The First Time They Ask About Someone They Never Met

The First Time They Ask About Someone They Never Met By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of FuneralCostOntario.ca One of the things that has surprised me over the years is that every family eventually reaches the point where someone around the table has never met a person everyone else still talks about. It is a gradual thing, and does not happen all at once. A grandchild gets a little older, a new son-in-law joins the family, a niece, nephew or close family friend arrives years after someone has passed away. Then, somewhere in the middle of an ordinary conversation, they ask a simple question. "What was Grandpa like?" It is such an ordinary question that most people answer it without thinking very much about it. What I have found most interesting, though, is that families almost never answer with a list of facts. Nobody says he worked here, retired then, and liked to fish. Instead, as one would expect, someone usually smiles before they even begin. "Let me tell you what he used to do..." Almost without realizing it, the family starts introducing someone who is no longer in the room. I think that is one of the nicest things families do for one another. They do not describe a person nearly as much as they let them reappear for a few minutes. Before long, everyone is adding something. Someone remembers the way he laughed before he reached the punchline. Somebody else insists he always exaggerated that part of the story. The one telling the story is often convinced everyone else has forgotten the best ending. The youngest person at the table simply listens, trying to picture someone they never had the chance to meet. It is interesting how quickly those conversations stop feeling like explanations and start feeling like introductions. I have noticed this in my own family since my father passed away a couple of years ago. We still tell the stories he loved to tell, along with plenty of stories about him. They have become part of our family conversations again, and I honestly could not tell you when that happened. Somewhere along the way, they simply found their place again. What has surprised me recently is realizing that, before long, there will be younger members of our family hearing some of those stories for the first time. They will probably end up knowing my father in a very different way than I did, but they will know something of his humour, his personality and the way he looked at the world because the rest of us keep talking about him as though he has just stepped out of the room for a few minutes. Families probably do this more often than they realize. Certain stories are told often enough that they begin belonging to everyone. The people who were there still remember exactly where they were sitting. The people who came later know the story just as well, even though they were never part of the original moment. Somewhere along the way, the story stops being about remembering the past and simply becomes part of the family's everyday conversation. I suppose that is how people through these stories just become part of the next generation's memories without ever having met them. Not through formal family histories or carefully written biographies, but through ordinary stories told around kitchen tables, during long drives, over birthday dinners, and whenever somebody says, "That reminds me of Grandpa." The longer I have watched families grow and change, the more I have come to appreciate those moments. One generation tells the story because they lived it. The next generation listens because they are curious. Somewhere in between, without anybody planning it, a person they never had the chance to meet slowly becomes someone they feel as though they have always known.

Au Naturel

Au Naturel By Wayne and Tamara Ever since my boyfriend and I moved in together, things have gotten complicated. We rarely have sex anymore. I don't know what “rarely” means to anyone else out there, but let's just say I'm feeling rejected. Now it's a few times a month, sometimes more, sometimes less. When we saw each other once a week, he was all over me. I thought when we lived together, we'd have more sex, not less. When we do, it's great. I know I love it, and he seems to be into it, so I'm having a hard time understanding his reluctance. Over the past months, I've tried in various ways to entice him, seduce him, or propose a quickie if he's busy. Just as often, I give him his space. I bring it up in a gentle way. "Wouldn't it be great if we made a little more time for each other? We could start here," uttered in the bedroom, with a smile and playful tone. His response is always something like, "I need to pull another all-nighter for tomorrow's work deadline, and sex makes me want to fall asleep. And hey, remember last week, when we went two days in a row? Hey, hey, not bad!" Then he'll hug me guiltily and be off again to work in the dining room. Maybe we have different libidos. He was a virgin until we met; not to say all late-bloomers have low sex drives, but maybe there's a reason he waited so long to do the deed. As for me, I'm not exactly a man-eater, but I've been in a sexual relationship before and I love that aspect of connecting. The last thing I want is for sex to be an obligation. Maybe I'm asking too much, and the idea that young happy couples sleep together more than once a week is a media myth. Who knows? All I truly know is how I feel: humiliated, inadequate, and scared. About a week ago, after he rebuffed me so he could work again, I checked the history on our computer. Turns out he'd been up all night, watching documentaries and reading news--which has nothing to do with his job. I almost wish it had been porn, which would suggest he's horny, just not about me. Instead, it's pure intellectual research. I confronted him in a calm manner, but he said he reads the Internet to stay awake as he works. I get that, we're the multitasking generation. But still, since then, he's been online almost every night, for hours and hours, reading about everything under the sun. Except sex. I have told no one. Everyone thinks we're happy. My single friends envy us, and my married ones tell us to milk pre-marriage while we can. My dad calls him "Romeo." I would love to try therapy for both of us, but he rejects the American idea of "outsourcing" mental health care to strangers. Is this a phase, or is he just not that into me? Paris Paris, if you buy a house in the wrong location, remember one thing. It will always be in the wrong location. Licensed professionals cannot make all relationships work, and we doubt this is even a mental health issue. He is simply different from you. People who are right for us should be right for us in their natural state. If we want people to be authentic, we can’t continue in a relationship with someone who has to alter themselves so much they are not themselves anymore. If he acquiesces to your wishes, the changes are not likely to be permanent, and two things may follow. You will come to disrespect him, and he will realize you don’t love him for who he is. At that point he will scream, “Enough!” That may happen before the wedding, after the honeymoon, or after the two kids are born. Wayne & Tamara

There’s Good Reason for an Afternoon Snooze

There’s Good Reason for an Afternoon Snooze Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones Winston Churchill once said, "Nature has not intended mankind to work from eight in the morning until midnight without that refreshment of blessed oblivion.” He was justifying his habit of an afternoon nap, a practice he said that gave him "two days in one." Many hot climates around the world have embedded some form of shuteye during the midday heat. Spain and Mexico’s siesta. Italy’s riposo. Greece has quiet hours. In China, the midday sleep is widely accepted. And the Japanese have the practice of inemuri, literally “being present while sleeping.” Dozing off is seen as evidence of hard work, not laziness. But in North America, napping has an image problem. The adulation we have for snoozing babies and toddlers turns to scorn when teenagers put their feet up. Office workers risk being fired if they put their heads down. Good luck finding a spot in school and college settings where students can have a safe snooze. There’s a widespread conviction that we need to power through the day, and that doing so is the definition of industrious. Churchill thought differently, and he wasn’t alone. Leonardo da Vinci slept in short bursts throughout the day. John F. Kennedy was known to retreat for a brief afternoon sleep. Albert Einstein reportedly slept about ten hours at night and still enjoyed daytime naps. They were hardly lazy men. Researchers in Japan showed that even a short daytime nap measurably improves alertness, mental performance, and fatigue. Waking at just the right point in the nap reduced the grogginess many people complain about after sleeping too long. European researchers studying older adults in both China and Europe found napping wasn't good or bad. Like Goldilocks, it seemed to be "just right" when it was neither too short nor too long. Moderate naps were associated with better cognitive performance, while marathon afternoon snoozes offered no reward. Neuroscience can explain it. The brain is like a busy office. All morning, papers pile up, phones ring, and sticky notes cover every surface. A short nap is the cleaning crew. Memories are sorted. Unimportant information is discarded. New learning is filed where it can be found later. Meanwhile, stress hormones decline, and the nervous system shifts into a more restorative gear. That's one reason people often wake feeling clearer, calmer, and more creative. The sweet spot appears to be about 20 to 30 minutes in the early afternoon. That's long enough to recharge without descending into deep sleep, where waking can leave you feeling as though you've been hit by a truck instead of refreshed. Of course, there is an important caveat. If you're routinely sleeping for hours every afternoon because you're exhausted, that's another matter. Long or frequent naps can sometimes signal poor nighttime sleep, sleep apnea, medication effects, or underlying illness rather than helpful restoration. In health and sickness, context always matters. I'll admit, a nap still feels like an indulgence. It even feels wrong to relax when many people around the world are lurching from one crisis to the next. It's hard to settle in for forty winks knowing so many people are worrying about war, paying the rent, or simply getting through another day. I'd enjoy a midday snooze more if I knew everyone had the same carefree opportunity. But guilt has never been a substitute for sleep. And the evidence is clear: a short afternoon nap is one of the healthiest habits many people forego. We all should do it more. So if anyone accuses you of laziness, simply tell them you're following the latest international research. Then nodded off in the recliner.

Our Children Aren't Commodities

  By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               Most of us have watched a child climb onto a school bus, ride a bicycle down the street, or walk to a friend's house. We wave goodbye, expecting them to be home for supper. We never imagine that an ordinary day could become a family's worst nightmare. Then, for some families, it does. A child's bedroom remains exactly as it was left. The bed is made. A favourite stuffed animal rests on the pillow. School books are still on the desk. A backpack sits by the door. Every night, a porch light stays on because hope refuses to go out. No parent should ever have to live like that. Thousands of children are reported missing in Canada every year. The good news is that most are found quickly. The heartbreaking news is that not every child comes home. Some become victims of sexual exploitation. Some are trafficked. Some are murdered. Others simply disappear, leaving families with unanswered questions that may never be answered. According to the Government of Canada's National Centre for Missing Persons and Unidentified Remains, 34,222 children under the age of 18 were reported missing in 2025. About 57 per cent were located within 24 hours, while 91 per cent were found within one week. The report also found that 70 per cent of missing children were classified as runaways, placing many at a much greater risk of sexual exploitation, trafficking, violence, and abuse. Nearly 78 per cent of all missing children were between the ages of 14 and 17. Statistics tell us how many. They do not tell us who. They do not tell us about the little girl who loved horses, the boy who dreamed of playing hockey, or the teenager who never forgot to hug their grandmother goodbye. Behind every number is a family waiting for a miracle. Canada has police officers who dedicate their careers to protecting children. The RCMP's National Child Exploitation Crime Centre works with police services across the country to identify victims, rescue children, and investigate those who prey on them. Earlier this year, Project STEEL brought police agencies together from across Canada. The operation resulted in the arrest of 106 suspected child sex offenders, the protection of 37 children, and the seizure of more than 1,100 electronic devices believed to contain evidence. Those officers deserve our respect and support. But here is the question I keep coming back to. If protecting children is one of Canada's highest priorities, should we create a nationally recognized organization whose sole mission is finding missing children, supporting families, coordinating investigations across the country, and carrying out the relentless pursuit of child predators? That is not about politics. That is about priorities. Children are not commodities. They are not to be bought, sold, exploited, or abused. Every child deserves the chance to grow up safe, no matter where they live or what their family's circumstances may be. Imagine knowing that every available resource was focused on bringing a missing child home. Imagine families knowing their child's case remained a national priority long after the television cameras had left. Imagine predators knowing there would be no safe haven because Canada had made the relentless pursuit of child predators one of its highest priorities. Would it solve every case? No. Would it save every child? Probably not. But if it saved even one child, would it be worth it? I believe most Canadians already know the answer. The true measure of a country is not found only in its economy, its technology, or its politics. It is found in how it protects those who cannot protect themselves. Every missing child has a name. Every missing child has a family. Every missing child has a future worth fighting for. Our children are not commodities. They are Canada's future, and they deserve nothing less than our full commitment to bringing them home and bringing those who harm them to justice. Sometimes the hardest conversations are the ones we most need to have. Until next week, I'll meet you Around the Coffee Table.

Making Your Job Search Public Doesn't Do You Any Favours

Making Your Job Search Public Doesn't Do You Any Favours By Nick Kossovan Every day, my LinkedIn feed is filled with posts and comments from job seekers expressing frustration and anger, criticizing recruiters, blaming employers, and claiming victimhood. A large percentage of LinkedIn has become an online group therapy session, minus privacy and confidentiality. Recently, I saw a post from someone I know announcing that, out of sheer desperation, they'd subscribed to an AI tool to mass-apply on their behalf. This person should know better; making their job search a public spectacle wasn't doing them any favours; in fact, it was prolonging their unemployment. Searching for a job was never meant to be a public event; effective job searching requires absolute discretion. I long for the days when you'd meet a friend over a few beers to moan about the uphill battle of job hunting. Whether it was you or the other person searching, the other was always there to lend an ear, and the conversation stayed strictly between you. It was a private release valve, not a public broadcast. Today, job seekers vent online, naively believing (or not caring) that employers won't Google them or check their social media, especially LinkedIn, to determine if they're interview-worthy. If you're part of the "I have the right to say what I want!" camp, understand that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the consequences of your speech. How recruiters and hiring managers perceive you is your responsibility. The venting online follows a predictable, tiresome script: "I've applied to 500 jobs," "The hiring system is broken," or, what's become an urban myth, "The ATS keeps rejecting my resume." Unemployment is undoubtedly emotionally challenging; however, turning your job search into a public grievance campaign isn't a job search strategy; it's a surefire way to repel employers. Employers don't read displays of bitterness and resentment as passion. They see someone with an entitlement mentality who can't control their emotions when things don't go their way. There's a direct correlation between a candidate's digital maturity and their job search success. Often, job seekers blame technology for rejecting their applications. It's a comforting excuse that sidesteps personal accountability. The reality is more mundane: your resume either fails to demonstrate immediate value, lacks relevant keywords, or is poorly formatted. Employers use technology to manage volume, not to maliciously exclude candidates. Publicly attacking an employer's hiring tools and process shows you prefer complaining over self-reflection. Then there are the job seekers who evangelize working from home, a privilege, as an absolute right. Publicly demanding remote flexibility signals entitlement rather than collaboration. What does a hiring manager think when reading an "I shouldn't have to step foot in an office" rant? They see someone who feels entitled to dictate to employers how to run their businesses, an attitude they're unlikely to hire. Before you publish a post, pause and ask yourself: "How will recruiters and hiring managers perceive this?" In case you haven't been reading the room, LinkedIn has become a validation platform. Along with auditing your LinkedIn activity to determine whether you're contributing valuable industry content and whether you're a thoughtful professional who understands your industry's community, or simply adding to the negativity, they'll also cross-check your resume against your LinkedIn profile to verify your identity. In order to maximize LinkedIn's ability to attract recruiters and employers, rather than turning them off, ensure your behaviour on the platform focuses on value creation, not complaining. You establish a professional reputation by sharing insightful commentary on industry news, highlighting a peer's successful project, or offering constructive feedback that demonstrates your expertise. Every digital interaction either builds or diminishes your professional brand; hence, you build your professional reputation by consistently providing value and engaging in thoughtful conversation. The main reason to job search discreetly is to avoid posting anything hiring managers and recruiters might misinterpret, which will never be in your favour. Broadcasting your tactics, such as announcing you're going to "spray-and-pray" or venting about being ghosted or supposedly having been disrespected by your interviewer, signals a lack of professionalism. Employers judge your maturity and, by extension, your professionalism, by what you choose to communicate publicly. Keeping their sense of entitlement and the frustration and anger it generates off social media is one of the smartest moves a job seeker can make. The damage to one's job search from emotional oversharing is evident in a benchmark CareerBuilder screening study, which found that 70% of employers actively research candidates online and that more than half have rejected an applicant solely because of social media red flags, such as public complaints and "bad-mouthing" previous employers or hiring practices. The job market is a marketplace, not your personal diary. Instead of getting upset about rejections, critically assess how you approach recruiters and hiring managers; the problem almost certainly lies there. Quantify your impact on your former employers' profitability, sharpen your networking strategy, and ensure your LinkedIn profile aligns with your resume. Be a positive contributor online, not a negative one. Discuss your job search frustrations only with family and friends. Don't make your job search a spectator sport; doing so will only prolong it.

When Deflection Replaces Leadership

When Deflection Replaces Leadership By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton, Former Mayor of Clarington CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE One of the oldest tricks in politics is simple: when you can't defend your record, change the subject. Throughout history, governments and politicians of every stripe have relied on deflection when faced with uncomfortable questions. Rather than addressing the issue itself, they attempt to redirect public attention toward something more emotionally charged. We're seeing that happen again. Across our community, residents have raised legitimate concerns about allegations of animal abuse, enforcement of existing laws, transparency, and the willingness of elected officials to show leadership. These are real issues that deserve real answers. Instead, too often the conversation shifts. Rather than debating the evidence, the focus becomes accusations of racism, Islamophobia, or intolerance. Let me be clear. If someone engages in racism or religious hatred, they should be called out. There is no place for hatred in a civil society. But neither should legitimate questions about public policy, animal welfare, or the enforcement of our laws be dismissed simply by attaching labels to those raising concerns. In a democracy, difficult conversations are not silenced by accusations. They are resolved with facts. Animal welfare is not a racial issue. The rule of law is not a religious issue. Leadership is not a partisan issue. These are community issues. The public has every right to ask whether municipal leaders are providing the leadership expected of them. When citizens raise concerns supported by evidence, elected officials should respond with transparency—not distraction. As we approach this municipal election, voters have an opportunity to decide what kind of leadership they want. Do they want leaders who engage directly with difficult issues? Or leaders who avoid uncomfortable conversations by changing the subject? The choice belongs to the voters. Whatever your political views, don't allow yourself to be distracted from the issue that brought you to the discussion in the first place. Stay focused. Demand facts. Demand accountability. And above all, remember that elections are how democracies correct their course.

Vote for the Record, Not the Rumour

Vote for the Record, Not the Rumour Election campaigns are, unfortunately, the season of rumours. Every four years, social media fills with anonymous accusations, edited videos, half-truths, gossip, headlines designed to provoke, and opinions repeated so often they’re mistaken for fact. Candidates attack one another. Supporters repeat what they’ve heard. Before long, narratives replace evidence. That should concern every voter. If there is one piece of advice I’d offer this election, it’s this: vote for the record, not the rumour. Don’t let Facebook comments decide your vote. Don’t let headlines decide your vote. Don’t let campaign flyers decide your vote. And don’t let someone else’s opinion become your own. Do your homework. If someone tells you a candidate said or did something outrageous, don’t stop at the headline or the thirty-second video clip. Watch the council meeting. Read the minutes. Review how they actually voted. Look at the staff reports that were before council. Ask yourself whether you’ve heard the entire story or only the version someone wanted you to hear. If you’re considering re-electing an incumbent, don’t ask what they’re promising today. Ask what they’ve done over the last four years. Did they show up prepared? Did they ask thoughtful questions? Did they challenge assumptions when something didn’t make sense? Did they vote consistently with the principles they campaigned on? Were they willing to stand alone when they believed it was the right thing to do, or did they simply go along with the majority because it was easier? If you’re considering a first-time candidate, ask a different set of questions. Have they attended council meetings before deciding to run? Have they spoken publicly about municipal issues over the past four years, or did their interest begin when election season arrived? Have they volunteered in the community, served on local boards, or demonstrated a genuine commitment to public service? Do they understand the responsibilities of the office they’re seeking, or are they making promises that sound good but are beyond what a municipal council can legally deliver? If they’re seeking the office of mayor, what experience or preparation have they demonstrated to lead an entire municipality? Municipal government is far more complex than most people realize. It involves budgets, legislation, governance, planning, infrastructure, public consultation, and understanding the distinct roles of council and staff. Experience isn’t everything, but knowledge, preparation, and a willingness to learn matter. After serving on council, I’ve come to appreciate just how much there is to learn about municipal government. Budget decisions aren’t simply a matter of finding something to cut. They require understanding legal obligations, long-term financial planning, infrastructure needs, reserve funds, contractual commitments, and where meaningful savings can realistically be achieved without simply shifting costs somewhere else. Experience doesn’t mean someone has all the answers, but it does provide valuable insight into how municipal government actually functions. Character matters just as much as experience. Watch how candidates conduct themselves during the campaign. Do they spend their time explaining their own ideas, or attacking other candidates? Do they encourage respectful debate, or rely on rumours and personal attacks? Do they ask questions before reaching conclusions? Do they think independently, or do they simply follow the crowd? Just as importantly, ask yourself how they reach their conclusions. Do they read the reports? Attend the meetings? Listen to residents with differing opinions? Ask difficult questions? Examine the evidence? Or do they simply repeat what someone else has told them? The campaign often reveals how someone will govern. A candidate willing to spread rumours during an election may be just as willing to make decisions based on rumours once elected. A candidate who refuses to listen to opposing viewpoints during a campaign is unlikely to become an open-minded decision-maker after election day. During my years on council, one lesson has become impossible to ignore: facts matter, but so does the willingness to seek them out. I’ve experienced firsthand how quickly public narratives can take hold when people rely on headlines, social media, or someone else’s interpretation instead of asking questions and examining the facts for themselves. Whether people ultimately agree with me is not the point. The point is that every candidate-and every issue-deserves to be judged on the evidence, not on gossip. Healthy democracy depends on independent thinkers. The easiest thing in politics is to follow the crowd. Real leadership requires something more. It requires the courage to ask difficult questions, challenge assumptions, examine the facts, and stand by your principles - even when you stand alone. As voters, we should expect nothing less.

RUSSIAN STYLE DEMOCRACY

RUSSIAN STYLE DEMOCRACY By Joe Ingino It is an election year. One would think that new candidates would know what they are doing. Recognize that time is not your friend and that **NO BUDGET** means NO chance at winning. In the so-called "FREE" world, we pride ourselves on championing democracy... a word that has as many meanings as "LOVE." Unfortunately, when it comes to politics, we are fed the belief that we have a choice and that democracy is an institution to preserve at all costs. In reality, democracy, by definition, is a system of government where political power is vested in the people, who exercise it either directly or through elected representatives. It is characterized by the rule of the majority, protection of fundamental human rights, and free and fair periodic elections. **Core Principles** Modern democratic systems, such as Canada's parliamentary democracy, rely on specific essential elements to ensure that all citizens are treated equally. * Citizen Participation: The right and responsibility of citizens to vote in elections and engage in political life. * Rule of Law: The principle that all citizens, including leaders and government officials, are equal under the law. * Individual Liberties: Guaranteed civil freedoms, such as freedom of speech, religion, and assembly. **Types of Democracy** Representative Democracy: Citizens elect officials to make laws and govern on their behalf (e.g., Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom). Direct Democracy: Citizens participate directly in making laws and public policies themselves, without intermediaries (e.g., ballot initiatives in certain jurisdictions). On the surface, what a great tool to control the masses. Give them the perception that they have choice and involvement. Look at the communist system. They like to think they also practice a form of democracy. Historically, Russia's transition to democracy following the 1991 Soviet collapse faltered due to a weak institutional foundation, economic instability, and the rapid rise of an influential oligarch class. Under Putin, the political system evolved, with the Kremlin officially promoting a framework sometimes termed "sovereign democracy," which combines democratic institutions with strict central control. Practically, you can vote, but do you really have a choice? Or, to make it look legitimate... one choice. You laugh. Look at what is taking place in Oshawa alone. In Oshawa, for example, we have six registered candidates. Three of them are current council members. Do the voters have a real choice? Three candidates who are only in it for the pay increase. I say this with such confidence because what have these three scoundrels done during their term in office to better the quality of life in Oshawa? NOTHING. So we are going to increase their salaries to continue doing more of the same. Not one of them can argue the failure of their participation as council members. Justify the war-zone atmosphere in downtown Oshawa. **NO EXCUSE.** Yet these **3 amigos** want to continue—and receive a pay increase. **NO.** Now turning to the other three candidates. All outsiders. All wasting time instead of hitting the pavement and getting out in the people's eye. The new candidates, in my opinion, have no clue what they have signed themselves up for. I contacted them personally. It appears that their schedules are too busy to meet with the city's newspaper. One would think that if any media called you, you would drop what you are doing and give it top priority. NOW I WILL GIVE THEM THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT and overlook their disrespect. I would meet with them at any time, as a responsible member of the electorate. It is my duty to find out who they are and what they are all about. By their actions, it tells me that they do not have what it takes to be mayor. A mayor should be available 24/7. No call waits. No concern is overlooked. Municipal office should always be available and easily accessible. Not like the Sing Sing they have created today. People are fed up, and rightly so. Time to elect someone who will open the doors and welcome change. The **3 amigos** are proven failures.**No more.**

Ontario's Municipal Elections: Taxpayers Deserve Better

Ontario's Municipal Elections: Taxpayers Deserve Better by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East When Ontarians vote in the municipal elections on October 26, they will do much more than elect mayors and councillors. They will decide what kind of communities they want to live in and, equally important, whether they still have confidence that local government is delivering value for the taxes they pay. Municipal government is often described as the level of government closest to the people. It is also the one that has the greatest impact on everyday life. It is responsible for roads, bridges, drinking water, public transit, waste collection, policing, fire protection, parks, libraries, recreation facilities, planning, and economic development. When municipalities perform well, citizens notice. When they do not, the consequences are impossible to ignore. Across Ontario, municipalities face genuine challenges. Population growth has accelerated demand for housing, transportation, water systems, and community services. Inflation has driven up construction and labour costs. Aging infrastructure requires billions of dollars in renewal. These pressures are real, and no responsible observer should underestimate them. However, acknowledging these challenges does not excuse poor financial discipline or weak accountability. Over the past several years, property taxes have increased substantially in many Ontario municipalities. For countless homeowners, seniors on fixed incomes, and small businesses, these increases have become increasingly difficult to absorb. Yet many taxpayers look around their communities and ask a reasonable question: Why are we paying more but seeing so little improvement? Roads continue to deteriorate. Traffic congestion worsens. Infrastructure projects are delayed. Public confidence in local government has weakened. In some communities, concerns about homelessness, public disorder, and declining downtown business activity have become more visible despite steadily increasing municipal budgets. The issue is not whether municipalities require revenue. They do. The issue is whether taxpayers receive value for the money they contribute. Good government is measured not by the amount it spends but by the results it delivers. Every municipal budget should be judged according to measurable outcomes, clear priorities, and transparent reporting. Every major project should demonstrate value for money. Every department should be expected to pursue continuous improvement and operational efficiency. Municipal elections should therefore become elections about performance. Candidates should not simply promise additional spending or pledge to keep taxes low. They should explain how they intend to modernize municipal administration, eliminate duplication, improve procurement, use technology more effectively, and ensure that every tax dollar produces tangible benefits for residents. Housing affordability will understandably dominate the campaign. Yet approving thousands of new homes without ensuring adequate infrastructure merely postpones today's problems until tomorrow. Growth must be accompanied by investments in roads, transit, schools, water systems, and community facilities. Planning must be integrated rather than reactive. Infrastructure renewal also demands leadership. Ontario's municipalities face billions of dollars in deferred maintenance. Bridges, water mains, storm water systems, and public buildings cannot be ignored indefinitely. Strategic long-term planning is essential if future generations are not to inherit even larger financial burdens. Public safety is another defining issue. Residents expect neighbourhoods that are safe, clean, and welcoming. This requires effective policing, but also cooperation with healthcare providers, mental health professionals, and social service agencies. Complex problems demand comprehensive solutions rather than political slogans. Economic development must also return to the forefront. Municipal governments should become partners in attracting investment, supporting entrepreneurs, and creating employment opportunities. Excessive bureaucracy and lengthy approval processes discourage investment and ultimately reduce economic growth. Another challenge is the relationship between municipalities and Queen's Park. Ontario municipalities carry increasing responsibilities while relying primarily on property taxes for revenue. A modern discussion is needed about municipal finance, one that provides local governments with sustainable resources while demanding greater accountability for how those resources are spent. Perhaps the greatest concern of all is voter apathy. Municipal elections routinely attract disappointing voter turnout, despite affecting the services citizens use every day. Democracy cannot flourish when participation declines. Every eligible voter should recognize that decisions made at city hall influence daily life as much as, and often more than, decisions made in Ottawa or at Queen's Park. Ontario's municipalities do not simply need larger budgets; they need better management. Before asking taxpayers to contribute more, every municipality should demonstrate that it has examined every opportunity to improve productivity, eliminate duplication, modernize procurement, embrace digital technologies, and streamline administrative processes. Families and businesses are expected to do more with less every day. Municipal governments should be held to the same standard. The October 26 municipal elections should therefore be about more than electing new councils. They should mark the beginning of a renewed commitment to fiscal responsibility, measurable performance, transparency, and service excellence. Citizens deserve local governments that spend wisely, plan strategically, and deliver visible results. Ontario's future will not be shaped only in Ottawa or at Queen's Park. It will be shaped in city halls, regional councils, and township offices across the province. Strong municipalities build a strong Ontario. When voters consider who to vote for this October, they should ask every candidate one simple but fundamental question: If you are asking me to pay more in taxes, what specific improvements will I see, when will I see them, and how will you measure your success? Those who can answer that question with honesty, evidence, and a realistic plan deserve the public's trust. Those who cannot should not expect taxpayers to continue writing blank cheques. Candidates nomination date deadline is 21 August 2026. More to come on this subject as the municipal election approaches.

Tick Tock It’s Summer Careful of Ticks...

Tick Tock It’s Summer Careful of Ticks... By Maurice Brenner Regional Councillor Ward 1 Pickering Now into full summer mode, its time to spend more time outdoors, Be it a dog walker, hiker or an explorer, while enjoying this time of the year beware of those potential risks to your health. Lets take a look inside the Region of Durham’s Public Health Department and the role they play, offering programs and services as well as the managing and control of diseases that we unknowingly can be exposed to while enjoying the summer outdoors. Ticks and Lyme Disease Like many diseases Lyme disease can be treated but not cured, which is why it is important when outdoors this time of the year to take the necessary precautions. Wear light clothing, covering as once skin as possible. Ticks neither fly nor jump but transfer from long grass areas and or overhanging trees to their host. Some are the size of a sesame seed and hard to see. Once home its important to remove your cloths for immediate hot water washing and take a shower, checking your body as you wash. Should you feel an area where you have already been bitten, you need to remove the tick gently with fine tipped tweezers. (Durham Region Public Health does provide Tick Kit Tweezers at No Charge) There is no shortage of wrong information floating around, never try burning the area with a hot match nor spraying it with insect repellent. These practises not only will not work, but could harm you. Once you have been bitten, it is important to contact your doctor or if that is not possible a pharmacist that has been granted Ministry of Health approval to administer treatment. This must be done with in 24 hours. Assume the worse and advise them you have have been bitten and believe it could carry Lyme disease. Municipalities such as Pickering are working with Regional Public Health, signs are placed along many trail entrances reminding those using the trails of risks along with a QR code to Regional Public Health for more information. Also as a prevention buffer zones are required along public walkways abutting Municipal or Regional Properties. Mosquitos and West Nile Virus Durham Region has been tracking and responding to the risk of West Nile virus as far back as 2003 when the Province of Ontario began funding the program. 76% of all reported cases occur between July to September. However with current environmental impacts such as Global warming risks can be increased throughout the year. The Durham Regional Heath Health Department conducts surveillance and control activities for West Nile virus along road sides, in catch basins, stagnant surface water sites, trapping adult mosquitoes and sending them for testing and identification and investigating reported human cases. While numbers have decreased over the years Regional Public health recommend prevention as the best defence. When walking at dusk or dawn (most prevalent times of risk) wear long sleeve shirts, long pants and covered shoes as well as spraying your clothes with an insect repellent. On your own property eliminate stagnant water. Should you notice stagnant water on private property or municipal property, including Conservation lands and Hydro corridors report it to your Municipality. Municipal Bylaw officers work as a team with Regional Public Health to ensure that the area is treated with larvicide while the Bylaw team will work with the property owner to remedy the situation which could mean pumping out the stagnant water or cutting the long grass and weeds.

Bird E-Scooter Pilot Review: My Experience, What I Learned,

Bird E-Scooter Pilot Review: My Experience, What I Learned, and Where We Go From Here By John Meloche Municipal Candidate for Ward 2 in in Pickering When Pickering launched its Bird e-scooter pilot, opinions quickly became polarized. Some residents loved the added transportation option, while others raised legitimate concerns about safety, sidewalk riding, underage users, clutter, and enforcement. Rather than forming an opinion from social media posts alone, I wanted to understand the program firsthand. So I met directly with Bird’s Durham Region management team, toured their local operations, rode the scooters throughout Pickering, asked dozens of difficult questions, and listened carefully to feedback from residents on both sides of the debate. One thing became very clear: not every scooter people see around the city is a Bird scooter. Private e-scooters, many of which have no speed limits, no GPS tracking, and no accountability, are frequently mistaken for Bird units. That’s an important distinction because the rules, technology, and enforcement options are very different. I was encouraged to learn that Bird operates far more sophisticated technology than many people realize. Every scooter is GPS tracked, allowing Bird and the City to monitor usage patterns, parking locations, and compliance. Geofencing allows speeds to be automatically reduced in sensitive areas and can even prevent scooters from operating in prohibited zones. Bird also operates a 24-hour support line and maintains crews that collect, charge, inspect, and reposition scooters on a daily basis. The company has also implemented measures to discourage misuse. Riders who repeatedly park improperly or violate program rules can receive warnings, temporary suspensions, or permanent bans from the platform. That said, technology alone is not enough. Many of the concerns raised by residents are absolutely valid. I have personally witnessed scooters left in inconvenient locations, riders ignoring traffic laws, people riding on sidewalks, and what appear to be underage users operating scooters. Whether those incidents involve Bird scooters or privately owned devices, the public experiences them the same way. In my view, the success of this pilot depends on three things: education, enforcement, and communication. Many residents simply don’t know the rules. Ontario law requires riders to be at least 16 years old, and those between 16 and 17 must wear a helmet. Riding responsibly and parking properly should be clearly communicated before and during every ride. Enforcement is equally important. Rules without enforcement quickly become suggestions. Dangerous behaviour should have consequences, whether that involves Bird removing riders from its platform or police enforcing provincial and municipal regulations when necessary. Communication also needs improvement. Many residents don’t know who to contact when they encounter a problem scooter or have concerns about the program. Making reporting easier would help address issues much more quickly. I also believe Council should rely on data, not assumptions when evaluating the pilot. The City has access to extensive information about ride volumes, usage patterns, parking compliance, safety incidents, and other performance metrics. Those facts should guide future decisions far more than emotion or speculation. After completing my review, I don’t believe the answer is simply to ban the program, nor do I believe it should continue unchanged. Instead, I support a balanced approach that strengthens enforcement, improves public education, increases transparency, and holds both the operator and riders accountable. If the pilot can demonstrate that problems are being addressed and that the benefits outweigh the risks, then it deserves fair consideration. If it cannot, Council should not hesitate to make changes. Good policy isn’t about choosing sides. It’s about gathering facts, listening to residents, asking tough questions, and making informed decisions.

Planning a Vacation?

Do you know what the correct travel Insurance plans are for you? Many Canadians are saying that they are planning to travel to the US and abroad. People are heading to a tropical location, on an important business trip or visiting friends. Is that you too? Why should you get travel insurance? Hospital providers in some countries can deny care without proof of insurance Protect your savings and cash flow from being exhausted by unexpected expenses Buying the right coverage can also protect the trip value should a cancellation occur prior to departure, or be interrupted Travel insurance products that you should consider: Trip Cancellation and Interruption Insurance Out of country travel medical reimbursement/payment Visitors to Canada insurance Student coverage: both in and outside Canada Research and contact insurance brokers that offer multiple travel carriers as not all plans are the same. Safe travel

Dead and Gone… The Day the Stories Became Funny Again

By Gary Payne, MBA Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario One of the things that has surprised me over the years is that families rarely notice the day certain stories become funny again. It is not something anyone plans for, and there is certainly no conversation where people decide that enough time has passed. Like so many things in family life, the change seems to happen gradually until one day everyone realizes they have been laughing for the last ten minutes about something that, years earlier, they could barely bring themselves to mention. I have often thought that every family has a small collection of stories that eventually become part of its own language. They are not always the biggest moments in a person's life, either. More often they involve something that went spectacularly wrong, a vacation that did not go according to plan, an old family dog, a burned Christmas turkey, a car that refused to start at exactly the wrong moment, or a joke that somebody insisted on telling every year whether anyone wanted to hear it or not. Those stories seem to gather a little more detail every time they are told, and somewhere along the way the family stops worrying about whether every fact is perfectly accurate because that was never really the point. Immediately after someone dies, those stories can become strangely quiet. Not because people have forgotten them, but because everyone is trying to look after everyone else. Someone starts a story, hesitates for a moment, and lets the conversation drift somewhere else instead. Nobody says that certain stories should wait, it simply seems to happen. The interesting part is that nobody notices when the change begins. No one decides certain stories are safe to tell again. One day at some family function or on a call, somebody starts telling one almost without thinking about it. Maybe there's a brief pause while everyone decides where the story is headed, then someone interrupts because they are convinced it happened the year before. Another person insists everyone has remembered it wrong for years. Before long the discussion has drifted away from the loss entirely and into the familiar family debate about who actually remembers the story properly. By then, nobody is trying very hard to settle the argument because the disagreement has quietly become part of the story itself. I have seen that in my own family over the past couple of years since my father passed away. We now find ourselves telling many of the stories he loved to tell, along with plenty of stories about him. I honestly could not tell you when we started doing that again. I only know that somewhere along the way those conversations stopped feeling difficult and started feeling familiar. They have become some of the moments I enjoy most when we are together, and I suspect everyone around the table would probably say the same thing. What strikes me is that the stories themselves have not really changed. We probably have a little, but the details are still argued over. Somebody still remembers the ending differently. Someone else always adds the part everybody forgot. The stories continue to evolve in the way family stories always do, but they no longer feel tied to one particular day or one particular loss. They have simply found their way back into ordinary conversation, which is undoubtedly where they belonged all along. The longer I have watched families gather around kitchen tables, holiday dinners, birthday celebrations, and ordinary Sunday afternoons, the more I have come to believe that the stories we tell each other eventually find their own way home. Nobody decides when that should happen, and perhaps that is why it feels so natural when it finally does. One day the story is told again, somebody remembers a detail everyone else had forgotten, another person laughs before the ending arrives, and without anyone noticing exactly when it happened, the family has quietly welcomed that story back into the room.

Test Of Time

By Wayne and Tamara I have been lucky in life, growing up in nice neighborhoods, going to good schools, with parents who are very successful financially. I am about to finish my bachelor’s degree and work full-time at a good job. I am 20 and things are going great. My wonderful boyfriend is 22 and has been less lucky. He was raised by an amazing single mother who has worked two jobs to support her four children; they are from a low-income, mostly Latino community, where the schools are poor. As a result, life has been harder for him. Unlike my parents who have given me money to save, he has had to work full-time, often living paycheck to paycheck. Because of this he had been out of school but just started working on his degree again. My boyfriend and I couldn’t be happier. We are living together and know that we want to spend the rest of our lives together. We can’t imagine it any other way. In fact, we are treating the economic downturn as a great opportunity and are hoping to buy a small house at the end of the year. The problem is my parents consistently make nasty remarks about him and our relationship. They say he’s riding my coat tails, taking advantage of me, and once we’ve cohabitated long enough, will take half of what I have. The things they say come off as classist and even racist, and my mother and father know these remarks hurt me deeply. Should I tell my parents to take a hike? Keely Keely, you can’t imagine your life without your boyfriend, but at 20 you can’t imagine a world with rotary telephones. At 40 you won’t be able to imagine what you did at 20. Let’s take a step back and try to decide if it’s fair to tell your parents to take a hike. A universal characteristic of humans is that we prefer our own group to other groups. As primatologist Frans de Waal says, “Identification with the home team comes easily to group animals like ourselves.” We might call this preference prejudice, but ultimately it is grounded in our biology. Aside from this innate preference, how might things look to your parents? They know marriages of young people are the marriages most at risk. At 20, you are five or six years below the average age of women marrying in the U.S. That is cause for concern. In addition, almost everyone getting divorced thought they were marrying for life. Everything has gone well in your life so far. It’s hard to imagine things not going well. But statistically speaking, you are on a lucky streak. You have been shined on. Research shows all of us are more likely to believe bad events will happen to someone else, not us. We don’t doubt your boyfriend’s sincerity, but from your parents’ point of view, he has every reason in the world to want you. You are a shining star. He may genuinely think he loves you, but the package is so attractive it may have him dazzled. On your part, your parents may wonder if you are confusing admiration and altruism with love. Parents fear for their children, and you are scaring them. They see you buying a house and his whole family moving in. They see you responsible for five lives and the whole trajectory of your life plummeting. Do 20 plus years of nurturance and raising you mean nothing? No, they count for a lot. Some people your age have found the one for them. Only time will tell. It is fair to tell your parents to stop with the racist remarks, but telling them to take a hike is going too far. If you are right about your boyfriend, if he is everything you claim he is, his deeds and character will in time win them over. Wayne & Tamara

The Summer Kidney Stone Surge

Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones Some medical tests involve long waits to see a specialist. But one of them is as simple as looking in the toilet before you flush. Is your urine pale straw-yellow, like the look of light lemonade? Or is it dark yellow? Clear or cloudy? What you see is an indicator of your risk for kidney stones. And it’s the summer heat that can bring on the trouble. Every summer, as temperatures climb, emergency room visits for kidney stones increase. The problem receives far less attention than sunburns or heat stroke, yet kidney stones send thousands of people into severe distress each year. A sharp, unbearable pain begins in your back or side. It doesn’t stay still. It comes in waves, tightening and releasing, often radiating toward the groin. Nausea follows. Sometimes vomiting. Many people describe it as the worst pain they have ever experienced. This is renal colic – a kidney stone making its way through the urinary tract. The connection between summer heat and kidney stones is not complicated. It is, in fact, almost mechanical. Your kidneys depend on adequate water to dilute waste products in the urine. When you are well hydrated, minerals such as calcium, oxalate, and uric acid remain dissolved and pass harmlessly out of the body. But in hot weather, especially when you are active outdoors, you lose large amounts of fluid through sweat. If you do not replace it, urine output drops and becomes more concentrated. Think of it as taking a clear solution and slowly evaporating the water. Eventually, crystals begin to form. Those crystals are the seeds of kidney stones. Once formed, stones may stay quiet for a time. But when they begin to move, the pain is anything but easy. While anyone can develop a kidney stone, certain groups are more vulnerable in hot weather. Older adults often have a reduced sense of thirst. Outdoor workers and athletes lose fluid through sweat. People with a history of kidney stones can expect them again. Medications can affect hydration. If you choose alcohol or sugary drinks over water during the heat of the day, beware. One of the most common misconceptions is that thirst is a reliable guide. But by the time you feel thirsty, you are already behind. Another myth is that high doses of vitamin C can be the culprit. In fact, C increases urine flow, results in a slightly acidic urine, and prevents calcium from binding to oxalate causing calcium oxalate stones, the most common type of kidney stone. Due to heredity, some people absorb more calcium from food, causing a high concentration of urinary calcium. But high salt intake is more frequently associated with increased stone formation. Obesity, diabetes, and recurrent urinary tract infections are also risk factors. Pain, however, is nature’s most persuasive teacher. As people who have experienced the sudden, severe, and fluctuating agony of a stone moving in the ureter will attest, they don’t want to experience it again. Fortunately, for most people, kidney stone prevention is remarkably straightforward. Drink enough fluid to keep your urine pale yellow. That’s it. Water is best. Not coffee, not sugary soft drinks, not alcohol. In fact, frequent consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages has been associated with a higher risk of kidney stone formation. Do people learn, even with so simple a prevention? Sadly, the answer should come as no surprise. If no effort is made, about half of sufferers will face another stone within five to ten years. So use the toilet bowl test and make it a routine to drink replacement water regularly throughout the day. During hot weather, the requirement increases.

Around the Coffee Table with Dale Jodoin Could Everyday Products Require Monthly Subscriptions to Work?

By Dale Jodoin Columnist                                               Over the past decade, monthly subscriptions have become part of everyday life. Many Canadians already pay monthly for internet service, mobile phones, streaming television, music, cloud storage, software, and other digital services. For many households, these payments have simply become another monthly expense. Now there are signs that the same business model is expanding into products people have traditionally expected to own outright. During my research, I found discussions on owner forums, Reddit, and consumer websites where customers were surprised to learn that some features in products they had already purchased required an ongoing subscription. Many believed they had bought the complete product. Instead, they later discovered that some features or services would continue only if they kept making monthly payments. One of the best known examples involved BMW. The company has faced a backlash after announcing subscription options for some vehicle features. Many drivers believed those features should have been included because they had already paid for the vehicle. The public response became so strong that BMW later changed course on one of its most criticized subscription programs. The discussion has now spread well beyond one company. Consumer groups, technology writers, and financial experts are asking whether subscriptions will remain limited to a few products or gradually become part of everyday shopping. That raises a larger question. Are subscriptions slowly becoming part of owning everyday products? The automobile industry appears to be leading the way. Several manufacturers now offer paid connected services, such as remote start through a phone app, live traffic information, advanced navigation, emergency assistance, and entertainment packages. While many of these services are optional, they demonstrate how companies can continue earning revenue long after a vehicle Although many of these services are optional, they showcase how companies can sustain revenue generation even after selling a vehicle.. The same business model Other industries are adopting the same business model. in other industries. Some printer manufacturers offer ink subscription programs. Home security companies provide additional video storage and advanced features through monthly plans. Smart refrigerators, televisions, thermostats, washing machines, and other connected appliances are becoming more common in Canadian homes. And as those products become more connected to the internet, companies can add new digital services through software updates, some of which may require ongoing payments. Modern farm equipment has also changed. Some advanced GPS guidance, mapping systems, and precision farming software are available through continuing service plans instead of a one-time purchase. Supporters of subscriptions say the extra revenue helps pay for software updates, improved cybersecurity, customer support, and new features that can improve products over time. Consumer advocates view the issue from a different perspective. Many households already pay monthly bills for housing, utilities, insurance, internet service, mobile phones, and entertainment. If more everyday products begin adding subscriptions, even small monthly charges could quietly increase the cost of living. Five subscriptions costing only ten dollars each would add another six hundred dollars to a family's yearly expenses. Think about your own monthly bills. Now imagine adding your vehicle, home appliances, security system, and other household products to that growing list. There is another issue many people may not consider until it is time to sell a product. If a vehicle, appliance, or smart device is connected to a subscription account, the owner may need to cancel the service, transfer the account, and remove personal information before selling it. Buyers of used products should also ask whether certain features require a new subscription. What appears to be a bargain today could include unexpected monthly costs tomorrow. No one can predict exactly where this trend will end. However, if consumers remain vigilant, they can already discern the direction it is heading. More companies are finding ways to earn ongoing revenue from products that were once purchased with a single payment. Whether this trend becomes the normal way of doing business will depend on the choices made by both businesses and consumers. The next time you shop, do not compare only the purchase price. Ask whether the product includes everything you are paying for today or whether some features could require another payment tomorrow. Spending a few extra minutes asking questions before you buy could save frustration and money in the future. Around the coffee table tonight, ask your family one question. How many monthly subscriptions are too many before we stop truly owning the things we buy? You have been warned. You have been informed.

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

By Nick Kossovan For most job seekers, job searching is a gruelling test of perseverance against their delusion that spending their time screaming into the digital void of applicant tracking systems, blasting out identical, AI-generated resumes like they're feeding a slot machine, and praying the next pull is 'the one' is a viable job search strategy. Most job seekers' job searches are prolonged because they approach employers like beggars, which is exactly what they are when they ask for a chance instead of offering a solution. Employers don't hire out of charity, nor do they hire to fill seats. They hire because they're bleeding time, money, or efficiency, and therefore need a specific headache taken care of. The moment you stop treating yourself like a commodity looking for a boss and start operating like a service provider looking for a problem, the power dynamic flips. You stop chasing opportunity. You start attracting it. If you want to shorten your job search, change your mindset. Follow these three steps to become an employer magnet. Step 1: Select a Problem Trying to be everything to everyone is one of the biggest mistakes job seekers make. In a desperate hope they'll expand their options, they craft generic resumes filled with vague corporate jargon, such as "results-oriented professional with a diverse background." They assume this versatility makes them attractive, but in reality, it makes them entirely forgettable. When you try to appeal to everyone, you end up appealing to no one. You become a commodity, and commodities are bought at the lowest price. As the old idiom goes, “a jack of all trades is a master of none.” Employers are looking for a scalpel, not a Swiss Army knife. They're looking for a specialist who can step in on day one and dissect a specific, painful operational bottleneck. Becoming an employer magnet requires declaring a specialty by choosing a specific problem to solve. Start by identifying a high-stakes challenge in your industry that you're uniquely equipped to address. Is B2B sales volume declining, thereby affecting revenue? Is a chaotic, unoptimized supply chain affecting timely order fulfillment? Is high turnover in mid-management negatively affecting morale? Is a messy, insecure digital infrastructure a security risk? Narrow your lane. Pinpoint the specific organizational headache that keeps hiring managers up at night. By owning a distinct problem, you distinguish yourself from the majority of job seekers who are merely looking for a paycheque. Step 2: Be the Solution to the Problem Once you've chosen a problem, your professional setup (e.g., resume, LinkedIn profile, digital footprint, cover letters) should reflect your expertise in solving it. This is where most job seekers fall short. They treat their resume and LinkedIn profile as historical records of past activities rather than as evidence of forward-looking capabilities. Employers don't care what you did; they care what you can do for them. The key is to restructure your professional narrative from a list of duties into a repeatable blueprint for success that demonstrates a predictable methodology for achieving measurable outcomes. Today, credentials are less important than tangible execution. According to Liz Ryan, author and former Fortune 500 HR executive who pioneered the pain letter concept, employers don’t hire people because they have impressive resumes; they hire them because their business pain(s) needs to be solved. Being “the solution” means speaking the language of metrics. If the problem you solve is inefficient digital processes, and you state on your resume and LinkedIn profile that you’ve “managed software migration,” the reader will inevitably say to themselves, “So what?” Instead, state: Streamlined legacy workflows, reducing project delivery timelines by 22% and eliminating $95,000 in software redundancies. Quantify your value. Frame your past achievements as evidence that you’ve successfully slain the dragon the employer you’re targeting is currently fighting. Step 3: Market Yourself to Employers as a Solution Your ability to solve an employer’s headache is worthless if you keep it secret. You can’t sit back and wait for employers and recruiters to discover you by accident. Humility doesn’t pay the bills, and hoping to be noticed is an inefficient strategy. “Without promotion, something terrible happens… nothing!” – P.T. Barnum’s promotion philosophy. Attracting employers magnetic-like requires aggressively and strategically marketing your capabilities directly to the decision-makers who are losing sleep over the problem you solve. This means abandoning the lazy “Apply Now” button mentality. First, curate your digital real estate. Use social media platforms, especially LinkedIn, to publish insight-driven commentary on industry trends and problem-solving strategies. Consistently sharing sharp, practical solutions establishes you as an authority. Second, build a proactive outreach strategy. Identify the hiring managers at your target employer who own the problem you solve (there's no need to contact HR). Reach out directly with a concise value proposition. Don't ask for a job. Instead, point out a common challenge their department faces and briefly showcase your proven track record of solving it. This is how you become not just another job seeker but a viable solution worth hiring. Stop looking for a job. Start looking for problems to solve. Position yourself as a solution, then activate the employer magnet by putting yourself in front of employers.

Karmageddon It's Time for an Animal Bill of Rights

By Mr. ‘X’ ~ John Mutton, Former Mayor of Clarington CENTRAL EXCLUSIVE Every election brings promises about roads, taxes, development, and infrastructure. Those issues matter. But there is another issue that speaks directly to the character of a community: how we treat the animals that cannot speak for themselves. Today, I am calling on every municipality in Ontario—and ultimately across Canada—to adopt an Animal Bill of Rights. More importantly, I am asking every municipal candidate to publicly sign a pledge committing to uphold these principles if elected. This is not about politics. It is about compassion, accountability, and responsible government. Municipalities already play a vital role in animal welfare through bylaws, licensing, enforcement, parks, and public education. By adopting an Animal Bill of Rights, councils can make it clear that animal welfare is a community value worthy of protection. The pledge asks candidates to support principles such as: Humane treatment of all animals. Strong enforcement against cruelty and neglect. Responsible pet ownership. Support for ethical rescue and adoption efforts. Public education on animal welfare. Cooperation with veterinarians, shelters, and animal welfare organizations. Transparent reporting of municipal animal services. Continuous review of bylaws to reflect modern animal welfare standards. Communities are often judged by how they treat their most vulnerable members. Animals rely entirely on people for their care and protection. They deserve laws and policies that recognize that responsibility. This initiative is not intended to divide people. It is intended to unite communities around a simple principle: unnecessary cruelty has no place in a civilized society. Over the coming months, I will be inviting municipal candidates to sign the Animal Bill of Rights pledge. Voters will then be able to decide which candidates are prepared to publicly commit to strengthening animal welfare in their communities. Leadership is measured not only by the decisions we make for ourselves, but also by the protection we provide to those who cannot protect themselves. I hope municipalities across Ontario will seize this opportunity and become leaders in building communities where compassion, responsibility, and respect for animals are not just aspirations—they are commitments.

In A Prejudice World Confusion Reign Supreme

By Joe Ingino It is sad that we live in such an advanced civilization made up of a bunch of confused people. Look at the disgraceful efforts made by politicians to gain browny points during and election, off what most would deem a neighborly dispute. No. Instead of treating with sensitivity. A dispute ended up a racial battle ground. The victim becoming the aggressor and the aggressor becomes victimized. This can’t be right. Let’s look at the whole realm of prejudice. Something that everyone practices. And prejudice does not necessarily mean racial. People are prejudice towards all kinds of disciplines. Prejudice by definition: It is an unfair or unreasonable opinion, feeling, or attitude formed about a person or group without adequate knowledge or experience. It often involves judging someone based purely on stereotypes about their race, gender, age, religion, or background. While "prejudism" is sometimes used, the correct and standard terms are prejudice (the attitude itself) and prejudiced (describing someone who holds these biased views). The Cognitive Trap: The word comes from the Latin praeiudicium, which means a "prejudgment." It is often a mental shortcut the brain takes to categorize people. Prejudice vs. Discrimination: Prejudice is an internal attitude or feeling, whereas discrimination is the actual behavior or unfair treatment that occurs because of that prejudice. Types of Bias: Prejudice can manifest in many ways, including racism, sexism, ageism, xenophobia, and classism. It can be either negative or positive (e.g., holding overly favorable stereotypes about a certain demographic). It appears that in modern times labeling has become fashionable against anyone that does not agree with the social norms imposed on the population through the manipulation of law and social etiquette. Using prejudice as a political tool involves weaponizing societal biases, stereotypes, and us-versus-them mentalities to achieve political goals. Leaders frequently exploit these deep-seated fears and grievances to mobilize voters, consolidate power, and distract the public from systemic issues. Key Mechanisms of Weaponized Prejudice Scapegoating: Politicians often deflect blame for economic, social, or institutional crises onto marginalized groups or out-groups. This simplifies complex problems by offering a single, easily identifiable target of public frustration. Identity Mobilization: Campaigns leverage deeply rooted social anxieties about cultural shifts or changing demographics. By framing political contests as zero-sum cultural battles, leaders can inspire high voter turnout and strong partisan loyalty. Dog-Whistling: The use of coded language allows politicians to signal prejudiced messages or appeal to specific biased groups without using overt slurs. This enables them to mobilize a prejudiced base while maintaining plausible deniability with the broader public. Dehumanization: By systematically painting political opponents or minority groups as dangerous or "less than," politicians bypass normal moral constraints on aggression, justifying more extreme political actions or discriminatory policies. Historical and Contemporary Patterns Electoral Strategies: Throughout history, political factions have utilized wedge issues—such as race, immigration, and religion—to fracture coalitions and build constituencies of like-minded voters. Erosion of Democratic Norms: When prejudice becomes the primary engine for political campaigns, democratic institutions suffer. It breeds systemic discrimination, suppresses trust in government, and deepens societal polarization.Information Ecosystems: The rapid dissemination of prejudiced narratives is often amplified through modern information networks. This ecosystem accelerates the spread of misinformation, reinforcing confirmation bias among voters. Understanding these dynamics reveals how the cultivation of prejudice is a strategic choice designed to capture and hold power at the expense of social cohesion. Politician in Clarington need to be educated and stop their ignorant theatricals to gain votes.

Canada Needs Immigration Reform—Not Less Immigration, but Better Immigration

by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East For generations, immigration has been one of Canada's greatest strengths. It has fueled economic growth, enriched our culture, and helped build one of the world's most successful multicultural societies. As a nation of immigrants, Canada has benefited immensely from welcoming talented people seeking freedom, opportunity, and a better life. However, acknowledging these successes does not mean ignoring the growing challenges facing our immigration system. Today, Canada needs immigration reform—not because immigration is the problem, but because our current policies are failing both newcomers and Canadians. The numbers tell part of the story. In recent years, Canada has admitted record numbers of permanent residents while also experiencing an unprecedented increase in temporary foreign workers, international students, and asylum claimants. Together, these groups have placed enormous pressure on housing, healthcare, education, transportation, and public services. The result is visible across the country. Housing affordability has deteriorated dramatically. Young Canadians increasingly struggle to purchase their first home or even find affordable rental accommodation. Emergency rooms remain overcrowded. Family physicians are in short supply. Public transit systems operate beyond capacity. Schools struggle to accommodate rapidly growing enrolment. These problems are not caused by immigrants. They are caused by governments that have failed to coordinate immigration targets with infrastructure planning. Immigration policy cannot exist in isolation. Each additional resident requires housing, hospitals, schools, roads, utilities, and employment opportunities. Without careful planning, even the best immigration program becomes unsustainable. Canada should continue welcoming newcomers, but admissions must reflect the country's capacity to integrate them successfully. Another area requiring reform is economic immigration. Canada faces serious labour shortages in healthcare, skilled trades, engineering, information technology, construction, agriculture, and advanced manufacturing. Immigration should focus primarily on filling these shortages rather than simply increasing overall population numbers. Credential recognition also requires urgent attention. Thousands of internationally trained physicians, nurses, engineers, and skilled professionals arrive in Canada each year only to discover that their qualifications are not recognized. Many end up driving taxis, delivering food, or working in jobs far below their skill levels. This represents an enormous waste of human talent. Provincial governments, regulatory bodies, and educational institutions must work together to accelerate credential assessment while maintaining professional standards. Temporary immigration programs also deserve closer scrutiny. International students have become an important source of revenue for many colleges and universities. Unfortunately, some private institutions have exploited the system by recruiting students with unrealistic expectations while providing inadequate education and support. Similarly, temporary foreign worker programs should remain focused on genuine labour shortages rather than becoming substitutes for investments in Canadian workers or productivity improvements. Border integrity must also remain a priority. Canada has both a humanitarian obligation and a sovereign responsibility to maintain secure borders. Genuine refugees fleeing persecution deserve protection. At the same time, asylum systems must be efficient enough to distinguish legitimate claims from those without merit. Lengthy processing delays undermine public confidence while creating uncertainty for applicants themselves. Integration is equally important. Successful immigration does not end when newcomers receive permanent residence. Language training, employment assistance, civic education, and community support help immigrants succeed while strengthening social cohesion. Integration is a two-way process that benefits both newcomers and Canadian society. Canada's official languages should remain central to this effort. Knowledge of English or French significantly improves employment prospects, social participation, and long-term success. Immigration should also support Canada's broader national interests. Population growth alone cannot solve Canada's economic challenges. Productivity, innovation, infrastructure investment, educational excellence, and responsible fiscal management remain equally important. Immigration should complement these policies rather than substitute for them. Regional immigration deserves renewed emphasis as well. Many smaller communities across Canada need workers and population growth, while the largest metropolitan areas struggle with congestion and housing shortages. Better incentives could encourage newcomers to settle in regions where opportunities exist and infrastructure has greater capacity. Finally, transparency is essential. Canadians deserve honest discussions about immigration policy free from ideological extremes. One extreme portrays any criticism of current policies as anti-immigrant. The other unfairly blames immigrants for every social and economic challenge. Neither position serves Canada well. Most Canadians continue to support immigration. They simply want an immigration system that is fair, orderly, economically beneficial, and sustainable. That goal should unite Canadians across political lines. A modern immigration strategy should include realistic admission targets, stronger border management, faster credential recognition, improved settlement services, coordinated infrastructure planning, and regular public reporting on outcomes. Success should be measured not only by the number of newcomers admitted but also by their ability to find employment, secure housing, access healthcare, and build prosperous lives. Canada has long demonstrated that diversity and national unity can coexist. Maintaining that success requires thoughtful leadership rather than political slogans. Immigration has helped build Canada into one of the world's most admired democracies. With sensible reforms, it can continue to strengthen our economy, enrich our society, and secure our future. The challenge before policymakers is not whether Canada should welcome newcomers. It is ensuring that our immigration system serves both those who choose Canada and the Canadians who have already made this country their home. That balance is neither anti-immigrant nor anti-growth. It is simply good public policy.

Striving for a Plastic Free July

By Larraine Roulston The Plastic Free Foundation partners with the corporate, philanthropic and community sectors to help affect the behaviour change required to create a healthier environment. With the help of aligned partners, they aim to become world leaders striving to be free from plastic waste. If, or when, we face a shortage of oil, will we begin to see plastic items prioritized? Less plastic toys, no inner plastic film on takeout coffee cups, and the gradual decreasing single-use food containers? It’s an anti-plastic challenge for you to tackle! My plastic rant questions the following: Why are 5 avocados in a plastic net bag cheaper than purchasing them loose? Who decided that loose mushrooms should be in a single-use air tight container where they decompose quicker? Why are children’s birthday party loot bags still popular? Generally, they contain 30 seconds of enjoyment from a little plastic toy, wrapped individual candies, plastic stickers, and a couple of magic markers. Will dental floss ever be PFC free? Most floss comes packaged in a plastic case. The floss is coated with Perfluorochemicals (PFCs) which is the non-stick coating found on teflon pans. Switch to a natural floss like silk Why do some grocery shoppers place bananas or a melon into a small plastic bag? Storing leftover food in glass jars or glass snap-ware containers is a healthier option than using plastic tubs. Want to phase out plastic wrap? One solution is reusable beeswax wrap, or simply scoop that bit of food in a bowl and refrigerate covered with a plate! Soap bars are wrapped in paper or sold without packaging. Using a bar of soap that was handled by someone else is just one small way to strengthen your immune system. Will soap bars make a comeback? When did Chiclets gum switch from a boxboard container to one that has each piece surrounded by a plastic bubble? Did you know that chewing gum contains plastic particles? A new study revealed that microplastics are being found in saliva. How many women know that many menstrual products are made of plastic? Best to opt for organic cotton tampons or switch to reusable menstrual cups. Can you say goodbye to your pink plastic razors? If so, swapping to a stainless steel safety razor with replaceable blades will last a lifetime, and save money. Did you know that you can go without using shampoo for weeks once your hair is accustomed to not being shampooed every 3 days or so? Shampoo bars can replace plastic bottles. You can wash your hair with a tablespoon of baking soda in a cup of water. Test out the No Shampoo method. Will board games ever come without little plastic markers? Players can find items around the house such as coins, buttons, and bread tabs to use instead. Are you ready to take the July Plastic Free Challenge?