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.

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.

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

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

A Candid Conversation

A Candid Conversation By Theresa Grant Real Estate Columnist A Candid Conversation By Theresa Grant Real Estate We have always had three markets when it comes to real estate in Canada. The buyers’ market, the sellers’ market and a balanced market. Awhile back, I coined a new term for the market we seem to be in. The Trump market. What exactly is the Trump market you ask? Well, it’s a market where the interest rates have really come down nicely considering where they were a year ago, house prices are down 22% from their peek during Covid-19, in fact some absolutely stunning homes that would normally be on offer for well over a million dollars are now being offered well below a million dollars. It’s truly astonishing to see what some of the more palatial mansions of old Oshawa are going for in this market. Why is this the case? In a word, tariffs. Donald Trump’s Tariffs have cast a cloud of fear over Canadian workers to the point that those who were thinking about buying when the interest rates dropped, seem to have completely abandoned the idea. So, while we would have called this a buyers’ market a few years ago. There is definitely something that keeps the buyers from buying. That is the underlying fear of losing their jobs in this very uncertain time. I have heard many stories over the years of people who signed the mortgage papers one day and were laid off or let go the next. Nerve wracking times to be sure. Some real estate agents are reporting zero traffic through their open houses on weekends. That in and of itself screams volumes because even when you’re not necessarily looking to purchase immediately, it’s always been something that people who are intending to purchase at some point enjoy doing. They get out and look. The news is full of reports that housing starts have collapsed, prices are down, the volume of sales is down. Interest rates will continue their downward trend over the next year, but will that make any difference whatsoever? It will help the homeowner who is renewing their mortgage next year, but it will not do much to convince the would-be homeowner that the water is fine and to jump on in. I will admit I have never seen a market like the one we are currently experiencing. That being said, the observance of human nature never disappoints. I find it truly fascinating to see how people behave in different environments, and this is no exception. One thing that stays with me and has since I was a child is a saying that my uncle had. He always used to say, “this too shall pass”. I have brought that to mind many times over the years and firmly believe that it is something we can take comfort in when things are uncertain.

Four Words That Will Help You Get Hired: Features Tell, Benefits Sell

Four Words That Will Help You Get Hired: Features Tell, Benefits Sell By Nick Kossovan The selling principle features tell, benefits sell highlights that customers are driven by outcomes, not technical details. While a product's features describe what it is or does, its benefits explain why that matters to the customer. Successful salespeople focus on conveying the benefits of their products or services in a way that builds both practical and emotional connections. Most job seekers refuse to acknowledge that job searching is a sales activity, which explains their prolonged search. A job seeker has one goal: to sell their value (benefit) to employers. Applying the features tell, benefits sell selling principle to your job search will significantly shorten it. Getting hired depends less on what you can do and more on the value you can contribute to an employer's profitability. Start by identifying your features (skills, experience) and then explain how they offer a tangible benefit (value). Feature: 15 years of delivering $4 million+ projects under budget and on schedule. Benefit: Projects are finished on time and within budget, resulting in cost savings (enhancing profits) and client satisfaction (recurring revenue). Feature: Automated data collection and analysis processes, reducing reporting time from 7 hours to 1.5 hours. Benefit: Executives can make decisions more quickly. Feature: Delivered training to over 50 employees, raising performance metrics within three months by 15%. Benefit: Increasing employee productivity eliminates the need to increase headcount. LinkedIn Profile: Your 24/7/365 Online Presence Your LinkedIn profile is how recruiters and employers discover you and assess whether you're interview-worthy. For these reasons, you should consider your LinkedIn profile more important than your résumé. Your LinkedIn profile and activity will either enhance or hinder your job search. Employing the feature-benefit approach throughout your profile is a game-changer. "As a Sales Manager at Ziffcorp, I led a team of eight outside sales representatives for five years, consistently surpassing our annual sales target by at least 120%, resulting in a 15% year-over-year growth without additional marketing investment." This shows potential employers not just what you did, but also why it matters; what employer doesn't want growth without spending more on marketing? Applying the feature-benefit approach throughout your profile is how you get employers to see you as a solution provider worth having on their payroll. Why would an employer hire you if they don't see an ROI from hiring you? Résumé: Your Marketing Document Like your LinkedIn profile, résumé is an opportunity to leverage features tell, benefits sell. As you should be doing throughout your LinkedIn profile, craft narratives that highlight your accomplishments and their impact. Avoid duplicating your LinkedIn profile; redundancy wastes valuable space that could be used to expound the benefits of hiring you. "I oversaw Grubhub's marketing campaigns, which led to a 55% increase in lead generation from 2022 to 2024, eliminating the need to buy leads." Again, what employer doesn't want growth without incurring additional marketing expenses? Cover Letter: Reason to Read Your Résumé Not including a cover letter is lazy. I don't know a hiring manager who hires lazy. Using your cover letter to provide context around your features, the ones the employer is looking for (skills, years of experience) and explaining the benefits they offer, gives compelling reasons to read your résumé. Don't just say, "I have five years of customer service experience." Instead, say, "Having worked in customer service for five years, I have developed a skill that enables me to resolve conflicts quickly. This has led to a 95% customer satisfaction rate, which correlates directly with customer loyalty and retention." Name an employer that doesn't consider retention and loyalty essential for their business success. Interviewing: The Sales Pitch An interview is a sales meeting; therefore, a feature-benefit approach is a solid strategy. When asked about your experience, don't just recite your résumé. Use the opportunity to show how your features translate into tangible benefits. Imagine you're interviewing for an account management position; don't just say, "I managed a portfolio of over 500 accounts." Instead, use the features-benefit approach: "I oversaw 547 accounts. While meeting the wants and needs of purchasers was my priority, I also ensured invoices were paid in accordance with the agreed-upon terms. As I'm sure you can appreciate, Nifty Snacks, being a wholesaler, constantly monitored how much each retailer was purchasing in relation to their ability to pay on time. Compared to my predecessor, I reduced delinquency by 45%, resulting in fewer accounts being sent to collections agencies." Networking: Building Professional Connections When you meet someone, consider your features and benefits as talking points. Instead of saying, "I'm a project manager," reframe it: "I'm a project manager who has successfully led cross-functional teams to deliver projects on time and under budget, saving my last employer over $475,000." This not only creates a more engaging conversation but also leaves a lasting impression. Articulating your features and benefits makes you memorable. By focusing not just on "what you've done" (features) but on "how it matters" (benefits), you transform your job search into a solid explanation of how you add value to an employer, an explanation few job seekers offer because they fail to understand that employers aren't interested in their features, but rather in the benefits of hiring them. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Oshawa: The City That Refuses to Die

By Dale Jodoin I’ve lived in Oshawa my whole life. My family came here in 1964, when my father got a job at General Motors. Like many others, he came for honest work and a chance to build something real. He didn’t come for politics or promises he came because Oshawa was a place where you could work hard, raise a family, and take pride in both. He stayed, and so did I. The Oshawa I grew up in was a different kind of city. King Street was lined with diners, barbershops, and smoky pool halls. Some of them even had “no women allowed” signs, strange to think about now, but that was the way it was. The air smelled of oil and metal. You could hear the GM plant from blocks away, humming through the night. That sound meant stability. It meant a steady paycheck, a full table, and a reason to get up in the morning. I worked downtown for years before retiring. I’ve seen this city in its glory days, and I’ve seen it when the silence after the layoffs felt like grief. When the plants slowed down, Oshawa was shaken to its core. Families struggled, businesses closed, and it felt like part of our identity had been lost. But Oshawa doesn’t quit. We bend, we bruise, but we don’t break. Now when I walk downtown, I see a city finding its feet again. Cranes rise where old buildings once stood. The Bond-Simcoe Urban Square is nearly finished, bringing people back to the core. There are new cafés, art studios, and trails being built by the lake that connect us back to nature. The smell of engine grease has been replaced with the smell of coffee and hope. It’s not the same city, but it’s still home. You can still feel the old Oshawa if you stop by the McLaughlin House or the Oshawa Museum. Those places remind us of where we came from the families who built this town with their bare hands, and the industries that gave them a reason to stay. It’s not about who sat in city hall or what policies were passed. Oshawa has always been about the stubborn, hardworking, loyal people who don’t give up even when everything around them seems to change. That’s what keeps this city alive. You see it in the small acts of neighbors helping neighbors, teachers staying late for students, volunteers handing out food with a smile. That’s the real Oshawa. Not the politics, not the headlines, the people. Sure, we’ve still got challenges. Homelessness, addiction, and high living costs are real issues. But we’ve faced worse before, and we always find a way forward. The new HART Hub will help, but real change will come from us from the same people who built this place in the first place. And there’s life here again. Durham College and Ontario Tech have filled the city with new faces and energy. The Convergence Festival paints the streets with color and music every summer. And now the Albany FireWolves lacrosse team is coming to town, bringing pride and excitement back to the Tribute Communities Centre. You can feel momentum again, quiet, but steady. Some say Oshawa isn’t what it used to be, and they’re right. It’s different now but that’s growth. The factories built our bones, but the people built our heart. The city has learned how to change without losing itself. When I walk by Lakeview Park and see kids riding bikes and families laughing near the water, I think about my father. He is proud. He sees that Oshawa still works, still grows, and still believes in itself. The sound may have changed, but the spirit behind it never did. And before I close, I want to thank those who’ve helped keep Oshawa’s story alive. Rick Kerr, City Councillor for Ward 4, believed in this city when others doubted it. He pushed for downtown renewal and never stopped fighting for progress. His persistence reminds us what real dedication looks like. And to Joe Ingino and The Central Newspaper thank you for keeping Oshawa’s voice strong. The paper has stood through the city’s highs and lows, giving space to local stories and international news that affect us here at home. Joe’s work reminds us that Oshawa isn’t isolated from the world, it's part of it, shaped by it, and still proud to speak its truth. That’s what makes Oshawa what it is: persistence, pride, and people who care. We’ve never been the kind of city that waits for someone else to fix things. We roll up our sleeves and do it ourselves. Every time someone says we’re finished, we prove them wrong. That’s why I think our motto should be simple: Welcome Home. Because no matter how much this city grows, it still feels like home. You can leave for years and still find your footing the moment you return. Oshawa bends, but it never breaks. It falls, but it always stands back up. We’ve come a long way, and there’s more to do. But growth isn’t supposed to be easy, it's supposed to be earned. And if any city knows how to earn it, it’s this one. Oshawa doesn’t just survive. It endures. It remembers. And through every change, it remains what it’s always been: the city that refuses to die. Dale Jodoin is a lifelong Oshawa resident and retired downtown worker who writes about the people and spirit that keep his city alive. His words are published with appreciation to The Central Newspaper for continuing to share Oshawa’s voice and the world events that shape it.

Chasing the Clock The Universal Anxiety Which Surrounds Loss of Time

Chasing the Clock The Universal Anxiety Which Surrounds Loss of Time By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist Everyone is given the same 24 hours in a day, 7 days in a week, and 365 days in a year. Yet, each individual chooses to spend those moments differently, shaped by personal goals, motivations, and circumstances. These moments make up more than one hour or day; they become our entire lives, second by second, whether we recognizeit or not. This reality of time can be viewed with either calm acceptance or anxious worry. Some individuals believe time is in abundance, that a few productive hours justify rest without purpose. However, many others fear the end of the day, concluding time slips away much too quickly. In a better system, I do not believe we would ever be confined to a 24 hour day. I am constantly paralyzed by the cl0ck, wondering how much of my unachievable workload I can get through before the clock strikes midnight. Although everyone shares the same 24 hour day, personal situations make each day distinct. While I study, a classmate is unable to do the same because she has to manage her family, while another can barely get out of bed. I know I am extremely fortunate to have the control which I do. I am able to choose the classes I study in and pursue activities which were chosen to better my future. Yet, despite the advantages, these choices overwhelm me. I want to manage everything, take extra courses, participate in every extracurricular, and master hundreds of skills. Doing it all is impossible, yet I hold a menu of possibilities which I am tooindecisive to choose from. I feel my only option is to order everything or nothing at all. I chase goals without understanding why, save money with no budget, study with no expectation. I spend such a large portion of my life working towards milestones I can’t explain, goals set with no real intentions. The clock keeps moving forward while I keep working, yet I don’t trust the direction either of us are heading towards. One day it may strike midnight, and I’ll realize I never wanted this in the first place. My combination of action and uncertainty can be closely related to the ideal “hustle culture,” as I am surrounded by others who seem so self-assured. People describe their non-stop days, every moment seemingly purposeful. Although this idea is clearly flawed, it continues to drain my motivation, setting an unattainable standard. This has created a need for action, even when the action lacks meaning. Somewhere along the way, time stopped being a gift and became a to-do list. We measure our worth by how many boxes we can check off, or how efficiently we use each hour. Rest, relaxation, and enjoyment never make it on the list, as they are never a priority. I sit, staring at the clock tick like sand running through my fingers, unable to catch a single grain. I fear it may be gone before I can prevent it, I know it is impossible to stop it. I may dictate my activities, but I will be forever confined to a day without enough time. The reality and illusion of control leaves me powerless, understanding I plan for something that was never meant to be mastered. The thought of looking back and regretting my past terrifies me. Every action is irreversible, every decision final. How many social events will I sacrifice for work, or assignments will I miss because of social events? Minor choices feel detrimental, and all regrettable. No matter which of the endless options I choose, none are correct. No matter which way I spin it, this anxiety is futile. I can not control every second, cannot plan the rest of my life. If I continue to attempt this, I will miss the moments in between the days, the seconds filled with happiness instead of intention. The point of a day isn’t to micro-manage and panic, but to experience and learn. As long as we spend our lives thriving to our own standards, then maybe our time is okay. Maybe, the point isn’t to fill every second, but to feel it. The only way to make full use of our time is to find a balance between micro-managing and apathy. We must plan what we can to make our days most worthwhile, but not sacrifice the little moments of rest. We need to stop chasing the moments not meant for perfection, and instead live inside of the opportunities they present. We cannot control the clock, cannot make it stop ticking. However, we can take control in a different way; we can fill each second, hour, and day with balance which makes life worth living.

I can’t believe I’m writing this but here we go

I can’t believe I’m writing this but here we go By Councillor Lisa Robinson Next time you’re at the grocery store, ask yourself: is the meat and dairy you’re purchasing real… or is it cloned? Most Canadians have no idea that our federal government has quietly opened the door to cloned animals in our food supply. Health Canada has reclassified cloned beef and dairy so they are no longer considered “novel foods.” That single decision removed the requirement for pre-market safety reviews, public notification, and labeling — leaving the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), the very agency responsible for enforcing food safety and labeling, with almost no authority to intervene. The CFIA is the same agency that didn’t hesitate to kill healthy ostriches — no tests, no proof, no concern for whether the animals were sick or healthy. And now? With cloned meat, they don’t even need to approve whether it’s safe for humans to eat. Think about that. The very agency that treated living creatures like disposable objects is now deciding what we put on our plates — and they don’t have to show us a single shred of evidence that it’s safe. If they couldn’t care about birds, why should we trust them with people? If Health Canada doesn’t require labels, then the CFIA can’t enforce them. Let me be very clear: cloned beef and dairy products from cloned cattle — and their offspring — can now legally enter our grocery stores. There are no labels, no warnings, and no way for Canadians to know what they’re buying or eating. And the most disturbing part? We don’t even know if it’s already on our shelves. Health Canada has not told the public when the change officially took effect — and since there’s no labeling or tracking, there’s no way to verify what’s already in circulation. They say it’s “safe.” But this isn’t about safety anymore — it’s about transparency, ethics, and trust. Cloning is not natural. It’s a laboratory process that copies an animal’s DNA to create a genetic duplicate. Many cloned animals suffer from deformities, reproductive issues, and shortened lifespans. Even the surrogates that carry them face complications. So instead of increasing oversight, our government quietly removed it. Instead of warning Canadians, they decided we didn’t need to know. WTF Canada — time to start paying attention. Do you think this is transparency? I bet the majority of Canadians — maybe 60 to 70% — have no idea this is even happening. And a good chunk would probably call it a “conspiracy theory” while reading this post. Year a little research will prove it’s truth. This is deception, plain and simple Canadians deserve to know what we’re putting on our tables and feeding our families. Health Canada made the decision. The bullies, I mean the CFIA will enforce it. And the Canadian people are left completely in the dark. Time to open your eyes and start paying attention my friends, Because no government should ever decide that the truth belongs to them — and not to the people. Kind regards, Lisa Robinson “The People’s Councillor” City of Pickering“Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head On And Rise Above It” - Lisa Robinson 2023

THE REALITIES OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY AND IT’S EFFECT ON CANADIAN SOCIETY

THE REALITIES OF THE CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY AND IT’S EFFECT ON CANADIAN SOCIETY THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH WE LIVE are very often designed to favour particular outcomes, whether we realize it or not. Quite recently, I came across an online discussion about what is referred to as the Cloward-Piven Strategy, being a process for social and political manipulation – and a topic that has since led me to examine more thoroughly the degree to which this initiative may exist in Canadian society. In this week’s column, I will share with you some of what I've learned. The Cloward-Piven Strategy is a political and social blueprint that aims to create a crisis, both politically and within our welfare system. The aim is to force radical social change and an increasing dependency on government. In recent years, this has included the establishment of a guaranteed minimum income – a topic most Canadians have by now either read or heard about. The strategy was outlined in a 1966 article entitled "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty," published in the ‘The Nation’ magazine by two American sociologists and political activists, Richard Cloward and Frances Piven. The central idea of their thesis is to encourage mass enrollment into social welfare programs to the point of overloading the administrative and fiscal capacities that support them. What that basically points to is a calculated effort, over time, to mobilize the ‘poor’ and so-called ‘marginalized’ groups in our communities to apply for all the benefits to which they’re entitled. The resulting flood of claims would strain local bureaucracies and budgets, leading to a breakdown in their ability to function properly. In theory, this would compel governments at various levels to intervene with a much bolder solution, such as a guaranteed minimum income provided by the state. As we know, this would result in a massive redistribution of wealth in our country – and add a frightening new level of dependency. For decades, Canadians have witnessed an ongoing expansion in Provincial welfare rolls, however, the concept of a guaranteed minimum income has yet to be implemented – regardless of the efforts made by social activists. I would argue that such a program would, primarily, encourage many thousands of unemployed people across this country to simply rely on government handouts manifestly designed to promote a socialist agenda. Stay with me, because there’s much more behind the ideals that form the basis of such an economic and political theory – ideals that go well beyond a guaranteed minimum income. Some of the more worthwhile commentary I have read on social media suggests the Cloward-Piven Strategy is right now being implemented by our federal government in ways I hadn’t previously considered. It begins with programs put in place during the Covid pandemic, those that included massive government stimulus spending, including the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB), which gave more than eight million Canadians free money with no strings attached. Some say desperate times call for desperate measures, however, there’s an argument to be made that CERB was in fact part of a broader agenda, one that helped to create an additional dependency on programs that allowed the federal government to gain more control. Justin Trudeau and his cabinet appeared ready and eager to raise our national debt to the point of bankruptcy-by-design, even under the guise of keeping our national economy temporarily afloat. Another example to be considered is the Liberals’ radical climate agenda that began affecting Canadian energy producers as major banks stopped issuing loans to oil and gas firms unless they complied with net-zero targets. With fuel prices soaring, we faced historic inflation, and food banks across the country reported record demand as the cost of groceries increased roughly 30 per cent between 2020 and 2025. This, too, helps to create a dependency never before seen, as individuals from coast to coast still struggle to feed their families and are more often starting to look to government for assistance. On a larger scale, our now-Prime Minister Mark Carney spoke at the Vatican in 2019 in support of the Council for Inclusive Capitalism, a group designed to unite global corporations, financial institutions, and the Catholic Church under a single moral-economic framework. His message was clear: Loyalty must shift from traditional institutions to a centralized system where authority is dictated by economic compliance. At the same time, there appears to be a movement dedicated to the creation of an even greater permanent dependency on the State through what is known as ‘programmable money’. Our Prime Minister has been seen as one of the most vocal international advocates for Central Bank Digital Currencies. In a speech given at a gathering of the Bank for International Settlements, Mark Carney suggested the future of ‘money’ will be programmable and trackable, and that its purpose must include support for what international agencies see as ‘sustainable’ development. In October 2023, the Bank of Canada began pilot testing a central bank digital currency, and our Prime Minister helped to advise that effort. If implemented, this programmable currency would allow the government to freeze accounts, limit purchases, and control every financial transaction – in theory. What is not mere theory but rather factual evidence is the swiftness of action taken by the federal Liberals to freeze the bank accounts of protesters they simply didn’t agree with. Those “financial incapacitation” measures by which individuals seen at a protest were subjected to bank account freezes and auto insurance cancellation decrees - all without a court order or even notice and a chance to respond - were ultimately deemed by the courts to be unlawful. The actions taken by then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet remain as one of the most glaring examples of government overreach in Canadian history. Additionally, many Western leaders across the globe appear to have loyalties more connected to the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, and other unelected global institutions than to national sovereignty and the maintenance of individual freedoms. The future is full of doubt, particularly for Canada, as in recent days our federal government has brought forward a budget that forecasts a total debt of $1.347-trillion in 2025-26, while at the same time offering up additional spending in excess of $140-billion over five years. When taken as a whole, these and other government initiatives that tear down the rights and freedoms of the individual can only succeed when a community of citizens is itself corrupted into almost complete dependency. This is the Cloward-Piven strategy in full force.

Remembrance Day 2025: The Nation That Remembers

by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As services across Canada prepare to mark Remembrance Day on November 11, 2025, we once again pause as a nation to remember — not only the wars fought and lives lost, but also the ideals for which those sacrifices were made. In an age when the world seems as turbulent as ever, remembrance is not a mere tradition; it is an act of unity, gratitude, and renewal. At the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, more than a century ago, the guns of the Great War finally fell silent. The armistice that ended the First World War ushered in a silence that was more profound than any words — a silence filled with the weight of loss, endurance, and hope. More than 625,000 Canadians had served; 61,082 never returned home, and another 154,000 came back wounded in body or in spirit. Those numbers, stark as they are, cannot convey the faces behind them — young men and women from farms, small towns, and city streets who answered the call to serve a country still defining itself. From the Fields of Europe to the Shores of Peacekeeping The legacy of service did not end in 1918. Canadians would again take up arms in the Second World War, standing firm against tyranny when freedom itself hung in the balance. They would serve in Korea, where Canadian soldiers fought in the bitter cold of the hills around Kapyong. They would wear the blue helmets of peacekeepers in Cyprus, Bosnia, and Rwanda. And they would deploy to Afghanistan, where over 40,000 Canadians served and 158 made the ultimate sacrifice. These stories — of courage, sacrifice, and endurance — have shaped our nation’s character. They have given us not only our freedoms but also our shared sense of duty and compassion. Yet as the years pass, the distance between us and those wars grows. The veterans of the Second World War are now few, their ranks thinning each year. That is why our remembrance must deepen, not fade. A Time for National Unity In 2025, the world faces new and uncertain challenges — wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, the shadow of extremism, and the pressures of social division at home. At such a time, Remembrance Day calls on Canadians to stand together, above politics, to reaffirm the values that those before us fought to defend: liberty, democracy, and the rule of law. In every community — from coast to coast to coast — Canadians will once again gather around cenotaphs, in schools, town squares, and legions. The red poppy, humble yet powerful, will bloom again on lapels and jackets. It is not a symbol of war but of peace; not of politics but of gratitude. To wear the poppy is to say, I remember. Sadly, there are voices today who downplay the meaning of Remembrance Day, dismissing it as a relic of another age. Yet to forget is to lose ourselves. As Nobel laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel reminded us: “Without memory, there is no culture. Without memory, there would be no civilization, no society, no future.” Remembering Beyond the Battlefield Remembrance is not only about soldiers at the front lines. It is also about the families who waited — the mothers and fathers, wives and husbands, children who watched the trains depart and prayed for their loved ones’ return. It is about the workers on factory floors who built the ships, the planes, and the shells. It is about the nurses and doctors who tended to the wounded, and the communities that rebuilt after each war’s end. In Canada, remembrance also means acknowledging those who served at home — Indigenous volunteers who fought in disproportionate numbers, new immigrants who defended a land they had just begun to call home, and women who kept industries running and later demanded their rightful place in society. The Meaning of Sacrifice Freedom, democracy, and peace are not guaranteed. They are earned, maintained, and renewed through vigilance. The men and women who wore the maple leaf on their sleeves understood this. As President John F. Kennedy said in 1961: “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” That promise remains relevant today — not as a call to arms, but as a reminder of the responsibility we all share. To be Canadian is to inherit not only rights but also duties: to protect the weak, defend justice, and foster understanding among nations. Lest We Forget On November 11, as the trumpets sound and the silence falls, each of us has a duty to remember — not only as citizens of Canada but as custodians of a legacy built on courage. We do not celebrate war; we commemorate peace. We do not glorify conflict; we honour sacrifice. The poppy on our lapel connects us to those who came before: the soldier in the trenches of Passchendaele, the pilot over Dieppe, the medic in Kandahar. It connects us also to those who serve today — sailors patrolling northern waters, peacekeepers abroad, and reservists who balance military service with civilian life. These men and women are not faceless. They are our neighbours, friends, and family. They have dreams and ambitions, yet they choose service before self. Their courage deserves not only our gratitude but also our enduring remembrance. Carrying the Torch Forward In classrooms across the country, young Canadians will once again recite the lines of Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae’s immortal poem “In Flanders Fields.” It is more than poetry; it is a passing of the torch: “To you from failing hands we throw The torch; be yours to hold it high.” That torch now rests in our hands. How we carry it — through respect, civic engagement, and a commitment to peace — will define us as much as the battles once did. As we look around our communities this Remembrance Day — from Vancouver to Halifax, from Iqaluit to Windsor — let us stand together as Canadians, united in purpose and gratitude. Let us remember those who gave their today for our tomorrow. For in remembering, we preserve not just the past, but also the very essence of who we are. We will remember them. Lest we forget.

Why Flying Is Safer Than Surgery?

Why Flying Is Safer Than Surgery By Diana Gifford Many of us have the experience of boarding a plane with a prayer that the pilot has had enough sleep. With your surgeon, it’s a similar problem. Few people get to choose who will do their surgery. Even if you’ve gone to the trouble of arranging a referral to the best, how can you know the doctor hasn’t hit a rough patch? Maybe a crumbling marriage? Or a punishing work and travel schedule that simply has your surgeon fatigued? What can you do? As individual patients, not much. In fact, wait lines are often so long there’s a disincentive to jeopardize that precious surgery date. But as for airline pilots, health care systems have safeguards to ensure surgeons are in good working order. But they are a looser and more opaque. Working hours for pilots are strictly regulated by law. Residents in training often work 24-hour shifts despite known fatigue risks. Fully trained surgeons often have no legally mandated work-hour limits. Schedules are set by hospitals and departments. Is there a culture of bravado among doctors, that they tolerate this? When there’s a near miss in an airplane, the pilot faces the same consequences as passengers. When a surgeon makes an error, there no co-surgeon to prevent or correct it, and reporting of incidents is rare for fear of lawsuits. Physicians are trained to diagnose and to treat. They are not trained to admit vulnerability. Yet, the profession is showing serious strain. More than half of Canadian doctors report feeling burned out, with many contemplating early retirement. In the United States, the numbers are similar. Across Europe, countries have begun to notice alarming levels of depression, addiction, and even suicide among doctors. Why then does the public know so little about existing programs that support doctors and their families. Even healers need help when the going gets rough. We should be broadcasting the programs that care for doctors. And they do exist. The Ontario Medical Association offers a confidential Physician Health Program for doctors, residents, and medical students dealing with mental health challenges, addictions, or professional stress. Other provinces in Canada have comparable services. The U.S. has the Federation of State Physician Health Programs. In Europe, the NHS Practitioner Health service in England, the Practitioner Health Matters Programme in Ireland, and programs in the Netherlands, Norway, and France provide support. Spain offers a particularly sobering example. In the 1990s, several high-profile physician suicides shocked the medical community there. The profession realized that denial and silence were killing their own, and that patients, too, were at risk. In response, the medical colleges created the Programa de Atención Integral al Médico Enfermo, or “Comprehensive Care Program for the Sick Doctor.” It has become a model across Europe, combining confidentiality with structured monitoring to ensure doctors get well and return to practice. The model is strikingly consistent across jurisdictions, offering confidential support, separate from licensing bodies, to encourage doctors to step forward. Where risk to patients is clear, reporting obligations to regulators remain. But the central aim is prevention: address problems before they spiral into impairment, mistakes, or withdrawal from practice. Should the public know more about these programs? My answer is yes. Not to fuel distrust, but to build confidence. A doctor who seeks help is not a doctor to be feared; quite the opposite. Still, it is easy to see why some bristle. Shouldn’t the system be stricter, not gentler, with impaired physicians? Isn’t there a danger these programs “protect their own”? Such suspicion misreads the design. These programs are protective, for doctors and patients. Alas, medicine clings to its culture of invincibility, and that’s why flying is safer than surgery. —————————————————————————————————————— 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

The Hidden Role of Luck in Building Wealth

The Hidden Role of Luck in Building Wealth By Bruno M. Scanga Deposit Broker, Insurance & Investment Advisor When it comes to money and investing, a lot of people fall into the same trap: chasing what’s “hot” right now. If a certain stock, sector, or trend is making headlines, many will jump in—hoping they’ve found a “sure thing.” The funny thing is that’s the exact opposite of how real planning works. Whether it’s a financial strategy, goal setting, or life in general, lasting results come from acting before the proof is obvious. Think about New Year’s resolutions. When you commit to exercising three times a week or finding a new job, you’re betting on something you want, not something you already see. At first, there’s no evidence it will work—but over time, if your actions match your intentions, results show up. Eventually, you may even enjoy the process. The problem is that most people want proof first. It works the other way around: action comes first, then proof follows. History is full of examples—Gandhi imagined a free India long before there was any evidence it could happen. A financial strategy works the same way. When you buy a car, you get the keys at once. But when you sit down with an advisor to map out retirement, you’re taking steps today for something you might not see for 20 or 30 years. The only “evidence” we have is the past—and while it can guide us, it can’t guarantee the future. That’s where both wise behavior and a little luck come into play. Advisors can point to past success stories, but your journey will be unique. You might even do better than expected—but there are no promises. The smartest path? Follow proven strategies to build wealth as efficiently as possible, while tailoring them to your comfort level, lifestyle, and financial situation. Your plan should factor in your health, earning potential, savings ability, and resilience against life’s bumps—like recessions, job loss, or unexpected expenses. Once the key pieces are in place—saving tax-efficiently with RRSPs or TFSAs, managing risk, and living within your means—the next step is to give your plan the one thing it truly needs: time. But don’t confuse that with “set it and forget it.” The economy changes. Government policies shift. Markets evolve. These things will affect your plan, which is why regular check-ins and adjustments are crucial. And then there’s luck—the wildcard you can’t control but can certainly be ready for. Who could have predicted that real estate values in some Canadian cities would skyrocket, giving many Baby Boomers an unexpected boost to their retirement? Sometimes, simply owning the right asset at the right time makes all the difference. In the end, good planning is about creating the conditions where luck can work in your favor. Preparation doesn’t guarantee success—but it sure stacks the odds. Talk about how to combine smart planning with life’s unpredictable twists to help you reach your goals.

As a Job Seeker, Are You Really Hungry?

As a Job Seeker, Are You Really Hungry? By Nick Kossovan Wanting "easy" is why most people underestimate the time and effort it takes to achieve success—whether that's shooting a round of golf under 85, running a marathon, starting a six-figure consulting business, making it in Hollywood, or finding a job that aligns with their career goals. As white-collar jobs decline and competition for the remaining positions rises, a job seeker's level of hunger becomes a crucial factor in their job search success. A determined job seeker leaves no stone unturned. They hyperfocus on one goal: securing employment. They don't point fingers or buy into the narrative that "the hiring system is broken." Worth noting: No two hiring managers assess candidates in the same way; therefore, a universal "hiring system" doesn't exist. Hungry job seekers keep their eyes on the prize and do whatever it takes to acquire it. As Henry David Thoreau said, "Success usually comes to those who are too busy to be looking for it." Whether intentionally or not, job seekers are associating the current hyper-competitive job market, paired with Millennials and Gen Zs beginning to take on gatekeeping roles in the workplace, bringing their own perspectives on work ethic professionalism, with a broken hiring system, which, as I mentioned, doesn't exist. Hiring processes aren't broken; employers are responding to the realities of supply and demand. Meanwhile, younger generations are modifying hiring processes to suit their preferred communication styles, and, like previous generations before, tend to lean towards candidates whom, for the most part, they can relate to. When interacting with recruiters and hiring managers, job seekers tend to lead with their skills and experience. While these are important, they're only the initial factors an employer considers. A candidate can possess all the qualifications but still lack the hunger for: · The company and its values · Their profession · The industry · Career progression It's a common misconception that hunger is hard to spot. Most hiring managers will tell you they recognize hunger when they see it; I certainly do. Signs that the candidate is hungry are important, as hunger fuels a person's drive to excel, whether it's for career growth, financial security, or to afford an annual European cruise. A candidate's chances of hearing "You're hired!" significantly increase when their interviewer perceives them as hungry and thus views them as the ideal employee, someone with intrinsic motivation. You're probably asking, "Nick, what are the signs that a candidate is hungry?" Actions speak louder than words. What a candidate does is far more important than what they say. Which candidate is hungrier? CANDIDATE A: Arrives 10 minutes early for the interview. CANDIDATE B: Arrives right on time or five minutes late. CANDIDATE A: Has grammatical errors throughout their resume and LinkedIn profile. CANDIDATE B: Has an error-free resume and LinkedIn profile. CANDIDATE A: Pushes back on doing a 45-minute assignment. CANDIDATE B: Welcomes the assignment to showcase their skills. CANDIDATE A: Doesn't send a thank-you note. CANDIDATE B: Sends a well-crafted thank-you note with additional insights about their impact on previous employers. Your actions, especially those visible to employers, reveal a great deal about your hunger and professionalism. No LinkedIn profile picture or banner? Not hungry. Only wanting a remote job? Not hungry. A hungry job seeker can be identified by: Their networking efforts. Hungry job seekers constantly reach out to everyone and anyone because they understand that job opportunities are all around them. The catch is they're attached to people; therefore, they know building relationships is how they uncover the jobs that are all around them. Including a cover letter. Not including a cover letter is lazy. Hungry job seekers leave nothing to chance; therefore, they include a cover letter that provides compelling reasons for employers to read their resume and visit their LinkedIn profile. Showing evidence of impact. Claiming "I'm a team player" or "I'm good at sales" is just an unsubstantiated opinion about yourself. Expecting employers to hire you based on your self-judgment shows you're unwilling to put in the effort to provide the information—numerical evidence of the impact you had on your previous employers—they need to assess your potential value. They've crafted an elevator speech. Writing and memorizing a 30-second elevator speech, a summary of who you are and what you offer, is an effort most job seekers won't bother with. When I hear a well-prepared elevator speech, I know I'm talking to someone who's hungry. The best elevator speech I received: "I sold Corvettes in Las Vegas." Not having a sense of entitlement. Nothing turns off an employer faster than a sense of entitlement. Hungry job seekers understand they must earn their way through an employer's hiring process. They don't expect special treatment, exceptions, or to be "given a chance." Due to the global economy and ever-changing consumer demands, companies are constantly striving to remain competitive and profitable by operating as lean as possible. The days of employers hand-holding their employees are long gone. Today, companies often have a "swim or sink" culture. Astute hiring managers know that candidates whose actions demonstrate a hunger for job search success are most likely to have the necessary motivation to succeed in a new job on their own. ___________________________________________________________________________ Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Scrolling Away the Days - How Social Media is Consuming the Life of Every Adolescent

Scrolling Away the Days - How Social Media is Consuming the Life of Every Adolescent By Camryn Bland Youth Columnist Social media has been incorporated into the routines of billions of people daily. It is used for entertainment, information, and creativity, all beneficial concepts at their core. The current issue isn’t with the idea of social media, but with the modern purposes of its usage and the degree it’s relied on. Not only is social media incorporated into the lives of so many individuals, but it is a time commitment that is much longer than one would believe. Short-form content, such as tiktok or instagram reels are often used as a time filler, something to watch in a spare moment. Every time I get on a bus, walk into a cafeteria, or wait for a class to begin, I witness countless people facing their phones. When adding all these simple moments in a day, a few minutes of screen time can easily turn into hours wasted. This wasted time is something which I cannot avoid in my daily life. I am a busy student who has very little free time, yet I always manage to spend more time online than I ever intended to. Any free time which I have should be rewarded by an activity which makes me feel good. I should spend my time reading, going outside, or baking, not watching others do these activities as if they’re a far off dream. In 2025, it has become easier to watch others enjoy their lives than to live our own, yet our dreams are calling from the other side of the device. My phone usage feels like an unbreakable cycle. The more overwhelmed I feel, the more I want to relax, which leads to doomscrolling on every social media app I have. This wasted time makes me feel much more anxious than I did when I began, and the cycle repeats. What was originally used to reduce my stress only continues to increase it, creating an addiction difficult to fight. When you read about social media, it seems almost silly how the lives of so many people revolve around something they could delete with the click of a button. The solution is right in front of me, yet I never choose to break the habit. I fear what I will miss out on, the jokes I will no longer understand. How will it affect my friendships if I am the only one offline? Will I be the last to hear the news if I remove my sources? How will I relax if I cannot scroll? Disconnection is the rational answer to fight a phone addiction, yet the hardest promise to commit to. The issue with this media doesn’t just come from the time commitment, but from the negative mood associated with it. When I finally disconnect, I feel worse than I did when I began scrolling. When I am online, I am fed a constant stream of comparison, upsetting news, and fake information. This outlet is no longer entertaining, informative, or creative, but a key source of anxiety and regret. One of the main influences of this regret is the comparison which stems from social media. Whether it be beauty, lifestyle, or success, influencers post the highlights of their lives, leaving out any inconvenience which may seem undesirable. Almost every post undergoes edits and tweaks before being seen by the vulnerable viewer, to make their posts, and their overall lives, appear perfect. This content causes feelings of shame and disappointment in my own life, despite the fact I know what I view is unrealistic. Social media is no longer about what is real and fake, it’s about what makes adolescents feel something, even if that's jealousy and dejection. These wasted hours are not solely the fault of the viewer; the addiction can be traced back to the algorithms which are keeping viewers hooked. Every social media platform, whether that be tiktok, instagram, youtube, or facebook are all designed to keep you coming back for more. It collects data from your interaction history, modelling itself to do whatever makes you interested. It is an effective strategy which keeps the media thriving and individuals struggling with an addiction to watching one more video. Every night, I promise myself I will reduce my screen time tomorrow. I understand the consequences of the manipulative system, yet the next day I scroll just as much as before. It is useless, as something created to inspire creativity and enjoyment leaves me more unmotivated than ever before. I could spend hours scrolling through the algorithm, yet not remember a single video which I watched. It’s a cycle which needs to be broken, a jail cell made of screen time which I must break free from. The key is right in front of me, the solution so simple; just delete the social media apps. Yet, it is something I may never be able to do, no matter how bad the consequences may be.

Tariffs and TV Ads Won’t Heal Our Hospitals: Ontario’s Misguided Priorities

Tariffs and TV Ads Won’t Heal Our Hospitals: Ontario’s Misguided Priorities by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC FEC, CET, P.Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East As Ontario devotes $75 million to a cross-border advertising campaign and faces punishing U.S. tariffs of 35 – 45 percent on Canadian exports, the fallout is being felt not just in factories but also in hospitals. The trade war threatens to drain over $1 billion annually from the province’s health-care system through lost revenues and higher costs for medical supplies. Instead of funding more nurses, beds, and diagnostics, Ontario’s leadership is spending on political optics while patients wait longer for care. Canada’s true deficit is not in trade—it is in health. Ontario’s paradox of priorities Ontario’s health-care budget now exceeds C$80 billion, roughly half of total provincial expenditures. Despite this enormous investment, hospitals remain overcrowded, rural clinics understaffed, and emergency rooms frequently forced to close because of personnel shortages. In 2025, the provincial government launched a C$75 million U.S. advertising campaign—complete with clips from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 radio address against tariffs—to defend Ontario’s manufacturing base and appeal to American public opinion. The gambit backfired. The Trump administration retaliated by imposing a 35 percent tariff on Canadian exports, which rise to 45 percent on certain goods not meeting “America First” domestic-content rules. Ontario, whose prosperity relies on cross-border trade in autos, steel, machinery, and pharmaceuticals, is hit hardest. The economic shock is now rippling into the very heart of public services. The indirect hit to health care Although the tariffs target export industries, their secondary effects—lost revenue, weakened growth, and supply-chain disruption—land squarely on the health-care system. 1. Revenue loss and slower growth: Ontario exports about C$200 billion a year to the United States. Even if only 10 percent of that total (C$20 billion) faces the 35–45 percent penalty, the province stands to lose C$7–9 billion in trade value annually. Lower profits mean smaller corporate and payroll-tax intakes, cutting provincial revenues by an estimated C$500–700 million each year—funds that otherwise would finance hospitals, long-term care, and medical infrastructure. 2. Rising costs for imported health goods: While the tariffs are levied on Canadian exports, the ensuing retaliation and logistical friction drive up import costs as well. Ontario’s hospitals depend heavily on medical technology, diagnostic equipment, and pharmaceuticals that originate in or pass through U.S. supply chains. Border delays, insurance surcharges, and counter-tariffs could inflate procurement costs by 8–10 percent. Given an annual operating budget near C$60 billion, even a modest 1 percent price increase translates to C$600 million in extra spending—money siphoned from patient care to cover higher bills for essential supplies. 3. Cumulative impact: Combining revenue losses and cost inflation yields a C$1.1–1.3 billion annual burden on Ontario’s health system. That sum could otherwise finance 1,200 to 2,400 new hospital or critical-care beds, pay yearly salaries for 7,000 registered nurses, purchase 150 MRI or CT scanners, or fund comprehensive home-care programs for 250,000 Ontarians. Instead, these resources are evaporating through a trade conflict that delivers neither economic stability nor better public health. Meanwhile, patients wait Across Canada, the median wait to see a specialist is 78 days, and one in four patients waits 175 days or longer. Ontario faces some of the worst backlogs for elective surgery among G7 countries. In northern communities, doctor shortages persist; in urban centres, ambulance off-load delays have become routine. It is difficult to justify multimillion-dollar ad buys in U.S. media markets while emergency rooms at home struggle to find enough nurses to stay open overnight. Political messaging has taken precedence over measurable service improvement. Eroding equity and the social contract Universal health care remains Canada’s proudest social covenant: access based on need, not wealth or geography. Yet that covenant is eroding under fiscal and logistical strain. When a government invests C$75 million in political advertising that provokes tariffs costing the treasury more than ten times that amount, while hospital budgets strain to maintain basic services, something fundamental has gone wrong. The result is a quiet inequity—urban hospitals absorbing shocks while smaller communities fall further behind. Every dollar spent on public relations warfare is a dollar not spent on the front lines of care. Why Ontario—and Canada—are falling behind • Fragmentation: Provinces administer health care independently, creating duplication, uneven standards, and limited data sharing. • Capacity constraints: Canada maintains fewer hospital beds and diagnostic units per capita than most OECD peers. • Under-investment in prevention: Only about 5 percent of total health spending goes to primary and community care, compared with 8 percent elsewhere. • Workforce exhaustion: Chronic shortages and overtime have driven thousands of nurses to the private or U.S. sectors. • Policy distraction: Trade wars and industrial headlines dominate the agenda, while systemic reform languishes. A road map for renewal 1. Re-centre priorities. Treat health care as national infrastructure, not a secondary political cost. 2. Set measurable national standards. Enforce maximum wait-time targets, minimum bed ratios, and rural-access guarantees. 3. Invest upstream. Strengthen family-health teams, community clinics, and preventive programs to reduce hospital demand. 4. Ensure transparency. Publish all government communication and trade-response expenditures beside health-care investments. 5. Coordinate federally and provincially. Align transfer payments and performance targets to ensure accountability for every public dollar. The lesson Ontario’s C$75 million advertising campaign and the ensuing U.S. tariff escalation to 45 percent reveal a profound misalignment of priorities. Political optics displaced policy substance—and patients are paying the price. If even a fraction of the money and lost revenue tied up in this trade confrontation were redirected to front-line care, Ontario could shorten surgical waits, expand capacity, and restore public confidence in universal health care. Canada’s hospitals do not need patriotic slogans broadcast across American airwaves. They need stable funding, long-term planning, and leadership focused on the well-being of Canadians. Canada does not need future aggravation by unnecessarily antagonizing an unpredictable president already primed for tariff battle. Ontario’s misguided ad, at great taxpayer expense, will put a serious spike in Canada’s future tariff negotiations and can be perceived as direct political interference in US domestic affairs. What do you think?

“How professors, politicians, and influencers turned victimhood into profit.”

By Dale Jodoin There is a new kind of industry rising in our society. It does not produce food, cars, or medicines. It does not build homes or make lives easier. What it sells is outrage. Professors, activists, writers, and politicians have discovered that anger and grievance are highly profitable. The more they talk about oppression and victimhood, the more money, attention, and power they gain. This is not by accident. It has become a business model. It has become what I call the victim economy. At the heart of this economy is something I call self-racism. In older times, the term meant that someone came to believe lies about their own group. They looked at themselves through the eyes of their oppressors and carried shame. Today, the meaning has shifted. Self-racism is when people repeat accusations of racism against the majority, while carefully avoiding any criticism of their own community. They mirror the words of outside attackers, but they use them as weapons, not as honest reflection. They never turn the mirror inward. Instead, they hold the majority guilty for everything, while their own side gets a free pass. This has created a new class of professionals whose careers depend on keeping this cycle alive. Professors design courses that treat whole nations as permanently guilty. Writers fill shelves with books that repeat the same story: Western culture is nothing but oppression. Media personalities gain ratings by stirring outrage. Politicians stand on stages and accuse ordinary people of racism in order to win votes and donations. The louder the accusations, the bigger the rewards. The method is simple and predictable. First, create a crisis. A speech, a law, or even an offhand comment can be branded racist. Second, amplify the outrage. Social media spreads it, journalists echo it, and the public is told to panic. Third, cash in. There are book deals, lecture tours, political campaigns, and endless interviews. Finally, protect the racket. Anyone who questions the process is branded a bigot or silenced through pressure. The cycle runs over and over, because it pays too well to stop. This industry has been built and polished by the political left. Woke culture has turned victimhood into a badge of honour. Cancel culture has become the enforcement tool that guards it. Students are taught that silence is violence, that even words can be acts of harm, and that every part of Western history is stained. Professors rise in status by promoting these views, building entire careers from guilt. Online influencers copy the formula, gaining followers and donations by accusing anyone who steps outside the approved script. Politicians join in, painting enemies where none exist and promising to fight oppression that is often exaggerated or imagined. It is a perfect racket. Cancel culture is the whip that keeps everyone in line. People see what happens to those who speak out. A job is lost, a reputation destroyed, a friend group abandoned. Ordinary people learn to stay silent. They watch their neighbours fall and decide it is safer to say nothing, even when they see the truth. This silence is exactly what the system needs to grow. Self-racism adds another layer of protection, because when someone from within a minority community repeats the same lines, it appears authentic. It gives the illusion of honesty. But it is selective honesty. It hides problems within while magnifying faults of the majority. It is a shield that deflects blame and keeps the profit machine running. The cost of this victim economy is enormous. Trust between people breaks down. Neighbours no longer see one another as equals, but as oppressors or victims. Every conversation turns into a contest over who has suffered more. Real issues are ignored. Crime, broken schools, and collapsing families go unaddressed because all energy is focused on accusations. The people who most need answers are left with none, while professors, authors, and politicians grow rich off division. This new economy rewards weakness instead of strength. It teaches that the path to success is not building, creating, or leading, but claiming victimhood. The more a person insists they are oppressed, the higher they rise. The majority is expected to sit silent, to carry guilt forever, while a class of professional victims enjoys the benefits. This does not heal wounds. It deepens them. It does not solve problems. It hides them. Escaping this cycle will not be easy, but the first step is to see it for what it is. Victimhood has become a product, sold like any other. Outrage is not a cure; it is a business. The second step is to demand accountability from all sides, not just from the majority. If one group demands respect and moral authority, then it must also face its own faults with honesty. Without this balance, the cycle of blame will never end. Finally, people must learn to resist fear. Cancel culture thrives only when silence wins. If enough voices refuse to bow, the racket loses power. Ordinary citizens must recognize that outrage is being sold to them like soap or soda. The less they buy, the weaker the business becomes. Self-racism and the victim economy have grown together. One provides the mask, the other provides the market. Together they form a machine that feeds on division and rewards those who profit from grievance. The left has built it, protected it, and turned it into a culture where outrage never ends. But a society cannot survive on blame alone. If we want a future built on trust and responsibility, we must stop rewarding professional victims and start rewarding truth. Until that happens, the victim economy will only grow, because outrage sells, and too many people are still buying.

When Democracy Becomes Propaganda

When Democracy Becomes Propaganda By Councillor Lisa Robinson When a sitting provincial premier in Canada produces a 60-second commercial using disembodied clips of Ronald Reagan speaking about tariffs — with the clear intent to influence U.S. political opinion — we cross a line. That’s not diplomacy or persuasion. It’s propaganda. Ontario’s government, led by Doug Ford, has spent millions on a U.S. TV ad blitz that features Reagan’s 1987 radio address, edited to criticize tariffs. The ad warns Americans that protectionism will cause retaliation, job losses, and economic collapse — extracting excerpts of Reagan’s voice to serve a modern political purpose. On the surface, using an iconic conservative figure to broadcast a message to Republicans sounds clever. But if you dig deeper, the ad is not an honest “Reagan speaks” piece — it is cherry-picked, decontextualized, and weaponized. The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation has already stated that the Ontario ad misrepresents Reagan’s full speech and that the province did not secure permission to edit or repurpose it. By stripping away context, selectively choosing sentences, and presenting Reagan’s voice as an argument tailored to this moment, the ad turns Reagan himself into a tool — not a historical figure. That is propaganda, not persuasion. And it’s fair to ask whether this kind of political theatre should be paid for by Ontario taxpayers at all. What Doug Ford’s government did with Ronald Reagan’s words isn’t an isolated stunt — it’s part of a larger pattern. We’ve seen the same tactics right here in Pickering. Our own mayor used taxpayer dollars to produce a propaganda video — not to inform residents, but to attack and discredit an elected colleague who dared to challenge the status quo. The intent was the same as Ford’s Reagan ad: distort the narrative, confuse the public, and weaponize perception. Both rely on emotional manipulation instead of honesty. Both use the public purse to protect political power. And both demonstrate a dangerous trend: government officials using the machinery of public communication to silence dissent and reward loyalty. It’s no coincidence that Doug Ford and the Mayor of Pickering have become close political allies — buddies with mutual friends in the development world, often benefiting from the same cozy network of insiders who profit most when the public stops asking questions. When propaganda replaces truth, those friends get richer, while the people get poorer — in trust, in transparency, and in representation. In an age of AI, deepfakes, and micro-targeted messaging, citizens can no longer assume all “endorsements” are authentic. When governments use history’s icons — or public platforms — as political props, democracy suffers. Whether it’s a province meddling in U.S. politics or a mayor weaponizing City Hall communications, both cross ethical lines. The public should never have to fund propaganda against itself. Ford’s ad campaign and Pickering’s political videos both show how far officials will go to control the narrative. When governments use public money to attack the truth, the people must push back. Because once manipulation becomes normalized, it spreads. Today it’s Reagan’s voice; tomorrow it’s your tax dollars funding hit pieces on local opponents. The same playbook — just a different stage. History and truth belong to all of us. When leaders manipulate one and erase the other, they’re not governing — they’re performing. Doug Ford’s Reagan ad and Pickering’s propaganda videos are not about communication. They’re about control. And when politicians form alliances built on deception, backed by money and developers, the people lose their voice. The antidote is simple but powerful: call it out. Every time. Everywhere. Because once the truth is gone, democracy doesn’t stand a chance. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

NOW IS THE TIME TO ELIMINATE INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL BOARDS ALTOGETHER

SCHOOL BOARDS IN ONTARIO ARE OUT OF CONTROL and it is long-past time to eliminate them altogether. In their latest round of orchestrated sanctimony, education workers are grandstanding in an effort to force the Ontario government to withdraw Bill 33, Ontario’s Supporting Children and Students Act. The bill would give the government the authority to remove School Board trustees and replace them with provincially-appointed supervisors if it is deemed to be in the public interest. This has been brought about due to wild spending sprees and other occurrences that have formed the basis – at least for some boards – of extreme radicalization of what should otherwise be the proper administration of our children’s education. David Mastin, president of the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario, was found to cry crocodile tears during a news conference at Queen’s Park recently when he had the audacity to suggest, “This is dangerously close to authoritarian control… We are seeing a dismantling of democracy in real time.” In spite of the big union boss and his useless rhetoric, many parents in Ontario would surely feel a sense of relief just knowing their children won’t be under the control of trustees who repeatedly engage in public displays of extremely bad judgment. Of course, it doesn’t end there. Educators are also stomping their feet and waving their hands over the potential placement of police resource officers within Ontario’s schools. This is nothing new, and is seen by many as a positive step toward improvements in safety. Joining her colleague on the soapbox of righteous indignation was NDP education critic Chandra Pasma, who called Bill 33 “a direct attack on the rights of students, parents, teachers and education workers to have a say in our local schools.” Citing what she suggests is a lack of resources for teachers, she went on to say, “We are seeing a rising violence problem… and a shortage of workers as good people are (being) driven out of the system every day due to the working conditions,” Perhaps she didn’t get the memo from the Teachers’ Federation who oppose police resource officers in schools. Talk about mixed messages. What wasn’t mixed in terms of the real agenda that exists among so many educators in Ontario was Ms Pasma’s admission that the need for authority among trustees far surpasses any other issue, as she went on to say, “Instead of fixing these problems, the government is focused on a partisan power grab.” Really? Not to be outdone on this theatrical stage, David Mastin chimed in by adding, “This is not just a bureaucratic shift, it’s a direct attack on democracy that will silence marginalized voices, harm students and strip the community of their right to shape public education.” Well, the only entity that would likely be stripped of the ability to “shape public education” are the radical Marxists who show more concern over race and gender politics than basic education like reading, writing, and arithmetic. Bill 33 provides a means of addressing financial mismanagement among school boards, which would include the ability to install provincial supervisors and setting out expense requirements. The bill would also impact post-secondary institutions by regulating fees mandating merit-based admission at post-secondary institutions, as well as children’s aid societies. “Parents deserve confidence that school boards are making decisions in the best interests of their children’s education,” said Education Minister Paul Calandra in a release announcing the bill earlier this spring. The bill is expected to pass this autumn, but as one might expect, Mastin and other critics say they want the bill withdrawn. “Our hope is that the bill will be withdrawn immediately,” Mastin explained. “There is no part of the bill we as teachers are comfortable with.” That’s a shame, Dave. Good luck with that narrative. There are so many examples of controversies among school boards in Ontario that it would take another three columns for me to discuss them all, but we’ll look at just a few. The most controversial policies established by the Durham District School Board (DDSB) in recent years have centered on human rights, equity, and inclusion, particularly related to gender identity, race, and the content of school libraries, igniting public debate and prompting protests from parents. DDSB policies regarding gender identity have consistently fueled controversy as well, notably concerning transgender students and gender-affirming practices. This includes concerns from some parents and community groups, such as the DDSB Concerned Parents, about gender education and practices like a student's ability to change their pronouns without explicit parental consent. The DDSB's broader human rights and equity policies have drawn criticism from some community members who argue they are ideologically driven. The 2022 Human Rights Policy proved contentious, with critics arguing that its definitions and framing were influenced by ‘critical race theory’ which fosters an ‘anti-white’ bias. The policy's description of so-called ‘white supremacy’ as a societal structure rather than being limited to extremist groups was particularly debated. A 2025 Juno News report highlighted concerns raised by the DDSB Concerned Parents regarding the board's equity spending. Critics questioned the effectiveness of equity programs, and the board refused to commission an independent audit to review the spending. Other controversial DDSB policies include the renaming of schools. Following a push from the Elementary Teachers' Federation of Ontario, the DDSB developed a policy for renaming schools that bear the names of historical figures with so-called "problematic" pasts. This included the decision to review schools named after figures like Canada's first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. This was brought about by extremists in their attempt to bring the societal norms of the 19th Century into modern times - for judgement by those who appear to harbor a profound resentment of the very founding of Canada. Finally, a quick look at the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) shows an equal resentment based on race. In 2024, the TDSB temporarily pulled a teaching guide titled Facilitating Critical Conversations after criticism from the Ontario Ministry of Education. The document referred to Canada's education system as a "colonial structure that centres upon whiteness and Eurocentricity" and claimed it "must be actively decolonized". Seriously. Critics argued the guide was divisive, while the board maintained it was committed to what they now call “equity”. As I stated at the outset, school boards in Ontario are out of control, and it’s time to eliminate them altogether.