This Past Weekend (THE DOWNTOWN FACTOR)

This Past Weekend (THE DOWNTOWN FACTOR) By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist This past weekend I had the pleasure of attending the new food hall on King Street here in Oshawa. Market at 70 king is what it’s called. They were advertising a few weeks back for vendors for their Christmas on King Street event and I decided to rent a table. What a great decision that was. At the time, I knew very little about the venue other than it had once been home to the Genosha Hotel. What a grand spectacle it was when it opened its doors on December 5th, 1929. Soon to be overshadowed by the great depression, the Genosha went on to host dignitaries and celebrities from around the world and take its rightful place in history. Over the years the Genosha changed ownership a few times and eventually fell into disrepair. In 2003 with all the glitter that once was completely gone, the hotel closed its doors for good. The structure sat empty and declining for 14 years until it was purchased by a group of people with a vision. Strategically and methodically the vision came to life. First up was the complete renovation of what used to be the hotel rooms which have been transformed into luxury apartments. Then the complete restoration of the main floor which is now the food hall. The food hall is quite something. It is a smattering of unique owner run restaurants with the exception of Church’s Chicken. They offer a variety of food from Sushi to Greek, Italian and Filipino. There is a sweet shop serving coffee and ice cream along with a few other gems. The absolute stand out for me was the Lobby Bar. The lobby bar faces King Street and is done up in a style and theme that evokes memories of the roaring 20’s through the fabulous forties. They offer a high tea service, which is a very popular thing in Durham Region. They also have happy hour, lunch, and some wonderful specialties. The entire building is steeped in history and pays homage to that. It was a real treat to spend the weekend so close to home yet feel as though I could be in old Montreal or Ney York City back in the day. I am grateful for this brilliant team of people who have come together with such an amazing vision. Downtown Oshawa certainly deserves it! I, along with many others, look forward to seeing what will take place next at this grand old building. There is parking behind the building itself along with street parking on King and Bond and Mary. When you drive by the building you will see it all lit up with beautiful lights. Take that as your personal invitation to take a moment to step through the doors and back in time to a glamorous world of art and entertainment. Soak it in and enjoy a drink or a fabulous meal. You won’t be disappointed.

Job Seekers: Self-Proclaimed Career Coaches Are Not Among the People You

Job Seekers: Self-Proclaimed Career Coaches Are Not Among the People You By Nick Kossovan Regular readers of The Art of Finding Work are familiar with my stance that self-proclaimed career coaches and resume writers, especially those claiming they can bypass an employer's ATS, are nothing more than hustlers selling recycled common-sense job search advice to desperate job seekers. My critical perspective on the career coaching industry arises from the following: · Lack of Regulation: The career coaching industry is almost entirely unregulated; therefore, anyone can call themselves a "career coach" without requiring certification, licensing, or providing a guarantee. · Absence of Corporate Experience: When I examine the background of a self-proclaimed career coach, I often notice a lack of significant corporate experience; most career coaches have never worked in the corporate trenches or advanced up the corporate ladder for a substantial period. (If they haven't done it, then what makes them think they're in a position to offer advice on how to do it?) Additionally, I've yet to meet a career coach with unique insights into the job market. · Marketing Focus: Career coaches who've been around for several years have mainly survived by excelling at marketing themselves with buzzwords, promoting the simplicity of their job-search strategies and portraying the ATS as the enemy they claim they can circumvent; they sell "the dream," not reality. · Common Sense Advice: Career coaches and resume writers only provide common-sense advice that job seekers likely already know, can easily find for free, or access without cost, such as through government agencies or the YMCA. To state the obvious, career coaches are in business to make money. Their 'I want to help job seekers' is a distant, if not entirely absent, motivator. Spend some time on LinkedIn and you'll quickly see that the ultimate goal of self-proclaimed career coaches and resume writers is to profit from job seekers who are frustrated and desperate in a tough job market. Job seekers, eager to speed up their job search, seek magic-bullet advice they believe will help them land their dream job. Because job seekers, especially at the beginning of their job search, tend to be optimistic, many get lured into paying career coaches and resume writers who can talk the talk, despite having never actually walked the walk. The belief that there are shortcuts to finding a job is what fuels the multi-billion-dollar career coaching industry today. So, if not self-proclaimed career coaches and resume writers, who should you turn to for job search advice? Based on my own experiences, I've found that there are four types of people you should seek advice from, whether it's about your job search or any other aspect of your life. 1. The Example, someone who's currently where you want to eventually be. Those who have lived through it are the ones to take advice from, not those who merely hold opinions. 2. The Public Failure. Someone who's failed publicly but persevered. Often, success hides in the lessons; thereby, failure frequently teaches valuable lessons. Listen to people who've been punched in the face by life and still got back up. Such a person actually wants to win. In addition to motivating and inspiring you, their story reinforces that failure is rarely permanent. 3. The Truthteller. Someone who makes you uncomfortable because they tell you the truth, not what you want to hear. Growth doesn't come from being coddled. If someone challenges you, pushes you, or calls you out, keep them close; that's friendship and love in disguise. 4. The Unbiased. Someone who doesn't benefit from your success. When you win, it doesn't matter to them. When you lose, it doesn't matter to them. They point out your bald spots when nobody else does. Whether you like them or not, listen to what they say. As for everyone else, smile, nod, be polite, and move on. Whose advice you follow is a choice, and like all choices, it comes with consequences, in the case of self-proclaimed career coaches and resume writers, at a significant cost. People tend to believe that luck is random; you either have it or you don't. Much of what is called "luck" is actually the result of taking the right actions. Therefore, the question becomes: What are the right actions you need to take to achieve your job search goal(s)? Taking advice from people who are already where you want to be, who have no financial stake in your success, and who want to pay it forward is the best life and job search hack I know. Like anything in life, success depends on taking the right actions. The most effective way to identify which actions you should take to reach your job search goals is to listen to the right people, which doesn't include those who make a living selling their unguaranteed service(s) to job seekers. Speaking from experience, advice and guidance from the right people (read: being selective) is invaluable. Investing time in the right people is far more beneficial and less expensive than spending money on someone who hasn't been there or done that.

Canada’s Broken Budget and the Union Army

Canada’s Broken Budget and the Union Army By Dale Jodoin Journalist and Columnist The Liberal government’s latest budget sh ows how desperate Canada has become. The plan to fill the military with federal union workers is not innovation. I panic. A military must defend the nation anywhere, anytime, without hesitation. Soldiers answer to the country, not a bargaining committee. Mixing unions with the armed forces is a recipe for collapse. What happens when troops can strike? When deployment becomes a labour dispute? When defending Canada depends on negotiations? That is not readiness. That is surrender. The truth is, the military can no longer convince enough civilians to join. Recruitment has plummeted. The government, under pressure to meet NATO expectations, is trying to fill empty ranks by any means. This is not strategy; it is damage control. The appearance of strength has replaced the reality of it. Unions exist to protect workers, not fight wars. A unionized military would be paralyzed by red tape and political squabbles. Canadians could find themselves defenseless while government employees debate overtime. This is how free nations crumble. Power shifts from citizens to politically protected unions. Every strike becomes leverage. Every contract dispute becomes a threat to national security. What the Liberals call modernization is nothing more than creating a fragile system that could collapse under pressure. We have already seen the warning signs. Postal workers strike. Bureaucrats walk off. Services freeze. Now imagine that attitude in uniform. A military strike during a national crisis would leave Canada vulnerable and humiliated. The government has forgotten that service means sacrifice. It means discipline and loyalty, not entitlement. The armed forces must be built on strength, not paperwork. Canada needs a general election. The people, not unions or party insiders, must decide how this country defends itself. Defence is not a political show. It is survival. If the military becomes just another branch of the civil service, Canada will lose more than its readiness. It will lose its independence. This is only one scenario, one many Canadians have likely imagined. But if we ignore it, we may one day find that the warning came too late.

TWO PROVINCIAL POLITICAL PARTIES WORTH WATCHING - IN BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ONTARIO

TWO PROVINCIAL POLITICAL PARTIES WORTH WATCHING - IN BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ONTARIO AMONG THE TEN PROVINCES AND THREE TERRITORIES that make up the Canadian fabric, no two have yet existed in which conditions have been so equal as to give rise to completely identical principles and policies that guide their legislatures. That being said, there are two provincial political parties that do share certain similarities – the one being the newly formed OneBC party and the other being the Libertarians here in Ontario, both of which I suggest are worth watching in an age of increasing voter discontent. Their similarities include support for lower taxes, private healthcare options, and opposition to certain government mandates and regulations. Both parties advocate for policies that actually reduce the size and scope of government interference in our lives, including significant reductions in taxes. OneBC proposes immediate cuts to personal and corporate income taxes, while the Ontario Libertarian party views compulsory taxation as “theft” and aims to someday eliminate both income and corporate taxes. Imagine that. On the matter of healthcare, there is a certain shared vision towards allowing private options as a way to reduce wait times, with the Libertarians going so far as to advocate for the repeal of the Canada Health Act to allow provinces more autonomy in their decision-making. If you believe parents should have greater choice in their children's education, you’ll easily relate to OneBC supporting equalized funding for public, private, and homeschooling options – all the while opposing "woke" activism in schools. The Libertarian’s also support increasing the availability of non-government education providers as part of their manifesto. Another similarity, and the one I’d like to focus on, is the recognition by both parties of the importance of property rights and the need to reduce government regulations they believe do nothing but burden individuals and businesses. This is of particular importance in the wake of the recent BC Supreme Court Cowichan decision that seeks to legitimize Aboriginal title over about 800 acres of land in South Richmond, specifically along the Fraser River. The ruling stated that existing private property rights in this area, which past generations of the Cowichan Tribes used as a summer village site, are an unjustified infringement on their “title” to the land. In my opinion, that decision is nothing less than monstrous, and it must be challenged in every way possible. The OneBC party is led by former Conservative MLA, Dallas Brodie, who has publicly questioned what many in her province – and I suggest the rest of Canada – see as a growing reconciliation industry. Victoria, the BC capital, initiated what they describe as a voluntary ‘Reconciliation Contribution Fund’ where property owners can choose to donate five or ten percent of their property taxes to local First Nations. The fund is separate from the regular property tax bill and directly supports Indigenous people. There are fears it could become mandatory under the provincial NDP government, and at some point be taken up by the federal Liberals in Ottawa. On the overall Indigenous question in this county, OneBC goes even further by arguing that, without physical excavation of human remains, the "discovery" of graves at residential schools remains unproven, and constitutes what they call "the worst lie in Canadian history". That may be seen as a reference to claims of ‘genocide’ that are being tossed about against what has become fashionable to label as “settlers” here in Canada. The Tk̓emlúps te Secwépemc Nation, which announced the initial findings of 215 potential burial sites at a former Kamloops Indian Residential School in May 2021, later clarified that these were preliminary findings of soil anomalies detected by ground penetrating radar (GPR), consistent with burials and supported by oral history, not physically excavated "mass graves". While many sites identified by GPR technology have not yet been excavated, some limited excavations including the former Pine Creek Residential School site in Manitoba have not found any human remains. There’s a lot there that could be further discussed, however I want to simply remind my readers of some of what I have already shared in a previous column. Governments at all levels in this country appear ready to continue enacting policies with regard to ever-increasing claims for land, money, and power on the part of Canada’s indigenous population. The federal government has tripled its annual Indigenous spending, from $11 billion to over $32 billion, since Justin Trudeau initially took office in 2015. During that time, Canadian taxpayers have been made to support several significant settlements with First Nations, totaling well over $57 billion. The Province of Ontario has also settled claims with First Nations, paying out a total of $14.9 billion in compensation, and has reached 65 land claims and other agreements, settling for close to $11.1 billion up to March 2024. With regard to ongoing treaty negotiations, a proposed $10 billion settlement was reached to compensate for unpaid past annuities, with the Ontario government contributing $5 billion. Additionally, the Province has committed over $3 billion for loans, grants, and scholarships to encourage Indigenous participation and ownership in the mining sector, and also funds various programs and initiatives through Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. That’s a lot to take in, and the dollars involved are nothing less than staggering. OneBC is attempting to push back against the reconciliation industry, in an attempt to bring at least a modicum of sanity into what has been a one-sided debate, and I suspect others, including the Libertarians here in Ontario, may eventually join in that effort. Time alone will tell. Overall, the list of key policy positions advocated by OneBC is impressive. It includes ending mass immigration, banning mandatory indigenous land acknowledgements, erasing "gender ideology and woke policies" from schools, banning teacher strikes (which should have been done decades ago), and putting an end to mail-in and early voting during elections, with all votes to be counted by hand. Those are solid proposals, the arguments for which cannot be broken – either by politicians or by the angry woke mob that seeks to dominate all aspects of our political and cultural institutions.

Former or Fashionable - Why Teens Are Choosing Older Items Over the Newest Edition in Everyday Life

Former or Fashionable - Why Teens Are Choosing Older Items Over the Newest Edition in Everyday Life By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist In modern society, pieces of everyday life are constantly changing, such as technology, fashion, and entertainment. There is always something newer, better and updated being advertised, as companies produce more and more products. Despite this, many individuals choose what is oldest, the most nostalgic. This preference of older editions is becoming more and more common. Despite the fact we are in a digital, high speed age, people often choose mature, vintage items time and time again. It can be expected for older generations to choose items which they grew up with, as the product serves more than a practical purpose; it also comes with nostalgia, familiarity, and enough back in my day comments to last a lifetime. Even to older adults, radios aren't inherently better than Spotify or Apple Music, however, they come with memories of dancing in the kitchen or learning to drive. There’s nothing wrong with a new wardrobe, but older clothes can bring an instant sense of nostalgia and comfort to those growing up with different fashion. It is easy to understand why adults and seniors appreciate what is now vintage, but the appreciation doesn’t just stop adults. Adolescents are beginning to turn away from new trends, instead loving anything older than they are. Record players, digital cameras, and wired headphones are all technologies whichhave been replaced by modern inventions, yet continue to trend. Any song can be found online with the click of a button, but record players are found in millions of teenagebedrooms. Practically all cellphones have a high quality camera, yet countless adolescents, including myself, choose to use a digital camera for photography. Wireless earbuds, such as Airpods, are owned by most youth, yet many individuals prefer their headphones wired for reasons other than the price. These examples raise the question of why? I can’t help but wonder if there is a specific reason younger generations choose items older than themselves as opposed to newer auditions crafted for human convenience. One of the most obvious reasons for this oddity would be the quality. In the example of record players, most music lovers believe sound quality is much richercoming from a vinyl or CD. One of the reasons I love my digital camera is the nature and appearance you cannot get anywhere else. In a lot of situations, classic items are believed to have a higher quality, or a cheaper price, when compared to modern items. However, the genuine quality is not the only reason individuals choose vintage over modern additions. I believe a primary reason is the personality and individuality which is interconnected with tangible items. In 2025, almost every Canadian teen uses a cellphone daily, giving them access to a world of content at their fingertips. Although this may be convenient, it has caused many actions to lose the deeper meaning they previously had. Pictures are now taken to be posted online, not remembered and appreciated. Texting is anticipated, not a choice of real compassion. With older items, normal tasks such as photography or contacting a friend feels less about convenience and more about memories and connection. When using a less modern item, everyday tasks turn into something special, partly due to the time and process involved. Dialing a phone number, downloading images from a memory card, or selecting and placing a vinyl all take time, even if only a moment. In an overwhelming and technological period, these moments which force us to slow down are crucial. It compels us to appreciate an average routine, making mundane moments stand out from the rest of the day. A trending example of the dismissal of recent items comes in the form of thrifting. This is an activity loved by practically all teens, as it combines shopping, saving money, and unique items. However, it also exposes teens to older styles, as thrift stores are a forest of timeless variety. It may take time and a whole lot of faith, but you can always find something unique and antique at a good thrift store. They’re the perfect way for anyone to access the trend of old-age style at an affordable price. Whether it be through second-hand stores or pricey record players, it is clear older items have gained their popularity once again. This comes partly from memories and quality, but also from the personality and experience which comes from these items. Vintage technologies allow younger generations to experience a history which was normal life only a few years prior. It’s easy access to nostalgia and memories different from our own, a different time period filled with more interaction and care than we have now. They hold a story, and allow you to add something new with every usage. Older concepts, whether it be related to technology, fashion, or entertainment, all feel unique, personalized, and tangible in our modern world of screens and convenience. With the modern disconnect and technology reliance currently experienced by teens, I believe we could use anything which forces us to pause and connect, even if it comes in the form of a record player, digital camera, or a pair of wired headphones.

DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?

DOES THIS MAKES SENSE? By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States This week a headline read: Ontario Investing $16.5 Million to Protect Tariff-Impacted Workers and Businesses Projects will support $120 million in total investments while protecting and creating 1,500 jobs across Ontario November 17, 2025 Ministry of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade VAUGHAN —The Ontario government is supporting companies and workers impacted by U.S. tariffs by investing $16.5 million through the Ontario Together Trade Fund (OTTF) to help them increase resilience, build capacity and re-shore critical supply chains to Ontario. The announcement marks the first round of funding under the OTTF program, with the eight recipient companies’ projects amounting to over $120 million in investments that will create over 300 new, good-paying jobs and protect nearly 1,200 more across the province. I am no economist, no banker nor a financial scholar. Do the math on the investment vs the return. Does it make sense to plunge 120 million to create 1,500 jobs. The math tells you it is $80,000/job. On the surface one may say. Great. In reality, one has to wonder who will the 120 million be really going to. I know the old thinking. Something is better than nothing... the government is famous for putting out cash and ending up in someone bank account that had nothing to do with the initial intent. I believe that our society is falling and about to fall even harder. We elect officials that do not have the business understanding to make the decisions that they make. So what do they do... they bunch up. Spend millions on expensive consultant to give them a series of choices. From these choices they engage in all kinds of paths. Good or bad. It does not matter. As it is not their money. They make a bad decision. They truly do not care as they are not accountable to no one. Think about it... the article read: The Ontario government is supporting companies and workers impacted by U.S. tariffs by investing $16.5 million through the Ontario Together Trade Fund (OTTF) to help them increase resilience, build capacity and re-shore critical supply chains to Ontario. The question I have for the government.... do they really have an understanding on how tariffs work and or how it will impact industry. I ask this question because tariffs in my opinion should only cause a shift in consumer buying... At the manufacturing level it should produce a shift to newer suppliers. If this stand to be true then where are all these millions going? Who are they politically paying off? Will the average worker really benefit... and if so for how long...

Canada Needs a Real Review of Its Criminal Justice System—Before the Trends Get Worse

Canada Needs a Real Review of Its Criminal Justice System—Before the Trends Get Worse by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East Canadians have long taken comfort in the idea that we live in one of the safest societies in the world. For decades this belief was supported by the numbers: violent crime steadily declined from the early 1990s onward, and homicides rarely reached the levels seen elsewhere. But the recent trajectory of serious crime—especially youth violence and non-homicide assaults—suggests that this old narrative no longer reflects the full reality on the ground. It is time for a sober, evidence-based review of Canada’s criminal justice system. Not a political slogan, not a reflexive “tough on crime” or “soft on crime” posture, but a genuine national assessment of what is working, what is failing, and what must be fixed to protect the public while maintaining fairness and due process. The starting point is the data. While Canada’s homicide rate actually declined last year, the overall Crime Severity Index, which measures both the volume and seriousness of police-reported crime, continues to rise. More troubling is the sharp increase in violent offences committed by youth. Police services across the country report more stabbings, swarming attacks, and group-related assaults by minors—crimes that not only shock communities but expose weaknesses in prevention, supervision, and early intervention. Non-homicide violence is also climbing. Assaults, armed robberies, carjackings, and gun-related incidents connected to organized crime have increased in several major cities. These are not isolated events. They are indicators of a criminal ecosystem in which a relatively small number of repeat offenders, gang-affiliated networks, and hard-to-supervise youth are driving a disproportionate amount of the harm. Yet our justice system still operates as if this pattern does not exist. Instead of a coordinated national strategy, we have a patchwork of bail rules, sentencing practices, and provincial policies that vary widely and often lack the resources to be effective. Police officers arrest the same violent offenders again and again, only to see them quickly return to the streets. Courts struggle with backlogs, prosecutors are overloaded, and probation and parole services are stretched beyond their limits. In too many cases, the result is predictable: a system that looks busy but does not deliver the level of public safety Canadians reasonably expect. One area urgently needing scrutiny is bail. Although reforms have tightened reverse-onus provisions for certain violent and firearms offences, the concern from police services across the country remains the same: high-risk repeat offenders are cycling through the system far too easily. Bail decisions are often made within minutes, with incomplete information, in crowded courtrooms that lack the personnel and time required to make properly informed assessments. This is not about punishing the innocent; it is about ensuring the system has the capacity to evaluate risk accurately and consistently. Sentencing and parole also require careful review. Canada must confront the fact that a small fraction of offenders are responsible for a disproportionate amount of serious, violent, and organized crime. For these groups, sentencing ranges, parole eligibility, and supervision models must reflect the real level of threat they pose. The goal is not mass incarceration, but targeted, effective incapacitation of those who consistently endanger the public. At the same time, a credible review must address prevention—not as an afterthought, but as a central pillar. The rise in youth violence is not merely a policing issue. It is connected to social dislocation, mental-health pressures, school disengagement, online radicalization, and the easy influence of criminal peer networks. Without early intervention, mentorship programs, addiction treatment, and collaboration between schools, communities, and justice agencies, the pipeline into criminality will continue unchecked. Canada also needs transparent, standardized national data on recidivism, bail breaches, weapons offences, gang activity, and case backlogs. Without reliable metrics, governments fall back on ideology rather than facts. A justice system that does not measure outcomes cannot improve them. This is why a full review is not just necessary—it is overdue. Canadians deserve a system that protects them while respecting rights, one that distinguishes between those who need treatment, those who need supervision, and those who must be separated from society for the safety of others. The current mix of rising serious crime, growing youth involvement, and administrative overload shows that the status quo is neither sustainable nor responsible. A national review, carried out with integrity and led by independent experts, would allow Canada to build a criminal justice system worthy of its reputation: firm where necessary, fair where possible, and focused always on the safety of its people. In conclusion, Canadians rightly expect a justice system that protects their families, supports victims, rehabilitates those who can be rehabilitated, and isolates those who pose a continuing threat to society. Today’s mixture of rising serious crime, overstretched courts, uneven policing resources, and growing youth violence shows that the current system is not meeting those expectations. A national review—independent, comprehensive, and driven by evidence rather than partisanship—offers the best path forward. Such a review would strengthen public safety, restore confidence in the justice system, and ensure Canada remains the safe, fair, and orderly country it has long aspired to be. With so many lawyers in the Parliament of Canada, that should be a relatively easy task, partisanship aside. This moment calls for leadership and clarity. Canada cannot afford complacency. The trends are unmistakable, the consequences are real, and the need for action is immediate. An evidence-based national review—supported by the many legal minds in Parliament and guided by a genuine commitment to public safety—would allow Canada to modernize its justice system before the problems become so entrenched they become cancerous.

The Magic Ingredient Behind Wealth (It’s Not What You Think)

The Magic Ingredient Behind Wealth (It’s Not What You Think) By Bruno M. Scanga There’s a story that gets passed around the financial world—about an advisor out in Omaha, Nebraska, not far from Warren Buffett’s hometown turf. Let’s call him Fred Smith. Fred’s built a reputation for helping local farmers understand the real power behind long-term investing. Nothing flashy. No gimmicks. Just simple, solid advice. When you walk into Fred’s office, you can see golden fields of wheat and corn waving behind him through a big window. It’s the perfect backdrop, because he often uses farming to explain the “magic ingredient” of wealth. Fred’s clients are hardworking folks—modest savers, often skeptical of big promises. When Fred starts talking about turning small amounts of money into large savings through long-term investing, they usually give him that “I’m-not-so-sure-about-this” look. So, Fred reaches for a small glass vial sitting on his desk. Inside are just a few wheat seeds. And then he says something like this: “If I took this vial to someone living in New York or Toronto and told them that from these few seeds, I could grow enough wheat to fill entire fields and feed a city—what do you think they’d say?” They’d probably laugh. But Fred knows that farmers get it. They live this truth every season. A few seeds today, with care and patience, turn into a harvest down the road. And that’s exactly what long-term investing does—it takes modest, consistent savings and, over time, turns them into something meaningful. The key? Compound growth. Let’s say you invest a dollar and earn 8% a year. After 20 years, that single dollar becomes $4.66. Not bad, right? But if you give it another 10 years—just let it sit and keep working—it more than doubles again to over $10. That’s the beauty of compounding: the growth builds on itself. And the longer you give it, the more powerful it becomes. Fred sometimes shares a classic example: Would you rather have a million dollars today—or start with a single penny that doubles every day for 30 days? Most people take the million without blinking. But that penny? If you do the math, by day 30 it’s worth over $5 million! Of course, in real life, investments don’t double daily—but the principle still holds. The earlier you start, and the longer you stay invested, the more time compounding must work in your favor. And here’s the thing: it’s never too late. Whether you’re 25, 45, or even 60, time is still on your side. People are living into their 80s and 90s now. That’s decades of potential growth—whether you’re just starting out or entering retirement. So, what’s the real secret to building wealth? It’s not about picking hot stocks or chasing the market. It’s about Patience. Consistency. And giving your money enough time to do its thing. Like Fred says—plant the seeds, nurture them, and let them grow. The harvest will come. Building wealth isn’t magic but it does take planning.

Speed Dating

Speed Dating By Wayne and Tamara I am a 19-year-old college freshman who has never been married. I am actually dating my first boyfriend, but that is by choice, because I never wanted to be a part of the high school drama scene. I wanted a mature relationship that transcended all that. However, I seem to have gotten myself far too deeply into something I am not ready for. I have been dating my boyfriend for almost three months. He’s 21, and we get along wonderfully. I am not his first girlfriend, but the first girlfriend he ”really wanted.” Just a few days into our relationship, he told me he loved me, and kept saying it, though I never responded in kind. After four weeks, I did finally tell him I loved him. I thought I meant this. However, since then, he’s come to mention quite often plans for the future. Plans such as marriage after we both finish college, children, names for those children, and more. I am not ready for this. I cannot definitely say I want to spend the rest of my life with him, though he is completely enamored with me. I’m also worried, because I have not known how to respond, and in saying nothing, I believe he has read my assent. I am truly scared I’ve led him on. This is not something I can accept of myself, since I honestly do care for him. I don’t want to hurt him, but I will continue to lead him on if I don’t say anything. Bobbi Bobbi, ancient artists drawing on cave walls didn’t sign their work. They couldn’t because they didn’t have a written language. Instead they put their hand against the cave wall, took color in their mouth, and blew. The outline of their hand is the mark they left for us. Lovers also leave a mark—on each other. When your boyfriend said “I love you,” he put his mark on you. When you said it back to him, you put your mark on him, even though you had your doubts. The problem with marks is, if love isn’t there on both sides, then the relationship has missed the mark. In sociology there is a term called the “norm of social reciprocity.” That simply means we feel obligated to give back to others what they give to us. It’s called a norm because if we violate it, if we don’t give back, we feel we have done something wrong. When social reciprocity involves sharing or being polite, there is nothing wrong with it. But it has a dark side. It can be used to take advantage of us. When your boyfriend kept saying “I love you,” it created the expectation that you had to say it back to him. Eventually you succumbed. “I love you” is also an implied promise. It says I will behave in certain ways toward you, now and in the future. Since people are supposed to stick to promises, you feel bad about pulling back now. But if you don’t, you will grow weaker as a person, and farther from your true feelings. You went to college to learn things, and one of the most valuable things you can learn is how to say no. You have a chance, through your education, to secure your future. That is an opportunity many young women don’t have. So grab that brass ring and put it in your pocket, knowing that economic freedom gives a woman the power to make wise decisions all of her life. One of the marks of maturity is the ability to do the right thing, even though it is a hard thing. We totally understand not wanting to trifle with another, but if your boyfriend has moved too far forward, that’s on him. The norm of social reciprocity is no substitute for the mark of genuine love. Wayne & Tamara

Reflecting on Mothers and Fathers

Reflecting on Mothers and Fathers By Diana Gifford We don’t choose the starting line. The family and life circumstances into which we are born is happenstance. Reading “Straight Life: The Story of Art Pepper,” a book described as ‘sheer horror’ and the ‘saddest autobiography ever written’, I’m reminded of my more fortunate start. Pepper was a jazz musician, born to a runaway, 14-year-old mother – drunk, violent, and mostly absent. It gets worse – a lot worse. Pepper’s extraordinary musical talent might have lifted him out of bad trouble. But it was not to be. It’s got me thinking about how the people closest us, in particular our mothers and our fathers, often set the stage for our lives. I am in the large club of people who believe they have the best parents in the world. My father, Ken Walker, wrote this column under the name W. Gifford-Jones, MD for 50 years, and readers will appreciate the good fortune my brothers and I feel. But what about our mother, a less well-known figure? When asked if she has any ‘wise words’ to share, she, in turn, reflects on her own parents. “I was blessed to have landed on this planet with many advocates before me who used ‘wise words.’ I did not appreciate them at the time and sometimes balked at their strictures, but eventually I learned that what they offered me, sometimes wordlessly, always by example, would provide a benefit I ought not to ignore. “My father, a corporate executive, became known by colleagues for his ‘integrity’, a word meaning strong moral principles. As a girl, I watched his behaviour, at home and in business. In time, I understood what that word meant. And I loved its strength and simplicity, as well as my father. I tried to emulate him. “Similarly, the word I would learn to apply to my mother was ‘rectitude’, correct behaviour or thinking. I saw that that made for a happy marriage. It was not easy to measure up to her standard, but she was insistent. “Those two words, thankfully, set me off on the right path. And I soon learned another word that was unexpected at the time. I set off for university in 1951, long before Women’s Lib. But I landed at a women’s college which was established to offer women ‘self-sufficiency’. Its motto was Non Administrari Sed Administrare. I learned during those four years to be true to myself, and to establish independence of thought and behaviour, against all odds. “Then came along one Ken Walker. It was not long before he showed me the meaning of ‘compassion’. I watched him over many years exhibit absolute devotion to each and every of his patients, in his office practice and in surgery. I worried about his own health. When he suffered intense criticism by colleagues and society in general for his forward medical thinking, he taught me another word, ‘tolerance’. This one I found very difficult at times, but he remained astute, and I could not argue. “There are enough ‘wise words’ to go around. Like ‘truth’ and ‘virtue’ and more. The world would be a better place if we used any and all of these words. They are so simple but so hard to find today. “This is my contribution to ‘wise words’. May it end with the word ‘health’, which blesses me at 93, and I wish it to all.” I can only say, “Thank you, Mom,” and “Thank you, Dad.” How tragic that some are born less lucky. But when encountering them, it’s an opportunity to reflect, and hopefully, an inspiration to be a better person and make the world a better place. —————————————————————————————————————— This column offers opinions on health and wellness, not personal medical advice. Visit www.docgiff.com to learn more. For comments, diana@docgiff.com. Follow on Instagram @diana_gifford_jones

Smart Tax Tips for Small Business Owners

Smart Tax Tips for Small Business Owners By Bruno M. Scanga Running a small business is exciting and rewarding—but it also comes with plenty of challenges. Between managing cash flow, building your client base, and keeping customers happy, taxes can easily slip down the priority list. With some planning, though, tax season can be less stressful and even work to your advantage. Keep Records Year-Round The number one rule for stress-free tax filing? Stay organized all year long. Keep receipts, invoices, and statements in one place—whether that’s a file folder or a cloud-based accounting system. Regular bookkeeping not only saves hours at tax time but also gives you a clear view of your business performance. As year-end approaches, run a quick estimate of your income and expenses. If you’ll owe taxes, set aside funds now to avoid a last-minute scramble. If a refund is coming, filing early means you can reinvest that money sooner—into equipment, marketing, or paying down debt. Use Interest Expense to Your Advantage Many business owners overlook deductible interest. One option is setting up a business line of credit—preferably secured by home equity or another asset—to cover expenses. The interest is typically deductible, which reduces taxable income. Meanwhile, you can use your available cash to pay down non-deductible debts like your mortgage or credit cards. This shifts interest costs into the deductible column and can improve your cash flow. Reduce Taxes Through Income Splitting If your spouse or children work in your business, consider paying them a fair wage for real work performed. This can reduce your household’s total tax bill because the income moves to someone in a lower bracket. Document hours worked, duties, and wages—just as you would for any employee. Family members are often exempt from Employment Insurance (EI) premiums, but the work must be legitimate, and the pay must be reasonable. Consider Incorporation For some entrepreneurs, incorporation offers tax advantages. If your business earns more than you need to withdraw for personal expenses, keeping funds in the corporation may mean paying lower corporate tax rates rather than higher personal rates. It can also offer legal protections and make raising capital easier. But it comes with setup costs, annual filings, and more paperwork—so it’s a decision to make with professional advice. The Bottom Line Small business taxes can be complicated, but they don’t have to be overwhelming. By keeping organized records, making smart use of deductible interest, exploring income splitting, and considering incorporation, you can keep more of what you earn. Before making major tax moves, talk to a qualified accountant or tax advisor. The right strategy can save you thousands, giving you extra resources to reinvest and grow. Running a business is hard work, but with a smart tax plan in place, you can make sure your profits stay where they belong—working for you. Saving taxes wherever you can free up more cash for your RRSP and other investments. The first step is getting professional advice.

Love’s Beggar

Love’s Beggar By Wayne and Tamara I am 20. Five months ago I started dating a coworker, 29. We work in separate departments, so we are not on top of each other every day. When we started dating, I told him I was looking for a relationship. He said he had just gotten out of a two year relationship four months before. We talk on the phone every day and see each other at least twice a week. I thought we were on our way to making it official as a couple—at least until two days ago. That’s when he confessed this new girl at work wants to get back together with him. That was a shocker. Before we started dating he dated her for a month, but she broke it off because he was moving too fast. Now he says he is stuck in the middle because he has feelings for both of us and doesn’t want to hurt either of us. I told him he was too late because he is already hurting me by leaving me to get together with her. I said I was beginning to fall in love with him, which is true, and if he cared as much as he said he did, he would stay with me. Well, he told me he wanted to be with me and he would tell her his decision. And he did. Problem solved, right? Wrong! While I was on the phone with him, she shows up at his house, and they have a long talk. He tells me she said he is confused, and now he doesn’t want to talk about it anymore because he’s stuck in the middle of a situation he doesn’t want to be in. I hurt so much when I realize I could lose him, because I have strong feelings for him. I want to be with him, and I already told him how I feel. What else am I to do? Shauna Shauna, some stories stick with us because they condense a truth in an unforgettable way. For us, one such story was a news item about a pilot guiding a large ship into port. When the ship collided with the pillar of a bridge, gravely damaging both the bridge and the vessel, the first words out of the pilot’s mouth were, “Don’t tell anybody.” People aren’t honest naturally. We are animalistic. Our self-preservation mechanism is still so strong that a lie is the first thing which tries to come to our lips. Only our good character can stop it. Your boyfriend is weak and a coward. When you jumped up and down, arguing with him, he didn’t have the courage to say he doesn’t want to be with you. Instead, he threw his hands in the air and said, “I’m confused.” But he doesn’t love you. He can’t explain why he doesn’t, he just doesn’t. No man can tell any woman exactly why he loves her. Love is an unmeasured quality, beyond factors and reasons. With a man who cares about you, you don’t have to beg. But when you beg, you know for sure you are not loved. Arguing will not change that. You think you have to make this relationship work because you are hungry for love. That is the first misstep in falling down a long staircase. When you find yourself tripping on the first step, you must grab the rail so you don’t fall all the way down the stairs. What railing are we talking about? The railing of reality. Grab hold of reality and say I’ve dated him five months, I told him how I feel, he doesn’t love me, and I’m not going to beg any man to be with me. Treat yourself as a person of value. Prize yourself, as the one who loves you will prize you. You need to be some man’s first choice, his right choice. Wayne & Tamara

A Candid Conversation (THE DOWNTOWN FACTOR)

A Candid Conversation (THE DOWNTOWN FACTOR) By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist One of the benefits of belonging to several community groups is that you meet many people. With many people come many opinions, and with an election less than a year away I thought it was a perfect time to see what is on the minds of the people. So, I asked, what are you looking for in the next election? I found it very interesting that after we got past the big three, so to speak, there were an array of different things that people took concern with. Now when I say the big three, I mean taxes, crime, and unemployment. Pretty standard stuff no matter where you live today. Being Oshawa, naturally, the state of our downtown is a big concern for most and I found that it really doesn’t matter where people live within the city, the downtown looms large in the minds of anyone who calls Oshawa home. I found it most interesting to sit and chat with people of differing walks and see what their opinion was. Some were more concerned with policing and thought that our police service was too constrained, that they should have more power. Of course, that is not determined at the municipal level, so we moved on to other topics. I found a woman who was not only outraged but saddened by Bylaws that govern helping the homeless. She wanted to see more freedoms surrounding how the individual person could help, contribute and donate. “When a corporate luncheon wraps up with 16 sandwiches left over along with dozen cookies or so, I should be able to take those to the people living on the street” she explained. “There is so much food waste in our society today and to think that I cannot give it away to people who would love to have it, we are forced to throw it away or let it go bad. It just doesn’t make any sense to me.” I spoke with another person who thinks that there should be a limit on how many cannabis shops should be allowed in one area. “From Athol to Bond on Simcoe Street, it seems like every other store is a pot shop”. “I don’t understand why there needs to be so many, he said.” One gentleman that I had the pleasure of chatting with thought that the vacant store fronts in the downtown were a glaring representation of decay in our city. “It’s a terrible shame that this is what the core looks like today, in my day people came downtown to shop and have a meal, it was really nice”. While there is no getting away from the fact that our downtown looks very different than it did many years ago, there is no shortage of opinions as to what is should look like and how to get there, among our citizens. I would like to thank everyone who took the time to sit with me, for being so open and willing to chat with a stranger who asks a lot of questions.

It Is Possible to Recover From a Bad Interview

It Is Possible to Recover From a Bad Interview By Nick Kossovan A job search strategy job seekers overlook: making a recovery attempt after a bad interview to try to alter their interviewer's opinion that they're not the right candidate. Like anyone who's ever job searched, I've had my share of bad interviews when I wasn't at my best. My nerves got the better of me; I hadn't slept well, traffic threw me off my game, a Mexican lunch wasn't settling right, and I leaned against a wall, serving as a cautionary lesson I'll never forget. I'd arrived early for a 10:30 AM interview, so I walked up and down the hall outside the interviewer's office. A guy was painting nearby, and we struck up a conversation. Then I looked around for a chair so I could sit down and gather my thoughts. Not seeing a chair, I leaned against the wall across from my interviewer's office. The moment I realized what I'd done, my interviewer opened her door. I could see she wasn't impressed as she looked towards the painter, who said, "I'll redo it." I took off my jacket, folded it, and carried it into my interviewer's office. The interview was curt and short. It's inevitable that, no matter how well you prepare for an interview, there will be days when you don't perform your best. Sometimes I wasn't as articulate as I'd like, or I didn't connect with my interviewer, or the interview ended abruptly before I could convey my value propositions, leaving me wondering if I could still salvage the opportunity. If you haven't interviewed in a while, nervous energy can easily spiral into anxiety and self-doubt. There's also the possibility, which I've experienced a few times, that your lacklustre interview performance was due to a lack of chemistry with your interviewer or feeling that things didn't quite "feel right." In such cases, accept that this wasn't the right job, company, or boss for you, trust your gut instinct and move on. However, if you genuinely want the job, instead of beating yourself up and dwelling on what went wrong, focus on ways to bounce back from a less-than-stellar interview. Think you have nothing to lose and everything to gain. 1. Send an email ASAP after the interview On the same day, send an email that highlights your skills, experience, and value, and elaborates on any points you feel you didn't communicate as effectively as you could have. Your email should include: · Express gratitude for the opportunity to interview. · Acknowledge that you wish you had communicated certain aspects of your experience and skills more clearly. · Clarify or reinforce your value by highlighting a key skill, experience, or insight that sets you apart. · Reiterate your enthusiasm for the role and the company. Subject: Thank You and Follow-Up Hi [Interviewer's Name], Thank you for taking the time to speak with me this morning about the [job title] role at [company name] and your vision for [specific aspect of the role]. Upon reflecting on our conversation, I would like to expand on when you asked me to share a situation in which I demonstrated leadership. After I left, I realized I should have mentioned the marketing committee I led during my time at [previous employer]. This cross-functional team consisted of five individuals from various departments, and our goal was to ensure that all company materials adhered to brand guidelines while maintaining high design standards. Our efforts led to a 70% increase in employee satisfaction with internal materials, which had a positive impact on overall engagement and productivity. Again, thank you for your time. Sincerely, [Your Name] When composing your email, avoid being too candid, like, "I'm so sorry I completely bombed the interview." Instead, keep it more professional, such as, "I wanted to expand on a point about my leadership experience," or "I have more concrete examples I want to share with you regarding my software knowledge." 2. Call and request an opportunity to elaborate. The majority of job seekers will only be comfortable sending a version of the email example I gave. Job seekers who stay within their comfort zone are more likely to have a prolonged job search. However, a bold move that has worked for me is to call and say something along the lines of "Hi [Interviewer's Name], do you have a few minutes? [wait for response, which'll likely be "yes"] Thanks. During our conversation yesterday, I felt that I didn't fully convey my experience in [specific area]. I'd like to better explain how my experience in [specific area] relates to the [position]." Sure, you could insert a paragraph into your follow-up email asking to schedule a call, but that isn't nearly as proactive (read: controlling your job search) as taking a deep breath and making the call asking for a chance to elaborate. I've yet to meet a hiring manager who wouldn't be impressed by a candidate trying to recover from a bad interview. Everyone messes up an interview now and then; however, don't assume you're automatically out of the running. Think about how you can recover from a poor interview. Dwelling on a bad interview accomplishes nothing, especially when it's possible to bounce back. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

The Price of “Free” Why Politics Has Forgotten Common Sense

The Price of “Free” Why Politics Has Forgotten Common Sense By Dale Jodoin Politics used to follow rules of logic and math. You could see where money came from and where it went. It made sense. Today, politics often ignores those simple facts. Leaders promise free programs without explaining how they will be paid for. But in reality, every dollar must come from somewhere. You can borrow, print, or tax, but the result is always the same. Someone pays. It may not be today, but it will be tomorrow. Economics is like physics. You cannot cheat the laws of balance. When governments spend more than they take in, they build a kind of energy debt. That debt has to be released later through inflation, higher taxes, or cuts to public services. These are not political opinions. They are measurable cause and effect results. Once, politics focused on responsibility. Now it is based on psychology. Humans crave safety, reward, and belonging more than logic. When times are hard, and prices are high, people become emotional voters. If someone promises relief, the brain releases dopamine, the same chemical linked to pleasure and trust. It creates a short term bond between voter and politician. But it also shuts down critical thinking. Studies in behavioural economics show that people value immediate rewards more than future ones. This is called “temporal discounting.” Politicians use it to win elections. They offer benefits today, knowing that future costs are invisible to most voters. When debt grows slowly, the pain is delayed. Like eating junk food every day, it feels fine until the health bill arrives. Psychology also explains why people defend bad policies. Humans are tribal creatures. We want to belong to a group, even if the group is wrong. In politics, this becomes “motivated reasoning.” Voters bend facts to protect their identity. They argue not to find the truth but to protect their side. The result is loyalty without logic. Media adds to this problem. Modern news rewards emotion over information. Algorithms push stories that trigger outrage or pride, not understanding. Research from major universities has shown that false or emotional headlines spread faster than factual ones. This constant stream of reaction weakens public focus. People believe they are informed, but they are actually conditioned to react, not reason. The cost of this behaviour shows up in the national budget. Canada, like many Western countries, spends billions more than it earns each year. Debt is now one of the largest items in government spending. Interest payments alone take away billions that could have funded hospitals, education, or senior care. This is the scientific side of fiscal policy: compound interest grows whether you like it or not. Every borrowed dollar multiplies over time. When people grow used to government support, another psychological effect appears. It is called “dependency reinforcement.” Once people rely on outside help, their motivation to return to independence weakens. The longer support continues, the harder it becomes to stop. The system feeds itself until it collapses under its own weight. Culture plays a role too. For generations, Canadians valued hard work and self-reliance. Those values supported stability. But modern culture often celebrates comfort over discipline. It encourages instant rewards and constant approval. From a psychological view, this is a shift from delayed gratification to emotional satisfaction. It weakens long-term planning and feeds political short-termism. The fix is not complex, but it is uncomfortable. The same way a diet requires discipline, national recovery needs restraint. Balanced budgets protect stability. Responsible spending builds trust. These are not outdated ideas; they are natural laws of systems. Whether in biology, physics, or economics, unchecked growth always leads to collapse. Citizens have more power than they think. Each vote signals what kind of system we want to live in. A vote for endless spending is a vote to delay pain. A vote for accountability is a vote for future security. The choice comes down to understanding the science of consequence. A country is like a household. You cannot keep running up the credit card and expect it never to be due. Debt is not evil, but it must serve a purpose. Borrowing for growth is good. Borrowing for popularity is not. The laws of economics do not care about politics. They always balance out in the end. The truth is clear. A stable country cannot be built on feelings alone. It needs facts, discipline, and courage to say no when spending goes too far. Real help does not come from promises that sound nice. It comes from leadership that respects the truth, even when it hurts. Science and math may not win elections, but they always win in the end.

A LOOK AT SOME OF THE DETAILS INCLUDED IN THE 2025 FEDERAL BUDGET

A LOOK AT SOME OF THE DETAILS INCLUDED IN THE 2025 FEDERAL BUDGET THIS COLUMNIST WHOLEHEARTEDLY CONDEMNS the decision by Mark Carney’s Liberals to exponentially increase spending in their recently released federal budget. Those words form the basis of one of last week’s editorials here at The Central, written in response to what has been labelled as the “Canada Strong 2025 Budget.” We were quick to highlight the fact that our nation’s debt continues to spiral out of control as spending on all manner of programs goes through the roof. We also suggested the Trudeau-Carney Liberals need to re-examine their ideology and actually start thinking of ways to get overall spending under control - because so much of what Canadians are paying in tax is now going to pay interest charges on our nation’s debt. The federal government is nowhere near balancing anything as they continue to borrow tens of billions of dollars every year, resulting in our having become a nation that now lives day-to-day on that same borrowed money, which is not sustainable. I did some research on what I see as a few key aspects of the budget, and this week I want to share some of the more relevant details. In the wake of years of prolonged deficits, there’s still a need for funding in crucial areas of national importance, and that requires a fresh look at where and how every tax dollar is being spent. Let’s begin by taking a look at the national crisis that is mental health and addictions – a crisis that is increasingly affecting our society in every way. The budget document has zero mention of meaningful support on this issue. There isn’t a single new dollar, program, initiative, or even passing reference to addictions treatment, recovery beds, opioid response, or any such mental-health-and-addictions funding anywhere in the budget. That seems almost unbelievable in the wake of so much suffering on our streets and in so-called ‘homeless’ camps. One notable mention is on page 247, informing us that current transfers to the provinces for the funding of home and community care - and mental health and addictions services - are set to remain at $1.2-billion each year for current programs that are set to expire in 2027. That means there is no new money being allocated to the healthcare crisis that is gripping our country. It is simply a recognition of the final two years of a 2017 commitment, with no mention of expanding or replacing that funding, either on page 247 or anywhere else in the budget. We need targeted action towards addictions treatment right now, not just a simple countdown of existing programs that we know will soon end. To let $1.2-billion in essential support simply vanish in 18 months without a known replacement plan at this stage is a failure on the part of our federal government to come to terms with a national crisis – one that has seen over 50,000 of our fellow citizens die from drug overdoses within the last ten years. The second issue I’d like to highlight concerns the state of childcare programs in this country. They are an essential element that helps keep our overall economy moving forward. Current federal programs have led to what many see as endless waits, a shortage of spaces, and a rationing of childcare. The Auditor General has issued a report which tells us the current approach on tackling this issue has actually resulted in less than half the number of spaces promised by the federal government. The report goes on to say the Liberals are in fact 69,000 spaces short of the target they set for the period ending in March of next year. Page 245 of the budget shows an expense outlook that offers little in the way of increased funding to alleviate the fact that 50 per cent of parents using child care said they had difficulty even finding a space. This is particularly challenging for those will low incomes who wish to enter the workforce. As it stands, there are too many prohibitive barriers to accessing childcare for vulnerable families, and the 2025 budget has failed to change that. Finally, let us turn our attention to the topic of productivity, research and innovation. The budget does seek to recognize that productivity and investment in research & development on the part of the private sector is lacking. Page 53 tells us, “Over the past decade, Canada’s productivity performance has been persistently weak. “In this time, productivity grew by only 0.3 per cent annually – less than one-third the pace of the previous two decades. “This has led to substantial productivity gaps with other G7 economies.” It has become common knowledge that for decades, Canadian companies have invested less per worker than their American counterparts. It’s a problem that has gotten worse since 2015 when commodity process began to collapse due to a sharp fall in energy investment. Well that’s no surprise, given the Trudeau government’s attack on our natural resource industries during their 10 years in office. Ironically, Page 54 of the budget document appears to offer up a dose of political humour. While seeking to double down on its attack against our oil and gas industries, it tells us that “Canada must look to new high-growth markets and invest in technology that can unlock its economic potential”. That is nothing less than ridiculous, given that we are literally sitting on massive wealth-generating resources as it is. Those resources are being kept locked in place by a radical environmental ideology the Liberals refuse to let go of. As if that wasn’t bad enough, the budget has the audacity to go on to say, “Doing so will position the economy for success in the future (What about right now?), defined by…decarbonisation…driven by technology advancement.” That sounds like another net-zero fantasy. So, in the face of all that we’ve reviewed, one does try to remain somewhat optimistic, which is a difficult task in our current economic and social climate. What the budget does do in terms of looking to a more prosperous future is provide enhancements to science & research initiatives, by encouraging investment in Canadian innovation. The federal government proposes to further increase the annual expenditure limit for science & research and to enable a more beneficial tax incentive program. If what is being proposed may truly help innovative businesses to scale up and grow, it can only be a good thing for a nation that is so desperately in need of increased productivity. There is so much contained within the 2025 budget that it would take another half-dozen columns to further highlight its important aspects. For now, we’ll simply have to leave it there.

ROGERS CUSTOMER SERVICE

ROGERS CUSTOMER SERVICE By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers Is it just me? On Friday, Rogers had an outage in my area... or so I thought. As most of you would have done. I called Rogers. First the pathetic automated system. In my opinion it is useless and time consuming. It is set as a way to delay callers from going to an actual person. The automated is 100% programmed to favor Rogers. Not the customer... and forget thinking that it is for our security and or best interest. In my opinion it is not. Once you actually get someone. You have to identify, verify and be blessed by the attendant before they actually can help you. The frustrating thing is that in many cases I feel like I am calling some office in the Middle East or South East Asia. Don’t get me wrong. I am not prejudice in any way. I just expect that for my $1,500/mth bill that Rogers would have some sort of language standards. The real sad thing that these standards do not seem to apply to the cultural indifferences that are obvious on the mannerism and attitude of the so called ‘SPECIALIST’. After 30 minutes of automated system. You get passed off to an attendant. Only after having to hear a prompt telling you that ‘We are glad you called, there is a bit of a wait’.... This time they told me ‘estimated time 1hr’. I almost fell off my chair. Want to hear the kicker? You have no choice. Once they answered. Once again had to authenticate... You would think that they would transfer the call with an already authentication from the previous 3 or 4 authentications. Bottom line. Each department knew less then one before. It got so bad. That I demanded to speak with technical support as it was Friday and we needed the internet back up and running. We are now 2 hours in this call. After another long wait. Finally someone came on line. I asked them if there was an outage and he confirmed it. He openly said that they are backed up do to all the calls coming in from people like myself. I asked him. What is the resolve? He said, we are working on it and you should have your service back up and running in no time. I asked him how long. He could not tell me. So now I am in almost 3 hours to be told that Rogers did not know what caused it and or how long will the service be down. This is not customer service. A company that size should not have to put consumers through such and ordeal. Now don’t get me wrong. BELL is no better. What has happened to customer service? What has happened to standards? Have we fallen so far down the human scale that we do not care. That corporations only interest in feeding the goose that lays their golden egg? Customers are treated like a number? This is not right... Then again they know this and they know we have no choice. We have no consumer protection and or recourse. Sad that we allowed customer service to collapse.

Canada’s 2025 Budget: A Turning Point or Another Missed Opportunity?

Canada’s 2025 Budget: A Turning Point or Another Missed Opportunity? by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East When Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne rose in the House of Commons on November 4 to deliver the 2025 federal budget, the tone was unmistakably ambitious. Framed as a “budget for a generation,” the plan seeks to reposition Canada’s economy for a volatile world. With Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first budget now tabled, Ottawa clearly wants to mark a decisive break from the incremental politics of the past decade. From Maintenance to Nation-Building The headline figure—nearly $280 billion in new investments over five years—is staggering even by post-pandemic standards. Yet the government insists this is not another spending spree but a deliberate bid to modernize Canada’s productive base, expand infrastructure, and strengthen national resilience amid global upheaval. What distinguishes Budget 2025 is its structure. It introduces a capital-budgeting framework that separates day-to-day expenses from long-term investments. This seemingly technical reform signals a deeper shift: Ottawa wants Canadians to view public spending as investment in national assets—ports, clean-energy grids, research capacity, and housing—rather than mere consumption. The allocations reflect that philosophy: roughly $115 billion for infrastructure, $110 billion for productivity and innovation, $25 billion for housing, and $30 billion for defence and security. In essence, it is nation-building 2.0, reminiscent of the post-war decades when Canada built highways, railways, and pipelines. In Carney’s televised address, he called the effort “the price of staying sovereign in an uncertain world.” With supply chains fragmenting and rivalries reshaping trade, Canada must rely more on its own productive capacity—from critical minerals and clean manufacturing to digital and transport infrastructure. The Fiscal Balancing Act Ambition carries a cost. The projected deficit of $78.3 billion for 2025-26 exceeds earlier targets, prompting charges that the government has broken its fiscal promise. Still, Ottawa pairs its investment drive with two anchors: balancing day-to-day operations by 2028-29 and ensuring the deficit-to-GDP ratio declines over time The government argues that not all deficits are equal—those creating long-term assets can strengthen the balance sheet. Whether voters accept that logic will hinge on tangible results: more jobs, affordable homes, better transport, and a stronger industrial base. Importantly, the budget avoids broad tax hikes. Instead, it leans on targeted incentives: enhanced clean-tech and critical-minerals credits, immediate expensing for manufacturing facilities, and renewed support for capital investment. The message to business is competitive, not punitive. The “New Way” Ottawa Envisions Beyond the numbers, Budget 2025 seeks to redefine Canada’s economic model. After decades of dependence on U.S. demand and commodity cycles, the government outlines a path toward self-reliant growth. Major infrastructure, defence, and energy projects aim to reinforce the North American industrial base and link economic policy with national security. Housing policy also takes a new turn. After years of stalled pledges, Ottawa commits $25 billion to expand affordable supply and speed up permitting through federal-provincial-municipal partnerships. By tying transfers to measurable results, it aims to impose coordination on a system long marked by fragmentation. This “whole-of-nation” narrative—combining productivity, housing, defence, and climate—reflects Carney’s belief that fiscal policy must prepare nations for structural shocks rather than react to them. Opposition Voices and Alternative Visions A credible democracy requires credible opposition, and reactions to Budget 2025 reveal Canada’s shifting political landscape. The Conservative Party, led by Pierre Poilievre, branded the plan “a costly budget of broken promises.” Their critique focuses on the deficit, debt-servicing costs, and the absence of direct affordability relief. Conservatives warn it could rekindle inflation and do little to fix the housing crisis, calling instead for spending restraint, a smaller bureaucracy, and repeal of the carbon tax. These arguments resonate with Canadians who feel squeezed by rising costs. Yet their response remains largely reactive—emphasizing cuts and deregulation without offering a detailed growth strategy. Fiscal prudence matters, but rebuilding productivity requires more than austerity. Their criticism and essentially lack of an intelligent alternative constructive proposal demonstrate some deficiencies in their professionalism. The New Democratic Party offered a more nuanced view. Finance critic Don Davies welcomed infrastructure spending and co-operative housing—long NDP priorities—but warned that removing the Underused Housing Tax and trimming public-sector jobs could hurt fairness. The party also questioned generous incentives for foreign corporations, urging stronger domestic-content rules.mIn a minority Parliament, such conditional support could shape amendments and ensure social equity remains part of the growth agenda. The Bloc Québécois and Green Party criticized centralization and questioned environmental follow-through. While their influence is limited, their calls for transparency and accountability echo public concern about execution. Risks and Rewards Execution remains the Achilles heel. Canada’s regulatory maze and permitting delays often stall infrastructure projects for years. Without serious streamlining, many of these investments could remain PowerPoint slides long after political momentum fades. Fiscal risk looms as well. Interest payments are projected to reach $58 billion annually by 2028, more than the federal health transfer. If global rates rise or growth falters, Ottawa’s fiscal anchors could wobble. Yet the potential upside is significant. If implemented effectively, these investments could renew productivity, expand the industrial base, and strengthen Canada’s resilience. The capital-budgeting reform, if maintained, may also improve transparency—clearly distinguishing investment from consumption. A Moment of Choice Every generation faces a moment when the old economic model no longer fits new realities. Budget 2025 aims to meet that moment with an integrated, forward-looking vision. Whether it marks the start of a new Canadian era—or another cycle of lofty promises—will depend on disciplined execution and a Parliament willing to debate rather than weaponize fiscal policy. For now, the budget stands as both a gamble and a statement of intent: that Canada is ready to invest in itself again—to build rather than drift, and to chart a “new way” suited to the century ahead. Let’s see if the budget will be passed or not next week. It is a confidence vote. Its rejection would start a winter election.

I Had Enough

I Had Enough By Rosaldo Russo Retired I like to begin by thanking the Editor of this newspaper for allowing an average guy like me contribute back to my community even after my retirement. I don’t know about you. But I am sick and tired of calling just about any branch of the government and after a lengthy voice system... end up at a voice mail telling me that someone will get back to me in a day or so. They never do. The other day I received an adjustment to my taxes... $1,800. Wait did my old pension go up? Did I win some lottery? Then how is it that I am supposed to pay an additional tax? Should I claim refugee status in my own country? Should I use this new addition to my tax as a government oppression tactic and feel for my life? Look at all the benefits I could get by filling as a refugee in my own country. I worked all my life very hard. I remember the days when I could not even afford food. Not once did I turn to the government. With my limited education compensated by passion to contribute to this great nation. My pride would not allow me to turn to the government. I also thought that if I worked hard, at the end of my life the government would pay me back by offering a reasonable quality of life. Well, I was dead wrong. It appears that there are no standards. Customer service both in private and government affairs is a thing of the past. What is going on here. I been trying to get a hold of our Mayor in regards to property issue. Never returned a call. I tried calling the Region. Once again. No one to be found. Leave a message and we will call you in 24hrs. What am I paying taxes for? So that the government can send it to the Ukraine or some other foreign nation? Where is my money going? I am forced to pay or possibly loose my property. Then you hear on how the Federal government is paying out for immigrants wages, homes and the likes. Now, once again. I am an immigrant. I like to think I have standards and would never even consider turning to the government for nothing. Now in my old age all I ask is to be respected and to be treated like a human being. To live free of problems and policy. Much like this tax increase. No explanation. No reason. Just pay. Where am I supposed to get the extra income? I like to think I am blessed in part as I invested some of my hard work earning so I can afford a little tax increase. But how about all those out there living day to day? It is not right. Bring back common sense. Bring back customer service and for God sake bring back operators...

Prying Eyes

Prying Eyes By Wayne and Tamara Okay, so I’m going to be 25, and I have lots of best friends. One of them is 35. She’s so cool and is super easy to talk to about crushes and stuff. The problem is I know her dad’s side of the family really well, but I don’t know much about her mom’s side. She wasn’t that close to her mom till she had her baby, and now she has gone back to not mentioning her mom much. For some reason my friend doesn’t like her stepdad. She never mentions him—ever. For the longest time I didn’t even know their names, and I only met them once. You’re probably thinking I could just ask her. You see, though, most of this I only know from her grandma who is like a grandma to me. That’s how we met. Her parents divorced when she was seven, and she lived with her dad growing up. I know it’s none of my business, but it would be nice if she could trust me with it. My friend lives a couple of hours away, so I don’t see much of her. I don’t feel like asking her grandma. I shouldn’t let it bother me, but I have so many questions and I don’t want to make her feel uncomfortable by asking. Joni Joni, we live in a world where you can go online and find a satellite picture of any stranger’s house, peek at their legal records, or hire a private investigator to ferret out their personal information. Those activities aren’t driven by altruism, but by baser motives. So the first question you might ask yourself is, why do I want to know? Your friend isn’t suicidal, on the edge, or depressed. Just the reverse. Her life is in order. Why do you need to know more about her background than she has already shared? Many people consider family to encompass everyone they are related to, biologically or through marriage. For others, however, family is the emotional network they were raised in. That seems to be your friend’s view. One thing is clear: you don’t have a true need to know, and a sure way to lose a friendship is by being snoopy and overstepping bounds. There is something creepy about the employee who wants a key to the business the second day on the job, and some of the most frightening movies, like “Single White Female” and “The Talented Mr. Ripley,” aren’t about chainsaw massacres. They are about a person who tries to invade a life. We say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but we don’t acknowledge that people who try to learn too much about us trigger our fears. We fear sharks because they can eat our body, but those who try to get too close may make us feel they are consuming our soul. The historian Felipe Fernandez-Armesto has suggested the earliest human idea—an idea far older than the first written records—is cannibalism. That sounds shocking, but he explains that our ancestors around the world rarely practiced cannibalism for nourishment. Rather they did it in a ritual fashion to take on the prowess of those they admired or regarded highly. If he is correct, then the idea of incorporating into ourselves as much as we can about a respected person is deep within us. Perhaps that is why advertisers use sports heroes to get us to purchase products. Paparazzi try to steal images of famous people, and tabloids dig up dirt on them. When tabloids cannot find dirt, they make the dirt up. We don’t think that describes you, but neither do we see a reason for you to look into your friend’s background. Friendship is not something to tamper with. Her example as a person and the warmth of her light should be enough for any true friend. Wayne & Tamara

Life and Critical Illness Insurance Planning

Life and Critical Illness Insurance Planning By Bruno M. Scanga Deposit Broker, Insurance & Investment Advisor We all know the saying: nothing in life is certain except death and taxes. But there’s another truth we tend to forget—life is full of surprises, and not all of them are good ones. A sudden job loss. A medical emergency. A serious accident. Even the loss of a loved one. When you think about how many ways life can throw a curveball, the odds of facing at least one major financial shock are high. Many Canadian families are just one missed paycheque away from real trouble. The real question isn’t if something unexpected will happen—it’s when. So, why don’t more people prepare for it? Often, it’s because we think we’ll have time “later” or that bad things only happen to other people. The truth is, unexpected events rarely give warning, but you can soften the blow by preparing ahead of time. Here are five key steps you can take to protect yourself and your family. 1. Build an Emergency Fund Aim to set aside enough cash to cover three to six months of living expenses. Keep it in a savings account you can access quickly—not tied up in investments. And no, your credit card doesn’t count as an emergency fund. In fact, relying on credit in tough times is one of the fastest paths to bankruptcy. It may take a while to build this cushion, but budgeting and consistency will get you there. 2. Get Life Insurance If someone depends on you financially, protecting them is part of your responsibility. Life insurance isn’t as complicated—or as expensive—as many people think. The right policy ensures that your loved ones can cover bills, debts, and living expenses if you’re no longer around. 3. Protect Your Health If you don’t have extended health coverage through work, investigate buying your own. Medical costs like prescriptions, dental care, and other treatments can add up quickly. Even if you’re young and healthy now, accidents and illnesses happen. Some insurers even offer coverage for those with pre-existing conditions—so shop around. 4. Cover Your Biggest Risk: Disability Before age 65, you have a 1-in-5 chance of facing a long-term disability that keeps you from working for more than 90 days. If your employer doesn’t provide long-term disability insurance, explore individual coverage. It can be harder to qualify for than life insurance, so if you’re eligible, don’t delay. 5. Insure Your Assets If you own, it—and it’s expensive to replace—insure it. This means your home, your car, and the possessions inside. Renters should protect their belongings too. For homeowners, aim for full replacement value coverage indexed to inflation. And if your car is relatively new, consider collision coverage, even with a higher deductible. Life will always be unpredictable. But with smart planning, you can turn the unexpected from a financial disaster into a manageable challenge. Your future self—and your family— will thank you.