A better perspective on government fiscal stupidity

The fuse is burning

Like most sensible people I often worry where the continuous overspending by all levels of government will eventually lead. Ongoing spending by Municipal, Provincial, or Federal governments seems to indicate a total lack of common sense or any fiscal responsibility on the part of our elected officials. It's almost like they live on a different world where money literally grows on trees and they function using a system of math where two plus two does not equal four. The alternative would be that they are simply stupid or incredibly naive about managing money.

Now while our Canadian Federal or Provincial governments are not by any stretch of the imagination "fiscally responsible" they do not even come close to displaying the free spending mindset and the reckless fiscal abandonment that our American neighbors to the south are engaging in, particularly at the Federal level in Washington. Watching their antics as they battle over adjusting personal tax rates higher, debt ceiling increases, and implementing spending cuts, would be comical if it was not so serious that the outcome has the ability to negatively impact the entire global economy. Even a simpleton knows that you can not continuously spend more than you take in, unfortunately this basic fact seems to be lost on America's elected officials especially the guy currently serving as President.

So if a simpleton can understand the concept, why can't supposedly bright elected officials?
Here's what I think........

So, Where do I sign up?

A day in the life of a Federal civil servant

When I was growing up, when you heard of someone who worked for the Federal government, you knew a few things right off the bat. One, they were probably not an ambitious individual, two, they didn't make a lot of money, and last but not least they would most certainly be serving a life sentence with the feds. It was a given that while a federal job didn't provide the big bucks that private industry did, it was a very secure position that in the end would provide a comfortable pension for ones golden years. Federal positions tended to attract those that wanted to take little risk on the career path and generally weren't overly eager to expend too much effort in earning a living.

Now fast forward to today's world......Lordy, Lordy, how things have changed and the pendulum has swung! Today's federal civil servant has rocketed ahead of us poor schmoes in the private sector to the point where one has to ask if the inmates are running the asylum in Ottawa. If by this time your beginning to believe that old Frustrated Joe is simply exaggerating the situation, just keep reading.

One can only wonder where it will all lead....

Over the years as I have watched the world go by it has become more apparent on a daily basis that the manner in which our democracy works is at times it's own worse enemy. Although from an early age we are taught that the different levels of government exist to serve the people, unfortunately in practice it seldom works as originally intended. In reality, many basic human traits make the practical application of good government far more difficult to implement than it appears on paper. Greed, lust for power, ignorance, prejudices, and people's general inability to understand that every action has a consequence, all play a role in making perfect government only a dream that will never be achieved.

Those that "serve us" in government rely solely on the electorate process to maintain their seats of power. So our politicians have learnt well that the people's loyalty can be bought with a few baubles and trinkets. Every election brings more promises of what the electorate can expect "in payment" from each of the political candidates if they are elected. What we generally see is a bidding war for votes with every party pulling out the cheque book and removing all stops in their zeal to promise the voter more than their opponent can. The problem is compounded as the demands of the electorate and the promises of those running for office increase with each election and every generation of voters. Now on first glance, one may wonder if this is such a bad thing, after all it is taxpayers money intended to be spent for the common good and the betterment of society as a whole.

Spend , spend , spend, where does it end , end , end?

I just read an interesting article on President Obama's recent re-election and particularly his spending habits during his first term. Now while I have for a very long time been critical of the reckless spending of most levels of government (on a global basis, including our own) the numbers quoted in this particular article opened my eyes to the fact the monetary crisis is far worse than I believed.

Here's a couple of facts to roll around in your head, if they don't cause you some sleepless nights you obviously can not comprehend the shear size of money involved, or you are simply naive. Sorry, but if there is a third possible reason for lack of panic I really want you to tell me, but trust me on this one I will need some convincing.

-Every hour - as in every 60 minutes of every day of every week of Obama's first term in office his administration was spending $188 million of money that the United States did not and does not have. This spending spree continued 24/7 for his entire term! Even worse, is the fact that this is just federal spending and does not include municipal or state. I fear if I combined all levels of government spending during that period and published the resulting number many individuals would emulate lemmings and head for the cliff. Who knows, upon seeing that number I might join them myself!

- If second term Obama performs in the same manner the American federal debt will hit $20 trillion by 2014, a figure so immense that there is not enough liquid cash in the world to bail it out. Think about that statement for a moment, "not enough liquid cash in the world".

The above numbers are staggering, but in all fairness Obama can't be blamed entirely for this fiscal disaster. When he walked into the Oval Office the debt was sitting at $10 trillion, his predecessor George W. had taken it up by $4 trillion during his two terms. So the nation is suffering from two wild spenders in a row. Unfortunately President Obama inherited a runaway train and rather than applying the brakes he opened the throttle. In fact, by 2014 he will have personally created as much federal debt as every preceding president combined over a period of over 225 years (including George W). It's ironic that George W and Obama, (two individuals who couldn't be more different in some ways) over the span of 14 years created $14 trillion in federal debt, approximately 70% of what will be owed by the nation in total by 2014.

Now for those Democrats or Republicans that live by the belief that their man in office can do no wrong, if you truly can not see the problem here it is too late to save you. You have already drank the "koolaid" as they say.

I wonder how history will best remember President Obama, as the first African-American to be elected President, as the President that introduced a federal health bill, or as the individual who destroyed America's financial future. Only time will tell.

Stormy Seas Ahead?

Over the last 6 months there has been tremendous focus on the Presidential election and what it's outcome would be. Well it's old news now and President Obama has another four years to fix Americas economy or continue it on the road to no return. Like most individuals I hope it is the former , not the latter, but unfortunately the man doesn't have a great track record up to this point.

My personal feeling is that Mitt Romney was a more qualified individual and better suited for the task ahead, simply based on his past experience. President Obama walked into the Oval Office with no real life business experience, Mitt Romney on the other hand has a lifetime of practical experience  running a large corporation. Now I for one am not against a bit of  "on the job" training in most instances, but I believe that most sensible people would agree that the Whitehouse is not the ideal  place for it.

However, no point in dwelling on what might have been, the fact is that Mr Obama is back for another term, like it or not. So am I just being negative towards the guy, well lets see how others view his re-election

- The stock market took a sharp downturn Wednesday, just a day after President Obama’s re-election. The Dow Jones average dropped about 313 points, or 2.4 percent, as if my writing this it is down 4%!

- How about job creation, or maybe the real indicator is job loss. So how many Americans lost jobs since the President secured another term. Here's a short list of layoffs that have taken place on or since November 6 in about a 3 day period .

Bristol-Myers – 480 Sales Related Jobs in NJ

ING – 2,350

Husqvarna AB – 600

U.S. Cellular – 980

Energizer Holdings Inc – 1500

Ameridose LLC – up to 650 Layoffs

Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne – 100

Boeing – 30% of Executives at Defense Unit

Hawker Beechcraft - 240

Vesta Wind Systems - 3000

Now trust me when I say the above list is but a small portion of layoff announcements I was able to find in short order, yet in just the 3 days after the election the list totals over 10,000. What confuses me is the fact that Mr Obama claimed during his campaign that he was the one that could create good paying manufacturing jobs. Seems he forgot to mention his abilities to the companies listed above. My personal belief is that the timing of these layoffs was not coincidental, they occurred right after Mr Obama's election for a very good reason. I suspect many of these companies held off on downsizing hoping beyond hope that the Oval Office would have a new tenant and Obamacare would be repealed. No such luck, so the pink slips went out. Now the count of those seeking government entitlements has increased by over 10,000, throw in the 18,500 jobs the unions killed over at Hostess and there are nearly 30,000 jobs down the pipe simply due to greed and stupidity (on both Obama's and the Unions part). Now the fact is that some of these jobs may come back if business feels a bit of confidence, but some are lost forever (i.e Hostess). But even as jobs come back Mr Obama has already laid the groundwork for a future workforce of part-time rather than full time jobs, he did this through Obamacare which defines a full-time position (for the purposes of health insurance coverage) as 30 hours per week! Think about it, the easiest way for employers to avoid the onerous costs of Obamacare is simply to hire employees on a 25 - 28 hour workweek (just shy of 30 to be safe), so Obama has just reduced the standard 40 hour workweek to 28 in his wisdom. His logic behind this is brilliant, any time the government quotes new job figures all of these part-time positions will fall into them and instead of having two (40 hour workweek positions), and assuming that employers commit to the same umber of work hours (80 per week) they will now count three (25-28 hour workweek positions) and an increase in the number of new positions of 50%! So the government looks like a hero, except of course to the guy that is short 12 hours a week on his paycheck.

Unfortunately while it seems that Mr Obama has the support of a good deal of the population who depend on government entitlements, he is not inspiring any confidence amongst the companies that create the jobs the American population is hoping for. Oops, I hope that statement didn't cause too much grief amongst those of you who are under the delusion that the President or any other politician can actually create meaningful employment, sorry I burst your bubble. All any politician can do is foster an economic and political climate that ensures that employers are confident enough to invest in creating jobs. Unfortunately, continuously bad mouthing the financially successful, and beating the drum of tax increases and additional employer costs (Obamacare) has exactly the opposite affect. I guess that's what one should expect when you have a community organizer in the Oval Office, rather than a successful businessman. Obama's roots as a community organizer are showing through, when he needs more money he just assumes the government will provide it.

The sky is not falling Chicken Little

In the days since the Presidential election the media has been rife with opinions on how and why Mitt Romney took second place. Commentators, talk show hosts, or political pundits all have a wealth of suggestions about what changes the Republican party must undertake to win the Whitehouse in 2016. Most of these suggestions tend to cover the same ground, the  Republicans need to get in touch with and win over the Latino vote,  single woman, African Americans, soften their stance on different issues, or learn to sling mud like their opponents.

This election is lost and there's no changing that fact. However, what a lot of this opinionated discussion overlooks is the fact that what America really needs at this moment in history and for the foreseeable future is a President who has truly bought into and believes in a Conservative platform , who places the interests of the nation before their own or their parties. An individual that fully understands the precarious financial position the nation is in and the dire consequences that it is facing due to a succession of free spending fiscally irresponsible federal governments. What America definitely does not need is a another leader who caters to the whims of every ethnic or special interest group as a means of winning their support and the Oval Office. Unfortunately for the last four years and the next four, America has a guy in the Oval Office with feet of clay whose only goal in life is retaining power long enough to see his personal agenda reshape the nation. As a means to do so Mr Obama will promise and do whatever it takes, something he learnt well in the Chicago political arena. He and his party proved themselves the masters of falsehoods and mudslinging over the last six months.And please don't get me started on his promise of open government and transparency..... sheesh. America has never experienced a more clandestine administration, two great examples are the "Fast and Furious" and "Benghazi" fiascoes. These guys would shame even Tricky Dick Nixon

Was Mitt Romney the man America truly needed in the Oval Office?  Probably not, but on the flip side he was a lot closer than the one they have.

Does such an individual exist and if they do is there even a remote chance they would survive the primaries or have even the faintest hope of becoming President? The primaries would certainly be a challenge as the upper echelon of the GOP are not exactly risk takers when it comes to their candidates and certainly respect a pecking order. What the GOP needs is another Ronald Reagan type individual, someone that stands on his principals knowing full well that in doing so he is bucking the "old boys club" in the party. However the electorate might very well reject just such an individual on the basis they simply have become very used to the idea that government provides everything and nurse maids them from cradle to grave. Americans might not be prepared for or even desire a more self-reliant existence, many of them might be very comfortable in their nanny state stupor.

My personal opinion is that the Right must go back to it's conservative values, and I am not referring to issues surrounding abortion or same sex marriage, these are societal and religious ones, not governmental ones. The conservative values I speak of are those of smaller government and sound fiscal management. The country is heading over the fiscal cliff, yes they may postpone it this year, but with current spending practices it is inevitable. Until Washington begins practicing sound fiscal management, and more importantly until the Oval Office has an individual in it that understands their job is to lead the country, not kowtow to every group that promises support, the country will remain on the same Greece like path. A true leader understands that at times they must make unpopular decisions, ones that look further forward than the next election. A true leader does not check the direction the political wind is blowing every morning upon getting out of bed (frankly I am surprised Obama has not had a weather vane installed atop the Whitehouse).

What the GOP does not need under any circumstances is a candidate that will cater to passing whims of this group or that group in hopes of currying favour and winning the Oval Office.  The GOP can not "outbid" the Democrats with promises, nor should they. After all, if they play that game we will simple see two versions of the Democrat party running for the Presidency in 2016 and the ultimate loser will be the American citizenry and the rest of the world.

On a last note, the good news is that Obama is now in his Legacy term of office, more to the point is the fact that after the first two years or so he will effectively become a lame duck President as Democrat politicians try to put some distance between themselves and him prior to the next election. So hopefully he won't cause much havoc or do too much more harm to the nation and the world.

Renovating the den, while he kitchen is on fire. Part 2

In Part One I discussed how our governments in both Canada and the United

States for all intents and purposes are simply ignoring the massive debts they are incurring. Sure, once in a while they pay lip service to the debt, but generally it is placed on the back burner. I detailed my thoughts on this in Part One, and since that time I have seen some classic examples of our elected officials focusing on minor issues and treating them as if they had the potential to change civilization.

Here is a real doozie!

It appears that both the American Congress and Senate are up in arms over the fact that the uniforms of the U.S. Olympic Team were manufactured in China. In fact a bill was introduced in the Senate that if passed, would require the US Olympic Committee (USOC) to outfit Olympic athletes in ceremonial uniforms "sewn or assembled in the United States."

Let me get this straight, in the midst of what could possibly be considered the second worst financial crisis in American history (a close second right after the Great Depression) and at a time when government spending is spiraling out of control, it appears that the biggest concern of these elected officials is who did the sewing for Team USA! One can only imagine what this is costing the American taxpayer to have these individuals sit around and discuss the rag trade. I'm not making this up, trust me I am not that creative to imagine such stupidity. Sure, I realize that the uniforms are just a symptom of the bigger problem, the outsourcing of American jobs. However, that horse has left the barn!

Renovating the den, while the kitchen is on fire....

With summer upon us I find that I am not devoting much time to writing on this blog, it could be that not much in the news catches my attention, or just that I would rather spend my time outside. I think it is a safe bet to go with the latter.

However, while watching the late evening news last night something did catch my eye and get me to thinking.  To be honest I don't even remember what the actual issue was, however the train of thought it put me on is important.

Lately I have noticed that more than ever both in Canada and the United States that politicians as a group are focused on a myriad of issues, yet ignore the single biggest threat to the future of both our countries. The threat?

The massive crushing debt that has been taken on by all levels of government.

While there is some 'lip service" paid to addressing the debt, little if any serious action is undertaken to tackle it. I mean really, for example neither federal government has any form of repayment planned. Each year simply slips by and the debt grows, and a myriad of excuses are given, poor economy, unexpected expenses, lower revenues, etc, etc, etc. We all know the drill

Now, part of the problem is that the average citizen is oblivious to all of this, for the vast majority they are aware to some degree that there is government debt, but simply don't see it as something that affects their life or that they need to be concerned about. There lies the sad part and the reason that there is no urgency to tackle the problem. Unfortunately politicians, better than anyone understand the adage of  "The squeaky wheel gets the grease". So if no one is complaining, why tackle the issue, after all there are only two possible ways to solve the problem, cut spending or raise more revenue (taxes). Obviously neither method garners a lots of support from the average voter who is looking to the government for all the entitlement programs they have come to view as their birthright. The sad reality of our self entitled society is that spending garners votes, not austerity. I personally believe that politicians understand the severity of the issue better than many of us give them credit for, they also understand that no one government in a single term will resolve the issue, and that more than likely the government that has the fortitude to tackle the issue will only serve one term. So their response is simple, leave it for "the next guy", and in the meantime divert the peoples focus from the real problem  by throwing them shiny baubles and trinkets.

So where will all of this lead, the answer is already playing out in Europe, in countries such as Greece and Spain. Unfortunately it is only a matter of time before North America suffers the same fate.

Government and Debt. How did we ever go down this road?

Just the other day I was watching television in my bed prior to drifting off for the evening. As I recall I was watching the news, and I got to thinking about how nice it would be to get rid of my 21" CRT boob tube and replace it with a brand new 32" Plasma, LED, or LCD HD television. You know the ones, fully loaded with all the bells and whistles.

Now I will admit that there is really nothing wrong with the TV I have, but lets face it the new ones are just a lot nicer. As I lay in my bed musing about this I thought that if I were to buy a new TV I might as well get one of those PVR satellite receivers, that way I could record programs and watch them at night. After all, in for a penny in for a pound. In fact since I am upgrading.... why not a couple of sets of wireless headphones for the wife and I, that way one could watch TV into the wee hours while the other slept. Ooops, almost forgot a DVD player, a Bluray, probably 3D with some wireless features (don't want to miss out on NetFlix).

Just as I was planning my run to BestBuy the next day, reality set in (it's a bitch at times). I needed all of this equipment like a "starving dog needs a second arsehole", more to the point where was the money coming from? After all it's not like I had a couple of grand set aside for tech upgrades, or that my employer would just cut me a cheque out of the goodness of their heart (and their understanding of my hi-tech needs). The bottom line was that the money would have to be reallocated from something else ( food, education, retirement, mortgage, emergency funds, saving, etc.) or borrowed, thus incurring some debt.

So, now that I have laid out my hi-tech bedroom fantasy (almost sounds risque doesn't it?) you are probably asking yourself what this has to do with Government debt.

Well its no big secret that governments at every level (civic, provincial, and federal) are and have been overspending for years, taking on ever increasing debt loads with no end in sight or any formal plan for repayment. So what is the answer?

Enough with the regulations and redtape!

As most Canadians go through their day to day life the last thing on their minds is the ever existing, non relenting government creep into our daily lives. Unfortunately, it creeps along taking our freedom a small bit at a time, not enough to raise a red flag, but there none the less. Like rats, one is just the first and before you know it your home is infested. Now the really insidious part of it is that it comes from all directions, from all levels of government, and seldom shows any indication of where it will lead say a decade down the road.

The underlying cause of all of this is that by default one of a governments main functions is to regulate. Think about it, at the end of the day once you set aside the most obvious top of the pile government duties like defense and such, what's left but regulation. Every level of government, civic, provincial, and federal all are at work continuously to rewrite, enhance, and create new regulations. Add to that the fact that with every change of government the "new guys" have to prove they can do better than the "old guard" by making changes to existing, trashing the old, writing new, or just being creative and making a crisis out of something that was never regulated before.

Think about it, what restrictions and regulations have been brought into place in just the last ten years? What regulations affect your daily life?

Government has gone from serving the people, to supervising the people. Canadians are now wards of the state, for the most part viewed as irresponsible individuals who have to be taken care of from cradle to grave, and told how to behave in society. Government regulation takes from our pockets as surely as taxes do, but regulations typically do it under the radar. Every product or service that you purchase almost certainly has regulations attached to it, regulations that incur costs for the provider, manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer, and in many cases all of them at differ points in the path to the end user, which are in turn passed onto you as the consumer. So, just how bad is it?

Now this is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black......

"Sydney, what happened to you? You've become obese!"

Recently, Jim Flaherty Canada's Finance Minister has taken to publicly criticizing the spending habits of the provincial government of Ontario.

Now while I can't argue with the criticism nor would I in my wildest dreams ever consider defending Premier Dalton McGuinty and his merry band of free spending caucus members, I do have a problem with this.
Where do I start, well it seems Jimmy has suggested that the McGuinty Liberals should "look in the mirror" to see who is responsible for Ontario's current economic woes. A fine suggestion, but tell me Jimmy-Boy, do you own a mirror?

Rather than having me take off on a rant (something I tend to do occasionally), let's keep this short and use a couple of old but well proven adages that accurately describe this soap opera.......
"cast the first stone" or  "Those that live in glass houses....."

I am personally amazed that Jimmy feels he can tell anyone how to be fiscally responsible. It certainly is not based on his setting such a fine example to follow,  another old adage says it best  "Don't do as I do, do as I say"

On the other hand, maybe there is a simpler motivation at play here, like the fact that Jimmy's wife Christine Elliot is the deputy leader of Ontario's Conservative party. You know, the same Conservative party that would like to form the next government of Ontario and currently sits in opposition to McGuinty's Liberals.

So Jimmy, how about doing us taxpayers a couple of favors?
First, balance your own governments budget and address it's debt before you worry about the other guys, and secondly when your working on our nickel let your wife do her own campaigning.

Getting closer each day to the edge of the cliff in Ontario...

Ontario Premier McGuinty and his ministers

Is it just me or does it appear that having a complete lack of common sense or any level of financial savvy is one of the prerequisites to holding an elected office in Provincial or Federal politics?

Now a lot of us non elected types who manage businesses and our own households understand the most basic of financial concepts, that you can not continuously spend more than you take in. Sure on occasion, all of us have gotten a little loose with the purse strings in the short term, but generally we rein them in pretty quickly to avoid financial ruin.

So why is it that governments with their army of accountants and advisers can't seem to balance a budget? To be fair I understand that on occasion revenues will be lower that anticipated and might result in a short fall, but the theory is that you adjust spending accordingly. Our governments in general have gotten to the point, particularly in the last number of years where a balanced or surplus budget is the exception, not the rule. Where they celebrate the introduction of a budget that shows a slight reduction (not elimination) in its projected deficit from the previous years deficit. Case in point, the Province of Ontario.

A taxpayers prescription to doctors and government, take on a daily basis.....

Image Courtesy of Acclaim Clipart

Doctors for Fair Taxation, a group of Canadian doctors is "prescribing" increased taxes on Canadians in higher income brackets. Promoting the slogan "Tax us. Canada's worth it!", the group is suggesting that both the Federal and Provincial levels of government raise taxes on the top 10% of wage earners in Canada.

"We are pleased that so far most of the health care system has been spared the cuts made to other sectors. But we see the impact of these cuts in our patients who lack the community services, housing, and income to be full participants in Canadian society," the group states in an online petition addressed to the federal and Ontario governments. "When a family faces a loss of income it doesn't resolve the crisis by denying food to one its members. A functional loving family makes the existing food go further. Our country should similarly find ways to best use our existing resources so no Canadian will be deprived of their health and security," said the group.
(Hold your horses Docs, since when did an individual citizen's earning become a national "existing resource"?)

In a nutshell, they suggest the following tax formula,
Canada's top 10% of wage earners, those who make more than $100,000 a year would see a 1% tax increase. But it doesn't stop there, they also suggest a 2% tax hike for the 1% of Canadians who earn more than $170,000, a 3% tax hike for the 0.1% who make more than $640,000 and a 6% hike for the top 0.01% who earn more than $1,85 million.

Now, some Canadians may look at the above proposal as being fair and just, after all why not take more from the "rich" (they can afford it, right?). Personally, I have some serious issues with the way that our progressive taxation system penalizes (via higher tax rates) individuals for taking risks and achieving success. But that's only part of the reason this proposal stinks......

Like pigs they head straight to the trough....

Every year the Canadian Taxpayers Federation announces the annual winners of their Teddy awards. For 14 years running these awards have been presented for the best examples of government waste, federally, provincially, or at the municipal level. In fact upon reading the details of the winners there are times when the thought that this is fiction crosses your mind, unfortunately folks sometimes the truth about our elected officials is just plain ugly. These awards are a great public service as they bring to light just how frivolous those that we elect are with our money.

As an Albertan, when I was reviewing the winners of this years Teddies one in particular caught my interest for a number of reasons.... Here you go , courtesy of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (I love these guys)

"Volt Obummer", An appropriate re-election slogan for November 2012

Back In December of 2011 we featured an article about the Chevy Volt that questioned the insanity behind the massive government subsidies (between $200K and $250K per vehicle) being provided to General Motors to produce a vehicle that consumers are not buying. Well three months later not much has changed, the subsidies are still being given out by the American taxpayer courtesy of President Obummer, unit sales are far below initial numbers predicted by GM and have been downgraded again for 2012, and there are still reports of Volts catching on fire. So when I stumbled across this ad parody for the Volt I just knew I has to pass it on. It comes to us courtesy of the folks at bailoutcost.com, a group that is promoting awareness of the real cost of the GM bailout. Enjoy... I sure did.

Now if I can just find such an ad parody for solar panels produced by Solynda, another company that received massive bailout subsides (upwards of $500 Million) from Obummer and his cronies and promptly went bankrupt virtually before the ink had dried on the bailout agreement.

CBC......What on earth are you thinking?

I read an article the other day, well actually I read it twice, then once more just to be sure that I was not imagining or misunderstanding what I saw in print. As I wasn't certain I could believe the contents of the article, I went out to do my due diligence and research to verify the facts.

As you may have surmised from the title of this post the article is about our beloved mother corp, the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). Now as a Canadian I have learned long ago not to be too shocked by any decision or course of action CBC undertakes, remember these are the same clowns that cancelled The Simpsons (a ratings giant) because it was not Canadian content, yet have force fed us Coronation Street (a British soap opera) for the last quarter century. So what was it that nearly made me fall out of my chair?

What's all the fuss about Old Age Security?

Like most people I see a day when retirement will be upon me. So while I am doing my best to build a nest egg for those years I also realize that I will be counting on the government for some of my retirement income.

This means that anytime our federal government discusses changes that may effect the retired segment of our population I listen up. Naturally when I recently heard Prime Minister Harper speak on the need for raising the age of eligibility for Old Age Security (OAS) to 67  from it's current 65 my ears perked up and I immediately assumed the worse. However like so much of what the mainstream media serves to us there is far more to it than meets the eye.

Once again the pigs are at the trough....

If you keep abreast of current news you have probably noticed that the topic of MP Pensions has been rearing its head again lately. Although these pensions have been in place for many years they seem to become the focus of attentions every once in a while. What amazes me personally as a taxpayer is that this issue is ever allowed to creep back into the shadows.This is probably one of the most blatant example of how our elected officials ensure their own pockets are lined at the expense of those that elected them. Don't believe me, well read on and you will....

According To Jim, sadly not a sitcom but reality TV

I read with interest the statements made in late 2011 by Jim Flahery, our Federal Finance Minister. According to Jim (wait a moment, isn't that the name of a sitcom?), due to the weak economy federal revenues are less than expected, this in turn will result in a delay in balancing the budget. Now, According to Jim ( hehe...) the earliest the annual Federal deficit of approximately $31 billion will be eliminated is 2015/2016. Well Jim, although I am not a Finance Minister or even a sitting Member of Parliament, might I suggest a simpler more immediate solution to the deficit.

Why do many government sponsored "Green" projects have the stench of something "Brown"?

Since the launch of the Chevy Volt, the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle built by GM (acronym for Government Motors (formerly know as General Motors) I have been watching to see one of these cars cruise down the road, unfortunately I am still waiting. The thought of an "electric car" intrigues me as much as the next guy, however I have a hard time imagining that they will become mainstream anytime in the near future. I say this for two reasons, first their limited range on battery power alone, and second the much higher initial cost .

Unfortunately neither of these issues on the surface are the real concern that any of us should have with this vehicle, the real concern is far more frightening....