Saturday, March 28, 2026
Does Your Doctor Care?
Does Your Doctor Care?
Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones
If doctors depended like actors do on an ability to connect with their audience, the medical profession would get better reviews. But most patients will tell you the same thing about their doctor: they don’t make that connection at a human level. They are elusive – virtually impossible to reach for a discussion. When they appear at appointments, they pay more attention to the computer screen in the examining room than they do you, the patient, the person needing their care. Patients have been complaining about it for decades.
In 1989, a major survey reported patients often felt “dehumanized,” and that doctors cared more about tests and procedures than about the person in front of them. Even earlier, in the 1960s, social researchers noted that patients described physicians as “curt” and “abrupt,” mechanical and impersonal. Studies ever since have confirmed that dissatisfaction with doctors is due to their lack of communication skills.
Medical schools have tried to address this. Teaching interpersonal skills is now part of the curriculum. Students rehearse interviews, practice explaining diagnoses, and even role-play with actors posing as patients. Research shows that effective communication improves diagnostic accuracy, increases adherence to treatment plans, and enhances patient satisfaction. Yet many patients would be forgiven for wondering where those lessons went. Heavy workloads, computer screens between doctor and patient, and complex medical teams continue to create barriers. Medicine may be teaching communication better than ever, but the system often makes it hard for the patient to see the doctor doing it.
Many patients assume they have no choice. “I’m lucky just to have a doctor,” they tell themselves. “There’s no way I could find another one.” This is a false narrative. Doctor shortages and the complexity of healthcare have people believing they must accept poor communication. You would not tolerate being ignored or dismissed in other parts of your life. Why accept it in medicine?
Patients do have power. Does your doctor ask about your life, listen without interrupting, and explain clearly? If the answer is consistently “no,” action is warranted. Even if you stay with the same doctor, your preparation can transform a visit. Write down your list of concerns and what you think the doctor needs to know as background. Prioritize your questions and have them written down too. Ask for clarification. Ask if you have options. Be sure you understand instructions relating to medication.
Communication matters immensely in consultations, where diagnoses are discussed, treatment plans explained, and long-term decisions made. But surgery is different. In the operating room, technical skills are what matter. A brusque surgeon may still be an exceptional technician. Reputation among colleagues, experience, and complication rates are more revealing than personality. Multiple opinions, careful questions about outcomes, and input from nurses or other professionals are the smartest safeguards.
Walking out on a doctor may be right for some patients. But a practical alternative is a health advocate: a trusted companion who attends appointments with you. They can ensure questions are asked, take notes, track instructions, clarify confusing explanations, and follow up on tests or referrals. They act as an extra set of eyes and ears, guiding patients through complex care.
There’s also the possibility that new artificial-intelligence tools capable of notetaking, translating medical jargon into plain language, and helping patients with treatment routines will take up the role of chief communicator. If managed wisely, these tools could make a big difference. But the relationship we all want still rests with two human beings: a doctor who cares and a patient who feels well cared for.
How Do You Even Start That Conversation?
Dead and Gone…
How Do You Even Start That Conversation?
By Gary Payne, MBA
Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario
There is a conversation many families think about having. And then don’t. Not because it isn’t important. But because it feels uncomfortable to begin.
If I were gone, I would not want my family to carry the weight of guessing what I would have wanted. And yet, I understand why these conversations get delayed. They rarely start easily. No one sits down at the dinner table and casually says, “Let’s talk about what happens when I die.” It feels heavy. It can feel out of place.
Sometimes it feels like saying it out loud might somehow make it happen sooner. So people wait. And often, they wait until it is no longer possible to ask. I have spoken with many families who told me the same thing afterward. “We meant to talk about it.” “We just never found the right time.” If I could leave my family one small piece of guidance, it would be this: There is no perfect moment to start this conversation.
There is only a gentle way to begin it. It doesn’t have to be formal. It doesn’t have to be detailed. And it doesn’t have to be finished in one sitting. Sometimes it starts with something small.
A comment after attending a service. “I liked how simple that was.” Or, “That felt a bit overwhelming.” Those moments open the door without forcing it. They allow people to speak in a way that feels natural, not planned. If I were sitting with my family, I would not want it to feel like a checklist. I would want it to feel like a conversation. Not “Here is everything I expect.”
But “Here are a few things that matter to me.” Because most people are not looking to control every detail. They are trying to remove uncertainty. There is a difference. I would want my family to know a few simple things.
Whether I would prefer burial or cremation. Whether I would want something quiet or something that brings people together. Whether there is anything that would feel important to include - or just as important, to leave out. That’s enough to guide them. The rest, I would trust them with.
There is another part of this that people do not always expect. These conversations are not only about logistics. They are about reassurance. I have seen families feel a sense of calm simply knowing they had talked about it. Not because every detail was decided. But because nothing felt completely unknown.
If I were gone, I would want my family to feel that steadiness. Not perfection. Just a little more clarity than silence would have left behind. I would also want them to know this. It is okay if the conversation feels a bit awkward. It is okay if someone changes the subject the first time. It is okay if it takes a few attempts before it feels natural. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen. It just means it’s human.
Sometimes the hardest part is not the conversation itself. It’s starting it. If I could offer one way to begin, it would be this: Make it about helping each other. Not about death. Something as simple as, “I’ve been thinking about this lately - I don’t want you to have to guess if something ever happened to me.” That changes the tone. It becomes an act of care, not discomfort. And that’s what it really is. Because at its core, this conversation is not about endings. It’s about making things a little easier for the people we leave behind. If I were gone, that is what I would want most. Not a perfect plan. Not every decision made. Just enough understanding that my family would not feel alone in figuring it out.
Next week, I will write about something that often follows these conversations, or sometimes replaces them entirely: what happens when nothing has been discussed at all, and families are left to make decisions without any guidance.
Protecting your investments from the CRA? Consider using segregated funds?
Protecting your investments from the CRA?
Consider using segregated funds?
By Bruno Scanga
Financial Columnist
Investing your money is an effective way to put your money to work and build your wealth. By investing smart, it helps give you more flexibility to earn more on your money, build more security for your retirement, and ultimately give you the chance at achieving your financial goals and dreams.
However, investing comes with risks. Segregated funds can help prevent these risks!
Segregated Funds: Investing with peace of mind
Segregated Funds allow you to invest your money and help grow your wealth but also gives you peace of mind knowing that you have protection against uncertainty.
Unlike other investment options, segregated funds give you features that aren’t found in the typical investments (ex. Mutual funds, stocks, and GICS):
Guarantees on your principal – money you invest is guaranteed up to 75% or 100% upon maturity and death
Reset Options – lets you lock-in market gains that can increase the amount payable upon maturity or death
Bypass probate – death benefits paid directly to named beneficiary instead of your estate ensures privacy and helps avoid the lengthy and costly process of going through probate
Potential creditor protection – by designating a qualified beneficiary, investments may be exempt from creditors in the event of bankruptcy or litigation
Who are Segregated Funds for?
Pre-retirees looking for wealth accumulation but want to avoid potential losses with maturity and death guarantees
Individuals looking to preserve their legacy and transfer their estate in a timely, private, and cost-effective manner
Business owners looking for creditor protection planning
Anyone who wants the ability to achieve the same type of investment returns as mutual funds but with the security and protection in knowing that their money is protected against any uncertainty
Investing helps you be more secure and confident about your financial situation. It is not a one-day initiative but rather a continuous long-term activity. The earlier you start investing, the more well-equipped you’ll be in the future. Working with your financial advisor can help put the roadmap in place that will help guide you towards your financial goals.
However, remember transferring your wealth is also a considering that should be reviewed in your planning process
Get started today so your family will have a easier transfer at time of your change of life.
Why Zagreb’s Transit Embarrasses the GTA (And What That Says About Us)
Why Zagreb’s Transit Embarrasses the
GTA (And What That Says About Us)
I didn’t go to Zagreb looking for a transit lesson. But I got one. And it wasn’t subtle.
The Moment It Hits You.You step onto a tram and something feels… off.
Not broken. Not chaotic. Just… easy. No schedule checking. No stress about missing the next one. No wondering if it’s actually coming.
It just shows up. Every few minutes. Like it’s supposed to.
The Difference Is Psychological
In the GTA, transit is something you plan around. In Zagreb, transit is something you trust.
That’s the entire game. And once you feel that difference, you can’t unsee it.
Let’s Talk About Home
Back here in the GTA—and especially across Durham—we’ve built a system that quietly tells people: “You should probably just drive.”
We:
- Stretch bus routes across massive distances
- Run them infrequently outside peak hours
- Design roads for cars, then try to “fit transit in” afterward
And then we act surprised when ridership lags.
The Lie We Tell Ourselves
We say:
“We don’t have the density for that kind of system.” Zagreb kills that argument. It’s not Manhattan. It’s not Tokyo.
It’s a mid-sized city that made a decision: Transit is core infrastructure—not a social service.
What They Got Right (And We Didn’t)
Zagreb built: - A tram network that actually covers the city - Frequency that eliminates planning - Priority lanes that beat traffic - A unified and simple system
We built: - Patchwork transit - Political compromise routes - Systems that compete with traffic instead of beating it.
And Here’s the Part That Should Sting
We pour billions into: - Roads - Interchanges - Expansions
Then debate transit funding like it’s optional. Meanwhile, cities like Zagreb treat trams the same way we treat asphalt: Non-negotiable.
The Real Issue (Mr. X Translation) This isn’t about trams. It’s about priorities.
You can’t: - Charge high development charges - Talk about intensification - Promise climate goals …and then fail to deliver reliable, frequent transit. That’s not planning. That’s contradiction.
The Fix (And It’s Not Complicated)
If you want people out of cars: 1. Frequency first — every 5–10 minutes minimum
2. Dedicated lanes — transit must beat traffic 3. Network coverage — not just corridors
4. Stop over-planning, start building.
Final Word
Zagreb didn’t outspend us. It out-decided us. They chose a system people could rely on.
We chose a system people tolerate. And until that changes, all the talk about: - housing - affordability - climate…is just that. Talk.
Mr. X - Because sometimes you have to leave the country to see what’s broken at home.
The Killing Of A Profession Scoundrels - Pretender & Wanabe’s
The Middle East Crisis and the Fragility of the Global Economy
Saturday, March 21, 2026
Dead and Gone… Are You Sure It’s Covered?
Dead and Gone…
Are You Sure It’s Covered?
By Gary Payne, MBA
Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario
There is a question many families ask, often quietly - sometimes sitting together after everything has already happened. “Would it have been easier if this had already been arranged?”
They are usually talking about prepaid funeral plans. If I were gone, I would want my family to understand what those plans actually do - and what they don’t. From the outside, prepaid arrangements sound simple. You make decisions ahead of time. You pay in advance. When the time comes, everything is taken care of.
In some ways, that is true. But like many things connected to funerals, the details matter more than people expect.
A prepaid plan is not always a single thing. Some plans lock in specific services and prices. Others simply set aside funds that will be used later. Some are guaranteed. Others depend on how costs change over time. Those differences are not always obvious at the beginning. I have spoken with families who believed everything had been taken care of, only to discover later that certain items were not included. Not because anyone did something wrong. But because the plan did not cover everything they assumed it would. I’ve seen the look when they realize it wasn’t as clear as they thought. If I were gone, I would want my family to feel steady enough to ask one simple question: “What exactly is included?” Not just generally. Line by line.
Does the plan include transportation? Paperwork? Staff services? Facilities? Is it tied to a specific funeral home? Are third-party costs included, or will those be separate later? Those questions matter more than the label “prepaid.” There is another part that can be confusing. Portability. Many prepaid plans are connected to a specific provider. If someone moves, or if the family prefers to use a different funeral home, transferring the plan is not always straightforward. Sometimes it can be done. Sometimes there are limitations. If I were gone, I would want my family to know where the plan applies - and what happens if circumstances change. I would also want them to understand something that is not always talked about directly.
A prepaid plan can reduce decision-making. It does not remove it completely. Even when arrangements are set in advance, the family still makes choices when the time comes. Dates. Timing. Small details that were not part of the original plan. I have seen families feel relief knowing certain decisions were already made. I have also seen families feel unsure about whether to follow the plan exactly, or adjust it.
If I could leave one quiet message, it would be this: Do not feel bound by a plan in a way that adds pressure. A prepaid arrangement is meant to guide, not to create stress. There is also the financial side. Many people choose prepaid plans to protect their family from rising costs. In some cases, guaranteed plans do lock in pricing. In others, the funds set aside may not keep pace with future costs.
If I were gone, I would want my family to understand whether the plan is guaranteed, or simply a contribution toward future expenses. I would also want them to know where the funds are held. In Ontario, prepaid money is typically placed in trust or backed by insurance. That structure exists to protect families. Still, it is reasonable to ask how the plan is funded and how it will be accessed when needed.
If I could leave one practical suggestion, it would be this: If a prepaid plan exists, review it. Not just once, and not just when it is purchased. Look at it again over time. Make sure it still reflects what is wanted.
And make sure someone else knows it exists. Because a plan only helps if the people who need it can find it and understand it. If I were gone, I would want my family to feel supported by whatever had been arranged - not surprised by it. Preplanning can be a gift.
But its value depends on how clearly it is understood.
Next week, I will write about something many families hesitate to start: how to have a conversation about funeral wishes without it feeling uncomfortable or overwhelming.
Could Air Travel Be Any Worse?
Could Air Travel Be Any Worse?
Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones
Air travel isn’t what it used to be. “Getting there” is no longer half the fun. It’s an exercise in survival. We’ve achieved incredible feats in aviation. Yet somehow, we’ve lost our way when it comes to intercontinental travel.
Flying back to Toronto from Tokyo, I looked with envy at the business class seats as I shuffled with many other annoyed passengers to the back of the craft. Then, with everyone seated, an allergic reaction to something caused serious trouble for a flight crew member, delaying departure for two hours. We sat there at the gate, squished in, wishing, praying, we were somewhere else.
It’s a conundrum. Because travelling is important. I’m convinced the world would be a better place if we all had more experience making friends in faraway places. For one thing, it’s a lot harder to bomb, starve, or otherwise destroy the lives of people if you have shared time together and truly understand each other.
Is there anything we can do to reverse the dehumanizing trajectory of air travel?
Airlines might be more motivated, frankly, if more people were dying as a result of their service. But deaths on flights are rare – around 1 per 5 million passengers. Remarkably, I’ve been on an international flight where this happened. We made an emergency landing in Rome, resulting in an all-night international dispute about which country would be responsible for the deceased. Trust me, you don’t want someone to die on your flight.
Maybe more of us almost dying would be the ticket. But I’m not sure, because we have already become our most indecent selves as it is. And the airlines don’t seem to care. They jam us into impossibly cramped spaces. They serve horrendous food. I’ve seen flight attendants ignore people calling out for water, or mercy, in the rare moment they pass by.
Aviation technology has made it easier to fly across the planet. But never have we all been more miserable doing it.
Physically, what happens to your body when you fly? Fluid builds up in the lower legs due to lack of movement, water retention from salty food, and lower cabin pressure. Dry cabin air causes dehydration. Jet lag disrupts sleep, digestion, and mood. Infections spread readily. Pressure in the ear and sinus cavities can be intense at take-off and landing.
It’s all bad, but not bad enough to counter the economic forces driving efficiency considerations. Corporations crush social well-being, even as they pretend to care about it.
Passengers leave decent behaviours at the airport check-in curb. We cope by ignoring each other. We glue our eyes to screens. We get anxious and annoyed with every inconvenience. We don’t acknowledge the person sitting right beside us as we recline our seat into the face of the person behind us.
My flight home was made worse by turbulence that prevented the crew from providing service. We eventually got a meal, but no drinks, precisely when a little alcohol might have eased the frustration.
On the bright side, research shows it is possible to offset unhealthy circumstances with healthy behaviours. For example, following up with exercise, healthy meals and hydration, and social time with friends can blunt the negative effects of long flights, drinking excessively, or missing sleep.
I have little hope flying is going to get any better. But if travel can increase empathy and broaden perspective, then perhaps that’s why, despite cramped seats, lost luggage, and endless lines, millions of people keep boarding airplanes every day. Somewhere on the other side of the discomfort is the reward of discovering the world.
Bans Versus Boundaries Finding a Solution to Teenage Social Media Usage
Bans Versus Boundaries
Finding a Solution to Teenage Social Media Usage
By Camryn Bland
Youth Columnist
Social media is something engraved into the lives of billions of people around the globe, practically unavoidable in daily life. These platforms have many benefits, as they are an accessible tool for connection, communication, entertainment, and self-expression. Despite these benefits, it also presents many challenges and consequences, especially for young users. Adolescents continue to engage with social media, despite the obvious consequences, and they will continue using it unless meaningful and strong actions are done to prevent it.
For teens, social media is more than just an app, it’s part of a shared routine. It offers instant connection with friends and a sense of belonging; when an individual cuts off social media, it can feel isolating, as they are also cutting off the connection. At an age where these simple relationships feel critical, easy connection seems almost essential, and social media provides that. Additionally, it acts as an easy booster for self-esteem, as likes, comments, and shares can feel incredibly rewarding. Social media also provides easy, endless entertainment through short-form content, which can feel difficult to step away from. It is a quick source of dopamine, influencing individuals to rely on it as an instant mood-booster.
These benefits often blind teens from the consequences of social media, which are otherwise hard to ignore. Heavy social media use is often connected to increased anxiety, depression, sleep disruption, and an overall increase in stress among teens. The online world is one of highlights and perfection, which creates an unrealistic standard which teens struggle to meet. They doubt their appearance, experiences, or talents simply because they don’t mirror the content behind the screen. This pressure and comparison negatively affects mental health for individuals of all ages. Additionally, the algorithms which control these platforms are designed not just for entertainment, but entrapment, as they hope to keep users scrolling for as long as possible. Without noticing, teens easily lose hours of their days online, ruining their mood, mental health, relationships, and overall well-being.
These consequences are not new, and not unknown. For years, psychologists have been worried about the impact of social media, especially on adolescents. The new research isn’t about the issue, it’s about the solution. Recently, governments around the world have begun to respond, each with different ideas of how to save teens from the addictive media. Countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom are introducing social media bans for youth, only allowing individuals above a certain age to create accounts. While this is a step forward, it does not seem to be a total solution. Enforcing total bans or age limits is practically impossible, and many teens will find ways to bypass restrictions.
Some countries, such as Brazil and France, are focusing on tighter regulations instead of a total ban. Governments and tech companies have implemented stricter rules regarding data privacy, parental controls, and company accountability. This recognizes the unavoidable role social media has on modern life, and understands that completely removing it is unrealistic. It hopes to decrease the unavoidable consequences while still allowing young people to benefit from online connection. However, even these regulations may be difficult to maintain, and will not solve the problem entirely.
One of the biggest challenges with digital limitations, whether they be a total ban or a partial restriction, is that they are easy to get around. This is not the first time social media apps have tried to limit users or content, as they have previously included birthday verifications or screen time limits. They have existed for years, yet most teens find loopholes and continue scrolling. In fact, restricting something too heavily often makes it more appealing for a young audience.
As the guidelines and controls get more intense, so will the attempts to overrule them. Ultimately, social media is not entirely good or entirely bad, even for adolescents. It can be used as a platform for connection and expression, or one of comparison and anxiety. While it has many real risks for young users, a complete ban altogether is unlikely to be a solution, as it sacrifices the many benefits, and may fail at reducing teen usage. A more effective approach may lie in balance. This includes implementing partial restrictions, holding companies accountable, and educating young users about online habits. As social media continues to evolve and further integrate itself into daily life, society must also adapt to ensure it remains a safe and positive space for the younger generations. 
According to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre
According to the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre
By Bruno Scanga
Financial Columnist
In 2023 there were over 62,000 reported fraud victims. Seniors in Canada are getting bilked out of more than $500 million every year. It is estimated that as many as one in five seniors have lost money to fraudsters and most don’t report it.
Even though seniors today may be mentally sharper than ever, they are still the con artists’ favorite target because they generally have more disposable cash and are often more trusting.
Also, with our population living longer, there are more elders in their 80’s and 90’s who are vulnerable because they live alone, have a certain level of memory loss and can be confused or frightened by slick scammers.
Scam artists try their tricks on all age groups, but some of their cons they focus on seniors.
Here are a few common scams targeting seniors:
Grandchild-in-trouble – Henry gets a call from what sounds like a grandson asking for some urgent financial help. Apparently traveling far from home, he needs bail money or emergency car repairs and asks for a wire transfer.
In a nasty new twist, crooks knew some things about the grandchild and used a software tool to impersonate their voice. They were told their grandchild had been kidnapped and demanded payment of ransom. Cunningly, the crooks earlier called the grandchild on their cell phone, impersonating the phone carrier, and asked them to turn it off for a maintenance check.
Protection – Wire payment or Bitcoin is the dead give-away. Never send money before confirming the grandchild’s whereabouts and call police.
Phony bank official – Anne was bilked out of more than $15,000 when she thought she was helping her bank catch a thieving teller. She was instructed to withdraw a large sum of cash from her account and deliver it to the ‘bank official’ at a mall in her neighborhood. He was well dressed and assured her that the funds would be deposited back to her account. Anne was told not to tell her bank because they didn’t want to tip-off the teller, and he was able to get her to make two more withdrawals.
Protection – Do not give any personal information to someone claiming they represent your bank. Call the police.
Scareware – Shortly after David and Gail got their first computer; a message appeared on their screen telling them it was infected with a virus. They were invited to download a program for a small charge, giving the fraud artist their credit card information.
Protection – First thing, have Internet security software from one of the big-name providers installed. Set it to update regularly and ignore the phony pop-up messages.
On The Road Again
Job Ads Without Salary Information Are Business Opportunities
Job Ads Without Salary Information
Are Business Opportunities
By Nick Kossovan
LinkedIn is flooded with job seekers complaining that many job ads don't mention salary. While their frustration is valid, publicly criticizing the lack of compensation transparency wastes mental energy and doesn't look good to recruiters and hiring managers.
Do complainers genuinely believe their posts and comments will influence employers, who aren't spending their time on LinkedIn reading comments—except perhaps when assessing a candidate's LinkedIn activities to decide if they're interview-worthy—to overhaul their hiring process?
Controversial digital footprints negatively affect job seekers more than they realize. While you're free to say, or write, what you want, you're not free from the consequences of what you say.
I understand that work isn't a hobby, and pay is important. However, in fairness to employers, there are many reasons why they might choose not to include compensation details in their job ads or ask applicants for their salary expectations, a few being:
· Seek candidates motivated by fit over money. While this line of thinking contradicts why people work, it's understandable that employers want workers who are enthusiastic about the job, not just the paycheck.
· Avoid salary questions from current workers. It's common for employers to have salary disparities among their employees.
· Avoid wage wars with competitors. Employees who contribute measurable value to their employers' profitability are often on the lookout for higher pay, especially in higher-level professional circles.
· They'll get stuck at the top of the salary range. If a candidate is offered a starting salary near the lower end of the range, they might feel disgruntled before even beginning the job.
· More diverse applicants. In some cases, salary isn't listed because the employer is willing to pay even more for a truly exceptional candidate. From personal experience, I know that salary ranges are meant for average applicants, but if an ever-so-rare 'must-hire' candidate comes along...
Whether you agree with the reason(s) or not isn't the employer's concern, nor is it their concern that omitting salary details in job ads can seem like a power move to pay as little as possible—an unsubstantiated narrative that job seekers tend to promote.
The employer's closed-door reasoning for not including salary in their job postings isn't the job seeker's concern. It's because job seekers are hyper-focused on what they can't change, which, in this case, having employers list a salary or a small gap between the minimum and maximum salary pay range in their job posting, that they're overlooking a huge business opportunity.
Stay with me; what I'm about to explain will require a shift in your mindset—letting go of any limiting beliefs you might have about employers' motives, along with any frustrations and anger you have towards them, which recruiters and hiring managers can sense.
Employers whose job postings don't mention compensation often (no guarantee) are willing to negotiate salary; a skill most job seekers lack and, for some reason, refuse to learn. My advice: Name your salary expectation and stick to it!
I've never accepted a job where I wasn't comfortable with the salary; consequently, I've never been the employee who constantly complains about not being paid enough. Whenever a recruiter or employer contacts me, which, thanks to my writing of The Art of Finding Work, occurs frequently, I make it a point to inquire within the first five minutes what the compensation plan is, where the job is located, and how the role fits with the employer's bottom line. (Is the job essential to the employer's success or just a 'nice to have'?)
Growing up, I was taught that employees are free agents providing services; essentially, each employee operates as a business of one. I came to understand that an employee doesn't own their job; their employer does. This understanding led me to adopt the view that by making my salary requirement non-negotiable—rather than having expectations or desires like most job seekers—I controlled my salary, not the employer.
By waiting for an "offer" from the employer, you give them too much leverage. State your salary requirement, and see what happens. "But Nick, what if I'm too expensive?" Do you want to work at a job where you're constantly feeling underpaid? You deserve to feel satisfied with your salary. Don't be salary-guilt-tripped or salary-benchmarked.
Your attitude should be: "Yes, I may be expensive; however, here's how I can impact an employer's bottom line."
You probably noticed that I’ve overlooked the crucial part of securing the salary you want, which most job seekers fail to do. You must justify your compensation request (salary, paid time off, benefits, paid sick days, perks, bonus, profit sharing, etc.) by demonstrating the value you can bring to an employer’s profitability. As I’ve mentioned in previous articles, job hunting is a sales activity, and interviews are sales meetings based on the core sales principle: features tell, benefits sell.
There'll always be job postings without salary information, or with a ridiculously large salary range. How you react—how you spend your mental energy—is a matter of choice. You can get frustrated, angry and publicly condemn employers, which, as mentioned, hurts your job search, or say to yourself, "I'm a business of one! I’m going to prove my worth and name my salary!"
Breaking: Canada Facing a Growing Repair Skills Crisis
Breaking: Canada Facing a Growing Repair Skills Crisis
By Dale Jodoin
Columnist
Across Canada, a quiet problem is starting to appear in neighbourhoods, small towns, and even large cities. It is not a dramatic crisis that makes the evening news. There are no flashing lights or emergency sirens.
But the signs are there if you look closely.
A loose fence that never gets fixed. A deck board curling up after winter. A broken gutter hanging for months. A small repair that once took an hour now waits for weeks.
For many Canadians this may seem like a small issue. But behind these small problems sits a much larger concern. Canada is slowly losing a generation of people who know how to repair things. The country is entering what many trades workers quietly call the repair gap.
For decades, the backbone of home repair in Canada came from the Baby Boomer generation and the group sometimes called Generation Jones. These Canadians grew up in a time when fixing things was normal. If something broke, you did not replace it. You repaired it. Many of these skills started in school. High schools once had strong shop programs. Students learned woodworking, metal work, basic electrical work, and small engine repair. They learned how to measure, how to cut properly, and how to work safely with tools. Those lessons did not end in the classroom.
At home, young people often watched their parents repairing the family car, patching roofs, fixing lawn mowers, or rebuilding a broken fence. It became part of daily life. Many people took pride in knowing they could solve their own problems.
For that generation, fixing something yourself was more than saving money. It was a point of pride. It showed independence and responsibility. Today many of those skilled homeowners are retiring. Some are selling homes they have cared for over forty or fifty years. Others are moving into smaller houses or retirement communities. Some are simply no longer able to climb ladders or handle heavy tools. As they leave those homes behind, a new generation is moving in. But many younger Canadians did not grow up with the same training.
Generation Z, the group now entering adulthood, grew up in a different education system. Over the past few decades many schools removed shop classes. Wood shops closed. Auto repair programs disappeared. Welding programs were reduced or eliminated. The focus shifted heavily toward computers, testing, and university preparation. Technology became the future.
Young Canadians today are extremely capable with digital tools. They can build websites, edit video, manage social media businesses, and troubleshoot computer problems quickly.
But digital skill does not always translate into practical repair ability.
Ask many young homeowners how to repair a loose railing or replace a faulty switch and the answer is often the same. They were never taught. This is not a criticism of the younger generation. It is the result of education choices made over many years. When governments removed practical training from schools, they removed a key path where young Canadians learned how to work with their hands. The effects are now being felt across the country.
Canada is currently experiencing shortages in many skilled trades. Electricians, plumbers, welders, mechanics, appliance repair technicians, and construction workers are in high demand.
In some communities it can take weeks to schedule basic repair work.
Part of this shortage comes from retirement. Many experienced trades workers are leaving the workforce at the same time.
Another part comes from a lack of new workers entering those trades.
To fill the gap, many companies are turning to skilled immigrants who already have strong repair and construction experience. These workers arrive from countries where trades training remains a major part of education.
They bring valuable knowledge and strong work habits. Their work helps keep homes maintained and infrastructure running.
In many cases they are filling jobs that currently do not have enough Canadian workers.
However, their presence also raises an important question.
Why did Canada stop preparing its own young people for these roles?
Many experts believe the answer lies in the slow disappearance of trade education in schools. Over time shop programs were considered outdated or unnecessary. Education systems focused more heavily on academic pathways and university preparation.
The result was a generation highly trained in digital technology but less experienced in hands on repair. There is another factor making repairs more difficult today.
Modern products are often designed in ways that prevent easy repair. Phones contain sealed batteries. Appliances rely on locked software systems.
Even farm tractors sometimes require special computer tools before repairs can be made.
This has led to a growing public movement known as the right to repair.
Supporters believe that if consumers buy a product, they should have the ability to repair it themselves or choose an independent repair shop. They argue companies should provide access to parts, manuals, and software tools needed for repairs.
Farmers, mechanics, and small businesses across North America have strongly supported the right to repair legislation. They argue it restores independence and reduces waste.
Canada has begun discussing these laws, but many advocates believe stronger action is needed. Beyond legislation, there is growing discussion about rebuilding trade education.
Many educators and industry leaders now support bringing back practical training in schools. Modern shop programs could teach woodworking, electrical basics, mechanical repair, and construction skills alongside digital technology. This approach would not replace academic education. Instead it would balance it.
Not every student needs to become a trades worker. But every student should understand basic repair skills that help them maintain their homes, vehicles, and equipment. Those skills also support local economies.
When repairs happen locally, money stays in local communities. Hardware stores benefit. Small repair businesses grow. Local trades workers find steady work.
Rebuilding these skills could strengthen both the economy and community independence.
The discussion now moves beyond education alone. Citizens across Canada can raise this issue with city officials, provincial representatives, and federal leaders. They can ask for stronger support for trade schools, apprenticeship programs, and right to repair laws.
Public policy often begins with public conversation.
Canada was built by people who understood how to build and repair the world around them. Those practical skills helped create strong homes, reliable infrastructure, and resilient communities. Many Canadians believe those skills should remain part of the country’s future. The challenge now is making sure the next generation has the opportunity to learn them.
Because once the last of the old fixers finally put down their tools, someone else will need to pick them up.
Mr. X Files: Walkable Communities and Unshakeable Freedoms
Mr. X Files: Walkable Communities and
Unshakeable Freedoms
There has been significant debate recently regarding "15-minute cities." Depending on the perspective, the phrase represents either sensible urban planning or something more concerning. In truth, the concept is neither new nor controversial when viewed through the lens of traditional urban design.
The core idea is simple: residents should be able to access everyday services—groceries, parks, schools, and shops—within a short walk or bike ride from home. This planning reduces traffic, strengthens local businesses, and improves quality of life. Many historic Ontario towns were built this way long before the term was coined, with homes and services existing in close proximity.
The current controversy stems less from urban planning and more from a decline in public trust. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of extraordinary federal powers, such as freezing bank accounts, raised serious concerns about the extent of government authority. These concerns regarding civil liberties and the foundational trust between citizens and government must not be dismissed.
It is important to clarify that municipal planning policies for walkable neighbourhoods are not intended to restrict movement or control daily lives. Local governments manage infrastructure and services; they do not control citizen mobility or possess the authority to interfere with personal finances.
To restore confidence, the path forward must combine good planning with strong protections for civil liberties. Governments must reinforce the principles of freedom of movement and financial security. This means establishing clear legal safeguards ensuring that no government can freeze a citizen's bank account without a court order tied to a criminal conviction or formal legal proceeding.
When civil liberties are legally protected, debates about urban planning can focus on their true purpose: building convenient, healthy, and vibrant communities. Walkable neighbourhoods are about expanding choice, not limiting it. Residents should be able to walk to a park or local shop while remaining free to travel and live without government interference.
Good communities are built on both thoughtful planning and personal freedom; one should never come at the expense of the other. By strengthening the protections Canadians expect for their financial and civil liberties, discussions about neighbourhood design will become far less divisive. Our goal should be simple: communities that are easy to live in and a country where freedoms remain firmly protected.
GIBERSON SHOULD STICK TO THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY PRIMARILY ‘THE CIRCUS’
GIBERSON SHOULD STICK TO THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY
PRIMARILY ‘THE CIRCUS’
By Joe Ingino BA. Psychology
Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers
ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800 ,000
Published Columns in Canada and The United States
Who is that Gumby of Giberson... How do people get elected to office with little or no real life experience. For those that read my column on a regular basis will know how critical I am of politicians. Oshawa was a beautiful place. A peaceful and affordable place to call home.
I been your Editor for the past 30 plus. I have seen administration come and go. Unfortunately, quality of life has been deterioration at an alarming rate. The downtown our pride and joy had been handed over for the past 10 years to a city councillor with little or no life experience at best a third rate musician. At the region for the same downtown ward. We have an ex-educator/actor... One would think we would vote in a local business person. Someone with a title and or proven track record.
Well, Derek Giberson had almost 10 years to do something and has done nothing. Worst, he is indirectly/directly responsible for the open drug use and drug trade in our city core.
Just this past week as to pretend he is doing something. Giberson posted on line:
Derek Giberson is with backdoor mission in Oshawa. (Same Mission that is responsible for allowing a the dispensing and consumption of narcotics from it’s property.)
Another Housing Townhall, another night with over 100 people in Oshawa showing up because they believe things can be better. The undeniable truth is that the status quo is failing too many people: workers, seniors, students... so many who have been caught in this housing affordability crisis. (THIS GUY IS INSANE... ‘THE STATUS QUO’. Did he forget that he is the one that was elected to do something about it. No, instead he attempts to pass the responsibility of others... This is the same guy that does not return his city newspaper messages and or many of his constituents. But 2026 is an election year and he is once again attempting to sell pipe dreams...) And the brilliant Dr. Carolyn Whitzman showed us with evidence and clarity the policies failures and government inaction at all levels that got us here. Yes, the brilliant.... Carolyn Whitzman is a Canadian urban planner, community activist and author. Another words... A pipe dream maker. He continues in his post - But we also got to imagine what different could look like. Giberson and his pipe dreams have to go. We need real leaders that will improve the quality of life for all and keep our taxes at ‘0’. People commented on his post...
Don Rockbrune Did you have a representative from the provincial government there to explain what they are doing to fix the system? It largely is a provincial issue that directly affects municipalities…. THE ANSWER IS NO. OUR LOCAL MPP AND MP NO WHERE TO BE FOUND.
Michelle stated... So Derek barely answers emails or calls from his constituents, yet suddenly, just a month and a half before his municipal campaign starts, he’s holding a town hall?
Give me a break. Giberson has been known to attack using taxpayers time and money local businesses on bogus allegations. He has so many failures under his belt that local merchants throw him out of their businesses. This is the same GUMBY that allowed the waste of 10 million dollars on a downtown park.
HE HAS TO GO. VOTERS DON’T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE.
Canada’s Trade Diversification Imperative: From Dependency to Strategic Resilience
Canada’s Trade Diversification Imperative:
From Dependency to Strategic Resilience
by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC
FEC, CET, P.Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East
For generations, Canada’s prosperity has been built on trade. Our vast geography, rich natural resources and skilled workforce have positioned us as one of the world’s great trading nations. Yet despite this global reputation, the structure of Canada’s trade remains remarkably concentrated. Roughly, three quarters of our exports still flow to a single partner: the United States.
Our economic relationship with the United States is not only natural—it is essential. Geography, shared infrastructure, integrated industries and the framework of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) have created the most successful bilateral economic partnership in the modern world. Canadians should celebrate this relationship, not diminish it.
Hovewer, reliance is not the same as resilience.
In a world increasingly shaped by geopolitical competition, supply chain disruptions and economic nationalism, Canada must confront a strategic question: Can we maintain our deep North American integration while building a more diversified and resilient global trade network?
The answer must be yes—and the time to act is now.
As a former Member of Parliament who served on national committees dealing with defence, industry and international affairs, and as an engineer trained to think in systems rather than slogans, I see Canada’s trade challenge as fundamentally structural.
Our economy has become comfortable exporting raw materials southward while importing finished goods or higher-value technology. That model was sufficient in the twentieth century. It will not sustain Canada’s prosperity in the twenty-first.
Trade diversification is not about turning away from the United States. It is about strengthening Canada’s strategic autonomy while reinforcing our role as a trusted partner within the democratic world.
Three pillars should guide this national effort.
First, Canada must move up the value chain.
For decades we have exported timber instead of advanced wood products, crude oil instead of refined fuels, and minerals instead of the technologies built from them. The emerging global demand for critical minerals—lithium, nickel, cobalt, copper and rare earth elements—presents Canada with an extraordinary opportunity.
However, exporting raw ore is not a strategy. The real value lies in processing, refining and manufacturing.
Electric vehicles, battery systems, small modular nuclear reactors and clean energy technologies will define the industrial landscape of the coming decades. Canada possesses the resources, the engineering expertise and the political stability required to anchor these supply chains. What we lack is a coherent national strategy that integrates mining, manufacturing, research and infrastructure.
Second, we must build the infrastructure required for global trade.
Canada’s geography should be an advantage, not a constraint. We are the bridge between the Atlantic and Pacific economies, between Europe and the Indo-Pacific. Yet our transportation corridors, ports and energy infrastructure remain underdeveloped relative to our potential.
Rail capacity to the West Coast remains strained. Port expansion projects face years of regulatory delays. Energy export infrastructure has become mired in political paralysis.
In engineering terms, the system is under-dimensioned for the load we expect it to carry.
If Canada wishes to diversify trade toward Europe and the Indo-Pacific, we must invest in strategic corridors: modernized ports, resilient rail systems, reliable energy networks and secure digital infrastructure.
Trade agreements alone cannot move goods. Infrastructure does.
Third, Canada must strengthen its domestic economic foundation.
One of the most overlooked barriers to trade diversification lies not at our borders but within them. Internal trade barriers between provinces continue to fragment the Canadian economy. Different regulations, licensing regimes and procurement rules restrict the free movement of goods, services and labour within our own country.
For a federation that prides itself on economic openness, this reality is both ironic and costly.
Removing these internal barriers would expand Canada’s domestic market, increase productivity and create stronger national supply chains capable of competing globally. In effect, Canada must first become a truly unified economic space before fully projecting its strength abroad.
Trade diversification also carries a strategic dimension that Canadians cannot ignore.
The global trading system is undergoing profound change. Economic coercion, technology competition and the weaponization of supply chains have become common tools of geopolitical rivalry. Democracies must respond not by retreating from trade but by building networks of trusted partners.
Canada is well positioned to contribute to this effort. Our trade agreements with Europe through the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and with the Pacific through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) provide a strong foundation. Yet these agreements remain underutilized by Canadian industry.
Government policy must therefore shift from simply signing trade agreements to actively enabling Canadian companies to use them.
Engineers are trained to understand redundancy. Critical systems are designed with multiple pathways so that a single failure does not cause collapse. Canada’s trade architecture should follow the same principle.
Diversification is not an act of economic nationalism. It is an act of economic prudence.
As someone who served both in the Canadian Armed Forces and in Parliament, and being a designated Professional Engineer, I have always believed that national security and economic strength are inseparable. A country that depends excessively on a single market—however friendly that partner may be—limits its strategic flexibility.
Canada does not need to choose between North America and the wider world. Our task is to build a model in which strong continental integration coexists with global reach.
The objective is simple: a Canada that trades confidently with the United States, competitively with Europe, and dynamically with the Indo-Pacific.
Achieving this will require political leadership, industrial vision and long-term infrastructure planning. It will also require Canadians to think of trade not merely as commerce but as strategy.
Canada has the resources, the institutions and the talent required to succeed. What we need now is the determination to transform our trading nation from one defined by dependency into one defined by resilience.
The twenty-first century global economy will reward countries that build diversified partnerships and secure supply chains. Canada should be among them.
Saturday, March 14, 2026
Tiny Fish Offer Great Nutrition
Tiny Fish Offer Great Nutrition
Common Sense Health – Diana Gifford-Jones
This week, I write from Tokyo, where small fish are eaten with remarkable regularity. A traditional Japanese breakfast includes such fish – salted, dried, grilled and served cold – consumed head-to-tail, bones, eyeballs and all. Small sardines are tucked into lunch boxes. Convenience stores sell little fish for snacking. It’s common to add sardines or mackerel to spaghetti sauce. Eating little fish is a way of life.
What is it about little fish? A large Japanese cohort study following more than 80,000 adults for roughly nine years found that people who regularly consumed small fish had significantly lower risks of death from all causes and from cancer, particularly among women. Even modest intake of just a few times per month was associated with measurable reductions in mortality.
Nutrition science offers an explanation. Small oily fish, such as sardines and anchovies, are rich in omega-3 fatty acids, along with minerals and high-quality protein that support cardiovascular, brain, and bone health. Emerging evidence suggests regular sardine consumption may also improve insulin response and reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes.
Eating the head, bones, and organs means the Japanese are consuming concentrated micronutrients such as calcium and vitamin A that are largely lost when fish are filleted. Westerners throw that nutrition away.
A reader recently reminded me of the Japanese word kuchisabishii, translated literally as “lonely mouth”. It describes eating out of boredom, not hunger. But if mindless snacking is the need, then little dried and crunchy fish are a great choice.
A modelling study published in BMJ Global Health estimated that replacing some red-meat consumption with forage fish – species such as sardines, anchovies, and herring – could prevent up to 750,000 premature deaths annually by 2050. These fish are exceptionally nutrient-dense, and in comparison to any other animal protein, have among the lowest environmental footprints, if one can say that of fish.
In North America, seafood choices tend to centre on large predatory fish such as salmon and tuna. These species are popular and nutritious, but they are also more expensive, accumulate more contaminants over long lifespans, and require greater ecological resources. Meanwhile, vast quantities of small forage fish are processed into animal feed.
There is a practical challenge, however. Achieving the levels of omega-3 fatty acids associated with cardiovascular benefit – particularly EPA and DHA – requires consistent intake. For many North Americans, eating small oily fish several times a week is a stretch, whether because of taste preferences, access, cost, or habit.
For that reason, supplementation can be a sensible adjunct. A high-quality fish oil provides concentrated, purified omega-3s without requiring major dietary overhaul. Readers can find the fish oil recommended by W. Gifford-Jones, MD, Certified Naturals Omega3X, in natural health food stores. It has earned the recommendation because it delivers high levels of EPA and DHA in a purified form that is tested for contaminants and formulated to enhance absorption.
None of this calls for dramatic change. It may simply mean replacing meaty meals with modest, more frequent servings of small fish. Imagine a tin of sardines on whole-grain toast, anchovies folded into pasta, or herring added to a salad. Frequency is better than occasional large portions.
Tokyo’s markets do not advertise their bountiful fish sections with signs proclaiming “Eat fish. Lower the risk of death.” But would it be a crime to encourage people to think about their mortality when grocery shopping? Fresh or tinned, little whole fish are affordable, accessible, and ordinary. Perhaps that is the lesson. Healthful patterns tend to endure when they are woven quietly into daily life, rather than announced as resolutions.
Why the Quietest Costs Sometimes Surprise Us
Why the Quietest Costs
Sometimes Surprise Us
By Gary Payne, MBA
Founder of Funeral Cost Ontario
Most families expect to talk about big things after someone dies. The service. The paperwork. The decisions that need to be made right away.
But if I were gone, I would want my family to be prepared for something smaller - the quiet costs that appear without warning. Not the price of a casket or the fee for cremation. I’m talking about the costs that slip in around the edges. Parking at the cemetery.
Extra death certificate copies because someone forgot how many banks or institutions would ask for one. An obituary notice that ends up twice as long as expected - because the words matter more when you’re trying to say goodbye.
These are not the first costs people plan for. They show up later, quietly, and sometimes feel more personal than practical. If I were gone, I’d want my family to know these things aren’t mistakes. They’re just part of what happens when people are trying their best to honour someone they love.
The lunch afterward might feel small in comparison to the service - but it matters when people sit together and share stories. The printed cards, the flowers delivered late, the rush courier to send papers across the province - these things are often about more than logistics. They are about care. And yes, they add up. That’s what surprises some families the most. They budgeted for the core service. They compared funeral homes. They asked good questions.
But a few days later, the extras begin to show up. And often, they are paid without question - because it feels like the right thing to do. I have spoken with many families who later asked themselves the same thing: “Did we spend too much?” If I were gone, I would want my family to know that asking that question does not mean they did something wrong. It means they’re human.
Grief has a way of making generosity feel urgent. We want to do right by the people we’ve lost - even if it means stretching ourselves in the moment. Still, I would want them to know it’s okay to pause. To ask whether that delivery charge is necessary.
To take a breath before upgrading something no one asked for. And if someone says, “This will only be another hundred dollars,” I would want them to feel free to say, “Let me think about it.” Because every small cost feels manageable on its own. It’s only later, when the receipts are gathered, that people realize how quickly it all added up. That realization shouldn’t bring shame. It should bring clarity for the next time - for another family, or for another conversation.
If I could leave one reminder, it would be this: The way someone is remembered does not depend on the extras. It depends on how they were loved. No one sits at a memorial and says, “The parking was free, so it must have meant less.” No one judges the depth of someone’s grief based on how many flowers arrived. So if I were gone, I would want my family to spend carefully, but not guiltily. And to know that the small things they chose - or chose not to do - will never define how I am remembered. Next week, I’ll write about something that confuses many families: how prepaid funeral plans actually work, and what to watch for when comparing options.
Most Canadians
Most Canadians
By Bruno Scanga
Financial Columnist
Most Canadians want to pass their life savings on to their heirs. The assets remaining once retirement needs are met will be distributed more effectively if there is a properly prepared will detailing the deceased’s wishes.
Many people mistakenly believe that this issue is far in the future. Preparation of a valid will and its related estate planning considerations should be the cornerstone of a proper estate plan.
Whenever there is a change in circumstances, the will should be reviewed and updated as needed.
Despite good intentions, far too many people die without having a valid will. The will is a legal document that details the process for distributing the deceased’s assets in an orderly and tax-efficient manner. More importantly, the will documents the way the individual intended to have their estate administered.
There are two main purposes of making a will.
The first is to document the intentions of the person making the will (testator) as to their choice of beneficiaries, the recipients of their assets.
The second purpose is to appoint the executor, whose role it is to make sure the creditors of the deceased are paid and to disperse the remaining assets according to the terms of the will.
Anyone who has a spouse or children, obligations from a prior relationship, or is simply concerned about how their property will be distributed after their death should make a will.
Although there are do-it-yourself will kit and software packages readily available, using the services of a legal advisor is highly recommended.
What you may think is a simple estate may actually have complexities that cannot be properly addressed without legal help.
If someone dies without a will (intestate), it may require going to court before the assets can be distributed.
Without a will, personal property will be distributed according to the laws of the province in which the testator lived when they died.
Real estate will be dealt with based on the intestacy rules of the province in which the property is located.
Guardians for minor children will be appointed by the courts.
Special-needs family members may not receive the same priority by the courts as the testator might wish.
Without a will, the court will appoint someone to take care of your estate.
The time taken by the court to appoint an administrator will cause a delay that can trigger cash flow problems for your family.
Remember, until an appointment is made, no one has the legal authority to touch your estate.
Dying intestate can also result in needless taxation and other fees leaving less for your beneficiaries.
Have a Proper Will – because it’s the right thing to do!
Goals or Memories - The Importance of Stepping Outside the Comfort Zone
Goals or Memories - The Importance of Stepping Outside the Comfort Zone
By Camryn Bland
Youth Columnist
Every day, we are faced with opportunities for new experiences and exciting risks. Our daily routines constantly present chances to change through small decisions, yet we rarely choose to take them. Too often, we follow the path which is easy and convenient instead of one that offers excitement and growth. What feels like the safe option can instead lead to stunted potential and missed moments, all because of fear and a need for comfort.
Risks and opportunities come with unknown consequences, which can feel impossible to ignore. It makes sense why we often refuse unusual experiences, as they are so separate from our ordinary. So, we stay close to the normal which we know, instead of the rewards or consequences which are unknown. The unusual uncertainty can turn into fear, which can lead to inaction and stagnation. Too often, we sit and think about the prospect until it passes by us before we can make a final decision.
The most obvious cause of this loss of opportunities is the fear of failure. Whether the experience be social, educational, or related to employment, nothing is guaranteed. A new friendship may not last, you might not make the school team, or might not receive the promotion. The possibility of disappointment prevents us from trying in the first place. Sometimes we may even fear acceptance, worrying it may not meet our expectations, or could lead to regret later.
Additionally, it can be easy to get caught up in the opinions of others when faced with new options. We are not only afraid of our own disappointment, but also that of people around us. We fear judgment, criticism, and misunderstanding from people who may not value the experience as much as we do. When outside opinions begin to overshadow our own, our personal goals can quickly become blurred and forgotten.
We rarely recognize these motivations for decline at the moment. Instead, we create alternative reasons to decline opportunities, such as a busy schedule, lack of background knowledge, or not wanting to do it alone. We constantly find excuses for ourselves. We don’t want to do it alone, we’re too busy, or we don’t have the skills.
Although these excuses may feel valid, we use them as a shield to prevent us from dealing with the bigger issues, such as our fear or stagnation.
These day-to-day choices of comfort and complacency may feel small in the moment, but they add up to a life filled with goals instead of memories. We get stuck worrying about failure, and forget to ask what happens if we succeed. What first seems like a leap of anxiety can instead be an avenue for memories, growth, and adventure. Through this success, new friends can be made, new skills learned, or further opportunities unlocked. The only thing preventing this from happening is fear, which must be pushed aside in pursuit of development.
Although I often find myself worrying about the “what-ifs” of new opportunities, I still choose to try them. I have applied for jobs, drama productions, and extracurricular activities even when they felt like unrealistic longshots. Many of those longshots helped shape who I am today, showing the importance of taking a leap of faith.
Even when an opportunity does not turn out exactly as expected, or when we fall short, there are still valuable lessons to learn. When I first applied to my school’s Student Administration Council, I was not accepted. Instead of letting that disappointment stop me, I used the experience as motivation and a lesson in collaboration, communication, and leadership. The following year, I applied again and was accepted. Today, I serve as the council’s vice president, all because I decided to take a chance on that first interview years ago.
The only way to learn, grow, and develop is by leaving our comfort zones and trying something new. One day, I know I will be looking back and reflecting on my past, and I know what I hope to see; a life full of memories, not goals. One where I joined countless clubs, applied for countless jobs, and met countless people. A life lives not in fear and comfort, but in meaningful risks and irreplaceable growth.
Home Court Advantage
Home Court Advantage
By Wayne and Tamara
My husband and I were married this weekend in Las Vegas. At the wedding dinner my mother-in-law leaned across the table and started cutting my husband’s steak! I was mortified.
The next day we met my parents and his parents in the lobby bar for a soda before we headed for the airport. My mother-in-law pulled out a velvet bag and tossed it to my husband. It was a bracelet for him. I should mention I bought him a nice watch for a wedding gift, and he showed it off the previous day, our wedding day.
When we returned home, my sister and I had a brief argument the way sisters do. But when I turned around my mother-in-law was making fun of me to my sister. I stormed out, calmed down a bit, and then told my sister how much she had hurt me. She told me my mother-in-law said she should give me the “Boy Scout salute” and held up her middle finger.
I let my mother-in-law know unequivocally I knew what she said and so did her son. She gave us the cold shoulder and this continues 48 hours later. My husband keeps saying “she’ll come around,” “just wait and see,” and “that’s just the way my mom is.” I would never let my mom treat my husband like that. I’d call her out on it and tell her it was unacceptable.
Rachel
Rachel, you could try to put your personality on a back shelf and accommodate your mother-in-law, or you could have a knock-down, drag-out fight with her for possession of her little boy.
The first course is not likely to work because when real change comes, it comes from within not from without. The second course may work, but it poses an opportunity and a danger. Your mother-in-law has known your husband longer than you have, and she is part of the development of his psyche. On the other hand, since it appears he married a woman like his mother, he might yield to the stronger woman.
The danger is that you will start resenting him for not being a real man in your life. Sons who want to be treated like men don’t let their mother treat them like a 2-year-old, while sons who like being treated like boys do. It will be no fun playing strict parent to your husband and being the third wheel in your own marriage will exhaust you.
The final possibility, of course, is your husband is so laid-back he doesn’t care what his mother does. What is missing here is the pre-story. How much did you know before the wedding? If you didn’t realize until the wedding dinner what you tied yourself to, a divorce attorney can ensure that what happened in Vegas will stay in Vegas.
Wayne & Tamara
Between Friends
I just found out my girlfriend is pregnant from a text message while watching a movie with my wife. I don’t know what I’m going to do. Please help me do the right thing. And yes, the girlfriend knows about my wife. They are friends.
Gus
Gus, what is the right thing? Your girlfriend gets to take her friend’s husband by using a baby? Two women should fight over a man neither one can trust? Your wife should remain with a man who cheats on her?
Once the time for doing the right thing passed, it became a matter of trying to patch up the wrongs. Two wrongs will never make a right, and it’s too late for you to be a stand-up guy. These two women have shared more than any two friends should ever share.
Arrange a calm sit-down with all parties, and let each person decide what is right for them. Get this done now because each day you sit on the problem is another deception.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)