I was living in Regina, Saskatchewan in 1960 - 61 during the “doctor strike” there. The NDP’s Saskatchewan plan was based on the Scandinavian and British ones. The doctors lost, and the rest, as they say, is history. But the naysayers were loud and determined to stop it, as were the Saskatchewan Medical Association. I recall a hilarious cartoon in the Regina Leader Post, depicting an African” witch doctor” applying for a position at the hospital there.
However, it was not long after the strike was over that the doctors noticed that their incomes actually increased, and they had no fee collection problems any longer, and the complaints ended both from doctors and patients.
When the Canada Medicare was introduced by Lester Pearson’s government, there was less opposition because of Saskatchewan’s pioneering experiment. In this area we did leapfrog the Americans, not imitate them, as we do in most other areas.
Some abuse of the system is inevitable, both by doctors and by patients. I recall growing up in a small village in Western Norway, where the doctor held court each Wednesday, in a local office. In those days, housewives did not work, and village life got rather boring at times. Thus, the highlight of their week was Wednesday’s doctor visit, and a standing joke was that one Wednesday, Mary, one of the regulars, was missing from the doctor’s waiting room. When one of the ladies asked where Mary was, she was told that she could not come because she was sick (!). There was more than a little truth in that one. Yet, who is to judge if you need to see the doctor. Not the doctor; once you are there, you have all ready usurped his allotted patient time.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Accountant gets 5 years for bilking winemaker –Star, Aug 25/09
Christine Papakyrioku has a problem. Not just that she is going to jail, but that she is addicted to gambling. Her addiction made her steal more than 7.4 million from her employer where she was employed in a position of some trust; namely as an accountant. Addiction, as we all now know, is a serious affliction that must invoke pity and empathy from everyone. It’s not really her fault, since her employer “failed to examine her accounting practices closely” so as to prevent her from stealing millions. Her venality is really venial –she just could not help herself.
It is also the provinces fault, and Niagara Falls Casinos, for not preventing her from acting on her base impulses and reprobate desires –so she is suing them. Clearly, she is a VICTIM.
In today’s society, it is not “cool” to take responsibility for your actions and to say you are sorry. Surely, we are all victims of something or other, and the fault lies elsewhere, outside our control. Guilt and contrition are obsolete terms, and culprits should be handled with extreme unction, lest they suffer permanent emotional scars.
My question is this: with all these victims loose in our society, who is to be the victimizers?
It is also the provinces fault, and Niagara Falls Casinos, for not preventing her from acting on her base impulses and reprobate desires –so she is suing them. Clearly, she is a VICTIM.
In today’s society, it is not “cool” to take responsibility for your actions and to say you are sorry. Surely, we are all victims of something or other, and the fault lies elsewhere, outside our control. Guilt and contrition are obsolete terms, and culprits should be handled with extreme unction, lest they suffer permanent emotional scars.
My question is this: with all these victims loose in our society, who is to be the victimizers?
Monday, August 24, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Nortel, and our techno-nationalist delusions -Andrew Coyne, Maclean’s Aug 31st
Andrew Coyne has changed my mind about Nortel’s sale to Ericsson. I suspected the Conservatives were reluctant to get involved since Nortel had most of its work force outside the country, and thus did not represent many voters. It turns out that Ericsson has in fact more workers domestically. Coyne also makes a good point about past government investment as sunk costs that won’t be recovered by handing Nortel to RIM. In our global economy, corporate ownership is fluid and ephemeral. Canada has lost many of its old corporate names to foreigners – Stelco and Falconbridge just two of several. Nortel has had several corporate name changes in its long history in Canada. It started out as part of Bell Telephone, incorporated as Northern Electric in 1895 and later became part of Western Electric and AT&T in the US. In the sixties, Bell Canada & Northern Electric was separated from US Bell and Western Electric by government decree, and in 1972 it became Northern Telecom getting involved in the electronic switching market as well as manufacturing telephones and combined research with Bell Canada.
Thus, Nortel‘s origin was what we used to call a “branch plant” of US industry, making the nationalist argument rather weak. It never was a “national treasure”, and in the recent past, their CEO’s have all been Americans.
There are always at least two sides to every story. Thank you, Andrew Coyne, for pointing out this side.
Thus, Nortel‘s origin was what we used to call a “branch plant” of US industry, making the nationalist argument rather weak. It never was a “national treasure”, and in the recent past, their CEO’s have all been Americans.
There are always at least two sides to every story. Thank you, Andrew Coyne, for pointing out this side.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
RIGHTS ANS WRONGS
Toronto has many fine attractions, but the annual Gay Parade is not one of them. Here we even have our mayor riding around in the parade, mingling with raunchy half-naked men and women jiving to raunchy music and making obscene gestures. But, of course, it brings in money for the city, and money trumps decorum any day. It’s Sodom and Gomorrah combined into a, big public frenzy.
I thought of initiating a Heterosexual Parade, but realized that unless I got some naked Hollywood beauties on the floats, no one would come; and if I did, it might become an issue for the Ontario Human Rights Commission for not including everyone.
We live in a “rights” society, where you have a right to be different, even if it goes against nature. With our modern technology, propagating need not be limited to man and woman; why, some day we might find that you just get a baby in a bottle at the local baby dispensary.
But we still have our rights – right to be so obese that we need to occupy two seats on an airplane, and use gender-neutral address if we have a gender identity crisis while boarding the flight.
We are all “victims” of one thing or another, and need to be coddled and protected from our own vices. What I still don’t understand is that with all these righteous victims, who is left to do the victimizing?
I thought of initiating a Heterosexual Parade, but realized that unless I got some naked Hollywood beauties on the floats, no one would come; and if I did, it might become an issue for the Ontario Human Rights Commission for not including everyone.
We live in a “rights” society, where you have a right to be different, even if it goes against nature. With our modern technology, propagating need not be limited to man and woman; why, some day we might find that you just get a baby in a bottle at the local baby dispensary.
But we still have our rights – right to be so obese that we need to occupy two seats on an airplane, and use gender-neutral address if we have a gender identity crisis while boarding the flight.
We are all “victims” of one thing or another, and need to be coddled and protected from our own vices. What I still don’t understand is that with all these righteous victims, who is left to do the victimizing?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Friday, August 14, 2009
Our changing world of work and play
In olden days, artisans lived and worked in a seamless life of work and private existence, as did the peasants and yeomen of the land. Modern, industrial life has separated work from home life; work being a means to an end, a necessary evil.A few lucky individuals can do what they love to do and also make money from it — artists; hi-tech entrepreneurs, and the creative individuals come to mind. However, most people spend half their waking hours “earning a living” with little or no enjoyment derived from the activity.
In Europe, where I grew up, there was usually a road to semi-professionalism for those not inclined to go the academic route. It was apprenticeship; shop craft, usually a five-year internship with little pay and much menial work for the master. Afterwards, you had status, and usually steady work as a tradesman. However, technology has changed much of that privilege too. Printers, draughtsmen and many other trades have gone by the wayside, diminished in importance and remunerations;eliminated or sidelined by technology.
Even post-secondary education is no guarantee of an interesting and well-paying job, but it does give you more options.
In many ways, we have come full circle with the days of yore. Manual, repetitive factory type work is declining and more and more; education, skills and “meritocracy” determines ones status and earning capacity in life.
The day might well come again, when there will be two classes of citizens: patricians and plebeians; those who toil, and those who manage. Meritocracy care only if you can perform; and to do so, beyond the most menial tasks, you need brains and motivation –in that order. The egalitarian society might have been just a chimerical dream, and we will awaken to the brutal truth of the market economy.
In Europe, where I grew up, there was usually a road to semi-professionalism for those not inclined to go the academic route. It was apprenticeship; shop craft, usually a five-year internship with little pay and much menial work for the master. Afterwards, you had status, and usually steady work as a tradesman. However, technology has changed much of that privilege too. Printers, draughtsmen and many other trades have gone by the wayside, diminished in importance and remunerations;eliminated or sidelined by technology.
Even post-secondary education is no guarantee of an interesting and well-paying job, but it does give you more options.
In many ways, we have come full circle with the days of yore. Manual, repetitive factory type work is declining and more and more; education, skills and “meritocracy” determines ones status and earning capacity in life.
The day might well come again, when there will be two classes of citizens: patricians and plebeians; those who toil, and those who manage. Meritocracy care only if you can perform; and to do so, beyond the most menial tasks, you need brains and motivation –in that order. The egalitarian society might have been just a chimerical dream, and we will awaken to the brutal truth of the market economy.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
“We can’t talk about immigration” –Mark Steyn, Maclean’s Aug.17th
Yes, we can! But, it does little good, because like the weather, no one can do anything about it. Lately, it seems I agree with Steyn half the time. That’s not bad for an old contumacious curmudgeon like me.
Steyn need not go to Germany and Sweden to find examples of “reunification” abuses and welfare dependency among immigrants. We Canadians have also made it so, by making it too easy to claim refugee status, or to enter as a dependent under the reunification program. What you get, are older parents who come here to enjoy our free medical system and other entitlements (I know whereof I speak: I personally know “new Canadians” who put their mother in a government supported seniors home, even though they were rich).
As to the many professional, independent immigrants who are doing menial jobs here; part of the reason is that they have been “oversold” on Canadian opportunities, possibly by local immigration officials, and also by their own relatives or friends all ready here, who send them glowing accounts of their success here, with nice photos of their new houses, though devoid of furniture, they, like some people, look nice on the outside. Some more realistic picture should be presented to potential immigrants, and some basics in Canadian laws, mores and expectations should be inculcated before their landed certificate is issued. Another issue is that sometimes their educational standards are not always comparable to ours. This was perhaps more so in the past, but I know, for example, that China’s educational system was at least 10 years behind ours until fairly recently; and during Mao’s time, almost non-existent. You got accepted by the university based on how good a Communist your parents were, and if you came from the right proletarian background (for example, surgeons at the hospitals were required to read a chapter of Mao’s Little Red Book before commencing an operation!). I would want to know that before someone began surgery on me, they were truly skilled and qualified.
Then there is the issue of latent or subtle discrimination. Today’s “visible minority” immigrants are more “visible” than the earlier European immigrants, and their cultural and religious backgrounds are more “foreign” to the native population. They take longer to integrate –perhaps as much a two or three generations, and they cling to the “old country ways” longer than the immigrants of yore. This is, however, one area where Canada does better than Europe, because we are attuned to immigration –we are an immigrant country. Europe, in particular the two countries mentioned by Steyn; Germany and Sweden, have a much a more homogeneous society than do we. This causes them to, in spite of the “official” welcoming stance, be more wary of newcomers, especially if they persist in setting themselves apart and creating ethnic ghettoes.
Immigrants do not help themselves either by supporting such nuts as Mullah Krekar in Norway, where they have tried to deport him for some time; but he is still there. There is even a Facebook page dedicated to sending Krekar home! [http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=37022756828].
Canadians are concerned about our rather loose immigration policy, and even more so, the ability for wannabe immigrants to claim “refugee” status once they manage to get here by hook or by crook. It is unfair to the Canadian public and it is unfair to new Canadians who have come here the legal way. By all means, bring in qualified, skilled immigrants that we need, but to let in people willy-nilly is asking for trouble down the road –in fact, it’s all ready here. Being more critical in our immigration policy does not mean that we should revert to the discriminatory policies of old, where, in the case of Jews, “one is too many”, or like the Chinese Exclusion Act.
I do think that there is a valid economic argument for immigration, in addition to the skills we need for the economy; we are also a nation with a low birth rate, below the level of replacement. Thus, if we want to grow economically and also to have enough young people who can pay our old age pension, we need immigrants. But, not just any immigrant –we don’t need people who become a burden on our society –we need productive, intelligent people who can build on what we have achieved so far, and even make it better –regardless of colour, creed or nationality.
Yes, we can! But, it does little good, because like the weather, no one can do anything about it. Lately, it seems I agree with Steyn half the time. That’s not bad for an old contumacious curmudgeon like me.
Steyn need not go to Germany and Sweden to find examples of “reunification” abuses and welfare dependency among immigrants. We Canadians have also made it so, by making it too easy to claim refugee status, or to enter as a dependent under the reunification program. What you get, are older parents who come here to enjoy our free medical system and other entitlements (I know whereof I speak: I personally know “new Canadians” who put their mother in a government supported seniors home, even though they were rich).
As to the many professional, independent immigrants who are doing menial jobs here; part of the reason is that they have been “oversold” on Canadian opportunities, possibly by local immigration officials, and also by their own relatives or friends all ready here, who send them glowing accounts of their success here, with nice photos of their new houses, though devoid of furniture, they, like some people, look nice on the outside. Some more realistic picture should be presented to potential immigrants, and some basics in Canadian laws, mores and expectations should be inculcated before their landed certificate is issued. Another issue is that sometimes their educational standards are not always comparable to ours. This was perhaps more so in the past, but I know, for example, that China’s educational system was at least 10 years behind ours until fairly recently; and during Mao’s time, almost non-existent. You got accepted by the university based on how good a Communist your parents were, and if you came from the right proletarian background (for example, surgeons at the hospitals were required to read a chapter of Mao’s Little Red Book before commencing an operation!). I would want to know that before someone began surgery on me, they were truly skilled and qualified.
Then there is the issue of latent or subtle discrimination. Today’s “visible minority” immigrants are more “visible” than the earlier European immigrants, and their cultural and religious backgrounds are more “foreign” to the native population. They take longer to integrate –perhaps as much a two or three generations, and they cling to the “old country ways” longer than the immigrants of yore. This is, however, one area where Canada does better than Europe, because we are attuned to immigration –we are an immigrant country. Europe, in particular the two countries mentioned by Steyn; Germany and Sweden, have a much a more homogeneous society than do we. This causes them to, in spite of the “official” welcoming stance, be more wary of newcomers, especially if they persist in setting themselves apart and creating ethnic ghettoes.
Immigrants do not help themselves either by supporting such nuts as Mullah Krekar in Norway, where they have tried to deport him for some time; but he is still there. There is even a Facebook page dedicated to sending Krekar home! [http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=37022756828].
Canadians are concerned about our rather loose immigration policy, and even more so, the ability for wannabe immigrants to claim “refugee” status once they manage to get here by hook or by crook. It is unfair to the Canadian public and it is unfair to new Canadians who have come here the legal way. By all means, bring in qualified, skilled immigrants that we need, but to let in people willy-nilly is asking for trouble down the road –in fact, it’s all ready here. Being more critical in our immigration policy does not mean that we should revert to the discriminatory policies of old, where, in the case of Jews, “one is too many”, or like the Chinese Exclusion Act.
I do think that there is a valid economic argument for immigration, in addition to the skills we need for the economy; we are also a nation with a low birth rate, below the level of replacement. Thus, if we want to grow economically and also to have enough young people who can pay our old age pension, we need immigrants. But, not just any immigrant –we don’t need people who become a burden on our society –we need productive, intelligent people who can build on what we have achieved so far, and even make it better –regardless of colour, creed or nationality.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
TORONTO GARBAGE
Mayor David Miller made a lot of noise about discontinuing the “sick days” provision in the union contract; but ultimately, he managed to alienate both the taxpaying public and the union members. Surprise! He should have consulted with Bob Rae, who could have enlightened him about the disutility of trying to do the right thing for union members. After all of Millers’s posturing, he ended up caving in to almost all union demands –Mayor Miller knows on which side his bread is buttered.
The union movement is a many-sided organization and reflect, to a large extent, its membership and societal makeup. Not to put too fine a point on it, but an union of dustmen is going to have differing interests from a union of, say, university teachers.
I spent my first few working yeas as an union member (CNR), and the rest on the other side, including negotiating labour agreements in the private sector(transportation).I have seen “the good, the bad, and the ugly”. The standard advice given to new employees was to work hard and not get into trouble with management during the probationary period, until they were in the union. Unions provide, in the phraseology of John Kenneth Galbright, a “countervailing force” to the excesses of industrialists and even governments. Unfortunately, because it is legalistic, rule-oriented, and often highly politicized, the union leadership is often in tow to the noisiest and more radical elements within their membership, with the “silent majority” just on for the ride. The power-politics of unions reflects and mimics, to a large extent, the politics of society at large or organizational politics in general. Self-interest is paramount in most human organization and societies.
Finally, there is the issue of entitlements: it is difficult to take away something one has had for a long time and come to assume a permanent arrangement and their “God given rights”, such as “sick days”. It should never have been given in the first place; but it is always easier for politicians to give in than take out ( that’s one argument for not having unions in most public works: political considerations interfere with the practical, economic perspective when negotiating with a large group that also votes ).
And as to a poor example or precedent: it is hard to “kick against the pricks” when you, the negotiators, have just given yourself a pay raise; or when the heads of automobile manufacturers who have just been given public funds (corporate welfare) give themselves huge bonuses! In the wise words of Forrest Gump: “stupid is who stupid does.”
The union movement is a many-sided organization and reflect, to a large extent, its membership and societal makeup. Not to put too fine a point on it, but an union of dustmen is going to have differing interests from a union of, say, university teachers.
I spent my first few working yeas as an union member (CNR), and the rest on the other side, including negotiating labour agreements in the private sector(transportation).I have seen “the good, the bad, and the ugly”. The standard advice given to new employees was to work hard and not get into trouble with management during the probationary period, until they were in the union. Unions provide, in the phraseology of John Kenneth Galbright, a “countervailing force” to the excesses of industrialists and even governments. Unfortunately, because it is legalistic, rule-oriented, and often highly politicized, the union leadership is often in tow to the noisiest and more radical elements within their membership, with the “silent majority” just on for the ride. The power-politics of unions reflects and mimics, to a large extent, the politics of society at large or organizational politics in general. Self-interest is paramount in most human organization and societies.
Finally, there is the issue of entitlements: it is difficult to take away something one has had for a long time and come to assume a permanent arrangement and their “God given rights”, such as “sick days”. It should never have been given in the first place; but it is always easier for politicians to give in than take out ( that’s one argument for not having unions in most public works: political considerations interfere with the practical, economic perspective when negotiating with a large group that also votes ).
And as to a poor example or precedent: it is hard to “kick against the pricks” when you, the negotiators, have just given yourself a pay raise; or when the heads of automobile manufacturers who have just been given public funds (corporate welfare) give themselves huge bonuses! In the wise words of Forrest Gump: “stupid is who stupid does.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)