 25-25YR plan (they all have spreadsheets that THEY are consulting) then we'll be able to see who's varying from the plan and ask why.

8)Healthcare is consuming the provincial budgets BC says if nothing changes it'll take 71% of the Budget + 28% for education, leaving 2% for everything else.
Canadian public spending on Healthcare ~$100billion, Federal Personal Income Tax ~$100 Billion. Your federal income tax IS healthcare spending!!
Make Healthcare a national Program, take it OFF the Budget (like CPP) manage the money in based on lifestyle ie skydivers pay more.

9)The notwithstanding clause is a righteous part of the constitutional bargain cut in 1982.
Without it the Courts are in control .... like now.
In fact the National governingf party just USES the court to achieve its secular-humanist, anything goes(that gets votes) agenda of self-preservation in power (they just REALLY screwed up badly with the sponsorship thing ... it'll take at least 2 yrs for docile Canada to forget that.

10) There never was a definition for marriage in Canada, the USA or the UK.
The Appeals Court in Ontario decided a judgment in an 1866 polygamy/bigamy case was a definition (hence the One man, One woman emphasis) and changed an off point comment of one Judge into a new definition of marriage for all Canadians.
No government appealed, and the Supreme court refused to offer an opinion on the constitutionality of the 'old' definition (man if they had that would have been a good one to read)
Are you happy with the court process?
I say it's an abomination in a country that says it is subject to the rule of law.

On the idea of HomoSex marriage, the concept so flies against history, biology and society that I cannot believe we're even discussing it.

NB If anyone wants a civil union - a state-sanctioned pledge of eternal love and support for each other .... why not, but few will take it up.

If HomoSex couples want to be considered equal to common-law couples under the law ... so be it ( MvH case brought that in) both are still fornication ie sex outside marriage

We just cannot allow it to be called a marriage (ie approval by family, church and society of the sexual union of this man and woman) nor condoned as an 'alternative, equivalent and as just as good' form of societal building block

11) Climate Change
Don't fall in love with Kyoto, because it's less than it's proponents expound.

A) Kyoto does nothing about pollution, it's not about pollution. It's NOT about cleaner air.
B) Greenhouse gases - the Stern report said it's NOT a calamity, it's manageable, the sooner the better, start by concentrating on deforestation and electricity production
c)Kyoto - China India, the under-developed world are not involved. The USA & Australia decided against it. Europe an Russia's limits are a joke that they can easily attain
A polluter in Canada paying money to an African nation for "emission paper credits" does nothing to reduce emission - it's just accounting smoke and mirrors (and a wealth transfer to developing nations ie governments ie leaders ie pockets)
D) Global warming - remember the Ozone hole these same nuts were worried about? well it's closing and this will cause the Antarctic to warm up.
Remember pollution and the blanket of soot that was to cover the atmosphere - turns out that blanket was keeping the warming of the sun OUT - in Nairobi the Ozone Nobel rize-winner was advocating shooting sulfur back into the atmosphere to 'shade' the earth

There all off on 6-16-65 different half-baked agendas
-one world government
-anti car
-pro-third-world
-anti-western society
-anti USA
-anti-war
-anti-poverty
-anti-business
-pro-union
-pro-HomoSex
-pro-Abortion
you name it
But none want responsibility to pay for the changes they're recommending - they just want to lobby and get the credit for it.

But... now that all humanity has developed a environmental-sensitive awareness ... Look very carefully and deeply at any new politico running to the head of the parade.

So that's what I'm talking about, but I never had the 45 minutes to attempt to briefly lay it out!

Good Night and many happy tomorrows

Rce
Nov27/06

Politics Blog Top Sites