Like a vision of a god, the average American witnessed a burning Bush spewing forth new laws and direction. The result of which was Barack Obama riding into Washington on the back of an ass.
Within the day of Obama’s inauguration, books, DVD’s, music CD’s, magazines and newspapers hailed Obama as the man who is going to fix the world! If this was only just an exaggeration. All you have to do is walk into a music store or bookstore in Canada and you would think that our flag is the stars and stripes and not the humble maple leaf.
Canadians are reading books like, “Dreams of my Father: A story of Race and Inheritance”, “Words on a Journey: The Great Speeches of Barack Obama - Special Inauguration Edition”, "President Barack Obama: Change Has Come To America. His Words - His Promises”, “Barack Obama: The Audacity of Hope”, “Barack Obama: What He Believes In - From His Own Works”, “Change: Barack Obama's Plan to Repair the U.S. Economy.” You can find in audio the CD “Change We Can Believe In: Barack Obama's Plan to Renew America's Promise”, and the DVD “Obama All Access/ Road To the White House.” Yes, it appears as though people may have a case of ObamaMania. I saw these titles in two books stores and one music chain this past weekend.
This fascination with the man appears to be not just limited to North America, these same books are published in German, French and Spanish. However, the big question here is why Canadians are so gravitated to American politics, and in particular Barack Obama.
Let’s put the obvious aside and make some observations.
Yes, the man is considered black, African American or even negro, take your pick, it depends on when you were born. The USA has always been considered an unenlightened nation of rednecks, racists and warmongers. So a democratic black man in office is even a bit more of a stretch. These two facts alone may justify seeing a flurry of media as a result of winning the presidency. But whether Obama is black, Democratic or from Mars, the man is just that, a man, nothing more and nothing less.
But the press, media promoters and a slew of backers are hailing him as the messiah not only of the USA but also of the World. I don’t think I have ever witnessed in my time hysteria at the election of one man as we are seeing today.
As one fella said to me as I was standing in the aisle of Indigo Books, “But dude, he is the head of the most powerful nation in the world, of course he will have to save it!” I looked over and saw this pocket-torn teenager shrug his head at me and walk away. I really have to develop an inner monologue when in public.
Lets put ourselves in Obama’s shoes. He is walking into office with his nation fighting a war on two fronts, all the while poking at a third, Iran. Even before the global economy tanked, the American’s were in debt over their heads. People are losing their houses and the private banking structure in that country is coming to their knees. Pressures from left-wing interest groups are pushing for rapid development of alternative technologies that will crush previous stable industries that the USA requires to recover their economy.
He has inherited powers that have put eyes and ears into private homes without legal protection to its citizenry, a power that has been in question ever since Bush pushed ahead with laws to empower the “Department of Homeland Security.”
He has inherited the largest terrorist day-care facility on the planet, with no due course to deal with the men arrested in Afghanistan and Iraq who were taken out of those countries to the island of Cuba. In short, he is walking into a real mess.
So what fascinates Canadians with Obama is therefore pretty clear. It’s the situation that man is in. Like a crowd gathering at a car wreck the world, including Canada, is waiting on the sidelines to see if he will truly become a ‘superman.’ Only Obama himself knows the fear he is hiding at his plight.
Whatever Obama’s agenda may have been, he has inherited an America nested with Republican elements, with a war room entrenched by people fighting for 7 years. He is one man alone and certainly not the messiah. He is only one man, who against the odds, was elected the President of the United Sates. A man, who right now is carrying the ‘football.’
Friday, January 30, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Jim, just answer the questions!
Last Monday Dave Rutherford was interviewing the right honourable Minister of the Enviroment Jim Prentice on CHED radio. This interview showed just how patient and professional Dave is when dealing with a guest who appears to skirt the issue. Prentice had just returned from hosting the first Canadian Federal Summit on the Environmental Plight of Polar Bears. Lets just call this the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. for short.
Mr. Rutherford was trying to get information from the Minister regarding any consensus that this group of scientists, wildlife officials and Inuit leaders may have come to regarding the endangered species we all know as the cuddly Polar Bear. In one sense Mr. Prentice conveyed that the Inuit leaders are under the impression that there are more Polar Bears than ever. He then qualified the Inuit’s observation as saying to Dave that there are 13 sub populations of Polar Bears including 3 in Greenland. This clearly painted in your mind that you could disregard the Inuit’s concern because it must be the 3 sub populations in Greenland that the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. should be addressing. With each question, Prentice squirmed about using highfalutin words and political posturing. The segment lasted about 20 minutes with the listener, me, thinking, “Jim, just answer the questions!” One thing for sure about radio programs like this is that it makes a person research. If Prentice was not going to pony up, I thought, “Someone out there has the answers.”
Greenpeace, the environmental watchdogs of the world, have cited that we need to reduce greenhouse gasses because global warming, which according to Greenpeace will evaporate all icecaps in 70 years, is killing the Polar Bears. In this respect, the Polar Bear is being used as a political icon for global climate change. The fact is that in Canada we have over 15,000 of these creatures, many have been found to be a nuisance to communities such as Churchill, Manitoba.
In 2004, 174 of these bears had to be airlifted out of the area because of them entering the small community of 1200. In that small town street signs are posted that say, “WARNING: Beware of Polar Bears on the Streets.”
This problem is more prevalent that one thinks. It fits well within the “on-the-ground” observation of the Inuit at the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. when they tell the scientists and politicians that there are more Polar Bears than ever. It is interesting as I read from one environmentally slanted writer’s take on these airlifts, “ Another somewhat ominous attraction has for some years been added to bear watching. Perhaps attributed to global warming, resource people have been finding air lifting of bears out to the ice necessary because freeze up is coming later and given the timing, bears are in danger of starvation.”
Many an enviromentalist may point out that it is because of the ‘shrinking’ ice caps that the polar bear are encroaching on the Inuit communities looking for food, but if this were true, would not the opposite be observed on the ground? Since Polar Bears hunt on the ice for pre-clubbed seals, would they not migrate further north following the ‘shrinking ice?’
It should be noted that the Polar Bears are extremely adaptable and persistent creatures. They have occupied the arctic for at least 120,000 years and have lived through ice ages and polar cap shrinkage without the help of man.
Another interesting observation I made was that it was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that first identified the Polar Bear as an endangered species. Canada followed suit, but unlike the Americans where hunting for Polar Bears in Alaska is strictly prohibited, hunting for them in Canada is controlled with limits with geography playing a role. One could say that us northerners have a more realistic understanding of the plight of the Polar Bear. Once again, Prentice could learn something from the “on-the-ground” observations of the Inuit people.
So is the Polar Bear really an endangered species? The Canadian perspective seems to differ from nations with less polar experience. The issue of the these northern beasts has become more of an emotional issue that tends to cause politicians to tether their tongues to specific groups, and organize meetings such as the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. designed to convey a predetermined message rather than being an actual fact finding mission. The truth seems to be the Inuit peoples dealing with the Polar Bear should be considered the experts regarding the Polar Bear.
Global warming, whether it is anthropomorphic or naturally cyclical, will likely not kill off the Polar Bear. They will endure as they have in the past. Perhaps our government should deal with the environment in a more constructive way rather than leave people wondering why they attended in the first place.
Mr. Rutherford was trying to get information from the Minister regarding any consensus that this group of scientists, wildlife officials and Inuit leaders may have come to regarding the endangered species we all know as the cuddly Polar Bear. In one sense Mr. Prentice conveyed that the Inuit leaders are under the impression that there are more Polar Bears than ever. He then qualified the Inuit’s observation as saying to Dave that there are 13 sub populations of Polar Bears including 3 in Greenland. This clearly painted in your mind that you could disregard the Inuit’s concern because it must be the 3 sub populations in Greenland that the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. should be addressing. With each question, Prentice squirmed about using highfalutin words and political posturing. The segment lasted about 20 minutes with the listener, me, thinking, “Jim, just answer the questions!” One thing for sure about radio programs like this is that it makes a person research. If Prentice was not going to pony up, I thought, “Someone out there has the answers.”
Greenpeace, the environmental watchdogs of the world, have cited that we need to reduce greenhouse gasses because global warming, which according to Greenpeace will evaporate all icecaps in 70 years, is killing the Polar Bears. In this respect, the Polar Bear is being used as a political icon for global climate change. The fact is that in Canada we have over 15,000 of these creatures, many have been found to be a nuisance to communities such as Churchill, Manitoba.
In 2004, 174 of these bears had to be airlifted out of the area because of them entering the small community of 1200. In that small town street signs are posted that say, “WARNING: Beware of Polar Bears on the Streets.”
This problem is more prevalent that one thinks. It fits well within the “on-the-ground” observation of the Inuit at the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. when they tell the scientists and politicians that there are more Polar Bears than ever. It is interesting as I read from one environmentally slanted writer’s take on these airlifts, “ Another somewhat ominous attraction has for some years been added to bear watching. Perhaps attributed to global warming, resource people have been finding air lifting of bears out to the ice necessary because freeze up is coming later and given the timing, bears are in danger of starvation.”
Many an enviromentalist may point out that it is because of the ‘shrinking’ ice caps that the polar bear are encroaching on the Inuit communities looking for food, but if this were true, would not the opposite be observed on the ground? Since Polar Bears hunt on the ice for pre-clubbed seals, would they not migrate further north following the ‘shrinking ice?’
It should be noted that the Polar Bears are extremely adaptable and persistent creatures. They have occupied the arctic for at least 120,000 years and have lived through ice ages and polar cap shrinkage without the help of man.
Another interesting observation I made was that it was the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that first identified the Polar Bear as an endangered species. Canada followed suit, but unlike the Americans where hunting for Polar Bears in Alaska is strictly prohibited, hunting for them in Canada is controlled with limits with geography playing a role. One could say that us northerners have a more realistic understanding of the plight of the Polar Bear. Once again, Prentice could learn something from the “on-the-ground” observations of the Inuit people.
So is the Polar Bear really an endangered species? The Canadian perspective seems to differ from nations with less polar experience. The issue of the these northern beasts has become more of an emotional issue that tends to cause politicians to tether their tongues to specific groups, and organize meetings such as the C.F.S.E.P.P.B. designed to convey a predetermined message rather than being an actual fact finding mission. The truth seems to be the Inuit peoples dealing with the Polar Bear should be considered the experts regarding the Polar Bear.
Global warming, whether it is anthropomorphic or naturally cyclical, will likely not kill off the Polar Bear. They will endure as they have in the past. Perhaps our government should deal with the environment in a more constructive way rather than leave people wondering why they attended in the first place.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
I do, I do, I do, I . . .
‘Bountiful wives nets criminal charges!’, ‘Hen pecked cult leaders seeks confinement!.’, and ‘Monogamy challenged in Bountiful become Butch’s bride!' No matter the heading the bottom line is two members of a religious sect known as the United Order Effort residing in the small community of Bountiful, B.C. have been charged with one count each of Polygamy. Jim Oler and Winston Blackmore, leaders of the movement were charged under Section 293(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. An indictable offense that can land the two vigorous men in prison for up to five years.
A slew of stamina jokes can be tossed around regarding these fellows, since Blackmore is purported to have 20 wives while for all of Oler ‘s efforts he was only able to procure a measly two. But the true story here will be if the prosecutors in BC will be able to convict. Charter of Rights ‘freedom of religion’ arguments aside, how can Canadian laws and our track record of our degrading moral code stand up to the public scrutiny of a trail? Because in the end, it will be the Polygamy laws that are put to the test.
The Criminal Code of Canada is a hypocritical document when it deals with offenses relating to Public Morals and Sexual Offenses. Lets just break this down and see where it takes us.
The charges of Polygamy are one that prohibits someone from being married to more than one person at a time. Subsection 293 (1)(a)(ii) states, practices or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practice or enter into any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage. In other words, a certificate of marriage by the BC government is not needed to recognize the union as a marriage. Of course, polygamy is unlawful; therefore a government cannot ‘certify’ the union!
In order to call the union a marriage, the government has to recognize this group as a legitimate religious order giving the leaders “clergy” status in order to conduct a ceremony of marriage. The ‘church’ records would then be the certification needed to call the conjugal couple(s) married. Furthermore, witnesses would be needed to state that they saw an act of marriage performed by the church leaders. This all would come out of a closed religious sect. In the end, the government will have established this cult as a church with all the legislated rights and protections they need to continue their practices.
It was also interesting to note that no sexual or child corruption charges make up any part of the Information in the proceedings. This clearly indicates that the police investigation did not have evidence of immoral acts conducted in the home. A home that is most definitely full of children.
The hypocritical thing here is that if the marriages are not legal, then the first wife is the true wife and the rest are all adulteresses. Up until 1985 it was a Criminal Offense to commit Adultery. But now Adultery is condoned by Canada! Just don’t conduct any private ceremony before ya do the deed. If you do, then its Polygamy and you start all over again.
It brings to mind the image of an Ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail. Because that is exactly what Canada is doing with is its morality code, consuming itself in a cyclical fashion. Our moral code neither lives nor dies, it just exist, with no teeth or ethical compass.
Whether it is Adultery or Polygamy, either act destroys the fabric of a family, degrades the women involved and can corrupt the morals of children. Having polygamy unlawful in Canada is a good thing. But it was only enforceable years ago before Canada legalized adultery and softened other sexual offences. The laws that protect society in these from these acts are soft and unadministratable.
Its about time that the Criminal Code be changed in a manner that strengthens society, protects our children from moral corruption and protect each citizen from each other.
Years of erosion have stripped us of these fundamental laws. How much more erosion can we take?
A slew of stamina jokes can be tossed around regarding these fellows, since Blackmore is purported to have 20 wives while for all of Oler ‘s efforts he was only able to procure a measly two. But the true story here will be if the prosecutors in BC will be able to convict. Charter of Rights ‘freedom of religion’ arguments aside, how can Canadian laws and our track record of our degrading moral code stand up to the public scrutiny of a trail? Because in the end, it will be the Polygamy laws that are put to the test.
The Criminal Code of Canada is a hypocritical document when it deals with offenses relating to Public Morals and Sexual Offenses. Lets just break this down and see where it takes us.
The charges of Polygamy are one that prohibits someone from being married to more than one person at a time. Subsection 293 (1)(a)(ii) states, practices or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practice or enter into any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the same time whether or not it is by law recognized as a binding form of marriage. In other words, a certificate of marriage by the BC government is not needed to recognize the union as a marriage. Of course, polygamy is unlawful; therefore a government cannot ‘certify’ the union!
In order to call the union a marriage, the government has to recognize this group as a legitimate religious order giving the leaders “clergy” status in order to conduct a ceremony of marriage. The ‘church’ records would then be the certification needed to call the conjugal couple(s) married. Furthermore, witnesses would be needed to state that they saw an act of marriage performed by the church leaders. This all would come out of a closed religious sect. In the end, the government will have established this cult as a church with all the legislated rights and protections they need to continue their practices.
It was also interesting to note that no sexual or child corruption charges make up any part of the Information in the proceedings. This clearly indicates that the police investigation did not have evidence of immoral acts conducted in the home. A home that is most definitely full of children.
The hypocritical thing here is that if the marriages are not legal, then the first wife is the true wife and the rest are all adulteresses. Up until 1985 it was a Criminal Offense to commit Adultery. But now Adultery is condoned by Canada! Just don’t conduct any private ceremony before ya do the deed. If you do, then its Polygamy and you start all over again.
It brings to mind the image of an Ouroboros, a snake eating its own tail. Because that is exactly what Canada is doing with is its morality code, consuming itself in a cyclical fashion. Our moral code neither lives nor dies, it just exist, with no teeth or ethical compass.
Whether it is Adultery or Polygamy, either act destroys the fabric of a family, degrades the women involved and can corrupt the morals of children. Having polygamy unlawful in Canada is a good thing. But it was only enforceable years ago before Canada legalized adultery and softened other sexual offences. The laws that protect society in these from these acts are soft and unadministratable.
Its about time that the Criminal Code be changed in a manner that strengthens society, protects our children from moral corruption and protect each citizen from each other.
Years of erosion have stripped us of these fundamental laws. How much more erosion can we take?
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Cutting them off is just not Canadian
How many times have you been talking with a fellow Albertan regarding water, fuel, power or cattle? Think about it. Those four commodities have been the subject of news reports off and on for decades. They all have one thing in common and that is foreign investment.
When cattle are brought to the forefront, it is because the USA has shut the border down to Canadian beef sales. Water comes to mind when the USA wants to get fresh. Power comes to mind every time California and the Midwest States have brown outs, because we assume that Alberta is feeding a large portion of the North America grid. Fuel comes to mind because we are sitting on one of the largest bitumen deposits in the world next to Russia, when the USA threatens to boycott our so-called dirty oil. Yes my fellow Albertans we got what they need, and our cousins to the south continually come crawling to the trough.
It seems that more often than not the USA has threatened to stop buying any of these products from Albertans. We feel threatened, betrayed and down right angry. You can be sitting in a restaurant in Alberta and listen, as many an Albertan will say. “We should just turn off the spigot to our oil, water or power. Maybe then they will appreciate our services.” or “Lets just pull the switch and leave in the dark ages for a spell.”
That’s actually pretty good logic. It fits well within the thinking of good-old capitalism. If you want to raise the price of anything, create a shortage. The increase in demand is good for the economy. A great example of this is the current price of oil. Sitting somewhere around $36.00 per barrel, oil once sold internationally for $115.00 per barrel. The cocky OPECians came out with a news release in early July stating, “The price of a barrel of oil will never drop, below $100.00!” It appears that the richest tribal community in the world finally took notice when in early December OPEC announced that they are going to reduce production of oil. Taking a lesson from their Economic 101 professor, they are trying to stimulate the prices by creating a demand through reduced production. To bad for them that Canada and Russia can produce more then OPEC if need be.
So if OPEC can get away with it, why can’t Alberta? Even former Communists have mastered the art of Capitalism. This week Russia has taken the example of the Kingdom. CBC News announced Tuesday that “Russia cuts gas flow to Europe.” The reports states that “Reductions in supply by Russia’s state gas company halted natural gas flow to several European states Tuesday and severely cut back supply to other nations amid its price dispute with Ukraine.” They cut all the countries of Europe off because Ukraine would not allow a price increase! At the risk of stating the obvious… it’s winter there! I would suspect that a demand has been created. Natural gas is the primary heating and cooking fuel in most countries. It should not take long before Europe puts pressure to bear on the Ukraine to start paying their bills.
Are the actions of Russia fair? For that matter are the actions of OPEC fair? First the OPEC solution did nothing to create a demand because while they were basking in their luxury other nations refusing to come under another 70’s style energy crisis accelerated their exploration and technology development. But in Russia’s case, I would suspect that that all pipelines lead to the Steppes of Russia.
The immediate response regarding Russia’s actions ranged from, “How unethical” to “Russia is not that stupid, they know they have the upper hand.” But many global monitors will criticize their actions, equating it to global economic terrorism. But it really is not the business of any person, group or nation how they do business. If they need to justify an increase their rates, so be it. The world has been under that energy policy since OPEC was formed and the founding countries of that organization implemented price controlling. In the 70’s the founder of OPEC, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela cut the spigot off to the USA. In the end, prices of gasoline increased, and the markets adjusted.
So, I guess I am saying, Alberta has the upper hand. Do we join in on the new world order strong arm policies?
When cattle are brought to the forefront, it is because the USA has shut the border down to Canadian beef sales. Water comes to mind when the USA wants to get fresh. Power comes to mind every time California and the Midwest States have brown outs, because we assume that Alberta is feeding a large portion of the North America grid. Fuel comes to mind because we are sitting on one of the largest bitumen deposits in the world next to Russia, when the USA threatens to boycott our so-called dirty oil. Yes my fellow Albertans we got what they need, and our cousins to the south continually come crawling to the trough.
It seems that more often than not the USA has threatened to stop buying any of these products from Albertans. We feel threatened, betrayed and down right angry. You can be sitting in a restaurant in Alberta and listen, as many an Albertan will say. “We should just turn off the spigot to our oil, water or power. Maybe then they will appreciate our services.” or “Lets just pull the switch and leave in the dark ages for a spell.”
That’s actually pretty good logic. It fits well within the thinking of good-old capitalism. If you want to raise the price of anything, create a shortage. The increase in demand is good for the economy. A great example of this is the current price of oil. Sitting somewhere around $36.00 per barrel, oil once sold internationally for $115.00 per barrel. The cocky OPECians came out with a news release in early July stating, “The price of a barrel of oil will never drop, below $100.00!” It appears that the richest tribal community in the world finally took notice when in early December OPEC announced that they are going to reduce production of oil. Taking a lesson from their Economic 101 professor, they are trying to stimulate the prices by creating a demand through reduced production. To bad for them that Canada and Russia can produce more then OPEC if need be.
So if OPEC can get away with it, why can’t Alberta? Even former Communists have mastered the art of Capitalism. This week Russia has taken the example of the Kingdom. CBC News announced Tuesday that “Russia cuts gas flow to Europe.” The reports states that “Reductions in supply by Russia’s state gas company halted natural gas flow to several European states Tuesday and severely cut back supply to other nations amid its price dispute with Ukraine.” They cut all the countries of Europe off because Ukraine would not allow a price increase! At the risk of stating the obvious… it’s winter there! I would suspect that a demand has been created. Natural gas is the primary heating and cooking fuel in most countries. It should not take long before Europe puts pressure to bear on the Ukraine to start paying their bills.
Are the actions of Russia fair? For that matter are the actions of OPEC fair? First the OPEC solution did nothing to create a demand because while they were basking in their luxury other nations refusing to come under another 70’s style energy crisis accelerated their exploration and technology development. But in Russia’s case, I would suspect that that all pipelines lead to the Steppes of Russia.
The immediate response regarding Russia’s actions ranged from, “How unethical” to “Russia is not that stupid, they know they have the upper hand.” But many global monitors will criticize their actions, equating it to global economic terrorism. But it really is not the business of any person, group or nation how they do business. If they need to justify an increase their rates, so be it. The world has been under that energy policy since OPEC was formed and the founding countries of that organization implemented price controlling. In the 70’s the founder of OPEC, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela cut the spigot off to the USA. In the end, prices of gasoline increased, and the markets adjusted.
So, I guess I am saying, Alberta has the upper hand. Do we join in on the new world order strong arm policies?
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Strange, it's in our hands
Its official, Canada as strong as it has been, is following the USA into a recession. But how deep we fall, is oddly in the average persons hands. I am not suggesting that all we need to do is close our eyes, click our heels and recite, “There’s no place like home,” but history has a way of repeating itself if we do not take heed.
Over the past four weeks, Canadians have been watching as our federal government was being pecked away by the ‘Three Stooges’, citing a need to remove Harper and the Conservative for the sake of our economy. They actually believe that in their hands they can steer Canada away from economic crisis. It will be no surprise to any of us that when January 26th comes around and Parliaments sits again, the opposition will accuse Harper of causing our current crisis. But the sad reality is that many Canadians believe that governments can just turn the economy around. I just don’t believe that politicians wear blue and red tights with a cape.
The last economic recession that was felt world wide occurred in the early 1990’s. Canada had just come off a boom, which came to an erupted stop during the middle of 1988 and did not let up until the mid 1990’s. One factor was “Black Monday” when the American markets took the hardest fall since 1929. Although they recovered, lumbering savings and loans were beginning to collapse, putting the savings of millions of Americans in jeopardy. The panic that followed led to a sharp recession that hit hardest those countries most closely linked to the United States, which included Canada. This panic was widely publicized in the press and the result influenced a sharp drop in the consumer confidence index. The average Joe fearing their family’s financial stability socked their money away. The result was a hefty drop in consumer spending in Canada as well as Alberta.
Many will notice that it was during the 1990’s we saw the collapse of the family operated small business being the market norm. The loss of consumer confidence led to many small businesses laying off workers, the development of part-time employees as a standard which in turn saw full-time workers and benefit’s a thing of the past. Many businesses closed their doors or filed for bankruptcy protection. Larger retail corporations put the squeeze on dealerships and franchises in an effort to keep their margins and the collapsed cascaded. When the dust settled and the economy recovered, we saw the rise of the super big box retail shopping centres.
If we look further back to the Great Depression we see a similar economic pattern. The world had just come off of a period of great economic boom. In October of 1930, the American stock market experienced “Black Monday,” followed immediately by “Black Tuesday.” Falling share prices caused a collapse in confidence and consumer wealth. Spending fell and the decline in confidence precipitated a desire for savers to withdraw money from their banks. In short the average Joe began to sock away their savings, pulling money out of circulation. This affected the banks, in that many began to fail. In a desperate bid to raise money, the banks tried to call in their loans before people had time to repay them. As banks went bankrupt, it only increased the demand for other savers to withdraw money from banks. Consumer confidence, failing businesses, unemployment all occurred in that order. It would take over eight years for the economy to be stimulated.
Today, we are coming off an unprecedented economic boom that has been stimulated by the energy market, the rapid growth in housing starts, the continued expansion of the big box retails centres, a gluttony created by a diversified auto industry, and a continued low interest rate set by the Bank of Canada. North America has witnessed lending practices by banks and trust companies that have made the average Joe feel richer than they think. This in turn increased consumer confidence at a 50 year high.
The Consumer Confidence Index, which is monitored by many countries, is showing that as a result of the failing banks and heavy layoffs in the USA and now in Eastern Canada, the average Joe is again socking away their money. The consumer confidence index is showing that retail sales will hit, if not already an all-time low.
Meanwhile, Canadians sit and wait to see if Harper is going to make good on an “Economic Stimulus” package. Yes, many Canadians are watching to see if the government will re-emerge wearing blue and red tights and a wavy cape. But the key phrase here is “stimulus.”
The government can only do so much to stave off a cascade of financial failures. In the end, the lives of small business, retailers, local grocers, restaurateurs, service providers are in the hands of a handful of Joes. You and I, the very factor that the government will try to stimulate. Instead of watching an episode of the ‘Three Stooges,’ we should plan our spending. Invest smart, redirect our saving to support those businesses in our communities, the same businesses that employ our loved ones.
In the end, how deep we fall is in our hands.
Over the past four weeks, Canadians have been watching as our federal government was being pecked away by the ‘Three Stooges’, citing a need to remove Harper and the Conservative for the sake of our economy. They actually believe that in their hands they can steer Canada away from economic crisis. It will be no surprise to any of us that when January 26th comes around and Parliaments sits again, the opposition will accuse Harper of causing our current crisis. But the sad reality is that many Canadians believe that governments can just turn the economy around. I just don’t believe that politicians wear blue and red tights with a cape.
The last economic recession that was felt world wide occurred in the early 1990’s. Canada had just come off a boom, which came to an erupted stop during the middle of 1988 and did not let up until the mid 1990’s. One factor was “Black Monday” when the American markets took the hardest fall since 1929. Although they recovered, lumbering savings and loans were beginning to collapse, putting the savings of millions of Americans in jeopardy. The panic that followed led to a sharp recession that hit hardest those countries most closely linked to the United States, which included Canada. This panic was widely publicized in the press and the result influenced a sharp drop in the consumer confidence index. The average Joe fearing their family’s financial stability socked their money away. The result was a hefty drop in consumer spending in Canada as well as Alberta.
Many will notice that it was during the 1990’s we saw the collapse of the family operated small business being the market norm. The loss of consumer confidence led to many small businesses laying off workers, the development of part-time employees as a standard which in turn saw full-time workers and benefit’s a thing of the past. Many businesses closed their doors or filed for bankruptcy protection. Larger retail corporations put the squeeze on dealerships and franchises in an effort to keep their margins and the collapsed cascaded. When the dust settled and the economy recovered, we saw the rise of the super big box retail shopping centres.
If we look further back to the Great Depression we see a similar economic pattern. The world had just come off of a period of great economic boom. In October of 1930, the American stock market experienced “Black Monday,” followed immediately by “Black Tuesday.” Falling share prices caused a collapse in confidence and consumer wealth. Spending fell and the decline in confidence precipitated a desire for savers to withdraw money from their banks. In short the average Joe began to sock away their savings, pulling money out of circulation. This affected the banks, in that many began to fail. In a desperate bid to raise money, the banks tried to call in their loans before people had time to repay them. As banks went bankrupt, it only increased the demand for other savers to withdraw money from banks. Consumer confidence, failing businesses, unemployment all occurred in that order. It would take over eight years for the economy to be stimulated.
Today, we are coming off an unprecedented economic boom that has been stimulated by the energy market, the rapid growth in housing starts, the continued expansion of the big box retails centres, a gluttony created by a diversified auto industry, and a continued low interest rate set by the Bank of Canada. North America has witnessed lending practices by banks and trust companies that have made the average Joe feel richer than they think. This in turn increased consumer confidence at a 50 year high.
The Consumer Confidence Index, which is monitored by many countries, is showing that as a result of the failing banks and heavy layoffs in the USA and now in Eastern Canada, the average Joe is again socking away their money. The consumer confidence index is showing that retail sales will hit, if not already an all-time low.
Meanwhile, Canadians sit and wait to see if Harper is going to make good on an “Economic Stimulus” package. Yes, many Canadians are watching to see if the government will re-emerge wearing blue and red tights and a wavy cape. But the key phrase here is “stimulus.”
The government can only do so much to stave off a cascade of financial failures. In the end, the lives of small business, retailers, local grocers, restaurateurs, service providers are in the hands of a handful of Joes. You and I, the very factor that the government will try to stimulate. Instead of watching an episode of the ‘Three Stooges,’ we should plan our spending. Invest smart, redirect our saving to support those businesses in our communities, the same businesses that employ our loved ones.
In the end, how deep we fall is in our hands.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)