Is It Time to Revamp the Vancouver Police Department?

July 25th, 2010 Thomasso

Lets start off with a woman named Sandy. When we talked about this after class on back Thursday, which was fittingly a class about human rights, I was applauded, shocked and embarrassed from both watching and hearing the news about the women in the Vancouver Downtown East Side who was pushed to the ground by a Vancouver Police Officer because she walked into him. The embarrassment escalated when it was discovered that the women has cerebral palsy, and because of this she has difficulty walking at the best of times.

The British Columbia Civil Liberties (BCCL) are an organization of lawyers who volunteer their time that fight for the rights of those who otherwise could not, or challenges our legal and moral values that have being corrupted and that treat people unfairly. They released the video from a street cam that takes video for the purposes of surveillance along Hastings Street where there is no doubt a high concentration of the poor and homeless, and where drug addicts and malcontents gather. Ironically, that same video is what brought justice, the public’s view as in this case, to the forefront.

The public outcry has been deafening in my circles of friends. I have not heard so much outrage about the police since the Robert Dziekanski Tasering murder at the Vancouver Airport back in October 14, 2007 by four RCMP Officers.

The impact that video has is immediate and stands on it own in the public’s mind. Unlike paper that can be censored by government, special organizations and the courts, or testimony that is based on memory that is tainted with objective spin and well rehearsed lines, video is the ultimate eye witness, even when there is no audio to accompany it. It is very difficult for the pubic to see the extenuating circumstances, and to allow legal ambiguous speak to interfere with the actors’ case who is trying to change public’s opinion as the legal system is constantly under attack by the public from all angles.

Does the moral compass of the VPD and other police forces need to be fixed? This was one of the questions that we debated back on Thursday. With the riggers of police training, one would assume that police would be more attuned to the area that they are serving. As one colleague put it, “all it takes is one bad apple…”

Here is the email I sent after class:

Things That Make Canada Questionable in its Stance on Human Rights and the treatment of the Weak and Disabled.

Last night in one of my classes we debated the aspects of what transpired from an incident that occurred along Hasting street in Vancouver, BC on about July 1st 2010. We focused on the communication by the Vancouver Police Department (VPD), not what the media is saying. At present, the VPD is saying very little as it seems that the department is still reviewing the case; however, they are satisfied that the officer did apologies, but the three officers have not comment on their conduct before, during and after the incident occurred.

Have an opened mind when viewing this video. Reflect upon it, and then ask yourself these questions, what would you do if you were the police officer, and the person with the disability? How would you react? If you were a bystander, what would you do? There were Good Samaritan’s along the sidewalk, but would you look the other way, or would intervene regardless that it was police offers who started the action?

Courtesy of CBC NEWS

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-civil-liberties-police-push-ms-woman-video.html

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/07/22/bc-woman-shoved-sandy-police-downtown-eastside.html

Just blowing off of some steam when I see imbalances in power and misuses of authority.

Please go to these links:

CBC New Website -

“Police Shoving Woman On Video Raises Questions.”

“Woman Shoved By Police Says, ‘He Has No Right.‘”

You can watch the video for yourself, and you be the judge, “was it provoked, or a bad move on the officer’s part?”

Sincerly

Posted in Criminology, Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice, University classes, Video | No Comments »

The Black Mark of a Credit Stain of a Corporate Shame

July 13th, 2010 Thomasso

This morning, as I was driving into work, I heard on the radio, CBC, that a couple had their credit history ruined by a black mark from the TELUS corporation from a bill that was never paid. This story intrigued me because I went through this exact same situation over fifteenth years ago from a couple called City Tell, from up in Prince Rupert.

What was so intriguing was the attitude from the customers, who obviously valued their credit rating, were out raged that something from so long ago was biting them in the butt now. From what I understand, when an account goes delinquent it is automatic for a company to put it into arrears, then  onto collections. I mean, I do this on a weekly bases at my second job, as I deal with delinquent accounts when searching for information on people who have moved, or for those do not want to be found: the Skip-Tracer. What I have found is that communications is the primary reason for ninety percent of all issues that I come across.

The fault of two fold. First, companies are lazy. It is easy to set up the billing account and have it sent off through the post office, email, or what ever other form of billing there is. There is usually a different department for each process of services; for example, the government, which is the worst for having multiple departments running the same account. Then if the account changes, there is most always a lag in the chain of command before the action is finished. I found in my little world that forty percent of my cases the fault started with the company and its inefficiencies on handling account. This is where the customer has given the correct information and followed through with the proper legal steps to change the status of the account. Also, most customers actually have over paid at this point. The remaining case the customer simply allows the count to go delinquent, mostly in protest.  Second, and the larger slice of the pie chart, the customer simply vanishes, and what information the company has, goes towards that customer’s credit information. The recovery rate, in my cases, are about seventy percent. So here you have total communication breakdown.

My advice to this couple would have being simply to implement legal action against the corporation, and then start the negotiations. I mean, only if their credit rating with worth that much to them would this have been worth the effort and cost. You must use justice in business as it was intended for – to fight a wrong and seek damages.  Of course, a $200.00 bill it a tough case to consider going to court over, but I have seen this done.

I also believe the couple has put too much into their financial institution for going public against TELUS like this. It is obvious that they use credit, and have a lot at stake with their money. Perhaps they should consider becoming rebels and start dealing with cash only instead and not ever have to worry about the credit scores again? Just a thought.

But I applaud these people for the guts it took to stand up and go public with this.  Bravo for them!

Here is the story: Credit ruined over unknown Telus bill: Company says privacy concerns prevented search for couple

Posted in Diatribe, General, Social Justice, Social economics | No Comments »

Human Rights Maybe Low on the Priority of Some

May 29th, 2010 Thomasso

OK, a little back grounder on for my thoughts on human rights, and why we wave the banner around but no one does anything about it. I am taking this course, as part of my degree in Criminology, and it deals specificity with all subject matter under the umbrella of human rights. We will cover, once the course is completed, everything from domestic and local issues, all the way up to international and global issues that concerns us today, and from the past. The mesh of political views, to cultural dynamics, are the themes that are a constant so far in this course. But this course is more than covering current events, and history texts, it is all about the ideas and solutions that could change the world in the near future.

War is a nasty business, right? When we talk about human rights, it is usually in the shadow of war. Ware is when man kind is at its worse. War teaches that all rules can be thrown out, or ignored, and these times of conflict bring the opportunity of creating exceptions to the rules of human rights, circumventing them in order to wreck complete havoc towards the enemy. However, when the conflict is over, and the wounds begin to heal, the world cries out for accountability, so the Untied National was born, and later on, the World Criminal Court. Venues that try to convict those people who started these terrible things that they did during those conflicts, and hold them to accountability. But the system is weak and, yes, it is very politely motivated.

Sovereignty (hey, I got the “g” in the right spot) is the key issue when thinking globally.  Would we ever consider the UN police marching down the streets of Washington D.C., poised to arrest President George W. Bush for possible war crimes? No way because the U.S. Would not tolerate it, and they have the means of making sure they are in total control of their sovereignty, not the U.N.. It is not the U.N.’s place to do this anyway. But for a class debate, this makes for some very interesting lectures. What right does a nation have for sending in it’s “special” forces to capture and detain a suspect of war crimes inside another country? I can write about this for hours…

In my class, there is a great mix of students from just about every walk of life from around the glob. We have students from just about all of the major organized religions, and about five students who are from the Middle Eastern areas, including Israel. Last week’s class lecture was the best yet. Although the principles of human rights seems obvious, the world that we live in is far to complicated to have every nation adopt in its laws these basic tenants. However, having such a diverse class means that the discussions are as diverse too, so when discussions start tackling issues such as international human rights laws, the brain power really start to crank up among the students.

I am look forward to next class. I think as we dive deeper into the murky world of human rights, my level of enlightenment will also increase.

Sadly, this will be my official last class of Criminology. I only have two courses after this, and they are electives. I will miss these classes after I graduate.

Posted in Criminal Law, Criminology, Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice, University classes | Comments Off

So, Do You Think Canada is Learning Anything from the Oil Disaster in the Gulf of Mexico?

May 15th, 2010 Thomasso

So, do you think Canada is learning anything from the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico? With the oil spewing into the water from British Petroleum’s doomed Deep Sea oil platform where, several workers died, is it any wonder that people in Canada should be very concerned as oil exploration is top on the list for all three coasts here. The precedence has being set–we now know first hand just how bad off shore oil operation is now, not that we didn’t know from before, but we can see it now right in front of a faces today.

There is a very good chance that the United States could be powerless getting the “full” cost settled from British Petroleum for the clean up. Like any corporation/business, the risk that they go bankrupted, challenge it court, or just refuse to pay is always there. My fear is, the U.S. government could at best meet them halfway and let the taxpayers flip the second half of the bill.

And what about Mexico? Oil must be landing on their shores too? I have heard very little from the other countries who share those waters, and this bothers me as I listen to the media, in particular the CBC, but only little snippets of news that amount to nothing.

In Canada, if such a disaster were to occur, the likelihood of the corporation responsible getting away with cleaning up is very good, and current laws work in its favour. Canada’s track record shows this quite well: look up the Great Lakes, the Love Canal 1976.

Sadly, in my opinion, Canada is ripe for such a disaster to happen on our waters, and with a federal government that is pro corporation, the law will likely get softer on businesses as they can seek exemptions and ask for environmental guild lines to be lifted in lieu of profits. In my group of friends, having cheep gasoline to put in their cars is far more important than the risk of loosing an entire ecosystem, a vital food source. Where the rubber meets the road is fore most top of any voter now-a-days, and no one wants higher taxes either, so they vote accordingly.

I have heard one “self expert” tell me face to face that oil is a perfectly nature substance and nature has a way of taking care of it. The Gulf of Mexico will be back to normal in a matter of a few years he told me. I highly doubt that, but he sure believes it. But he is also one of these people that believes the Earth is only 4300 years old too? Where did that come from? Perhaps I could sell him a bridge over the Fraser River. But this proves that some people will never understand the damage that is taking place in the Gulf of Mexico. Heck, with British Petroleum using huge amounts of chemicals to disperse the oil, a blatant form of the cover-up becuase if the oil stays below the surface then it is out of sight-out of mind, and the media will have search harder to get images of huge oil slicks floating on the water along the beaches. So for my friend, seeing is believing, and if you can’t see it, then it is a conspiracy perpetrated by the government. The oil is still there.

Oh Canada.

Posted in Criminology, Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice | 2 Comments »

HST – I’m Mad As Hell, and I’m Not Going To Take It Anymore!

April 17th, 2010 Thomasso

I feel better now that I took the time yesterday to sign the (anti) HST petition of British Columbia. In fact, I felt so good that I went and told as many of my friends as I could that they should show their support and sign too-and many of them did. I met a lot of angry people who are feed-up with all levels of governments, especially our provincial government for the implementation of this new tax structure called the Harmonizing Sales Tax, or HST.

What is the HST? In my own words, it is the consolidation of both the federal, GST (Goods and Services Tax), and the PST, (Provincial Sales Tax), and lump them into one tax, where everyone will pay the one lump tax, and the various governments then divvy up their take form the total sum left over. There are a number huge problems that I see with this new tax regime, and they cancel out any of the positive good that this tax does make. Net widening, and increases in the number of  items being taxes are my biggest gripes with this. The New tax will reach more people than ever before, and also, items that only had one tax applied to it, will have both wrapped up into the HST. This is more hardship for the consumer in what is already a very difficult time for most British Colombians  who are still struggling with the wrath of the recension, like those who are still unemployed.

So I got off my butt and did something about it. I saw the HST petition sign-up station along Glover Road, and I rushed right back to it after I changed at home. I live only a five minute walk from the sign-up station so I walk there to sign up.

I felt great after I singed it. Though, there were two things that I pondered while I was walking home afterwards. First, I never thought I would ever climb on board with anything that involves Bill Vander Zalm, the man who spearheaded the HST petition campaign. Second, what will our governments do if the people vote overwhelmingly in favour of having no HST? I shutter to think what these megalomaniacs will do to us? Medicare is one thing, but Corporate Welfare is another.

Some Good Links To Check Out:

http://fighthst.com/

The Straight.com/

Posted in Diatribe, General, Photographs, Social Justice, Video | 1 Comment »

The Last Few Seconds of March

March 31st, 2010 Thomasso

I just thought I would throw up a quick post tonight and try and get some content up for March, being that this month was so dismal from me not having much time to post and care for my web site. I thought I would talk about some things I have noticed about the world around me in terms of the economy for spring of 2010. To sum up in a nutshell, stuff is getting more expensive and access to money is getting harder, and having more strings attached becuase it does not grow on trees any more.

Two things that hit home for this week, transit fee increases and the HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) being pushed down our throats by the British Columbian government.

Transit fees are no laughing mater for those who have but no choice to use it. I have looked at the fare increases, and I am judging this from the perspective of a University student who needs it to travel to and from home to school, and if need be, to work. When I heard that students from Kwantlen Polytechnic University were not getting the same rate as their UBC counterparts, this caused me to question the current state of Translink and its sub-jurisdictions, the municipalities that it serves. The official excuse was that it needs the added revenue and any new rates would reflect this need for generating revenue. Any government should realize that it should treat people fairly, or the government gets voted off the island.  For myself, I now believe that it is cheaper for me to drive to my classes than take the bus(es). I do not pay for parking any more, and the time that I save driving does not encourage me to take transit on any level, and the $5.00 per day is probely close to what I spend on gas for that same trip. This is an added effect to inflation, especially on students, the poor and those who can’t drive. Of course there is always walking.

The HST debate is a fun topic at the water cooler. The Pandora’s box that was last opened came from the introduction of the GST back in the days of then prim minister Brian Mulroney, January 1, 1991. Oh those were the days. The GST was supposed to help clear up the, then manufactures’ tax, and end duplication of taxes from business, and was only to be collected and born by the consumer. Sounds very right wing doesn’t? However, it did have a cascading effect becuase it made businesses responsible for the collection the tax, and created a whole new branch of criminals. When we had the roaring 2007 year, I remembered getting a letter by my beloved provincial government asking me if I made any purchases outside of the Provence, bluntly saying that I would need to pay the tax ( the BC, PST if buying from Alberta+ GST if outside of Canada) if I did. The government has become very dependent on this tax as one of its major sources of revenue. It would make sense to me to use a HST becuase it would cast the tax net very wide and hit consumers where they are not getting hit now.

With just these two increases in the cost of living, I wonder how long the economy will go before it stops growing and starts to reverse. Notice that I am saying that this is inevitable? I have already cut back on my personal spending, and have made adjustments to my lifestyle accordingly. I eat out less at restaurants, go on fewer trips and impulse buying it now the thing of the past as a result of the slowing economy. I’m saving more and more now, preparing for that inevitable work stoppage, creating an emergency fund, as businesses around me slow and some take the bankruptcy pill. I think with the HST being pushed down our throats, consumers are going to have to adjust their spending habits in this new era. Hey, this just might create a whole new branch of criminals: the HST fraudsters?

Hey, feel free to comment if you think I’m on the right track, or completely off my rocker? I would love to hear whet other people think of these two topics I just posted about.

Posted in Diatribe, General, Social Justice, Social economics | Comments Off

If You Drink and Drive, You Should Forget About Driving Ever Again!

February 20th, 2010 Thomasso

Last night while I was heading home from work, I was passed on the road by a rather rude driver who was just in too much of a rush that everyone on the road was in his way, so he tail-gated, honked his horn and swerved contently to get around you. Finally he passed me going towards Fort Langley on Glover Road, just pasted the 232nd Street turn-off to highway #1. I kept to my lane, gave him some extra room so he could at least have some space to make his manoeuvre before he had a head on collision with the on coming traffic, and then he was gone.

After I got home, I decided to do a little shopping. I hopped back in the truck and headed off to Walnut-Grove, where “low and behold” there was that same rude driver again, stopped by the police getting a breathalyser test. The officer has his stash of beer cans on top of his car, and I could see the look on the driver’s face as he was lead to the police car when I drove by.

I am somewhat perplexed that after all the TV commercials and anti-driving ads, that people still think it is wise to drive while having a few drinks? I mean honestly, you are endangering all the people around you when you are driving intoxicated. You are not in full control of your faculties–even though “you” think so. And with the beefed up laws that we have now, with costly fines and a possible criminal record, not to mention the loss of your driver’s license, you would wonder that people would think twice about getting behind the wheel of a vehicle and driving off after having a few belts.

I hope that the system has done its job and has taken one more inconsiderate driver off the road. If anyone wants to argue with me on this one, then I will start with by saying this is a safety issue from all aspects. Unsafe drivers need-not-drive.

Posted in Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice | Comments Off

The Sue-ability Scale

February 5th, 2010 Thomasso

Lawyers, you may not want to read this, this might be a tough pill to swallow? These are my personal thoughts based on my personal experiences with Civil Court.

Justice is a weird thing. I have studied it to death and it still leaves me scratching my head wondering, asking why-and the answers become as vague as following a white car in the middle of a snowstorm. I have found that justice in Canada is only for those who are rich, or are very clever. That in most cases if you are being sued in civil court, it is better not to participate than it is to waste your time with the process of jurisprudences; and flip side to this, if you are rich, you are an easy target than compared to someone who is poor and homeless. Seriously, of the five people in my life that I have brought to the halls of justice, only one took the pledge and participated. The other four knew the system well enough not to bother, and I found it (almost) impossible to seek my claim, costs, damages and compensation. In fact, the one time that I was the respondent, it was easer to go on with my life than it was to play the game. To this day, the company that I had an agreement with is still out the initial $72.00, but they are also out on their costs too, so it pays not to bother with Canadian Justice if you have nothing to loose. Was it worth my time to show up—I’m still evaluating that?

I now know that there is a scale that the professionals follow when they go out on suing expeditions. They automatically drop anyone who has no money; who is renting; earning a low wage; has no bank account; has little or no identification, i.e., drivers license or birth certificate; uses aliases and moves around a lot. However, for the poor there is this thing called Small Claims Court, or the Pauper’s Court as it is called in my circles, but you still need to pay to use it though. When I studied Medieval legal systems of European cultures, Small Claims Court to me has a reminiscent quality of early continental European courts where the jurist is free to adjust, amend, vary and control all aspects of the hearing and decisions—although you can appeal in today’s court. One day I was helping a friend fight for his money from a debtor, and once it was our turn, the sitting judge read the Statement of Claim, then threw up his arm up with the documents in hand and said, “You expect to me rule on this? I think you should go back and talk to this person and make the effort on collecting your money before you go into my court.” Perhaps it was because we were not wearing $900.00 suites at the time? I’m still in awe to this day about that?

If you do have something to loose like a house, wages, assets, or your respondent has too, then going to court is the way to go. I have also seen the dual effects of court at play many times as the monetary and psychological costs play their toll and all parties. The trouble is, court is not a guaranteed bet. Just when you thought you had the full force of the law on your side, you are hit with a sucker-punch and your case falls like a house of cards. In one case of mine, I filed for a garnishment of wages and the respondent’s employer decided not to cooperate. The business told me that he does not work in their department any more. I found myself having to take extraordinary measures to track down who this person really worked for before I could I proceed with the action. This involved two days of driving by this guy’s work every ten minutes searching for what door he came out of. Then once I saw him walking out to go home, I went into the building and had to do some quick lurking. I asked one of the managers that I was looking for my “friend.” When I confirmed that that was the respondent’s employer, I then went to the manager’s office to serve the garnishment order. I received two out of the five payment to fulfil the debt, but then they stopped as the guy quit his job and moved elsewhere. I just recovered only my court costs in that case. Was it worth it? At least I got to play the psych-game with him.

Posted in Criminology, Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice | Comments Off

I Applaud the BC Court of Appeal’s decision on Insite

January 16th, 2010 Thomasso

One of the greatest contradictions of Canada’s “sheepish” war on drugs as been the connection between the cost of health to our healthcare system and the battle to regulate what the State thinks is good or bad for its citizens. The criminalization of drugs is a recent phenomenon that is just over a hundred years old, and was born out of attacking specific marginal and ethnic groups. Canada has a very deep cultural love affair with illegal narcotics, and none could be more so than with marijuana. But for whatever stance you choose in your ideology, albeit the left or right, the drug culture in Canada isn’t going to go away any time soon, and we have to deal with that.

Insite was born out of long term thinking and the concept of rehabilitation; in other words, having a safe place to be that offers hope is a better approach than by pushing it underground and letting the long term effects eat away at our society. The logic behind Insite is simple: safety and hope. The people who use the facility are addicted to drugs, and are at the bottom of the social ladder. Further criminalization is not going to “fix” them, but rather push them deeper into marginalization.

The nay-sayers seems to start off with the line, “If you prohibit drugs and the use of it, then that will fix the problem… .”

I argue that the nay-sayer, has not found the root cause of the problem, but has only made it even worse than the act of using the drugs in the first place. The nay-sayer needs to ask why that person has chosen to take the drugs in the first place. However, it is easer to criminalize something than to fix it—well, that seems to be Canada’s current model. But to become homeless and drug dependant means that that person has issues that go beyond the act of taking drugs. Then you reach a point where you have no where to go, you become vulnerable, and as a result you become more visible. From Hitler to Harper, the right-wing thinking is to invoke prohibition against specific marginal groups that do not appeal to middle and upper class standards, and to simply criminalize something that does not adhere to those standards seems to be the answer.

What insite does is to give these people the chance to use clean needles to inject themselves with in hopes of stopping the practice of sharing needles. The AIDS epidemic, and many other diseases too, has a direct correlation with this group of people with the sharing of needles, so it would make sense to offer clean needles than to deal with growing numbers of AIDS victims. Safety too is an issue with Insite because if that user needs further treatment, or decides to move towards kicking their habit, then there are people right there on site to offer that help. When the user is in the facility there are staff on hand that can promptly offer help if that person is in distress. I think it is far better than having someone injecting drugs in some back alley in the middle of Vancouver.

I totally agree with the British Columbia Court of Appeal on their decision to keep the jurisdiction of Instie with British Columbia’s authority, and thus allowing the facility to stay open without Federal interference. The Federal government should stop wasting our tax money on fighting this. Remember that the majority of Canadians did not vote for Harper!

Posted in Criminology, Diatribe, General, Law, Law and Order, Social Justice | 2 Comments »

Post New Years Disorder

January 4th, 2010 Thomasso

Now that everyone is nicely in debt, suffering from the flu, and ready to get back to work, I now must take a step back and see the world that I am part of and ask myself why people do what they do, especially pondering the question of why is everyone so pissed off this time of year? Since the new year has started I have noticed a shift in the people around me, and more so from those who I work with, but this also applies to some of my friends too. However, I think there is more to it than meets the eye?

We just got off of two long weekends in a row with two paid statutory holidays. We went through, for most cultures, the most festive season in the calender; of course, I am the exception as I don’t celebrate the Christian, Jewish or Muslim traditions, but the Season of Tom (sic), which is 365 days per year–I am not a lemming. I enjoy everyday and treat everyday like it is New Years. So most people gave each other gifts and had fun with family and friends, and I am sure it was time well spent, but what happened afterwords, when it is time to go back and renew the year, the week, and continue on with our jobs?

So why does everyone seem so pissed off? Is it becuase the party is over? Hum? No, I think it goes deeper than that?

I think part of the answer is in the frustration that times are leaner, and becuase of the tight economic era that we now live in, people are “taking it out” on the first person that they encounter becuase they are frustrated with themselves . People have over spent. As the cost of living shoots upwards, so does the cost of giving in the monetary sense. So far since I have come back to work I have heard nothing but complaining about how in debt everyone is, and how expensive things are getting. Also, the labourers seem unwilling to motivate themselves as one person put it, “How can I work for this much when it now costs me more to do the job in the first place…” When they complain, the management resorts to apathy towards them. When they come to me, they act sometimes so vulgar and pathetic that I tune them out too.

Take for example the “Coughing More-On.” Today while I was setting everything up to start my day, this one guy comes in coughing and hacking his lunges out becuase he is in the full throws of the flu. First, he shows up at work so sick that he could pass out from coughing so much.  He then starts coughing without covering his mouth. He told me that If he caught it, then it should get it passed around also so he can “give it back” to whom ever he caught it from down the line. Stupendous logic here, eh? I know for someone with AIDS, there is a section in the Criminal Code of Canada that deals with that, and under the Infectious Diseases and Control Act, there are provisions for dealing with those people, but there ought to be something in there to the flu too, especially on the job. But I ask this question, because he is sick, does that mean he must make everyone else around him sick too?

So money and health seem to be the first casualties of the new year. This does not surprise me? I heard on CBC Radio One that the stats on consumer spending surveyed by the Bank of Montreal says that Canadians are confident about the economy. First, a Bank telling us that we are happy with the economy – now that is a joke. But it also says that if the Banks are happy with the way we are spending, and unemployment is still increasing, than that only leave debt as the only logical answer to this social phenomenon. Throw in some flu germs and you now have the recipe for Post New Years Disorder.

Posted in Bitching about work, Diatribe, General, Humour, Social Justice, Social economics | 3 Comments »