CAN YOU HEAR THE CHINESE LAUGHING?

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - They say not to judge a book by it’s cover. I think in this case we have to make a huge exception. This past week the news headlines read: Canada doesn’t need foreign interference inquiry, but public hearings warranted: Johnston David Johnston’s recommendation comes as part of an initial report about how the government should proceed with the allegations of foreign interference. Gee, what a surprise for Canada. No Inquiry... instead let’s have hearings that cost the tax payers dearly and at the end of the day file them for information. In my opinion Canada could not have picked a worst investigator. David Johnston for all that he may have accomplished in his life. At the point of retirement to me does not look like he could find his shoes in the morning. We are talking about the possible of some real heavy serious espionage. High tech intel gathering. What does Canada do. Hire a man that looks like he still uses dial up phones. Come on people. We are talking about some serious allegations against a nation that is supposed to be our enemy. No instead Justin appoint a Huckleberry Finn era character to decipher sophisticated computer technologies. The Chinese must be rolling and laughing.... Then again. Maybe that was Justin’s plan. Appoint someone that will fudge the investigator and instead of going after perpetrator. Call in the hearings. A bunch of grandstanders. Fooling the public to the assumption that they know what they are talking about. At the end of the day. Puff goes the magic wagon and China is given the green light to continue silently invading our country. Mark Twain had the right idea in his famous quote, “Never put off till tomorrow what you can do the day after tomorrow.” Justin, in his choosing of an investigator fall perfectly to that quote... Who benefited from any intervention? The Liberals, who is parading around with China’s leader. He who, assigns a stick in the mud to tell us the time of day. There was no interest nor emergency to start pointing finger at any Chinese tampering.... Yet, the signs of China’s tampering with Canadian economy are wide and spread. China’s phantom infiltration of immigrants to Canada is one that is shrouded in the deepest of government secrets. China’s ability to gather intel about the United States utilizing our networks is something that this Inspector Jacques Clouseau could not figure out. LIke really!!! What did Johnston look into? What did he investigate? Why is he so hung up on inquiry instead of presenting obvious facts that most Canadian citizens clearly see happening in their communities? The invasion has begun from many fronts. Canadians are to blind to see it. We have become to politicized to realize the danger we will soon face. I sure hope Twain was wrong... REMEMBER ALWAYS Hope for the Best. PREPARE FOR the worst.

Ageism: Does it Exist or Is It a Form of 'I'm a Victim!' Mentality?

By Nick Kossovan ]Understand the employer's side. This is the second of a 4-part series dealing with ageism while job hunting. There are two sides to every story and every issue. When it comes to hiring, there's the employer's side and the job seeker's side. " Employer's side: Find the best candidate with the least perceived risks, willing to accept the compensation package being offered. (Risk aversion is why long hiring processes and numerous vetting steps exist.) " Job seeker's side: Obtain a rewarding and satisfying job that pays well. As you can see, each party is looking out for their own interests, resulting in a contradictory situation. In John Hughes's 1985 film The Breakfast Club, Andrew Clark (played by Emilio Estevez), in the library scene, sums up the end goal I'd say most job seekers and employees have: "What would I do for a million bucks? Well, I guess I'd do as little as I had to." In recent years job seekers and employees have been creating unquantified narratives that attempt to justify doing the least amount of work-and to work on their terms-for the most money. (e.g., The current 'get paid what you're worth' movement.) I find employees today are promoting the view that employers are responsible for their well-being-they expect their employer to act as their nanny. Employee-employer relationships are rarely discussed in terms of finding a middle ground, which I believe exists, in which employees look out for their employers' interests and vice versa. Where's the brainstorming on how to form a healthy "you scratch my back, I scratch yours" employer-employee relationship? Until we reach a point of balanced co-dependency, the current, growing tug-of-war between employer and employee will continue. Often, this pulling in opposite directions results in workplaces that neither the employer nor the employee(s) is happy with. Employee-employer relationships will never be 100% equal because employers create jobs and sign the paychecks for those jobs; thus, employees are income dependent on their employer. In employee-employer relationships, this dependency gives employers more leverage. (I know, this truth hurts.) Consequently, it's in the job seeker's best interest to understand the many risks employers want to mitigate when hiring and how their biases were formed. Embracing the employer's perspective will help you succeed more efficiently in the job market. Business survival requires companies to primarily focus on creating and distributing products and/or services as profitably as possible. Profits, which are needed to survive, will always remain the ultimate objective of companies, despite their efforts to disguise the profit-seeking motive through less capitalistic language. No profits = No company. The more profits, generated with the least amount of friction (READ: headaches), the better. An employer's biggest headache is managing its employees, especially with employees' growing sense of entitlement, keeping them from focusing on profit creation. It's common knowledge that payroll is the largest expense employers face. Ironically, an employer's biggest expense is also its biggest headache. Profitability is an employer's ultimate goal, while minimizing headaches and risks. Hence, employers prefer candidates who can deliver the greatest ROI for their compensation and who'll not create "too many" headaches and risks. In my last column, I wrote that hiring is choosing, a process requiring discriminating against those not chosen. Regarding a candidate's age, a hiring manager may have many risk assumptions (READ: biases). - Older candidates: Set in their ways, overqualified (Yes, you can be overqualified, which makes you a flight risk.), won't fit with the current demographics of employees/customer base, don't possess the latest-technology skills, have health issues, expect a higher salary. - Younger candidates: Don't have a proven track record of achieving results, flight risk (Always seeking better opportunities.), lack a solid work ethic, will be demanding, have a sense of entitlement. Do the presumptions mentioned above have merit? In the eyes of the employer, yes. Human psychology explains how biases are formed: Our brains are trained by our experiences. A hiring manager may be more inclined to hire candidates over 40 if they've had several "bad experiences" hiring candidates under 40. If the hiring manager has had several bad experiences hiring candidates over 40, the reverse will probably be true. Truth bomb for all job seekers, regardless of age: Never think you're "the best," you're not. Instead, aim to be the least painful option, which is a much easier target to hit than claiming and trying to prove you're "the best." Contrary to conventional psychology, most of your biases don't come from what your parents, teachers, or friends have told you, taught you or adopting their biases. Your biases come from what you've personally experienced. By understanding how an employer's hiring experiences may negatively impact their view of your age, you can take proactive steps towards addressing how your age is irrelevant, even advantageous. How? __________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

Canada and the Arctic

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East The Arctic is an important part of our country and deserves a lot more attention than it is getting. It is a vast land, our land, which is being completely ignored by our esteemed politicians. As Canadians we routinely and unquestioningly sing its praises in our national anthem, O Canada, referring to "the True North Strong and Free". However, a more realistic description would be "the True North Weak and Neglected". Forty percent of Canada's land mass is considered Arctic and Northern. There are 162,000 kilometres of Arctic coastline, accounting for 75% of Canada's national coastlines, making Canada's coastline the world's longest. The territory is vast, but the population is small at 200,000 inhabitants, half of whom are indigenous. Our Arctic immediate neighbours are Russia, the United States, and Denmark, putting the Arctic at the centre of increasing geopolitical rivalries since 1945. In my tenure as an MP on the Defence Committee, I tried several times, to draw attention to this important region. I voiced the need to develop our Arctic in a way that would allow us to rightfully claim sovereignty over the contested North West passage and develop the vast resources that exist there. It is in the interest of our nation to have a well and uniformly developed country with many essential resources for our own use. A meaningful debate on Canada's role in the Arctic is long overdue, and hopefully we will finally get around to holding one soon. Such a debate is of particular importance, given the central place that the circumpolar region occupies in the tapestry of Canada's national interests. Beside the obvious strategic military importance of our Arctic, on which I will not elaborate, there is also potential wealth off our Arctic coastline. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) gives coastal states full sovereignty rights over a 12 nautical mile territorial sea, and a 200 nautical mile continental shelf exclusive economic zone. That allows countries the rights to exploit resources like deep-sea mining or oil and gas exploration in the seabed and subsoil (the economic zone confers rights below the surface of the sea; the surface waters are international waters). Half of the Arctic Ocean's 14 million square kilometres is already claimed by the five coastal states. Canada's economic zone of approximately 2.9 million square kilometres is the seventh largest in the world. Beyond this bounty for coastal states, the Law of the Sea provides a process for assessing further claims if science can delineate that the continental shelf extends beyond 200 nautical miles. States submit claims to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, which examines the submitted data drawn from mapping underwater geological features like ridges (Canada began collecting data in 2003 and submitted a claim in 2019, with an addendum in 2022). The Commission judges the accuracy of the claim and makes recommendations. If states have overlapping claims, they must negotiate the boundaries. In 2021, Russia made a maximum claim that its continental shelf stretched right up to the exclusive economic zones of both Canada and Denmark/Greenland, potentially giving it 75% of the seabed in the central parts of the Arctic Ocean. Canada then revised its 2019 submission in 2022, now arguing that its continental shelf extended to 2.4 million square kilometres, an area about the size of the Prairie provinces. It will be years before the UN Commission makes recommendations on Canada's claim but when it does, Canada must negotiate with Russia. The stakes are potentially very high indeed. The case that a greater concentration on the Arctic would fulfill several of Canada's national interests is compelling but articulating a strategy and actually making it happen are very different things. In recent years, the Government of Canada's rhetoric about our economic development in the Arctic and foreign policy goals and accomplishments has been effusive and confused. This has resulted in underinvesting in its diplomatic capacity, spending huge quantities of taxpayers' money overseas without accountability and totally neglecting national interests. In 2008, for example, Stephen Harper announced that Canada's aging heavy icebreaker, CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent, would be replaced by a new vessel, the CCGS John G. Diefenbaker: Fifteen years later in 2023, steel for the Diefenbaker has yet to be laid, though the government is now promising to do so. In 2007, Stephen Harper announced that Canada would construct a naval refuelling facility at Nanisvik, Baffin Island to service new Arctic patrol vessels with a planned opening in 2013. Initial plans were for year-round personnel and a jet airstrip to support the naval facility, but these were soon scaled back due to costs. Instead of pursuing our interests in the Arctic the Liberal government is spending huge amounts of money on foreign aid for their own political purposes. As a result, delays with the icebreaker program have suffered delays year after year. It is now expected that the facility will not be operational until 2024-25, 18 years after it was first announced. Well done! During the same period, Rob Huebert a prominent Arctic defence analyst, and I, have noted, that Russia has modernized and reopened 13 Cold War military bases in the Arctic as well as dozens of smaller posts and has also enhanced economic activities in the area. Since 2011 for example, an interdepartmental Marine Security Operating Group has repeatedly identified gaps, looming equipment obsolescence and weaknesses in satellite surveillance in the Arctic, but limited actions have been taken. The report concludes, "we found significant risks that there will be gaps in Canada's surveillance, patrol, and presence in the Arctic in the coming decade as aging equipment reaches the end of its useful service life before replacement systems become available." The need for a serious economic development plan in the Arctic should be a priority for any future Government of Canada for the benefit of our stringent national interest. We as Canadians deserve better! In conclusion, both achieving our interests and enhancing our values, the Arctic should be a preeminent priority of Canadian policymaking. Developing the Arctic is in Canada's national interest, perhaps even its paramount national interest. Time to focus on the future of our own Canada the good! mate e for cities to hit their decarbonization targets by 2040, but they have to act now, and the shift will require a co-ordinated effort between government, industry and residents. The question is, where is the money coming from? Mark Hutchinson, vice-president oange experts this is possible. But wait a moment, WHO will foot the bill? Like I said, get ready to pay more taxes soon….

LET’S TEACH OUR CHILDREN HOW TO FARM

By Rosaldo Russo Allow me to begin this column by thanking the Oshawa/Central newspaper for allowing me the opportunity and access to the press. Not to many if any allow an average person like me to tell the world what I see and think. In my opinion. The Editor/Publisher is a real upstanding type of guy. He shoots from the hip and hold traditional core values. My name is Rosaldo Russo. I came to this great country to make a better life for myself and my family. I thank Canada for everything it has allowed me to do and earn. I worked construction all my life. I know the value of hard work and honesty. I remember as a boy my father always telling me to work hard and buy land. So I did. I remember days when I did not have enough to eat. I go to work... but I did not wait for hand outs. I rounded up my pride my skill and my determination to succeed and went to work. In those days the only benefits we received was the fact we were employed. Before retiring I was the owner and operator of local material supply company that allowed me to retired without worry. Now that I have time to enjoy life. I look around me and have some concern for future generations. I see that the world is finished. Finally we are getting good weather. This past week I ordered my bees to put in the bee hives. So I am going to be good for honey this year. It is so much fun to work with bees and know that at the end of their work cycle I will enjoy 100% pure honey. My summer joy also rallies around my tomatoe plants, my many vegetables and fruits. Not to mention my green house figs. Please don’t get me wrong. I do not need to grow vegetables as most of my friends laugh at me and tell me to go buy them at the market like every one else. For me it is more than just turning over the soil and planting an array of vegetables and fruits. It is rewarding on many levels that my friend will never understand. I can assure you that when my vegetables start producing. They all of a sudden change status from friend to best friends as they all ask for something. To me there is nothing better then to enjoy fresh eggs from my chickens. To go out to the yard and watch my peacocks fluff their feathers. To me it is very rewarding and peaceful. This brings me to a thought. As our kids grow. As our kids attend school. Do they teach them how to work with the land. How to raise animals in a farm. Now, don’t get me wrong. I am no scholar. I graduated from the school of hunger. If you did not grow it you did not eat it. Simple teacher and his name was hunger. Farmers would use their crops are currency to exchange with one another. A true farmers market. I remember as a boy being taught the art of farming. Each crop deserves different attention. For example. My friends make fun at how small the bananas fron the banana tree. Or how big are the lemons on the indoor lemon tree. They are the size of a 10 pin bowling ball. For me hobby farming is something I enjoy. As I drive downtown Oshawa and see all the lost souls. Young men under the influence of drugs and God knows what else. Why not take them off the streets and put them to work at a farm. They will work for their food and their lodging. They will learn a very valuable lesson that may just keep them off our streets. Keep them off drugs and jail. Come on folks. Let’s teach our young the value of a hard days work...

CUT THE WASTE FROM THE TOP DOWN

cut the waste from the top down

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - You know things are about to get serious when Durham Regional Chair and CEO comes out and talks about it openly. In a statement Henry stated: Durham is likely to be included under any new review of regional governments, following yesterday’s announcement that Ontario government has begun the process to dissolve the Regional Municipality of Peel, according to John Henry, Durham Regional Chair and CEO. The old saying is you want to lead by example. Start by cutting the fat from the top up. Ford in this case has it right with the announcement of Peel soon to be dissolved... Neighboring municipalities are all scrambling to prepare in the event that they may be next. For anyone that knows municipal and regional affairs will quickly tell you that municipal governments are a thing of the past. Modern day municipal office are nothing short of kangaroo governance that only purpose is to shadow the bureaucracy that assists them to make decisions.Then the question. Why do we need municipal representation? When was the last time you seen your council person? Do you even know who or she may be? Hell, do you know who your mayor is? Well in Oshawa how can we not. He is the one responsible for allowing our farm lands to be raped to the north. The downtown over ran by crime, drugs and the homeless. Carter is the one responsible for wasting 2 million of your tax dollars to fund his own private security firm. Sure the Region has been talked into paying part of the bill. But still.... we the people pay for their insecurity... For their administration lack of customer service. Ford has it right. Let’s cut the millions we spend on people that are not worth a dime. Our communities continue to decay and we the honest slaves keep on paying. We need to cut the waste and invest back in our people. Our infrastructure and the quality of life. We need to fight crime and the drug trade. No more excuses... But in Oshawa instead the Mayor finds a need to hire a personal body guard to protect him from his own cowardness and lack of leadership. If he was such a good leader as he lied to the people of Oshawa during the election. Why the need of a body guard. Exactly. It is not his money but yours.

How building construction is supposed to fight the war against climate change in Canada

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East With the climate change hysteria in full gear, not mention the fake climate emergency upon us, get ready, humble taxpayer, to pay even more taxes for our politicians' pet projects, duly executed by their faithful, public servant fat cats. Let us therefore look at the planned next steps in raising Canada to the utopian goals set forth by our fearless leaders at the expense of the hapless taxpayer. While Canada has set a deadline to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, several provinces and cities, including Toronto and Prince Edward Island, have made commitments to reach that goal a decade earlier. It is an interesting commitment, especially in the City of Toronto, which has major difficulty, even without it, in managing its annual budget. To satisfy this commitment, all of the existing buildings and houses in the city would need to be retrofitted so they no longer use fossil fuels. The building sector is the third-largest source of emissions in Canada. In Toronto, buildings make up 58 per cent of the city's total emissions, mostly from burning fossil fuels for heating, cooling and hot water, which are the elementary needs in a civilized society. The push to cut these emissions will be expensive. No kidding. The Pembina Institute estimates the federal government, in partnership with provinces and utilities, will need to invest $10 billion to $15 billion per year over the next 20 years to reach its net-zero commitment. As you can imagine, this is not chicken feed. Many billions is quite a lot of money! However, Jessica McIlroy, senior analyst for the Pembina Institute's buildings program has issued the following optimistic and politically correct statement: "This might seem like a big number, but the economic opportunity is significant; this could create up to 200,000 long-lasting, well-paid jobs and generate more than $48 billion in economic development each year." How fortuate to be living in Eutopia! I think this statement is over the top because in today's geopolitical environment anything can happen, and we need to be more realistic. To meet the net-zero commitments, Canada needs to upgrade many existing homes and more than 750 million square metres of existing commercial space per year between now and 2050. A chorus of experts believe it is possible for cities to hit their decarbonization targets by 2040, but they have to act now, and the shift will require a co-ordinated effort between government, industry and residents. The question is, where is the money coming from? Mark Hutchinson, vice-president of green building programs and innovation at the Canada Green Building Council, told Canada's National Observer informs that right now, Canadian cities and municipalities will not meet climate targets unless they address the need to retrofit existing large buildings, like multi-unit residential buildings, schools and office buildings. "All together, these large buildings represent approximately a third of Canada's existing floor space and about a third of building-related emissions. These large buildings also represent as much as half of the emissions reductions that the building sector can achieve," Hutchinson stated. He suggests that the best solution is a co-ordinated response from multiple angles that supports the transition. At the moment, the onus for retrofits is on the building owners and operators. Upgrading a major building system is more complex than simply replacing equipment, said Darla Simpson, retrofit program manager at Zero Emissions Building Exchange. She added that building owners need support to make informed decisions about decarbonization. "Decarbonizing buildings by 2040 is possible, but we have to act now. Most mechanical systems need to be replaced roughly every 20 years, so we have a window of opportunity." continued Simpson. Academia, as usual, has a lot of advice, but largely, it is theoretical, with no money attached. Anyone with any practical experience knows that theory meets reality in the execution of a project, and that reality is in large part, the cost. In this context: "There is no single solution because all buildings are different. We need tools to help us rapidly find the right combination of retrofit measures for each building," Ralph Evins, associate professor of civil engineering with the University of Victoria's faculty of engineering and computer science, told Canada's National Observer in an email. What tools? "The retrofit rollout will need appropriate financial support, including rebates/incentives and low-interest loans. This carrot will work together with the stick - building owners will eventually be forced to upgrade, whether by rising costs, a carbon tax or other means." What a commendable motherhood statement! So let's take a look at the city of Toronto which promised to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040. The City of Toronto told Canada's National Observer there are an estimated 475,000 homes and buildings in Toronto. The city has various programs to support building owners with retrofits while maximizing mutual benefits and minimizing potential harm to owners and tenants. "Through its Better Buildings Partnership, the city delivers a variety of programs that provide funding, expertise and support to help building owners improve energy efficiency and accelerate emissions reductions in residential, commercial, industrial and institutional buildings," stated Jessamine Luck, communications adviser for the City of Toronto. "Programs include the Green Will Initiative and Deep Retrofit Challenge. Through its Home Energy Loan Program, the city offers low-interest loans to support homeowners' decarbonization and energy efficiency projects." According to Luck, the Net Zero Existing Buildings Strategy advances the decarbonization of existing buildings in Toronto. The strategy includes plans to eventually require Toronto building owners to annually report and disclose their building's greenhouse gas emissions performance. This is intended to improve both building owners' and the city's understanding of the performance of Toronto's homes and buildings, Luck explained. The full financial impact of the required net-zero investments are still to be determined, but Luck said estimates suggest the total investment required by the city, the business community, other levels of government and individual residents is in the order of $145 billion. Wow! Where is this money supposed to come from? She explains: "This number includes the financial investments made by homeowners towards retrofitting an estimated 475,000 homes and buildings, or about 27,000 home retrofits each year until 2040, as well as individual purchases of 333,000 electric vehicles before 2030," Luck said. "These investments will need to be complemented by provincial government actions to support and maintain a carbon-free provincial electricity grid." According to climate change experts this is possible. But wait a moment, WHO will foot the bill? Like I said, get ready to pay more taxes soon….

Good Oral Health Demands Manual Labour

The Doctor Game

By Common Sense Health – W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford Mickey Mantle, former star of the New York Yankees baseball team, often remarked, “If I knew I was going to live this long, I’d have taken better care of myself.” He was only 63 when he died. Now, with many of us getting a good chance to live beyond 100, what’s one of the best investments in maintaining good health? It’s cheap, easy, and right inside your mouth. Tooth decay affects 96 percent of North American people 50-64 years old. The statistics for tooth decay are almost as high for people aged 20-49. One in five North Americans over age 19 have lost teeth. One in four over 75 years of age have no teeth. Last year, the World Health Organization reported that nearly half of Earth’s human population suffers from oral diseases. Something is very wrong. The problem is that good oral health demands consistent manual work. Everybody knows that brushing, flossing and regular dental visits are crucial for keeping good teeth. But the greatest gap in life is between knowing and doing. Who knows why, but perhaps prevention is a price too high for people who enjoy laziness for free. According to a report from the University of California, only two-thirds of Americans brush their teeth twice daily. Fewer floss, and the laggards don’t admit their negligence. Many fail to make regular visits to their dentist. Is cost a factor? Dental bills can be high when treating disease. But the math looks good when weighing a checkup twice a year against the annual cost of sugary foods people buy without hesitation. Taxpayers should note, the cost of excess sugar consumption in Canada is $5 billion in health-care expenses. The U.S. healthcare system spends about $1 trillion per year on the negative health costs of excess sugar consumption. A toothbrush, toothpaste, and floss cost a few dollars. Cheap weapons to fight the enemy. Normally the balance of bacteria in the mouth does not injure teeth. But decay can develop from a combination of decreased saliva, poor diet, inadequate dental hygiene, and bacteria that produce high levels of acid. This results in the gradual demineralization of the tooth’s enamel. Losing teeth through decay is one problem. Gum disease is another, and it’s a common cause of tooth loss. Most people are unaware that 50 percent of North Americans over age 30, and 70 percent of those over 65, suffer from gum disease. Poor oral hygiene starts with what dentists call gingivitis, resulting in swollen red gums that bleed while brushing teeth. Plaque, composed of microscopic food particles and bacteria, forms around the base of teeth. This gradually hardens into tartar. Research has linked gum disease to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The American College of Cardiology confirms bacteria can enter the bloodstream and affect the heart and arteries. Over 400 years ago, Miguel de Cervantes, author of Don Quixote, knew the importance of teeth. “For what I would have you know, Sancho,” Don Quixote said, “that a mouth without molars is like a mill without a stone, and a tooth is more precious than a diamond.” Today, women seem to be paying better attention than men. One study found that 88 percent of women brush their teeth almost every day at bedtime, compared to 61 percent of men. Among teenagers, another study found 31 percent of girls flossed regularly, and only 21 percent of boys. But even if the girls outperform the boys, these rates are still too low if they hope to live to be 100 with all their teeth in place. Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

Networking Can Be as Comfortable as Having a Garage Sale

By Nick Kossovan When I hear someone say, "I hate networking," I wonder why anyone would dislike something that offers many benefits, most notably more job and business opportunities, broader knowledge, faster career advancement, and higher status. Generally, people who make networking a daily habit have an easier time finding employment. Whatever your reasons for disliking networking, which comes down to socializing in professional settings, here is a tip to overcome your mental obstacle to networking. (READ: change your mindset) Four years ago, I held a garage sale to sell most of the contents of my parent's home, which they had lived in for 43 years, in preparation for their move to a retirement community. The objective was not to make money but to get rid of 43 years of accumulated stuff. My thinking: It would be much easier to have people pay my parents to take their no longer-needed stuff away than to pay someone to do it. The things sold at the garage sale were no longer valuable to my parents. I did not even bother pricing each item. The value of my time outweighed trying to determine a price for each item, so I stood in the driveway and made-up prices. I sold most items for a couple of dollars; most I just gave away. Compared to the items, the small amount of money my parents received was more valuable to them. On the other hand, the item was more valuable to the person who bought it for two bucks. Hence, on a summer Saturday morning, I stood in my parent's driveway, creating value from nothing, which surprisingly felt good. All around me, I was witnessing the truth to the adage, "Value is in the eye of the beholder." This got me thinking about how this adage applies to networking. Give away everything you have to offer! You have a lot more to offer than you realize. - Ideas - Advice. - Experiences you have had and the lessons you learned. - Recommendations (e.g., books, blogs, movies) - An introduction to someone capable of helping. There are many reasons people do not network. "Networking feels awkward," or "I don't want to ask people for anything." Whenever someone says this, my response is: "Give first. Give to the other person, and networking will feel better." During a conversation, listen to what the other person is working on or their challenges, and offer whatever help you can. Simply put, when meeting someone for the first time, ask yourself, "How can I help this person?" Asking yourself this question will help you feel less awkward when you first meet someone. You feel more relaxed about how the conversation will proceed when you approach it with the expectation of being of assistance. Your knowledge, experience, and way of thinking are unique. The collection you have in your head is one-of-a-kind. Like my parents, having accumulated stuff for 43 years, you have accumulated your collection simply by being alive. We often take for granted the experiences, knowledge, and many of our relationships because we believe that if they are not valuable to us, they are not valuable to others. This would be a wrong assumption. Nobody knows what you know, and nobody knows it like you do. Chances are: - With so many people wanting to pivot their careers, your experience in an industry or field would be valuable to someone looking to pivot into the industry or field you are familiar with. - You are an SME (Subject Matter Expert) in a few subject areas. - You have a unique point of view about a widespread challenge facing your profession. - You have overcome the pain points of the person you are speaking with or know someone who has. (You have been there, done that.) You have all this to offer and much more-give it all away! When I started sharing my behind-the-scenes hiring process stories via this column, The Art of Finding Work, it connected with many people. Not because they had similar experiences to mine but because they gravitated toward what I had to offer; unsweetened job search advice from the trenches. My corporate world journey-still ongoing-as a hiring manager is unique to me. However, I believe the lessons I learned and, more importantly, the observations I made along the way can be helpful to job seekers. If I kept my experiences, observations, and lessons to myself, they would not be valuable to the millions seeking job search advice, hence this weekly column you are reading. I have already lived and learned from the lessons I write about. Thus, their value to me is in the past, like the stuff my parents bought 20, 30, 40 years ago was valuable to them then but not at the time of the garage sale. However, when I write about my experience and observations and the lessons I learned and share them with my readers, I give them value. The next time you meet someone, imagine yourself having a mental garage sale, giving away your knowledge and experience, and offering to connect them with people you know. It will feel good, I promise. __________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

CUSTOMER CARE HALO MR. CUSTOMER CARE

By Rosaldo Russo Allow me to begin this column by thanking the Oshawa/Central newspaper for allowing me the opportunity and access to the press. Not to many if any allow an average person like me to tell the world what I see and think. In my opinion. The Editor/Publisher is a real upstanding type of guy. He shoots from the hip and hold traditional core values. My name is Rosaldo Russo. I came to this great country to make a better life for myself and my family. I thank Canada for everything it has allowed me to do and earn. I worked construction all my life. I know the value of hard work and honesty. I remember as a boy my father always telling me to work hard and buy land. So I did. I remember days when I did not have enough to eat. I go to work... but I did not wait for hand outs. I rounded up my pride my skill and my determination to succeed and went to work. In those days the only benefits we received was the fact we were employed. Before retiring I was the owner and operator of local material supply company that allowed me to retired without worry. Now that I have time to enjoy life. I look around me and have some concern for future generations. I see that the world is finished. Excuse me my english... but I like to know who changed the definition of ‘CUSTOMER SERVICE’? It appears that what I thought customer was is no longer. That it has been transformed into this web of ‘for my convenience’ automated systems that can drive the most sane mind to the edge of insanity. These so called companies that employ such systems harp that it for our convenience. BULL, 9 out of ten is so that it expedites payments on accounts. The information available and help is pro corporation. You must click a series of choices. One leading you to another set of choices. Sometimes you reach a stall and it thanks you for calling and hangs up. Others actually have someone answer the phone. When they actually answer. They are less than helpful. I remember when I first came to this great country. My English not to good. I was shy of going out and socializing. Sometimes I would have a question and had no one to ask. We did not have google. So a friend said. Call the operator. They are really friendly. So I took his advice. When I had a question I would dial ‘0’ and boom there was this very friendly person. Compassionate and understandive. I would always apologize for my accent and she would assure me not to worry that she understood me perfectly. It was an ease to my ear to have someone not judge me. I remember sometimes calling for things like. Who do I call for my drivers license? Or ask advice on who to call when I had a problem. They were super friendly and would talk with you for ever in a day. I would pay my phone bill with pride and if I could afford it pay extra as a show of gratitude for their service. What has happened since those days. You call the phone company and good luck getting someone. Have you tried dialing ‘0’ lately? Or calling Bell for any issues... Where is my friendly operator. I remember one time on the phone with Bell on a technical support problem. I could hear roosters in the background squawking. I asked the lady where I was calling and she said, Jamaica. Try calling them for billing... If you press the English side... your heart will sink. You get this call center some place in India or the Phillipines.... With accents that make my look like I was born here. What is wrong with Bell. Now don’t get me wrong we all have to work and make a living. But come on. Your attendants should not have such horrible accents. Then they dare call you using the wrong syntax. Hallo, Mr. Rosaldo. Really, I even know that is wrong. My heart goes out to future generations. In aonther incident, I called 911. The operator there did not even know where Columbus was.... Like really. And I got to count on them to save my life. The world is messed up and there is no sign of positive change. Sad

EMERGENCY ALERT OR EMERGENCY CONTROL?

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - This past week you were subjected to a mass EMERGENCY ALERT - notice. In it. It stated: This is a test of the Ontario Alert Ready System. There is no danger to your health or safety. If this was an actual emergency, you would now see instructions for protecting yourself. Really!!! How considerate... I appreciate the vehicle they are using to stir fear of safety and compliance. After all would we not want to know if something had happened that may affect our health or safety? On the other hand. Is this not a form of control and proof of the power of cell technology as tracking surveillance tool? Even thought the concept may be beneficial in a time of emergency. Does this give the powers in control of cell technologies including government to send a message directly to my phone without permission? The tech minded folk will say. Oh it is an open system message and it goes to everyone. OK. Acceptable. Then they are admitting that this so called open messaging system exists. This giving to the creditability that every phone number may be accessed without consent. INTERESTING. Let’s think about this a bit more. Our so called ‘SMART PHONE’, for the general population of tech dummies is the ultimate tool go where no man has gone before in terms of access to personal information, tracking and surveillance. I remember my years as a private investigator. To the lengths that we use to go to track people. To the primitive methods... to some of the illegal methods that would allow us to develop tips and the ability to stay one step of the perpetrator. I can just imagine the technology available for both tracking, monitoring and intel gathering. By the government own admittance. They can send us a mass message. This means they can also receive as they are broadcasting over an open public medium, primarily cell. If so, then ideally anyone that has access to this type of technology may include a series of a million phone numbers and monitor all activities from these devices. In other words, a huge violation of your human rights, privacy. Remember not all criminals are caught in the act. Many arrests take months of preparation and intel gathering. From a government perspective. What better way to monitor the population at large then by having access to their most intimate means of communication. Both through speech, text, and travel. You say impossible. You say oh you are becoming paranoid and falling for conspiracy theory phenomena. I can see that thought and the rationale behind it. But think about this for a moment. Governments throughout history have rule by controlling the masses. What better way than to be able to stay one step ahead of trends and interest. Is this starting to take some resemblance to how intel services work? Government rule of governance. Keep them ignorant and make them do as we dictate. Anyone opposing us, will be deemed a threat to national security. Do you still think last week Alert was just an innocent alert? REMEMBER ALWAYS Hope for the Best. PREPARE FOR the worst.

Canada and corporate welfare

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East It is worth mentioning that in the past few years, Ottawa, Ontario, and Quebec have been using public funds to kick-start the development and commercialization of advanced technologies in practically everything; ranging from clean-energy steelmaking in Ontario to "green cement" in Edmonton. However, the latest flashpoint of that largesse is the recently announced electric vehicle (EV) battery plant, heavily subsidized by governments, that Volkswagen AG plans to build in St. Thomas, Ont. Routinely decried as a $13 billion taxpayer expense, what Ottawa actually negotiated with VW is a range of $6 billion to $13 billion over10 years conditional on rising production volumes at the plant. Queen's Park is kicking in about $500 million. These two levels of government will likely be asked to provide similar support to the Windsor, Ont. battery factory planned by a joint venture of Stellantis N.V., parent of Chrysler and Fiat, and South Korea's LG Energy Solutions. Most of the VW money will only start flowing once the St. Thomas plant is operational, which may take several years. That funding also stops if there is a cancellation of similar subsidies offered by the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act. Ottawa's upfront expense is $700 million to cover about 10 per cent of the cost of building what will be Canada's biggest manufacturing facility. Its footprint equals about 350 football fields, so it will possibly be the biggest EV battery plant in North America when completed. It is interesting to note that this corporate welfare is directed at Canadian industrial sectors of existing strength, like autos, steel, telecommunications, and building materials. Is the thinking that these choices will substantially reduce the risk of governments picking the wrong "winners"? The Canadian auto sector has long been in decline. It has slipped to about 12th in global rankings. The auto sector employs more than 125,000 Canadians directly, supports almost 700 Canadian parts suppliers, and contributes about $19 billion to GDP. Ottawa and Ontario have high hopes for the battery plants in St. Thomas and Windsor. Personally, I hope that this investment of taxpayers' money was well researched and thought through with engineering support, so it will not end as many other recent projects have. Like the Covid vaccine enterprise for example, that ended in a major loss of taxpayers' money. Even if corporate welfare is not limited, or outright eliminated, there should be a mechanism for taxpayers to have input into the government's adventurous commitment of taxpayer money. Let us take a look at how well corporate welfare is presently working in Canada. According to a recent study published by the Fraser Institute, federal, provincial and local governments in Canada spent $352.1 billion (inflation-adjusted) subsidizing firms from 2007 to 2019. This amounts to more than was spent on national defence over the same period. This corporate welfare, which does little to stimulate widespread economic growth, came with huge costs to government budgets and Canadian taxpayers. This total corporate welfare price tag-which included $76.7 billion in federal subsidies, $223.3 billion in provincial subsidies and $52.1 billion in local subsidies-reflects unrequited government transfers to businesses but excludes other forms of government support such as loan guarantees, direct investment and regulatory privileges for particular firms or industries. Therefore, if you suspect that the actual level of corporate welfare during this 13-year period was much higher, you're probably right. Of course, taxpayers ultimately bear the cost of government spending on corporate welfare. For Canadians who filed taxes from 2007 and 2019 (the latest year of available pre-COVID data), the cost per tax filer ranged from a high of $18,785 in Saskatchewan to a low of $6,048 in New Brunswick. The three largest provinces were big spenders, with corporate welfare costing $18,334 per tax filer in Quebec, $13,285 in Alberta and $12,627 in Ontario. That's a significant amount of taxpayer money unavailable for other, more acute priorities for our population. Such spending might be justified if it led to widespread economic benefits. However, there is little evidence that business subsidies generate widespread economic growth and/or job creation. In fact, research suggests that business subsidies may actually hurt the economy as the government's interference in the market ultimately distorts private decision-making and misallocates resources. When the government attempts to select winners and losers in the economy, it often makes the economy less efficient than if those decisions were left to individuals. Indeed, the better option is to let Canadians make their own decisions about where to spend their money and subsequently determine what businesses will succeed. Government should however, play a role in funding science, which is the future of any successful economic enterprise. Instead of giving preferential treatment to select firms and industries, government should help foster a pro-growth environment that gives all businesses the opportunity to thrive by reducing business income tax rates. The same study found that government spending on corporate welfare represents a significant share of business income tax revenues. For instance, Quebec and Manitoba spent roughly the same amount of money on business subsidies as they collected in business income tax revenues from 2007 to 2019. In other words, the provincial government could have effectively eliminated provincial business income taxes if it had ended provincial corporate welfare. Similarly, business subsidies represented roughly half of all business income tax revenue (on average) in Ontario and roughly one-third (on average) in Alberta. Had that money been used to broadly reduce business income taxes, it would have stimulated investment, job creation and economic growth. Clearly, business subsidies (a.k.a. corporate welfare) come with significant costs to Canadian taxpayers and government budgets. Because these subsidies do not produce the broad economic benefits that advocates claim, governments should rein in this spending and focus on pro-growth tax reductions. It's fair to say that the outpouring of corporate subsidies by Canadian governments is without precedent in recent times. We should talk about that. The politicians should talk about it. Is it a wise use of public money? Your time to reflect

For What It Is Worth, My Advice to the Graduating Class

of 2023 By Nick Kossovan Had my priorities been in order when I graduated, my career compass would have been: Love what you do. Love the people you do it with. Love what you leave behind. We live in a complicated world, especially when it comes to work. There are usually established, but not hard and fast rules, prerequisites to meet, such as obtaining an education, to begin moving towards your career aspirations. However, even when the prerequisite is met, success is not guaranteed. Do not expect your degree to be enough. After graduating from college, I stumbled through my twenties, unsure of myself and my place in the world. At the time, I did not fully grasp who I was or how my Social Science diploma would contribute to my career. Ultimately, I had to figure out the world and the workplace on my own. Undeniably, the past three years have been tough. The pandemic redesigned student experiences, and social media became more "social" than it was pre-pandemic. You are not the first graduating class to face a world full of turmoil and uncertainty. Imagine graduating in 1942 and months later finding yourself fighting somewhere in Europe or graduating in 2008 amid what is known as The Great Recession. You have challenges; a tight labour market, widespread layoffs, rapid technological advancement, particularly in artificial intelligence, technology that has the appearance of not being designed to enhance productivity but has an end goal of employee replacement, and hyperinflation making employers rethink how they do business. Like every graduating class before you, you, and only you, are responsible for your career trajectory, so take full responsibility for it. - Talk to everybody. Opportunities are all around you; there is just one caveat: they are attached to people. The adage, "It's not what you know, but who you know," is more relevant today than it ever was. Networking is the key to attaining a successful career. American entrepreneur, author and motivational speaker Jim Rohan summed up the importance of cultivating and maintaining a professional network, "Your network is your net worth." Recently I came across a troubling headline, Americans More Than Ever Have No Friends. The article's author, Elizabeth Gilbert, states that Americans are experiencing a "friendship recession." Today, many people participate in digital communities but have few real-life relationships. Instead of talking to people, texting has become the norm. Many employees advocate working from home so they can work in isolation. As an escape, binge-watching has become a trend. Human contact is decreasing as more people use technology to communicate or avoid dealing with their surroundings. As a species, we are rapidly becoming unsociable. Do not be part of this decline! Do not think you are above anybody. Give someone your undivided attention, and you will be amazed at what you learn. As much as possible, talk to people who have been there and done that. The best conversations I have ever had have been with people who had already travelled the path I was on or were where I wanted to be. Back to the job search and career thing, I can tell you from experience that opportunities pop up from the most random conversations. When meeting new people, remember that showing interest is a massive gesture. Place your attention on the other person by asking open-ended questions. TIP: When meeting someone for the first time, ask yourself, "How can I help this person?" - Do not feel entitled to anything. Getting rid of any sense of entitlement is imperative; otherwise, you will be holding yourself back trying to fight the fundamental universal truth that the world does not owe you anything, not even to make a living. PERIOD! Having a sense of entitlement is a turnoff. Not expecting anything from anyone is how you become an independent adult and earn respect. When you stop feeling entitled, your self-esteem will soar, and you will start upping your game. - Become a person who adds value. Make "Always add value" your personal mantra. Employees who contribute measurable (keyword) value are highly regarded and likely to enjoy job security. - Read these books. 1. How to Win Friends & Influence People, by Dale Carnegie 2. The Presentation Secrets of Steve Jobs: How to Be Insanely Great in Front of Any Audience, by Carmine Gallo 3. 100 Ways to Improve Your Writing: Proven Professional Techniques for Writing with Style and Power, by Gary Provost Regarding how rapidly AI is emerging, keep a close eye on it! Nobody, not even the Internet talking heads who are suddenly "AI experts," knows where AI is heading. One thing is certain: Many jobs will be eliminated as employers identify which jobs they can delegate to AI. Hence, avoid positions that AI is likely to be able to do in the future. Volatile economic conditions coupled with rapid technological advancements have created a job market in flux like never before; hence, my last piece of advice: Never lose sight of your career goals. Despite all the job market volatility, building a career you love is still possible by focusing on what you are good at while embracing lifelong learning. __________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

Why Do Some Women Have Pain During Sex

The Doctor Game

By Common Sense Health – W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford Why do some women shy away from sex? It might be fatigue after a long day where everything, everything, has gone wrong. But before men jump to conclusions, they should know about a disease called endometriosis. This problem causes severe pain during sex. It occurs in about 10 percent of women and has a profound effect of their lives. And, about 30 percent will have trouble becoming pregnant. Some women with endometriosis may be fortunate. In spite of extensive disease, they are completely free of symptoms. Others, with minimal amounts of endometriosis bitterly complain of a variety of symptoms. What is endometriosis? At the end of a menstrual cycle women experience vaginal bleeding. The inside of the uterus, called the endometrium, starts to break down, resulting in a normal menstrual period. Doctors cannot completely explain why some women also have misplaced endometrial lining in the abdominal cavity. This also bleeds. But since this blood is trapped, with nowhere to escape, it triggers pelvic symptoms. Endometritis is the unfortunate result, an inflammatory reaction throughout the pelvic cavity. Depending on the location of the abnormal endometrium, the pain can be intense. The uterus, ovaries, and fallopian tubes can be affected, as can the urinary bladder or the ureter, a small tube that carries urine from the kidney to the bladder. All too often the endometriosis is scattered throughout other parts of the pelvic cavity. However, the prime location for this disease is at the end of the vagina where the uterosacral ligaments provide support for the vaginal tissues. It is a very sensitive area after endometriosis triggers inflammation of these ligaments. They become thickened, scarred and terribly tender. Often the disease causes the formation of large abdominal cysts full of blood. It’s then small wonder that patients complain of a diversity of symptoms. In addition to painful sex, they suffer from generalized chronic abdominal pain, low backache, and fatigue. Abnormal bleeding is common too. What causes more anxiety is that about 30 percent of these women have trouble becoming pregnant. The actress Susan Sarandon, who suffered with this condition and advocates for the Endometriosis Foundation of America, said, “Endometriosis was definitely another character in any relationship that I had.” The comedian Whoopi Goldberg has also spoken about the need for more attention. “There is nothing dirty about it. No religious group is going to be pissed if you discuss this. Because if you don’t discuss it, many more women are going to find themselves unable to have children or find themselves close to dying because [the disease has] led to something else.” Medical treatment is always tried first. Birth control can provide relief by stopping periods. Surgery is usually done if doctors believe endometriosis is widespread throughout the abdomen. Doctors then resort to abdominal laparoscopy. What they see is often endometrial lesions involving many areas of the pelvic cavity along with extensive involvement of the uterosacral ligaments. Looking at these lesions though the laparoscope allows doctors to destroy them with an electric current. And if ovarian cysts are present these can also be removed, conserving normal tissue for future pregnancies. What about menopause? The pain may improve once periods stop and there is a lack of the female hormone estrogen. There is always hope that laparoscopic surgery and destruction of endometrial lesions will result in a wanted pregnancy. However, the constant waiting can be terribly frustrating for those desiring pregnancy. An Italian proverb reassures. “Hope is the last thing ever lost.” Or, as another wise sage remarked, “Don’t forget to wind the clock, as tomorrow is another day.” Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

The Doug Ford government's plans for increasing electrical power in the Province of Ontario

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East In view of a future need for electrical power in the Province of Ontario, the Doug Ford conservative government is looking for ways to enhance the capacity of Ontario power production. However, in increasing electrical production capacity, the government has, basically put the emphasis only on increasing the number of gas-fired power plants. Presently Ontario's electricity system has among the lowest rates of CO2 emissions in North America, with roughly half of the annual supply provided by nuclear power, one-quarter by hydro dams, and one-tenth by wind turbines. The gas-powered plants account for only about ten percent. The Ford government has decided to go ahead with building more gas-fired power plants in Ontario, neglecting the cleaner nuclear energy which has served Ontario so well. It is becoming quite clear that we cannot expect any better from a government, which is so technologically behind that it is incapable of promoting new and progressive ideas to produce clean, green, recycled-fuel nuclear energy. So let us try to understand what they are about. The province is currently soliciting bids for additional gas-fired electricity generation, which means either new gas plants are built, or existing gas plants are expanded. It's poised to be Ontario's biggest increase in the gas-fired power supply in more than a decade, since the previous Liberal government scrapped two gas plants, in Mississauga and Oakville, at a cost to taxpayers the auditor general pegged at around $1 billion. Well, here we go again, the new old never ends, costing the taxpayer again and again. The excuse, according to Ford's energy minister, Todd Smith, is that Ontario needs gas plants now to help meet an expected surge in demand for electricity and to provide power while some units of the province's nuclear stations are down for refurbishment. Suddenly we need more energy? Not long ago we paid handsome sums for the US to take our surplus energy, due to a sharp decline in manufacturing industries. This random, scattered policy illustrates the real problem that the political leadership is facing in shaping the future of Ontario. In a quite apocalyptic declaration Minister Smith said, "It's really important to have natural gas as an insurance policy to be there to keep the lights on and provide the reliability that we need." In supporting his Minister, Ford has been touting the province's "clean energy advantage" as one of the key reasons Volkswagen chose Ontario for a $7-billion electric vehicle battery plant. Certainly, this plant looks important for Ontario as well as Canada, but nobody seems to be asking, at what cost to Ontarians?' Corporate welfare eh…. Ontario doesn't really need new gas plants to meet the demand for electricity. It needs more modern nuclear that recycles spent fuel, and dynamic power storage systems based simply on using water level management. Instead of these simple engineering solutions, Ontario and Canada are favoring a grid electricity battery storage facility which is said to be the largest in Canada. It is set to open in two years on Indigenous land in southwestern Ontario, with Six Nations of the Grand River and Ottawa as investors. It is an interesting and innovative way to invest taxpayers' money. The grid battery storage solution may jive with similar storage sites, mostly in the US, but these sites have their own problems and will not necessarily resolve the problem of energy storage in its entirety. Ontario Premier Doug Ford has claimed the project will store up to 250 megawatts of electricity. Is that enough? In fact, more energy efficiency and conservation programs are needed in order to better manage our electrical energy needs. For one thing, the Ford conservative government's push to generate more of Ontario's electricity from natural gas has the potential to conflict with the Trudeau liberal government's push for Canada's grid to have net zero emissions by 2035. The companies who would build Ontario's new gas-fired power plants have nothing to worry about, though, because even if the feds shut them down, the Ford government is promising that they will continue to get paid. This has all the makings of a well-known recipe for a gas-plant scandal, similar to what the province saw in the 2010s under Dalton McGuinty's Liberal government. There is a very real risk that we will not only get these new gas power plants, but we will be continuing to pay for them long after they are required to shut down. Yet again, squandering taxpayers' money without heeding consequences. I will conclude now before I get too technical, but I think it is a time to reflect on what our political leaders of any color or shape are doing with the taxpayers' money. I leave it to you to ponder.

Employers Do Not Care About Your Past Experience

By Nick Kossovan Are you having trouble getting employers to respond to your applications? If yes, then change your focus. Instead of highlighting your past experiences, consider what you can do for the employer. Every investment brochure contains the following disclaimer: "Past performance is no guarantee of future success." Employers do not care about your past work experience. What they care about, rightfully so, is what can you do for their business. However, most job seekers rely on their past experiences to convey their value, hence forcing hiring managers to evaluate them based on their past results. Who do envision a hiring manager hiring: Asher, who says he increased sales by 25% in 2021 for a company that is roughly similar to the hiring manager's company? Or... Gia, who also has a strong sales record. However, Gia presents a detailed plan for how she plans to increase the company's sales by 25% within the next 18 months? I am not saying your background does not matter; it does. If anything, your past experiences reveal your strengths and passions. However, you need more than just your past experience to stand out from your competition, which means improving how you present yourself to employers. Saying, "I helped Tyrell Corporation increase their online sales by 16% within 14 months," is simply stating your history. Act like a consultant, not just another job seeker. Show the employer that you are aware of their pain points and opportunities, and have suggestions to address them along with the experience to do so. Analyze the website of your target company and identify three improvements that will enhance its online sales, such as: 1. Showcase trust visuals and customer testimonials. (Prominently display throughout website star rating, member of Better Business Bureau and/or local Chamber of Commerce, customer testimonials) 2. Create a sense of urgency. (Time-sensitive special offers, discounts, or free shipping if purchased now.) 3. Reduce friction in the checkout process. (Eliminate unnecessary steps in the checkout process that could discourage potential customers from making a purchase.) "During my last 14 months at Tyrell Corporation, I increased online sales by 16%. Having walked myself through your website and checkout process, I believe I can increase Globex Corporation's online sales by strategically placing customer testimonials throughout your website, promoting time-sensitive offers and allowing customers to make purchases without having to create an account, which many people today prefer not to do." You get the picture. Here is another example: Simply saying, "I saved Pendant Publishing $3 million annually by improving their printing processes," is irrelevant to your interviewer. This statement does not answer the question every interviewer asks themselves while a candidate is trying to convince them to hire them, "So what?" Learn how the company operates and suggest ways to improve its processes to save money. 1. Point out areas where the employer can automate. (Automation is one of the best ways to improve business operations, such as processing invoices, payroll, and returns.) 2. Improving inventory management. (It is common for companies, especially if they have a spread-out footprint, such as business units or stores throughout a region or the country, to unnecessarily order supplies. A central inventory management system for tracking internal inventory and orders would offer substantial cost savings.) 3. Matching staffing to actual customer demand. (In the world of call centre management, which I live in, agents are a call centre's highest cost-actually, this applies to all employers-therefore, I am constantly analyzing call volume patterns and staffing accordingly to minimize having agents sitting idle.) The two examples I gave fall into two categories that employees care about, since their business, like all businesses, can only survive if it makes a profit, which is accomplished by: 1. Making money, and 2. Saving money As a job seeker, you must show how you can either make money for the company or save money; otherwise, why hire you? More than ever, employers are looking to maximize their ROI from each position within their organization. Therefore, find specific ways to show that hiring you will result in a healthy ROI -this is how you score dream jobs! As a salesperson, you want an annual base salary of $100K, 3% commission and a $40K bonus for achieving your sales quota. You believe you have the experience to warrant your compensation ask. However, what you think you are worth and what an employer thinks you are worth are entirely different opinions. So, like Gia, approach the employer with a strategy (READ: a plan of action you present) for how you will use your sales experience to generate $1.5 million in new business within the first 18 months of being hired. Doing the math: $150K (18 months salary) + $45K commission + $40 bonus (assuming no bonus in the first year) = $185K. $185K for an increase of $1.5 million in sales is an offer most employers would not refuse. As a job seeker, keep top of mind that your value to an employer is not "This is what I have done." Your value is, "This is what I will do for you." __________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com