Longevity is a textbook ‘good problem

Longevity is a textbook ‘good problem ’By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist Longevity is a textbook ‘good problem’ for Canadian society, one that financial services professionals now must solve. Thanks to advances in health care and wide access to health care services, Canadian life expectancy continues to rise. Life expectancy at birth is now 82.16 and life expectancy at age 65 is now 86.15. That feat of longevity now creates a new slew of risks for retirees, namely that they will outlive their retirement savings, especially if they face high health care costs late in life. Those risks are compounded for the 52 per cent of Canadian workers who do not have access to any kind of employer-sponsored pension plan. Canadians now need to plan to live off their savings for decades, and many of them need to plan to do that alone. Retirees face as they live longer and highlighted how consistent retirement income and clear decumulation strategies can help manage those uncertainties. The importance of the advisor in this period, noting that decumulation can be far more complex and challenging than the accumulation phase that precedes retirement. “I think retirees are facing several key uncertainties. They don't know exactly how long they'll live, what future market returns are going to look like, or even how inflation will affect their purchasing power over time. And taken together, these risks can have a significant impact on retirement security, What we're seeing is that longevity risk has increasingly shifted from the institution to the individual. And retirement planning today requires a much greater focus on generating dependable income and managing risk while over what could be a very long time. Remember not all advisor offer the same services and solutions. Ask questions and find solutions that meet you needs.

When Standing Up Makes You Sick

When Standing Up Makes You Sick Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones It was like opening a time capsule when I met up with my college roommate after 35 years. We laughed about our good times together and recalled all the confidence we had about our futures at age twenty. Then the conversation turned to our children, and she told me about her daughter's long struggle to obtain a diagnosis of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, or POTS. Once that diagnosis became clear, it is easy to point to a distinguishing symptom. For people with POTS, standing upright triggers a debilitating racing of the heart. But for the 2-3 million people in North America estimated to have the condition, figuring it out is no easy job. Experts are not sure why, but it’s a condition that tends to strike young women, aged 15-35, most often from comfortable, and white, families. This fits my roommate’s situation. It may be that POTS could be found in other segments of society, but neither patients nor doctors are making the connection. The root cause of POTS lies in the body’s remarkable automatic control system – the autonomic nervous system – which manages heart rate, blood pressure, circulation, digestion, and temperature control. When we stand, gravity pulls blood toward our legs. A healthy nervous system immediately responds. Blood vessels tighten, the heart adjusts, and enough blood continues to reach the brain. In someone with POTS, that response does not work properly. The body struggles to maintain circulation when upright, and the heart often speeds up dramatically to compensate. The result can be dizziness, fatigue, weakness, exercise intolerance, difficulty concentrating, and a pounding heartbeat. Some sufferers feel better when they lie down – but not all. When the autonomic nervous system is out of whack, all bets are off. Historically, and to date, many patients have struggled to find an explanation. Because routine heart tests and blood work may appear normal, some are told their symptoms are due to stress or anxiety. During the American Civil War, physician Jacob Mendes Da Costa described soldiers who suffered from racing hearts, fatigue, chest discomfort, and poor exercise tolerance. The condition became known as “soldier’s heart.” Although it was not the same diagnosis as POTS, researchers believe these individuals may have had problems involving the autonomic nervous system. Over the decades, doctors continued to encounter patients who became ill when upright. But it was not until the 1990s that researchers formally described and named POTS. Scientists now understand that POTS is not one single disease. Different patients may have different underlying causes. In some, nerves that regulate blood vessels may not function properly. In others, there may be abnormalities involving the immune system, blood volume, or the body’s response to infection. The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented attention to POTS. Some people recovering from COVID developed persistent symptoms including rapid heart rate, dizziness, and exercise intolerance. Researchers began investigating whether viral infections could trigger autonomic disorders in susceptible individuals. Although POTS is often associated with younger people, it can occur at any age. In older adults, symptoms may be mistaken for medication effects, dehydration, heart problems, or the normal challenges of aging. For my roommate and her daughter, and similar to many other families, it was a long and frustrating journey to the diagnosis of POTS. Ultimately, it took a team of specialists at the Mayo Clinic to design and initiate a four-week intensive program of physical, mental, and behavioural changes to daily routines that enabled them to return to normal life. With better knowledge about what’s going on, there comes an appreciation for the extraordinary things the human body does, even when just standing up.

Hamster Wheel

Hamster Wheel By Wayne and Tamara I am 39, married for four years. I have no kids, but two stepchildren from my current wife. The problem is I may be in love with someone from my past, and when I say my past, I mean high school. I met this girl when I was a sophomore and she was a freshman. For me it was instant love. Not only was she the most beautiful woman I’ve ever seen, she was wonderful. Unfortunately, she was in a popular clique, and well, I was not. We lived close by, so we rode the same bus to and from school. We were friendly and all, but nothing more. Looking back I can’t honestly say if I asked her out she would have said no, but at the time there was no way I was going to risk it. I wrote her love letters and sent roses on her birthday. She called to thank me, but since I had no idea how to talk to girls, I completely blew that opportunity. The years sped by as they tend to do, and I thought about her. I figured she was married with kids, and I should just let her go. Once or twice a month I have dreams about her, and no, none of them are sexual. But they usually make me sad. It sometimes takes me a day or two to get over the more vivid ones. Last year was my 20th high school reunion, and through the grapevine I found out she never married. She’s on my Facebook page. I was going to say hi to her just as a friend, but apparently she’s never on. I wrote this letter because last night I had another dream about her. I woke up nearly in tears because it was so emotional. I love my wife but not in the same way; it’s more like she’s my best friend. My greatest regret in life is that I never had a chance with this girl. I always felt she was the one I was meant to be with. I feel lost, my heart is breaking, and I have no idea what to do. Edgar Edgar, each year, not far from where we live, Civil War re-enactors gather to recreate a battle. They may think what they do is authentic, but parading on clean fields in pressed uniforms doesn’t capture the frontline realities of fleas, filth, and the fear of death. It’s more like a getaway weekend. The past is not a buffet where we can take what we want and move it into the present. In truth you are having night sweats over a woman you never dated and barely talked to. You don’t know her, and you can’t genuinely love someone you don’t know.There are three possible courses of action. First, you can sit around and wallow in this unmatured infatuation and let fantasy destroy your current life--which is exactly what you did as a teenager. Or you can go see this woman and almost surely be disappointed. But we don’t think you will do that. This daydream is about being able to sit on your hands through life, like the man who fantasizes about quitting his job but never does it. Or you can look at what has been so wrong in your life that you don’t want to live in it. What is going on is not about this woman. It’s about you. It has nothing to do with her. She doesn’t need to be talked to or chased or pursued. The tragedy is you are losing your life over a phantom. You are having highly charged emotional interactions with someone who exists only in the insubstantial, watery world of your imagination.We suggest sitting down and talking with a therapist about how to live in the here and now. Wayne & Tamara

Are Canadians Paying More to Build a Stronger Canada?

Around the Coffee Table with Dale Jodoin Are Canadians Paying More to Build a Stronger Canada?   By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               Around more than a few coffee tables lately, the conversation has started to change. People are no longer asking why everything became so expensive. They already know the answer isn't simple. The question now is this. Are we about to go through another round of rising prices? I'd like to know what you think. Do you think another wave of inflation is coming, or is the worst behind us? This question is significant because Canada is not isolated from global events. We may have our economy, but we are connected to almost every major event taking place around the world. A drought in Europe. Flooding in Asia. Wildfires in North America. Conflict in the Middle East. Shipping delays across the oceans. On their own they sound like separate news stories. Together they could affect every Canadian family. We cannot stop those events. But we certainly feel them. When fuel prices rise, trucking companies pay more to move goods. Farmers pay more to run equipment. Manufacturers pay more to produce products. Grocery stores pay more to stock their shelves. Those extra costs don't simply disappear. Eventually they land in one place. Our shopping carts. That is why inflation is more than an economic headline. It becomes a kitchen table issue. It affects seniors living on fixed incomes, young families trying to stretch every dollar, small businesses watching every expense, and anyone hoping to save for retirement. Another aspect of this discussion warrants further examination. Over the past while, many Canadians have made a conscious decision to buy Canadian whenever they can. Some have done it out of pride. Others want to support local farmers, manufacturers and small businesses. Many simply believe that spending their money should contribute to job creation at home. I understand that thinking. In many ways, I share it. But it also raises a fair question. Does buying Canadian always save us money? The honest answer is no. Some Canadian-made products cost about the same as imported ones. Others cost more. Higher wages, smaller production runs, transportation costs, regulations, and production expenses can all influence the final price. This does not mean that purchasing Canadian products is the cause of inflation. The evidence simply does not support that conclusion. What it does mean is that some Canadians are choosing to spend slightly more because they believe there is value beyond the price tag. Maybe they are helping to keep a neighbour employed. Maybe they are supporting a local farmer. Maybe they are investing in a Canadian company that will still be here years from now. That is not inflation. That is a personal choice about where our dollars go. The bigger question is whether those choices, repeated by millions of Canadians over many years, help build a stronger economy with more jobs, better wages, and businesses that are less dependent on foreign suppliers. If they do, perhaps paying slightly more today becomes an investment instead of just another expense. At the same time, inflation itself At the same time, larger forces, beyond the control of any individual shopper, largely drive inflation itself. by forces much bigger than any one shopper. World energy prices, poor harvests, global supply chains, international conflicts, and interest rates all play major roles. Canada is not immune. What happens on another continent often reaches our grocery stores, gas stations and family budgets within weeks or months. That is the world we live in. So perhaps the real conversation isn't simply about why prices keep rising. Maybe it is about what kind of country we want to build. Do we always chase the lowest price, even if it means buying products made somewhere else? Or are we willing, when we can afford it, to support Canadian workers, Canadian farmers, and Canadian businesses, knowing that sometimes it may cost slightly more? There is no single answer. A senior living on a pension may have no choice but to buy the least expensive item on the shelf. A young family raising children may be in the same position. Another Canadian may decide the extra dollar is worth it because they believe it strengthens the country. Every one of those choices deserves respect. So I'll leave you with one question this week. If buying Canadian means paying a little more today but helps create jobs, strengthen communities, and build a more self-reliant Canada tomorrow, is that an investment worth making? I'd like to hear what you think. Because this isn't just a conversation about inflation. It's a conversation about the kind of Canada we want to leave to the next generation.

Yes, It's Possible to Recover From a Bad Interview (Example of a Recovery Letter Included)

Yes, It's Possible to Recover From a Bad Interview (Example of a Recovery Letter Included) By Nick Kossovan All of us have been there. The heavy silence in the elevator on the way down, the sudden, agonizing clarity about what you wish you had said, and the burning realization that you just blew a job opportunity. A bad interview feels final, like a door slammed shut and deadbolted. Most job seekers throw in the towel. They chalk it up to nerves, decide it wasn't meant to be, or blame their interviewer for not knowing how to conduct an interview, all while convinced they won't get the job. The corporate world is filled with flawed human beings—me included—who, having also been in the hot seat, understand that interview pressure can make even the most seasoned professional lose their composure. The good news, and I speak from experience, is that you can recover from a bad interview. Most people view an interview as an objective test of what you can do and whether you'll be a cultural fit. For most job seekers, an interview is a high-stress conversation where nerves can make a brilliant career look amateurish in five minutes. When you freeze, ramble, or blow a simple question, the hiring manager isn't just concerned about your skills; they're concerned you're a risky hire. Course-correcting requires shifting their focus before they send you a generic rejection email. This is where a well-crafted recovery letter— not to be confused with a thank-you note—comes in. It isn’t about begging for a do-over; it’s about demonstrating professionalism by owning up to a bad interview, controlling the narrative, and reminding the employer why you belonged on their shortlist. Begin by acknowledging the elephant in the room. Trying to gaslight an interviewer into believing a subpar performance was a success is amateurish. Experienced hiring managers have a keen radar for double-talk; when an interview goes off the rails, they know it. Owning up to the fact that nerves got the better of you isn't a weakness; it’s self-awareness. It shifts the focus from a temporary emotional hijack back to why you'd be a great hire. Strategic execution requires the grit to assess your performance without sugarcoating. Did you ramble when asked about operational metrics? Did you fail to connect your past achievements to their current financial pain points? Once you identify where you stumbled, the recovery letter becomes your ultimate tool for damage control. It gives you a second chance to make the case you didn't make in the interview and to explain why you'd be a great hire. Your recovery letter must be sent quickly—ideally the same day, or no later than 9:00 AM the next day—before the hiring team finalizes their decision to move on. Keep it short and professional. Most importantly, no self-pity! Employers don't hire sob stories, nor are they in the business of handing out chances. They hire people who get results. Admit you blew it because of nerves, then pivot quickly to why you're the person for the job. It isn't over until you give up or get a firm "No." Here's how to write a recovery letter without grovelling or compromising your self-respect: Subject: Following up on the Operations Manager role – [Your Name] Dear [Interviewer Name], Thank you for your time yesterday. I enjoyed discussing [Company]’s immediate priorities, particularly your focus on tightening project delivery timelines and reducing vendor overruns from Q4 2026 onward. Reflecting on our conversation, I realize my answers didn't fully convey the depth of my track record or what I bring to the role. Quite frankly, I let my nerves get the better of me, and as a result, I didn't frame my experience as clearly as I should have. When you raised the issue of budget slippage during complex deployments, I didn’t mention that at [Previous Company], I overhauled our vendor management protocols—slashing project delay costs by 22% in less than eight months. That is the operational control I intend to bring to [Company] to protect—and grow—your margins. My interest in the Operations Manager position remains strong. I am confident I have what it takes to address the operational bottlenecks we discussed. Thank you again for the conversation. Regards, (Your Name] [Phone Number] [LinkedIn Profile URL] Keep in mind that a recovery letter isn't a silver bullet; it's an attempt to stay in the game. You're competing against candidates who may have seemed more polished and more confident. However, the letter's power lies in treating the interviewer as a peer, not a judge. It skips the laundry list of excuses, states a simple human fact—nerves happen—and offers a selling point, or several if you so choose, that you didn't mention during the interview. While giving up after a bad interview protects your ego, it also leaves you unemployed. Nobody's coming to save your candidacy; that's entirely your responsibility. Sending a recovery letter takes guts. It shows you don't fold under pressure and that you own your mistakes, traits that every astute hiring manager respects. When you feel you haven't interviewed to your full potential, send a recovery letter. It could be the difference between being written off and being hired.

Predictability

5 Seconds Can Change Your Life Predictability By Tom Reimer Metalex Security Predictability, when it comes to home invasion and break-ins, that is the word that comes to mind! After witnessing the same unfortunate outcome as I have, you see a pattern, an “M.O. short for “method of operation”. After, 40 years of arriving at one’s home to hear of the unfortunate past event, you develop a so called “Spidey sense” I see your homes weakness the same way as, what our not so friend “Sly” does and literally, his front door of opportunity! Why spend extra time lurking around the back, wasting precious time, obviously no one is home and the front door is closer to the stairs that lead to the master bedroom providing a very lucrative reward. So, looking at the front door what do we have, big breakable glass on the door, perfect to see out and provide extra light in your foyer also perfect to see in and easy to smash, simply walk through or reach in to unlock the door. 5 seconds. Or what about that skinny window beside the door, one hit, reach through and unlock the door. “That was easy” heck? why all the fuss, 2 kicks and I’m in, that dead bolt is held in place with no more than ¼ inch of grainy pine! And most likely will make the least amount of noise. So, this is all that it takes and now we need to break this down to provide the best line of defence simply to “One up” Sly, we need to “target harden” easy points of entry: How do you rob a thief? you take away their time! Let’s start with the visual. If you leave junk mail hanging around, you create a vacant home appearance. If you are away then ask a neighbour to keep it clear, in the winter, keep the driveway plowed or at least have a neighbour park in your space, at the very least drive up and down to make an impression that you are in and out. “It takes a community to thwart a thief” If you have a door glass, get some stick-on frosting (Home Depot) you will keep the light but also provide privacy the same goes for the window beside the door. Hang a heavy dog leash from a hook in an obvious location, near the door. Sly hates dogs, they make lots of noise and bite, he’s not smart enough to realize that it just a prop! Install a flip latch on the inside of the door, the product I like a lot is called “Door Guardian” you can find on Amazon or your local builders supply, this is an easy DIY Get yourself some 3” flat head screws and replace the existing ¾” hinge screws with some real holding power, these will penetrate the structural part of the door frame, same goes for the deadbolt strike plate. Get your self a video doorbell, Sly, most likely won’t come in if he thinks you are home, this allows you to answer and see who is at your door even if you are away. All the above are very simple and DIY, now if you want an enhanced level of security then take a look at what Metalex has to offer, products like “Rockglass” that will withstand a sledgehammer and Safe T Screen, a Screen door on steroids. Fresh air in, bad guys out! Next week we will cover the second point of entry. Not on my watch Sly! until then, Stay safe!

Rethinking Regional Government in Ontario

Rethinking Regional Government in Ontario By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton, Former Mayor of Clarington CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE A Blueprint for Transforming Regional Municipalities into Regional Service Boards Rethinking Regional Government in Ontario A Blueprint for Transforming Regional Municipalities into Regional Service Boards A Municipal Governance Discussion Paper By John Mutton Executive Summary Ontario's two-tier municipal system has served the Province for decades by delivering services across municipal boundaries. However, regional governments have gradually evolved beyond their original purpose. In many cases they now function as an additional layer of government, creating duplication, increasing administrative costs, and reducing accountability. Rather than eliminating regional governments, Ontario should modernize them. Regional municipalities should become Regional Service Boards responsible solely for delivering provincially mandated services in the most efficient manner possible. Every regional municipality should undertake a comprehensive Core Services Review to determine which services are required by legislation, which should be returned to local municipalities, and which should be eliminated altogether. The result would be a leaner, more accountable, and financially sustainable municipal governance model. Why Reform Is Needed • Duplicate services increase costs. • Taxpayers often pay twice for similar functions. • Accountability is blurred. • Governance has become more complex than necessary. Regional Service Board Model • Deliver only legislated regional services. • Eliminate or transfer non-mandated services. • Replace regional councillors with a board of mayors using weighted voting. • Provide transparent service-based budgeting. • Permit municipalities, where legislation allows, to purchase enhanced service levels using local funding. Examples of enhanced services include accelerated road maintenance, enhanced transit, expanded public works programs, and additional policing initiatives where authorized by provincial legislation. Implementation Phase 1 – Provincial Core Services Review. Phase 2 – Transfer or eliminate non-mandated services. Phase 3 – Transition to a Mayor-only weighted governance model. Phase 4 – Implement service-based budgeting and enhanced service agreements. Phase 5 – Annual performance reporting. Conclusion Ontario has an opportunity to modernize municipal government by transforming regional governments into efficient Regional Service Boards focused on mandated services while providing municipalities with greater flexibility and accountability.

Canada’s Nuclear Industry Is Losing Strategic Direction

Canada’s Nuclear Industry Is Losing Strategic Direction by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Canada is entering a period in which nuclear energy will be essential to electricity security, industrial growth and national sovereignty. Yet the country risks expanding nuclear generation without adequately protecting the technology, manufacturing capacity, fuel cycle and intellectual property that made Canada a leading nuclear nation. Canada possesses major uranium resources, a respected regulatory system, an experienced workforce and the internationally proven CANDU reactor. These are strategic national assets. However, public policy increasingly favours foreign-controlled reactor designs without sufficient consideration of the long-term consequences for Canadian ownership, domestic production and security of supply. Ontario’s choices are particularly important. The province is the centre of Canada’s nuclear industry, and its CANDU stations at Bruce, Darlington and Pickering have supplied dependable electricity for decades. They also created a sophisticated Canadian network of engineers, manufacturers, fuel producers and specialized contractors. Despite this history, Ontario has placed the American-Japanese GE Hitachi BWRX-300 at the centre of its new nuclear program. Ontario Power Generation intends to build four small modular reactors at Darlington. The BWRX-300 may prove to be a capable reactor. The issue is not that Ontario should reject foreign technology. International cooperation is normal and necessary in the nuclear sector. The concern is that Ontario appears unusually receptive to foreign technology without demonstrating that it has fully examined the consequences for Canadian nuclear sovereignty. A nuclear reactor is not an ordinary equipment purchase. It creates a relationship lasting 60 years or more and involving intellectual property, software, fuel, replacement components, specialized maintenance and continuing technical support. Ontario should therefore disclose more than the value of contracts awarded to provincial companies. It should explain who controls the reactor design, where the most valuable systems will be manufactured, what licensing obligations will apply and whether Canadian firms will obtain lasting rights to manufacture and export important components. There is a major difference between Canadian companies participating in a foreign-controlled supply chain and Canada controlling the technology itself. Fuel security must also be considered. CANDU reactors operate with natural uranium and benefit from an established Canadian fuel cycle. The BWRX-300 requires enriched uranium, introducing dependence on foreign enrichment capacity and international supply arrangements. Canada has abundant uranium, but it does not currently possess commercial enrichment capability. It is difficult to describe a strategy as fully sovereign when Canadian uranium may have to leave the country for enrichment before returning as reactor fuel. Ontario must also explain how its enthusiasm for foreign SMRs will affect the future of CANDU technology. If Canada’s largest nuclear province does not support a new generation of CANDU reactors, international customers may reasonably question why they should do so. A reactor technology cannot remain internationally competitive without a committed domestic reference customer. Ontario should therefore evaluate the next-generation CANDU alongside foreign SMRs, not treat Canadian technology as a secondary option to be preserved by the federal government or another province. The location of the first SMR fleet also raises an important strategic question. Why is it being built at Darlington rather than at a new site supporting development of Northern Ontario and the Ring of Fire? Darlington offers clear practical advantages. It is an established nuclear site with trained personnel, existing transmission infrastructure, emergency-planning systems and community familiarity with nuclear operations. These factors reduce the risk of constructing a first-of-a-kind reactor. For that reason, building the first BWRX-300 at Darlington is understandable from a project-management perspective. However, Ontario’s nuclear strategy should extend beyond the easiest existing site. The Ring of Fire contains major deposits of critical minerals needed for batteries, advanced manufacturing, defence systems and modern energy technologies. Developing these resources will require reliable electricity, roads, communications and significant new infrastructure. A small modular reactor could eventually provide dependable, low-carbon power for mines, mineral-processing facilities and northern communities. It could help transform the Ring of Fire from a remote extraction zone into a broader Canadian industrial region. Without adequate local energy, minerals may be extracted and shipped elsewhere for processing, leaving Ontario and Canada with only a fraction of the potential economic benefit. A northern nuclear project could support mineral refining, battery-material production, transportation infrastructure, housing and public services. It could also create opportunities for Indigenous ownership, skilled employment and long-term regional development. This does not mean that the first Darlington reactor should simply be relocated. A new northern nuclear site would require extensive environmental assessment, regulatory approval, transportation infrastructure and genuine consultation and partnership with affected First Nations. The electricity demand of future mines and processing facilities would also need to be established. A northern project therefore may not be ready on the same timetable as Darlington. However, Ontario should already be conducting a formal feasibility study for SMR development connected to the Ring of Fire. That study should examine possible sites, projected industrial electricity demand, transmission requirements, transportation access, environmental impacts and Indigenous equity participation. The objective should not be merely to provide electricity to one mine. It should be to create the energy foundation for a northern industrial corridor. Canada must avoid repeating the same strategic mistake in both mining and nuclear energy: exporting raw materials while importing the highest-value technologies and finished products. It makes little sense for Canada to export uranium, rely on foreign enrichment and purchase foreign reactor technology while also exporting critical minerals for processing abroad. Such an approach would leave the country at the lower end of two strategic supply chains. Nuclear energy, critical minerals and advanced manufacturing should be treated as parts of one national industrial strategy. Governments should establish meaningful Canadian-content requirements for publicly supported nuclear projects. These requirements should apply not only to construction labour but also to engineering, software, control systems, fuel services and long-term component manufacturing. Foreign-designed projects should include technology-transfer provisions and plans to establish Canadian production of critical systems. Strategically important Canadian nuclear suppliers should also be protected from acquisitions that could move intellectual property, production or decision-making outside the country. At the same time, Canada must maintain a viable domestic future for CANDU technology. Ontario need not choose exclusively between CANDU reactors and SMRs. Different technologies may serve different purposes. Large CANDU reactors could provide dependable baseload generation using Canadian natural uranium, while SMRs could serve smaller grids, industrial developments and remote regions. The central requirement is that foreign technology complement Canadian capability rather than gradually replace it. Darlington may be the practical site for the first BWRX-300, but it should not define the limits of Ontario’s nuclear vision. Future reactors should be considered not only where construction is easiest, but where they can advance national priorities. That includes opening Northern Ontario, developing the Ring of Fire, processing critical minerals in Canada and creating durable partnerships with Indigenous communities. Nuclear energy is more than an electricity source. It is an instrument of industrial policy, regional development, energy security and national independence. Canada must decide whether it intends to remain a sovereign nuclear nation or become primarily a supplier of uranium, public financing and construction sites for technologies controlled elsewhere. That decision is being made now, and Ontario is at its centre.

What Do You Think? AI Policing Over Humans!!!

What Do You Think? AI Policing Over Humans!!! By Joe Ingino The world is changing, and so is the way policing is dispatched and executed. We started with simple cameras overlooking our streets. We were told they were installed for our safety. Then came red-light cameras pointing in every direction—once again, supposedly for our safety. As technology evolved, these same safety cameras developed sophisticated facial-recognition capabilities. The information they collect can potentially be sent to a server and stored, creating an unofficial way to catalogue everyone’s movements without people even knowing it. This is high-tech surveillance.The public objected, and governments cut back on some camera programs while keeping many of the cameras in place as a supposed necessity. More recently, drones have made headlines. The idea is that they can arrive at crime scenes faster than a police officer or provide immediate aerial support.With increasing populations and greater urban density, drones could eventually become first responders. Currently, drones are being used as part of pilot programs to assist first responders. There have even been reports of drones helping police make at least one arrest in Durham Region. Now, let us close our eyes for a moment and imagine the world 20 years from today. The population may reach an all-time high. As it stands, the 911 system is already overburdened. With the introduction of artificial intelligence, an AI attendant could eventually answer your emergency call. That AI attendant could dispatch a drone to conduct video and audio analysis before sending a human police officer. The drone would have the ability to record the scene, compare faces against criminal databases and catalogue civilians as possible perpetrators, victims or witnesses. It could transmit live video of the surrounding area and identify people appearing in the footage, giving responding officers as much information as possible.Within 20 years, these drones could potentially be armed and used during hostage situations or violent domestic disputes. Using AI, a drone could assess a situation and decide whether to neutralize a threat with a Taser—or even lethal force. All in the name of public safety. I do not want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but policing in the future could be performed largely by sophisticated machines, with very little need for human involvement.Imagine an Orwellian future. A citizen calls 911. An automated system sends a drone to gather intelligence. Once the drone completes its assessment, a patrol vehicle is dispatched carrying two humanoid robots.Consider one of the biggest challenges police officers face today. Officers may arrive at a call and confront someone who is extremely aggressive, intoxicated or under the influence of drugs. The individual may become violent, and it can sometimes take four officers to bring that person under control. Now imagine the same scenario involving a humanoid robot. The condition of the assailant would not matter. The humanoid could be designed to understand body mechanics and constructed from titanium or another extremely strong material. No ordinary person would stand much of a chance.Before someone could throw a punch, the humanoid could have that person in handcuffs and on the way to jail.Do you think this sounds too futuristic?Consider the development of cellular technology. I remember people talking during my youth about telephones without cords that would be no larger than a pack of cigarettes.It sounded like crazy talk.Look at us today.Drone technology is already being used in wars—wars in which people are actually being killed.Humanoid robots are being developed and deployed for military purposes, including entering minefields while carrying specialized technology.Modern warfare is experimenting with ultrasonic weapons and electromagnetic propulsion and projection capabilities. Aircraft can now be flown remotely without pilots on board. These aircraft may travel at speeds that the human body could not tolerate. They can remain in the air for longer periods without the need for rest while providing live information to operators thousands of miles away. The United States Navy does not have only one unmanned ship. It is developing and operating a fleet of autonomous and uncrewed surface vessels. Prominent examples include the Sea Hunter, Seahawk, Ranger, Mariner, Nomad, USX-1 Defiant and GARC, the Global Autonomous Reconnaissance Craft. The Sea Hunter is an autonomous surface vessel originally developed for a DARPA anti-submarine tracking program. The Seahawk is an upgraded, medium-displacement autonomous prototype used to test operational concepts in the Pacific. The Ranger and Mariner are high-endurance vessels involved in the Ghost Fleet Overlord testing program. At present, no country appears to use a completely automated police force in which law enforcement, arrests and critical decisions are handled entirely by robots or artificial intelligence without human oversight. Countries such as China and the United Arab Emirates have deployed automated policing tools, but human officers remain in control. The future is here.The reality is that the world is changing. In the name of safety and convenience, we are gradually surrendering more control, privacy and responsibility to machines.The next civil war may not be between two groups of people.It could be humans versus machines. Futuristic? What do you think?

Customer Service Is the Most Underrated Public Service

Customer Service Is the Most Underrated Public Service By John Meloche Municipal Candidate for Ward 2 in in Pickering When people think about municipal government, they usually think about roads, parks, taxes, garbage collection, or development. Rarely do they think about customer service. They should. The quality of a city’s customer service shapes how residents feel about their government more than almost anything else. A pothole is frustrating. A delayed permit is inconvenient. But what often leaves people feeling truly unheard is when they report a problem and then… nothing. No response. No update. No indication that anyone even received the message. That silence creates something far more damaging than dissatisfaction—it erodes trust. Good customer service isn’t about always having the right answer. Sometimes the answer is no. Sometimes a repair has to wait. Sometimes funding simply isn’t available. Most reasonable people understand that governments, like businesses, operate within real constraints. What people struggle to accept is uncertainty. They want to know someone is listening. They want to know their concern has been recorded. They want to know who is responsible. They want to know what’s happening next. In other words, they want to be treated like valued customers. This is where technology can fundamentally change the relationship between residents and their local government. For years, many municipal processes have depended on disconnected emails, phone calls, handwritten notes, spreadsheets, and individual departments managing requests independently. Dedicated staff work incredibly hard within these systems, but the systems themselves often make it difficult to provide consistent communication and visibility. Modern technology offers a better way. Imagine reporting a broken playground, a damaged sidewalk, a fallen tree, or a malfunctioning streetlight through a simple online portal. Instead of wondering whether your message disappeared into an inbox, you immediately receive confirmation that your request has been received. You can see its status in real time through a dashboard. You know which department is responsible. You receive updates as work progresses. When the repair is completed, you’re notified automatically. The city benefits just as much as the resident. Every request becomes valuable data. Instead of relying on anecdotal complaints, municipal leaders can identify patterns. They can see which neighbourhoods generate the most service requests, which issues are recurring, where response times are slowing down, and where additional resources may be needed. Decisions become driven by evidence rather than assumptions. Transparency improves naturally because information is shared instead of hidden. Accountability improves because every request has ownership. Efficiency improves because duplicate reports are identified, priorities become clearer, and staff spend less time searching for information and more time solving problems. Most importantly, residents feel informed throughout the process. Technology should never replace the human side of public service. A friendly conversation at the service counter, a returned phone call, or a staff member taking the time to explain a situation will always matter. Great customer service is built on empathy, professionalism, and respect. Technology simply removes the friction that prevents good people from delivering great service. It allows staff to focus on helping residents instead of managing paper work. It gives elected officials and senior administrators better insight into what their communities are actually experiencing. And it gives residents confidence that their voices matter. The private sector learned this lesson years ago. Businesses discovered that customers are far more understanding when they are kept informed, even if the solution takes time. Expectations are managed through communication, not silence. Government should be no different. At the end of the day, municipalities don’t exist to process paperwork or manage databases. They exist to serve people. Every interaction is an opportunity to strengthen confidence in local government—or to weaken it. Excellent customer service isn’t a luxury or an afterthought. It’s one of the most important services any municipality provides because it influences how residents experience every other service the city delivers. When government is responsive, transparent, and accountable, trust grows. And when trust grows, communities grow stronger alongside it.

Housing insecurity

By John Meloche Municipal Candidate for Ward 2 in in Pickering Housing insecurity in Pickering and across Durham is not a distant problem, and it is not limited to people sleeping outdoors. It affects workers, families, people recovering from illness, those escaping unsafe homes, and residents moving between couches, cars, temporary rooms, and shelters. I recently met with Margaret Eskin of DARS at her farm house to understand the organization’s work. I expected to hear about homelessness. Instead, I heard a much broader story involving housing instability, mental health, addiction, trauma, illness, gaps in government services, and responsibility being carried by a small local organization. Margaret described people whose housing insecurity may not be obvious: workers, people couch surfing, and a teacher who came to a warming centre with her dog after cancer treatment left her unable to work or afford housing. Some people sleep during the day because it feels safer than sleeping at night. The public often sees only the most visible cases, including open drug use, untreated mental illness, theft, aggression, and legitimate concerns for businesses and residents. But moving someone from one doorway to another does not solve the underlying problem. DARS operates a transitional farm residence in Pickering that houses six people at a time. Approximately 18 people lived there during its first 18 months. Residents are expected to keep the home clean, spend productive time outside the residence, and complete volunteer work. Compassion does not require eliminating responsibility. Routine, accountability, and purpose can help restore dignity. The farm supports that process through gardening, animal care, food recovery, maintenance, and small-engine repair. Residents receive internet access and connections to employment, housing, and income supports. DARS uses head leases. The organization rents a home directly from a landlord and assumes the lease liability while residents build stability and prove they can maintain the property. The goal may eventually be to transfer the lease to the tenants without an unreasonable rent increase. This gives landlords an accountable partner while opening a door for people with poor credit, limited savings, or no recent rental history. DARS provides meals, showers, and outreach. Food is more than nourishment; it builds trust. Someone who avoids a government office may still come for lunch, creating an opportunity to connect them with housing, employment, treatment, or income support. These programs remain financially fragile. The transitional farm receives no direct operating support from Durham Region and relies on City support, grants, donors, fundraising, food partnerships, and volunteers. Proven housing programs should not survive solely on the ability of a small organization to continually raise money. One shelter cannot be the entire answer. Pickering needs a full housing continuum: emergency shelter, transitional housing, supportive and recovery housing, shared homes, head leases, treatment, rent supplements, and permanent affordable housing. Different people need different doors. Compassion and accountability are not opposites. Vulnerable people deserve dignity, treatment, housing pathways, and employment support. Residents and businesses also deserve safe, clean public spaces. Police cannot become the default social service, and non-profits cannot carry the entire burden. Many responsibilities belong to Durham Region and senior governments, but Pickering City Council is not powerless. The City can identify service gaps, support proven organizations, build partnerships, advocate for outreach, and demand measurable coordination between housing providers, police, health services, community agencies, and every level of government. DARS is already demonstrating practical local action. We should learn from it. Housing insecurity is already here.

GUIDE ON SELECTING CANDIDATES

By Joe Ingino Okay, let’s tear this Cracker Jack box wide open. It is an election year, and when someone knocks on your door, you always seem to get the same thing: a person with a huge smile attempting to gain your vote. At the door, they promise you the world. They ring every doorbell they can find. Unfortunately, once many of them are elected, they forget who you are. With that said, the box is now open. There are two types of election candidates: incumbents and new candidates. INCUMBENTS When an incumbent knocks on your door, the first question you should ask is: “What have you accomplished during your term in office?” If the candidate looks away or pretends to give you the answer you want to hear, that may not be the candidate for you. Ask: “How have my municipal services improved in comparison with my property-tax increases?” If the candidate simply tells you that services have improved without providing evidence or examples, that may not be your candidate. When evaluating incumbents, look for sincerity, honesty and humility. Do not fall for promises alone. Consider voting for candidates who ask what is important to you and provide a realistic timeline for addressing your concerns. Ask for their personal phone number—not only their office number or campaign line. If they refuse to provide a direct way to contact them, question how accessible they will be after the election. Look for genuineness. In my opinion, some incumbents become so institutionalized that they begin relying on charisma, smoke and shiny mirrors. Unfortunately, many constituents fall for it. NEW CANDIDATES When speaking with new candidates, ask simple questions: “What life experience do you have that qualifies you to represent the people?” If candidates talk only about their professional credentials, ask how those credentials have prepared them to understand municipal budgets, social issues and the needs of residents. Ask new candidates whether they have a solid understanding of taxation. Ask what their plans are to ensure that any future increases are kept to a minimum. Remember, the people you elect will make decisions on your behalf. OSHAWA’S LEADERSHIP Look at what has happened in Oshawa. In my opinion, voters elected Dan Carter based largely on charisma and promises. When faced with serious questions, I believe he often smiles but fails to provide meaningful answers. His budgets, in my opinion, are unacceptable. I believe taxpayers’ money has been wasted in many areas. In my view, Dan Carter did not have the real-world administrative experience required to run a city. Before entering municipal politics, he was best known as an on-air broadcaster. Now look at the state of Oshawa. Residents are concerned about crime, open drug use on city streets and homelessness. Mayor Carter’s response has often been that other cities have it worse or that the provincial and federal governments have failed to provide sufficient funding to lower-tier municipalities. The City can commit approximately $70 million toward refurbishing the GM Centre, yet it cannot invest comparable resources in a cooperative program involving the hospital and university. Such a program could potentially create warehouse-style transitional residences with appropriate mental-health services. Former GM properties remain available. Why are those possibilities not being seriously explored? In my opinion, Carter has demonstrated little vision and limited real-world experience beyond his own publicly discussed experiences with addiction and homelessness. Now consider Tito-Dante Marimpietri and Derek Giberson. On the Tito-Dante side, he has held public office for more than 20 years. What has he accomplished? How has residents’ quality of life improved during his time in office? Now that he is running for mayor, he appears to have solutions and answers to difficult questions that, in my opinion, should have been addressed during his many years on council. Then there is Derek Giberson. In my opinion, Giberson must answer difficult questions about the condition of downtown Oshawa. He supported supervised-consumption and harm-reduction initiatives and chaired a group involved in distributing supplies to people who use drugs. Where did officials believe unhoused clients would go after receiving those supplies? The city subsequently experienced serious concerns involving discarded needles in parks, creeks and other public spaces. This created what many residents viewed as a citywide health hazard. A group connected with the John Howard Society reportedly conducted a pilot cleanup project and collected hundreds of needles from parks and ravines within a short period. That total did not include needles that may still have remained in waterways. TAXPAYERS, BEWARE In my opinion, incumbents have not done enough to improve residents’ quality of life. Look around you. Can you afford more tax increases? Do you feel safe in your home and community? Have your schools, churches, neighbourhoods and City Hall improved? When evaluating incumbents, examine their records carefully. When evaluating new candidates, screen their qualifications, experience and promises just as carefully. Do not vote based on a smile, a slogan or a campaign sign. Vote based on experience, accessibility, honesty, accountability and results.

Canada Must Rebuild Its National Research System

by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Canada has no shortage of scientific talent. Our universities produce respected research, our laboratories contain highly qualified scientists and engineers, and Canadian entrepreneurs continue to develop promising technologies. Yet Canada too often fails to convert this intellectual strength into lasting economic power, industrial capacity and national resilience. The problem is not simply a lack of money. It is the absence of a coherent national research system. Canadian research is spread across universities, federal departments, granting councils, provincial institutions, private companies and numerous temporary programs. Each part may perform valuable work, but the overall system is fragmented. Priorities are frequently changed, programs overlap, promising discoveries struggle to move beyond the laboratory, and Canadian intellectual property is often commercialized elsewhere. Canada needs to revive and restructure its approach to research. At the centre of that reform should be a renewed and strengthened National Research Council of Canada, or NRC The NRC was established to help build Canadian scientific and industrial capacity. Over its long history, it has contributed to advances in aerospace, construction, health, communications, manufacturing and many other fields. It possesses laboratories, technical expertise, research centres and close relationships with industry. However, the NRC is no longer positioned strongly enough to lead a national research effort. It operates within a system containing many agencies and departments, each with its own mandate, budget and administrative structure. Canada has created numerous research programs, but it has not created a powerful mechanism to coordinate them around major national objectives. The NRC should be given that responsibility and the power to realize it. This does not mean that the NRC should control every university laboratory or determine what every scientist studies. Fundamental research must remain open, creative and independent. Many important discoveries emerge precisely because researchers are free to explore questions without knowing where the answers will lead. But freedom in scientific discovery is not incompatible with national purpose. Canada must identify the technologies and capabilities that are essential to its future. These include artificial intelligence, advanced nuclear energy, quantum science, biotechnology, aerospace, Arctic technologies, cybersecurity, critical-mineral processing, food security, advanced manufacturing, defence research, clean energy and climate adaptation. More than mere academic subjects, these issues affect Canada’s economic independence, public safety, national defence and competitiveness in a rapidly changing world. The NRC should become the principal technical and coordinating institution for a long-term Canadian research and technology strategy; A strategy developed in conjunction with the federal government, provinces, universities, Indigenous communities, industry and the scientific community. The strategic plan should cover at least ten years and be updated regularly, not be rebuilt after every election or budget cycle. The government should establish a limited number of national research missions, with each mission having clear objectives, stable funding and measurable results. Sample Canadian missions could include: · to become a world leader in small modular reactor technology and nuclear-fuel recycling. · to develop technologies for the Arctic, including communications, transportation, surveillance, energy and infrastructure suitable for northern conditions. Other missions could address domestic vaccine production, critical-mineral refining, agricultural resilience or Canadian artificial-intelligence capabilities. The NRC should coordinate the laboratories, technical personnel and testing facilities required to advance these missions. One of the greatest weaknesses in Canada’s current system is the gap between discovery and production. A university researcher may develop a promising technology, but the project can stall before reaching a prototype, demonstration plant or commercial application. At that stage, foreign investors or corporations may acquire the idea, move the intellectual property abroad and develop the product elsewhere. Canada then celebrates the discovery but imports the finished technology. A stronger NRC should provide the bridge between research and commercialization. It should help promising projects with engineering, testing, certification, regulation, intellectual-property protection, pilot manufacturing and access to investment. It should work closely with Canadian small and medium-sized companies, which often possess good ideas but lack the capital and facilities needed to bring them to market. Publicly funded research should also produce a greater public benefit. When taxpayers finance major discoveries, governments should ensure that Canada retains meaningful access to the resulting technology. This does not require excessive state control, but it may require conditions related to Canadian intellectual property, domestic production, national-security review and continued Canadian participation. Canada must also modernize its scientific infrastructure. Many research facilities are aging, while access to expensive equipment is uneven. The NRC should oversee a national network of laboratories, pilot plants, secure computing centres and testing facilities available to universities and Canadian businesses. This network should be distributed across the country. Atlantic Canada could concentrate on oceans, fisheries and marine technology. Quebec could build further on aerospace, artificial intelligence and advanced manufacturing. Ontario could expand its strengths in nuclear science, automobiles, health research and engineering. The Prairies could lead in agriculture, biotechnology and food security. Alberta could advance energy technologies and carbon management. British Columbia could expand clean technology, forestry and ocean research. Northern research centres should support Arctic sovereignty and Indigenous-led development. A national strategy must also address the loss of talent. Canada educates outstanding scientists, engineers and graduate students, but many leave for countries offering better laboratories, more ambitious projects and clearer career opportunities. Short-term grants and temporary positions cannot sustain a serious research system. Canada must provide stable scientific careers and allow talented researchers to participate in projects of national significance. The federal granting councils should continue to support fundamental and investigator-led research. Their independence is important. However, Canada needs a clearer distinction between basic science, mission-oriented research, industrial development and strategic technology. At present, these activities are often mixed together without sufficient coordination. A National Research and Technology Council should therefore be created at the highest level of government. It should include the NRC, the federal chief science adviser, granting councils, provinces, universities, industry and specialists in defence, health, energy and agriculture. The NRC should serve as its operational arm. Progress should be reported annually to Parliament. Canadians should be told how many publicly supported technologies reached commercial production, how much intellectual property remained in Canada, how many companies were created, what facilities were built and whether Canada’s strategic dependence on foreign technology was reduced. Research policy cannot be measured only by the number of grants awarded or academic papers published. Those indicators matter, but they are not enough. Canada must also measure whether research produces Canadian companies, Canadian manufacturing, secure supply chains, better public services and greater national resilience. Canada is entering an era of intense technological competition. Countries are investing heavily in artificial intelligence, defence, energy, biotechnology, semiconductors and space. Scientific capacity is now inseparable from national power. Canada cannot afford to remain a country that produces excellent ideas but lacks the institutional strength to develop them fully. The answer is not to politicize science or restrict academic freedom. The answer is to combine independent discovery with strategic coordination and national ambition. Canada needs freedom in research, discipline in execution and determination in commercialization. A revitalized National Research Council can provide the leadership required to connect our scientists, universities, industries and governments. Rebuilding the NRC, Canada can transform knowledge into capability, innovation into industry and scientific excellence into a stronger and more independent nation.

Karmageddon Oshawa's Greatest Opportunity Is Still Ahead

By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton, Former Mayor of Clarington CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE For years, the discussion about Oshawa has focused on homelessness, addiction, public safety, and the gradual erosion of parts of the downtown core. These are real issues that affect residents, businesses, and visitors alike. They deserve attention, compassion, and practical solutions. But if that is all we talk about, we risk overlooking one of the greatest economic opportunities in Ontario. Oshawa is already home to an extraordinary collection of institutions that many communities would envy. General Motors, Durham College, Ontario Tech University, Lakeridge Health, and the cancer centre provide a remarkable foundation for future growth. Ontario Power Generation has established its corporate headquarters in Oshawa while Canada advances Small Modular Reactors at Darlington. Major industries often develop corporate office clusters away from their operating facilities, creating an opportunity for Oshawa to become Canada's leading nuclear office and professional services hub. I believe Oshawa's next Council should establish a Nuclear Economic Development Task Force focused on attracting engineering firms, consultants, technology companies, legal and financial services, and other businesses supporting Canada's expanding nuclear industry while filling existing downtown office space. The new Queen's University medical education presence also has the potential to become one of Oshawa's greatest economic drivers, attracting physicians, researchers, students, investment, and healthcare supply-chain businesses. Addressing homelessness, addiction, and downtown decline remains a daunting challenge. However, economic growth and downtown revitalization can reinforce one another. More investment, more jobs, and more professionals downtown can strengthen commerce and community vitality. Getting this right could solve two challenges at once: helping revitalize the downtown while positioning Oshawa as one of Canada's premier centres for nuclear and medical innovation.

5 Seconds Can Change Your Life Home Invasion Or Break-in

By Tom Reimer Metalex Security That’s all it takes for a home invasion or break-in; crime is at an all-time high and increasing daily! The following chapters are intended to educate, YOU are vulnerable, sorry to say, ignorant and disinformed. Let’s take a short walk back in time, Alarm systems are not new, Historians state that the Romans used geese in 386 AD as a way to alert them of danger. Around 1700 an English inventor created a door lock that was linked to a set of chimes, then a century later in 1853 came the first electromagnetic system that when a door or window would open a circuit would close and set off an audible alarm. Now, think about what these 3 periods have in common? I call this “my bone of contention”. All Alarms, past, current and future can only tell you that you are being violated and you better get yourself into a defence mode or if you are not present then drop everything, the vacation is over, head to your home or business to face reality, you have just become a victim of crime! I’m not against alarms, I personally have one, what this is about is that you need to be more proactive in your quest to protect your home and family. It doesn’t matter if you’ve been away for a few hours, for the day, for the weekend or for an extended holiday. It takes burglars only a few moments “5 Seconds” to smash their way into your home, go to predictable places for valuables and be on their way again. You are left not only with the physical loss and inconvenience, but also with a sense that your privacy and home have been violated by strangers. “The scar that refuses to heal” The following chapters will take an in-depth look at what makes you a target and what can be done to make you safe. Let’s start with outward appearance and what the thief is looking for. You take pride in home ownership and so you should. A well-kept yard, fresh-cut grass, beautiful, lush green grass, new car in the driveway, you have spent a lot of hard-earned cash to present this to the world and that’s OK but it also speaks of that, you have something to lose, I’m not suggesting that you make changes, only that you need to be even more diligent! Let’s start at front door, why? Every would-be thief let’s call him “Sly” wants to know if you are at home. so step one, Sly knocks or ring the bell, no answer? Well, the coast may be clear or are you just not answering? Hopefully not the latter, you don’t want to come face to face. Then, Sly looks through that window beside the door (side lite) no shadows, or movement, OK, seems simple, so Sly turns around to see if anyone is walking by, the coast is clear and one or 2 kicks backwards (donkey kick) and the door frame or lock is on the floor Alarm count down is beeping, so what! Sly heads up the stairs, doesn’t take off his shoes, no time! And where does he go? Yup, Master bedroom, what’s he looking for? Your stuff, it’s conveniently left everywhere cash and jewellery in a nice wood cabinet, maybe a watch or two, how about that ID in the top dresser drawer, grab the pillowcase and start filling. At this point the alarm delay is over, alarm is blaring and Sly is out of here. 5 Seconds can change your life, come back next week to learn some effective ways to protect your doors from a random kick-in. Stay tuned.

Around the Coffee Table with Dale Jodoin A Country Afraid to Talk

By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               There was a time when you could sit around a coffee table with friends, neighbours, or co-workers and talk about almost anything. You didn't always agree, but that was part of the conversation. You challenged each other. You laughed. Sometimes you change your mind. Most times you didn't. Then you poured another cup of coffee and carried on. Today, it often feels different. Raise a question about immigration, crime, education, religion, the cost of living, or politics and, before long, someone reaches for a label instead of an answer. "Racist. Nazi. Bigot. Colonizer." Four words that can end a conversation before it even begins. Just like that, the conversation is over. I believe Canada loses something every time that happens. Before I go any further, let me be clear. Real racism exists. Real hatred exists. Hate crimes deserve to be investigated, and those responsible should face the full force of Canadian law. All Canadians, regardless of their race, religion or background, deserve equal protection. That's not my point. I fear the day when labels become more important than evidence. Words like "racist," "Nazi," "bigot," and "colonizer" are heavy words. They describe serious ideas with painful histories. They should never be thrown at someone simply because they ask an uncomfortable question or hold a different opinion. More than one million Canadians served during the Second World War, and tens of thousands never returned after fighting Nazi tyranny. That history deserves respect. Using these words carelessly weakens their meaning and can make genuine cases of hatred easier to dismiss. If someone commits a hate crime, prosecute them. If someone falsely accuses another person of hatred, challenge that accusation with the same commitment to fairness. Justice only works when it belongs to everyone. Canada earned its reputation by becoming a country where people from different backgrounds could live under the same laws while holding different beliefs. Agreement was never the goal. Respect was. That is why I worry about what some young Canadians are learning I am not talking about every teacher or professor. Many work tirelessly for their students. But education should teach people how to think, not what to think. Students need to learn to ask questions, examine evidence and back their ideas up with facts. If disagreement is met with a label instead of a discussion, we are teaching division instead of citizenship. Canada has welcomed people from every corner of the world. Most came looking for safety, opportunity, and freedom. They have strengthened our communities in countless ways. They deserve our respect. But becoming Canadian also means accepting a shared responsibility. If you came here to escape conflict, don't recreate it here. Our streets should never become battlefields for conflicts that began somewhere else. Peaceful protest is a Canadian right. Violence, intimidation, vandalism, and hate have no place in Canada. Governments also have a responsibility to lower the temperature of public debate. I believe the federal Liberal government, often supported by the NDP on key votes, has spoken about unity while many Canadians feel more divided than before. Others will see that differently, and that is their right. What matters most is that Canadians believe the law is applied fairly and equally to everyone. This isn't really about Left or Right. It isn't about race. It isn't about religion. It's about whether Canadians can still disagree without treating one another as enemies. Here's the question I keep coming back to. Are we really becoming a country that's afraid to talk? Or have we become a country that's forgotten how to listen? Listening doesn't require agreement. It requires enough respect to hear another person before deciding they're wrong. Most Canadians aren't looking for another argument. They're looking for fairness. They're looking for honesty. They're looking for the confidence that they can ask a difficult question without immediately being branded by a label. A free country isn't measured by how loudly people speak. It's measured by whether people with different opinions can still sit around the same coffee table when the conversation is over. If we lose that, we won't lose Canada all at once. We'll lose it one conversation at a time. Not because we stopped talking. Because we stopped listening. Maybe that's the real question each of us should ask the next time we sit down around a coffee table. Are we there to win an argument, or are we there to understand one another? I still believe Canadians can find their way back to the coffee table. I just hope we don't wait until there's no one left willing to pull up a chair.

I Don't Believe in Networking. I believe in Getting to Know People

By Nick Kossovan The word "networking" makes most people's stomachs turn. It conjures images of hotel conference rooms, aggressive business card swapping, and awkward, forced conversations in which everyone is subtly looking over their shoulder to see if there's someone more important they should be speaking to. If that's your mental picture of networking, you can't be blamed for resisting it. Undoubtedly, active networking has its place in job searching, just not to the extent self-proclaimed career coaches want you to believe. I don't believe in networking. I never have. I believe in something far more practical, rewarding, and effective: getting to know people. Shifting your focus from a process to a person changes everything. When you shift your mindset to having no agenda other than simply learning about the person, fear of rejection evaporates. Networking treats people like stepping stones or checklist items; getting to know someone treats them like a destination. You aren't pitching; you're exploring. You aren't trying to extract an immediate favour or engineer a shortcut. Ironically, once you stop treating people like vending machines where you insert a conversation and expect a job lead to appear, your job search and career trajectory will start to flourish. However, you need to change your definition of success. This approach rests on a fundamental human truth: showing interest in someone is a massive gesture. In a world where everyone seeks attention, giving someone your undivided attention is the ultimate differentiator. It's rare, flattering, and makes you incredibly memorable. Demonstrating genuine interest in someone's professional and personal journey is the ultimate compliment. People love to talk about themselves, and they remember the few who actually listen to them. The show-interest approach centers on a fundamental human truth: showing interest in someone is a powerful gesture. In a world where everyone is seeking attention, giving someone your undivided attention is the ultimate differentiator. It's rare, it's flattering, and it makes you incredibly memorable. Demonstrating genuine interest in someone's professional and personal journey is an ultimate compliment. People love to talk about themselves, and they remember the few who actually listen. In a 2024 UC Berkeley article, Why You Need to Expand Your Professional Network, Dr. Julia Schaletzky perfectly captured this dynamic: "A big part of networking is helping others; it lays the foundation for a reciprocal, mutually beneficial relationship. And it isideal to develop a strong network in times when you can give to others, so people are ready to help when you need it—for example, in case of a sudden layoff or life change." Dr. Schaletzky's insight hits the nail on the head. Relationship-building must happen before desperation sets in. It's your ego's sense of entitlement that leads you to expect a stranger to clear a path for your career, even though you haven't taken an interest in theirs. Strangers owe you nothing. Approaching someone you've just met, let alone someone you don't know, with an "I want something" attitude is likely to get you ghosted. You need a different conversational strategy, one that treats conversations as a discovery process, not an interrogation or a sales pitch. When you meet someone for the first time, ask yourself the networking tip I often share: "How can I help this person?" Determining how you can be of help begins with asking open-ended discovery questions about their personal and professional realities. Rare is a Saturday morning, weather permitting, when my longtime golf partner and I aren't teeing off at our local course. Most of the time, we're paired with another golfer or a twosome we'll be spending the next four hours with. To get to know them personally and professionally, I don't pitch myself; I ask low-pressure discovery questions. First, I break the ice: "How long have you been golfing?" "Have you played this course before, or do you have other local favourites?" Next, I pivot to the personal: "Do you live nearby?" "Where are you from?" "What brought you to this city?" Finally, I transition into the professional arena: "What do you do for a living?" "What led you to your career?” "What's the most challenging aspect of your job right now?" Notice that none of these questions asks for a job or an internal referral. Instead, they focus solely on the other person. By adopting this curiosity-driven approach—whether on the golf course, waiting in line to be served, or on a long flight—I've significantly broadened my professional network, received job offers, and gained numerous freelance opportunities. As I've noted in past columns, job opportunities are all around you; the caveat is that they're attached to people. Making it a habit to get to know people leads to several profound outcomes: · Trust replaces impersonal transactions. · Career opportunities arise naturally. · Job market intelligence is gained. · Your professional reputation grows organically (you become known). · You leave memorable, lasting impressions. Write a new internal script about networking. Drop the transactional mindset. Consider being solely interested in getting to know your fellow human beings. My experience has proven one undeniable truth: staying open-minded, asking discovery questions, and actually listening open doors that no resume could ever unlock.

Dead and Gone… The Things We Still Do Their Way

By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of FuneralCostOntario.ca Families carry forward all kinds of habits without giving them much thought. Some are useful. Some are oddly specific. Others survive mainly because nobody has ever seen a reason to do things differently. A recipe is made the same way every Christmas. The car is packed in a particular order before a trip. The doors are checked twice before bed. Someone cuts the grass in the same pattern their father did, even though they would probably have trouble explaining why. Nobody sits a child down to teach most of this. You simply grow up watching how things are done around the house. Your father packs the car a certain way. Your mother knows when something is cooked without looking at a clock. Years later, you find yourself doing the same thing and only then realize where it came from. Sometimes another person catches it before you do. You say something your father used to say, or reach for the same old tool in the garage, and a family member gives you a look. Nothing more needs to be said. Everyone knows where it came from. Recipes probably cause more of these conversations than anything else. Families can argue for years about what was actually included, how long something was cooked, or whether the person who made it ever measured anything properly. Someone remembers a written recipe. Someone else insists the written version was never followed. Instructions such as “a little,” “just enough,” or “until it looks right” are somehow expected to settle the matter. They rarely do. Someone eventually changes the recipe, usually for a perfectly sensible reason, and the first response is that it does not taste the same. Then the old recipe card comes out. Half the family cannot read the handwriting, and the other half insists the card is wrong anyway. By the time dinner is served, nobody has settled the original question, but several stories have been told about the person who used to make it. The less useful habits survive too. There is always somebody who arrives far too early, keeps pieces of wood that might be needed someday, or takes the same route across town long after a better one has opened. The person who complained most about those habits is often the one who ends up carrying them on. My father had his own way of doing many things. Some of it made perfect sense. Some of it probably made sense mainly to him. Since he passed away, I have caught myself doing something the way he did it or using one of his expressions without thinking. Usually I am halfway through an ordinary task before I notice. Not long ago, I put something back in the same place he always kept it. There was no particular reason it had to go there, and I doubt I had ever consciously decided to keep it there. It was simply where it belonged. I realized afterward that I had been doing that for years. That is often how these things continue. Nobody announces that a habit is now part of the family. Nobody even notices it leaving one generation and arriving in the next. It simply remains in the house, attached to a meal, a job, a phrase or a way of doing something. Of course, every generation makes changes. A recipe gets adjusted. A job that once took an afternoon can now be finished in an hour. A rule that seemed absolute when we were children quietly disappears once we are the adults making the rules. Still, enough remains that somebody usually recognizes the original. Sometimes it is the very habit everyone once found annoying. The reminder to bring a sweater. The need to check the weather before leaving. The insistence on arriving while everyone else is still setting up. We laugh about these things, but we also keep doing them. A familiar habit can bring up a story without anyone trying very hard. Someone says an old expression, packs the car a certain way or reaches for the same battered tool, and the conversation moves naturally to the person who did it first. There is no formal moment of remembrance. It is simply part of whatever else is happening that day. Years later, the habit may turn up in a grandchild who never met the person who started it. They may follow the same routine or use the same phrase without knowing where it came from. To them, it is not family history. It is simply the way things are done. Nobody decides which habits will last. The useful ones probably have an advantage, although usefulness is clearly not required. Some remain because they save time. Some remain because the family likes them. Others remain because nobody has found a better place to keep that old tool.

There is a legend

By Bruno Scanga Financial Columnist There is a legend about a successful financial advisor in Warren Buffett’s stomping grounds of Omaha, Nebraska. It is reported that this advisor has learned the art of communicating the basics of wealth building with the local farmers. The advisor, who we will call Fred Smith, greets clients in his office with a window behind his desk that overlooks fields of blowing wheat and corn. Many clients look at him skeptically when he explains the simple power of investing for the long-term and multiplying their savings into large amounts of money from their modest savings. They often blink at him with glazed over eyes and ask: ‘How can this be?’. To demonstrate his point about the magic of compound growth by owning a share of the growing profits over time of a group of world class equities, Fred leans across his desk and picks up a glass vial. He points to the seeds of wheat inside it and states, “If I show this vial to a resident of a city such as New York or any major urban center, and say to them, with these few seeds, I can populate many acres of land to grow vast amounts of wheat to feed entire cities, what do you think they would say to me?” They would likely stare at Mr. Smith in disbelief. Yet that is exactly what he is suggesting can happen to their modest savings if they have the patience to focus on the long term. This is the same patience that couples bring to their successful farming business with the ability to handle adverse weather conditions, volatile grain prices, long days of hard work, pestilence, government regulations and crop failures amongst other challenges on their path to success. The magic ingredient to their success is the power of compound growth on savings. For example, a dollar invested for 20 years at 8% grows to $4.66 and if left to compound for another ten years for a total of 30 years it more than doubles again to $10.06. While the return matters, the most important factor is the number of doublings that occur in one’s lifetime. Several books* and consumer finance personalities use the following example: If you were offered $1 million dollars right now or the option of taking an American penny (recognizing that Canada no longer has a penny) that is doubled in value every day for 30 days, which offer would you take?** The other key ingredient is time to allow compound growth to work its magic. And it is never too late to put compound growth to work for you. Whether you are in your early 20’s or even in your late 50’s time and compound growth on your savings can work for you. Many people now live into their late 80’s and 90’s so even someone who is just retiring can look forward to another thirty years or so as their investment time horizon. Looking after the pennies and the dollars will follow!