Showing posts with label Duher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Duher. Show all posts
Saturday, June 21, 2025
Apply Fundamental Relationship-Building Psychology
Apply Fundamental
Relationship-Building Psychology
to Your Job Search
By Nick Kossovan
An effective way to shorten your job search is to leverage the fundamental psychological principle—a game-changing lifehack—that most people overlook when trying to form a relationship, whether during job hunting, aspiring to climb the corporate ladder, seeking new friends, networking, or looking for that "special someone": If you want someone (read: an employer) to be interested in you, first be interested in them. Showing interest in someone is a massive gesture that makes you stand out; this is particularly true during interviews, where the goal is to establish a connection with your interviewer.
When expressing interest in someone—an employer—a key consideration is focusing your communication on how you can contribute to their success. This approach will make you memorable, which is what you should strive for, as it contrasts with most job seekers whose sense of entitlement has them primarily focused on their wants. Job seekers who are "what's in it for me" focused tend to struggle with their job search.
Focus on "What Can I Do for You?"
A hiring manager's primary concern is how the candidate can help the business. Therefore, distinguishing yourself from competitors, who are likely "me" focused, is as simple as demonstrating to employers the quantitative results you've achieved in your previous roles and how you intend to attain similar results. In 2025, your entire job search should focus on showcasing your past achievements that demonstrate your ability to either generate revenue or solve problems that hinder revenue. Can you answer the question savvy interviewers ask: "Tell me how you brought value to your most recent position."?
· "I led a software implementation project that was completed on time and under budget by $35,000."
· "By calling dormant accounts that hadn't made a purchase in over two years with a one-time offer, I resurrected over 200 accounts, generating $850,000 in revenue."
· "My hunger to achieve my monthly sales quota motivated me to make at least 40% of my calls before or after traditional business hours when decision-makers were most likely to answer their phones. This calling strategy resulted in a significantly higher connection rate, enabling me to exceed my monthly sales quota for 34 consecutive months."
Being different is better than "being better."
Stop trying to be "the best-qualified candidate." Remember, you're striving to be memorable. Solely highlighting your qualifications and experience, especially without numerical evidence, is a surefire way to blend in with every other candidate.
American psychologist Dr. Robert Cialdini asserts, "To be persuasive, you need to be unique." Determine ways to present yourself to employers that will make you stand out. Often, just doing the basics that few job seekers do, such as creating a results-oriented resume and LinkedIn profile, including a compelling cover letter that sells as the ideal candidate for the position (not including a cover letter is lazy), and sending a post-interview thank you note to reinforce why you're the 'must-have' candidate, really well will make your stand out from those you're competing against.
Job seekers, now more than ever, need to bring a fresh perspective to their applications.
Social proof helps establish trust.
Catherine Sanderson, Professor of Psychology at Amherst College, notes, "People are influenced by what others think. Social proof can be a powerful motivator."
Your interviewer is a stranger; best-case scenario, you're a referral, thereby sharing a "we know the same person" connection. Unsurprisingly, since they're hiring strangers, hiring managers ask themselves: "Can I trust this person?"
The foundation of any successful relationship is trust. A crucial step in establishing trust is demonstrating credibility. Today, the most effective way to establish credibility is by taking advantage of social media platforms—LinkedIn being the most obvious—to provide social proof. Post screenshots of your successes include recommendations from previous bosses and share client success stories. Establish your credibility! If you've worked with well-known companies and brands, mention them to foster a reputation for trustworthiness and competence. Employers are more likely to trust you when they see that a reputable company has hired (read: trusted) you.
Fear of missing out (FOMO) motivates.
We all want what others have. A job search tactic I've successfully used several times is to create a perception of scarcity—that I'm in high demand. The perception that you have other options makes recruiters and hiring managers move faster. Being interested in you is good, but being concerned about losing you to a competitor is even better.
If you're in contact with several companies, even if you haven't reached the interview stage, mention it subtly. "I'm excited about several opportunities right now" conveys value without being overly boastful. Using this tactic frequently (no guarantee) encourages the employer to act quickly to hire you.
Reciprocity is powerful.
"There is one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life - reciprocity." - Confucius. The act of giving fosters social connections while positioning you as a valuable resource, thus enhancing your visibility and desirability. Do what most job seekers don't do: share industry insights, write informative posts, or comment thoughtfully on hiring managers' posts. The more you give, the more people will remember you, which, in turn, facilitates striving to be a memorable candidate.
OSHAWA COUNCILLORS TURN A ‘SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING’ INTO A SATIRICAL ‘COMEDY OF ERRORS’
This Is Not Discipline It’s Political Punishment
This Is Not Discipline It’s Political Punishment
By Councillor Lisa Robinson
On Monday, Pickering Council will vote - again - to take away my income. If they approve the Integrity Commissioner’s recommendation, I will have officially worked an entire year without pay. A single mother, elected by the people to represent them, will be punished for doing just that - representing the people.
Let’s be absolutely clear: I submitted a full rebuttal to the Integrity Commissioner’s Preliminary Findings on June 6, 2025 - two separate emails outlining my response in detail. That submission addressed every allegation with facts and evidence. But the final report - the one being used to justify this punishment - falsely claims that I didn’t respond at all.
That is a lie. And when I asked that the item be removed from the agenda so this glaring error could be corrected, they refused.
Not only is this a blatant violation of procedural fairness, it exposes the political agenda at play. While the full contents of my response may not have been reviewed, Council, the Clerk, the Mayor, and the Solicitor are fully aware that I responded - and they’re choosing to move forward anyway.
This isn’t about conduct. It’s about control.
Let’s talk about the source of these complaints. Aside from the first two sanctions - one brought by Councillor’s Brenner, Cook, and Nagy, and the second, which I strongly suspect also involved a member of Council - every single complaint since then has come directly from the CAO or the Mayor, the two highest-ranking powerholders in the corporation. In fact, there are additional complaints from the CAO that were submitted even before she submitted this current one, but the Integrity Commissioner is deliberately holding them back - waiting to bring them forward after Monday’s vote, so they can hit me with yet another 90-day suspension. That’s not accountability. That’s strategic punishment - carefully staggered to keep me under continuous attack and financially crippled.
And what kicked it all off? A simple, honest statement I made months ago:
“If I were Mayor, I would remove the CAO, the City Solicitor, and several Directors - because corruption starts at the top. I’d tear down city hall, rebuild it from the ground up, and give it back to the people.”
That’s the truth - and it shook them. Because if I win the mayoral seat in October 2026, the CAO could lose her $250,000-a-year job. That’s over $4,500 a week. So ask yourself: are these complaints really about Code violations - or are they about protecting power, position, and
paycheques?
And let’s not pretend this is a fair process. The report actually says it’s “unfortunate” that Council can’t bar me from attending meetings, as if my very presence on the floor is something they’d eliminate if they had the legal authority. They use words like “sentencing” and
“deterrence,” as though this were a criminal courtroom and I were some repeat offender, not a duly elected official fulfilling her mandate, by being the voice of the people who voted for me, and even those who didn’t.
Even the Mayor himself has said, on the record, “She hasn’t learned her lesson” - like I’m a
disobedient child who needs to be punished into submission. That tells you everything you need to know about the mindset behind these votes. They don’t want accountability.
They want obedience.
Let me be clear: Council does not have to accept the recommendation of the Integrity Commissioner. The Municipal Act allows for alternatives: training, education, even community service. But they’ve never once considered a single other option. It’s always straight to the most extreme measure: take her pay. Why? Because that’s what hurts most.
And if Council votes in favour of this - knowing the report is flawed, knowing my response exists, knowing the bias behind these complaints - then every councillor who votes yes is complicit. It will say everything about their character, their cowardice, and their willingness to follow orders instead of doing what’s right.
This should concern every person in Pickering. If this council can financially destroy an elected official simply for telling the truth, what will they do to you when you speak up?
This is not democracy. This is dictatorship by majority vote. This is not discipline.
This is targeted political punishment.
I was elected to stand for the people. And no matter how many times they try to crush me, I will not back down.
Councillor Lisa Robinson “The People’s Councillor”
“Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head On And Rise Above It” - 2023 
June is Men’s Mental Health Month
June is Men’s Mental Health Month
By Dale Jodoin
It’s supposed to be a time to help men and boys feel brave enough to talk. To cry if they need to. To say, “I’m not okay,” and still feel like they matter.
But most people don’t even know it exists.
And the truth is, many men are struggling—but feel like they can’t say a word.
How Many Men Are There?
In Canada, there are more than 20 million men. In the United States, there are about 168 million men. In Europe, there are around 360 million men. That’s a lot of people.
That’s millions of fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, grandpas. But when it comes time to talk about their health—especially their mental health—something happens:
They’re forgotten.
It Starts Early
In schools, most teachers are women. About 65% of all teachers in Canada are female. That number’s even higher in elementary school.
This is not an attack on women—it’s a fact.
Boys grow up without male teachers or mentors. Most of them go through years of school without one man showing them how to be strong in the right way.
They’re told to “sit still,” “calm down,” and “stop being loud.” If they run around or get too excited, they get told they have problems.
Many get put on medicine just for acting like boys.
They’re not allowed to talk about how they feel. They’re told, “Be quiet. Don’t cry. Don’t complain.” Some boys even believe something is wrong with them just because they’re boys.
Then It Gets Worse
When boys become teenagers, the confusion grows.
They’re told being “manly” is bad. That it’s wrong to be strong or competitive. They start to think that being themselves is not okay. And if they speak up about feeling sad or lost, they get laughed at or called names.
In high school and college, many boys stop trying to date. They’re scared to talk to girls. They’re scared of being accused of something. They’re scared to even be near people sometimes.
They feel like being a man is dangerous or bad.
And when some men in college try to start clubs just for men—to talk and feel safe—they get shut down. People say those groups “hate women,” even if they don’t.
So the men go quiet again.
What About Fathers?
Here’s something wild.
Father’s Day is in June.
That’s during Men’s Mental Health Month. A time meant to honour fathers.
But instead of feeling honoured, many dads feel beaten down. They get taken away from their kids in court. They get told they don’t matter as much as moms. They lose jobs and homes. And nobody checks on their hearts.
Many boys grow up watching their dads get pushed around, or pushed away.
So what do those boys learn?
They learn not to trust the system. They learn that being a man means being alone.
No One is Attacking Women
Let’s be clear: this is not about taking anything from girls or women.
This is about boys and men having a space too.
If a group is just for girls, people say “good for them!” But when boys want a group just for them, they’re told it’s “not fair.”
That’s not equal.
All-boy clubs, spaces, and safe places are not wrong. They are needed.
It’s not about hate. It’s about healing. Boys need room to talk with other boys. They need male role models. They need men who’ve been through pain and made it out the other side. That doesn’t take away from anyone. It just gives boys something they’ve lost.
What We Can Do
So what’s the answer? Let’s start in schools.
Bring in male mentors. Real men. Police officers. Soldiers. Firefighters. Dads. Uncles. Coaches. Let them sit with the boys. Let them say, “You’re not broken. You’re just growing.”
Let’s build new boys’ clubs. No girls or women allowed. Not because we’re mean, but because boys need space. Real space. To talk. To laugh. To cry. To heal.
That’s not against equal rights. That is equal rights—for the boys.
Let’s make a new National Boys and Men’s Association. It can follow boys from middle school to college. Help them find friends. Help them find mentors. Help them find hope.
We used to have places like that.
They were called Boy Scouts and frat houses.
Now they’re called nothing.
It’s time to change that.
If We Don’t Act
If we don’t make space for boys to grow and talk, things will keep getting worse.
More young men will give up on dating. On love. On family. More will feel afraid to speak. More will stop trying.
And the saddest thing of all? Many will think it’s their fault.
But it’s not. It’s our fault—for staying quiet.
Let’s Be Brave
Let’s not whisper about this anymore.Let’s speak loud. Let’s speak clearly. Men’s Mental Health Month is not a joke. It’s not weak. It’s not something to hide.
It is brave. It is strong. It is needed.
And it should be taught in schools. Celebrated in towns.
Respected in the media. Supported in homes.
Let’s raise boys to be proud of being boys. Let’s show them how to be good men, not silent ones.
Because every boy deserves a hero.
And every man deserves a month where he’s not invisible.
Desjardins’ $7-Million Vacation-Pay Settlement Shakes Up an Everyday HR Practice
Friday, June 13, 2025
Know Your Numbers
Know Your Numbers
By Theresa Grant Real Estate columnist
I want to tell you about a story that was relayed to me through a friend. I came to know this by way of dinner conversation with this friend when I inquired about a mutual acquaintance. I was shocked but not surprised. We both knew this couple that were looking for a house to purchase. They had an agent and were actively looking. After seeing many houses this couple found a house they really loved so they put an offer on it. What happens when someone puts an offer on a house is, the listing agent sends out a message to anyone who has viewed the house either through an open house or a personal tour. The message is to let those people know that there has been an offer registered on that property in case they may have been mulling it over. It essentially brings everyone to the table. If you had walked through and were thinking about it, now was the time to make an offer and everyone gets a chance. It’s also how agents whip up bidding wars. That is exactly what happened in the case of this couple. They ended up losing the house to someone who bid higher than they could afford to go. This actually happened not once, but a couple of times. The couple grew somewhat despondent, thinking that they may never be able to purchase a house if this was the process with every offer. The couple were drawn to this beautiful house that had absolutely everything they wanted in their new home. They put a offer on the house knowing there would probably be at least one more coming in. They had a plan. When the agent came back to them and asked if they’d like to improve their offer, they said yes. They had launching into the bidding war. The problem being that they could only afford a certain number. They were just so desperate to get the house, they kept raising their offer. Eventually the agent informed them that they had won, and that the sellers were going to work with their offer. They were thrilled. Now came the real problem. While they had been approved for a certain dollar value in terms of the mortgage, the bank ordered an appraisal of the house. That is common in most cases. The appraisal came back far below the offer price on the house. That left the couple in a real bind. They could either come up with the difference between what the bank said the house was worth and what they had offered to pay for the house or, the sellers could sue them. This is a situation that played out during Covid-19 far too often as people got caught up in desperately trying to purchase something for fear they would not have an opportunity down the road. In this case the couple was able to come up with the difference, but in most cases the situation winds up in court. The whole process of house hunting can be an emotional roller coaster but my advise to everyone is to never panic, and always know your numbers.
The Endless #OpenToWork Banner Debate is Tiring
The Endless #OpenToWork Banner Debate is Tiring
By Nick Kossovan
A straightforward belief: A person's results speak for themselves. Making excuses for being a "victim of," "not having the same advantages as," or blaming your parents, the government, and the stars not being aligned doesn't change this. A person's results are influenced by how they respond to their circumstances, their actions—playing the hand they're dealt—and the amount of effort—strategic effort—they put forth.
When it comes to job search results, such as landing interviews, your results are a testament to the effectiveness of your job search strategy.
I'm sure you've noticed that many job seekers on LinkedIn harshly and venomously critique the job search strategies of other seekers. It's no one else's business how a job seeker conducts their job search, who ultimately must live with the results their job search strategy achieves. This supposed "concern" for what other job seekers are doing is why LinkedIn has become a digital hub for juvenile debates, the most prevalent being whether to use LinkedIn's #OpenToWork banner feature, adding a green circle frame to your LinkedIn profile picture to inform LinkedIn members you're seeking a new job.
My initial take: "Care about what other people think, and you will always be their prisoner." - Lao Tzu. Why do so many people give a f*ck about what others do on social media? An incessant need "to be right" (You're right, everyone else is wrong.) hinders personal growth. What prevents us from following the harmony principle: you do you, and I will do me? Basically, mind your own business!
My second take: Before LinkedIn became the dumpster fire it is today, where job seekers congregate to bash employers, essentially biting the hands they want to feed them, and self-proclaiming "experts" offering pseudo job search advice, followed by a pitch for their overpriced, never-guaranteed service, LinkedIn was the go-to platform for announcing you were looking for a new job. Why LinkedIn? LinkedIn was where your current and former colleagues, friends, hiring managers, and recruiters hung out. These days, many managers, directors, executives and even recruiters avoid LinkedIn. They no longer see LinkedIn's value or want to spend their time wading through the victim mentality drama that dominates the platform.
Once upon a time, you could concentrate all your job search efforts on LinkedIn. Today, LinkedIn should make up only a small part of your job search activities. The #OpenToWork banner is merely one tool in your job search toolkit. It's unlikely that the banner alone will significantly influence your job search, either positively or negatively; however, every little bit helps.
The #OpenToWork banner debate generally centres on whether the green banner makes a person seem "desperate." The banner is simply a sign that you're open (available) to opportunities, serving the same purpose as a red neon 'vacancy' sign in the window of a roadside motel, indicating to travellers that rooms are available. Is the owner of the roadside motel making it known they have rooms available "desperate"?
· If I owned a retail store, I'd display a sign that tells people what I sell.
· If I were selling my house, I would put a sign on my front lawn.
· If I were opening a new dental clinic, I would advertise on billboards.
· If I were looking for a job, I'd...
What LinkedIn's #OpenToWork doesn't do is help you establish your value proposition. It's your responsibility to demonstrate how you can contribute measurable value to an employer's bottom line. Hiring managers filter LinkedIn profiles by skills, experience, and other factors related to their search criteria. Filtering by "Open-To-Work" won't bring up LinkedIn profiles of those who possess the skills and expertise they're seeking. However, if your profile appears in an employer's or recruiter's search and you've toggled on the "Open to Work" setting, which is unrelated to the #OpenToWork photo frame and, while visible to everyone, isn't something recruiters and employers can search for, it makes sense, at least I think so, to contact you first since you're advertising that you're available and therefore are more likely to be open to discussing an opportunity than someone who's currently employed and will need to be persuaded to leave their current position.
Advertising your availability doesn't make you appear desperate; it removes ambiguity, making it easier for recruiters and employers to recognize candidates who are actively job searching. You're not pleading for a job; you're helping employers find you, which reflects a proactive mindset. I don't know any recruiter or employer who holds a candidate's proactive job search against them. However, it's crucial to recognize that being easy to find on LinkedIn and the impression a recruiter or hiring manager gets from your profile are two entirely separate influences on your job search. Unless your profile clearly states, using quantifying numbers, the value you've added to your previous employers, your #OpenToWork banner's effectiveness is almost nonexistent. One last note: if you're participating in the #OpenToWork banner debate, stop it! It's not your concern how others conduct their job search. Keep your focus on what you need to do to achieve your desired job search results, which speak for themselves.
_____________________________________________________
Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned corporate veteran, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. Send Nick your job search questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.
Conservative Party of Canada – success and failure
Conservative Party of Canada – success and failure
by Maj (ret’d) CORNELIU, CHISU, CD, PMSC
FEC, CET, P.Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East
As world affairs return focus to the geopolitical scene, and we have a strong minority Liberal Government for the fourth time in Canada, one may wonder why the Conservative Party was not able to form the current government. Since 2015 when PM Stephen Harper lost to the liberals, the Conservative Party has been unable to rise and form government.
We need to find the root causes of this situation and that is not so easy. However, we can analyze some factors that may go some way toward explaining this failure and suggest ways to potentially correct the situation and steer the Party towards future success.
In this last round, the Party lost a remarkable 27-point lead in opinion polls and failed to win an election for the fourth time in a row. While it gained seats and earned almost 42% of the popular vote - its highest share since the party was founded in 2003 - its leader, Pierre Poilievre, was voted out of the seat he has held for the past 20 years.
One of the main problems was the candidate selection process. Not only was it tainted by undue influences, but the Party was late in nominating candidates, thus reducing the time candidates had to get themselves known to their electorate. They had more than two years to prepare for the election before it was called. Furthermore, the Conservative Party does not seem to have been interested in choosing professionally qualified candidates. Instead, they selected candidates based on personal relationships with people close to the leader’s circle and staffers.
Much of the time, they overruled their own established rules, which was allowed by one toothless and apparently useless Conservative Party National Council. There were many cases of potential good and experienced candidates, who were denied the opportunity to be nominated. There were even situations where preferred candidates were nominated in new ridings even before a riding association was constituted.
Then came the resignation of Justin Trudeau on January 6 2025. After a short leadership contest organized by the Liberal Party Mark Carney was chosen as Leader and Prime Minister. An experienced professional with glowing qualifications, albeit non-political ones, he immediately called an election.
In the mean time, our neighbour to the South made some unfriendly gestures towards Canada, and the Conservative party leadership was slow to react. Most Canadians perceived this hesitancy in reacting to the American threats menacing our national existence as lack of courage and confidence.
The combination of all of these mistakes contributed to the sudden evaporation of the Party’s impressive lead in the polls built up over the Trudeau years, and the ultimate loss of the election.
The Conservatives have once again become the official opposition, and are stuck with a dilemma. What, if anything, should they do differently in the coming years, than they did before the election?
Do they head into the future with the same team of decision-makers who did not quite win? And, how do you answer that question when you don’t know what the future holds, given that one complaint against the current leader is that he didn’t respond effectively when the playing field changed?
As far as Pierre Poilievre is concerned, there’s nothing to decide. “We had the biggest vote count in our party’s history, the biggest increase in our party’s history, the biggest vote share since 1988 and we’re going to continue to work to get over the finish line,” he replied when asked. That argument is on offer from other Conservatives keen on moving past the vote that left them in second place once again.
Yes, Poilievre has done better than the previous leaders and Poilievre was not necessarily disliked by people; he was simply less liked than his opponent Mark Carney. In short order, Carney became the most positively viewed political leader in the country, generating positive impressions we have not seen since 2015.
In a campaign where trust and risk were key themes that made all the difference, Carney consistently outperformed Poilievre in leadership attributes such as trustworthiness, competence, and experience.
Their arrogance and inertia didn’t allow Pollievre’s, campaign staff, headed by Jenni Byrne, to see the shift of the electorate towards liberals in time to react effectively.
If they ever want to form the government, the Conservative Party needs to look at the lessons learned in the last campaign and needs to make some radical changes.
The beginning of these necessary changes starts with the Conservative Party's National Council, which is scheduled to meet on June 14 for its quarterly meeting. They will decide, among other issues, the timing and venue of the next policy convention.
So let us see if any changes are forthcoming in the Conservative party and its leader Pierre Poilievre. He appears to remain committed to key strategist and enforcer Jenni Byrne; a woman whose ability to make enemies is legendary and whose treatment of the Conservative caucus evokes thoughts of the Commissars in the soviet regime.
Indeed, whether or not Byrne keeps her job will be a telling sign of whether Poilievre’s support for change includes change on his own behalf.
In conclusion, having failed to react successfully to changed circumstances in the latest election, Conservatives need time to better prepare for the next one.
Let us hope that their leaders see the light sooner rather than later. It seems to me that a little hubris would not be out of place.
What do you think?
IN THIS MODERN AGE…
IN THIS MODERN AGE...
By Dale Jodoin
In this day and age, it’s become popular to point fingers at Boomers. You hear it everywhere—“They had it easy,” “They ruined the economy,” “They’re the problem.” But no one ever stops to ask what happens when seniors lose everything. When a lifetime of work, bills paid, children raised, and pride kept turns into nothing more than a shopping cart and a park bench. You don’t see many headlines about seniors becoming homeless. But it’s happening. Right now. Every day. Quietly. People in their 50s, 60s, even well into their 70s, are sleeping on sidewalks and shelter mats, not because they made bad choices—but because life, plain and simple, gave them the short end.
Here’s the part we don’t want to admit: the longer you work, the harder your body breaks. The wear and tear shows up in every joint. The knees swell. The hips grind. The spine stiffens. The hands curl with arthritis. And when the body gives out, the job usually goes right with it. Maybe they’re let go. Maybe they can’t physically keep up. Maybe their boss just wants someone younger. And once that paycheck stops, things fall apart fast. Rent is missed. Groceries are skipped. The car gets sold. The next thing you know, a man who spent forty years working is standing in a soup kitchen line wondering how he got here. But even then, even standing there with his life crumbling, he won’t ask for help. Because pride is the one thing he still has left.
That pride, the kind that built homes and raised families, becomes a curse when you’ve got nothing. It keeps seniors from reaching out. It keeps them quiet, curled up under a worn-out blanket in minus thirty weather, just trying to survive another night. Now picture this: your hips are gone, bone-on-bone. Your hands barely open. You haven’t slept right in weeks. You’re in a crowded shelter, surrounded by strangers. Some of them are angry, some violent. If you speak up, you might get beaten for it. If you say nothing, you might lose your only blanket. So you make yourself small. You find a corner. You try to disappear.
But not everyone in those shelters is cruel. Some of the young people in there—those who’ve also lost homes, jobs, families—see the older folks and step in. They give them a spot in line. They pass over a sandwich. They keep an eye out while the senior rests. These young ones don’t do it for thanks. They do it because they still understand what respect looks like, even in places where respect is usually long gone. And that matters. A lot.
Still, most seniors don’t make it to shelters. Many can’t. The beds are limited. The places are dangerous. Some have wheelchairs with dead batteries and no place to charge them. Others can’t walk the blocks to get there because their joints scream in pain. Health nurses are posted miles away, and they won’t come to the person—they expect the person to come to them. But how do you get there when you can’t even stand?
And what about money? The pensions supposed to come every month, right? But where do they send it? You don’t have an address when you’re living in a tent behind the strip mall. You don’t get phone calls when your battery’s dead and your charger got stolen. You fall through the cracks. Then you fall even further. Until you’re invisible. And most people just walk by, assuming the worst.
And even the little jobs they used to count on—like working part-time at Tim Hortons or McDonald’s—those are gone too. There was a time when an older person could stand behind a counter, move a little slower, greet customers with a smile, and still feel like they mattered. It wasn’t glamorous, but it gave them purpose and dignity. Now? Those spots are filled with foreign workers brought in on contracts, paid less, expected to move faster, and told not to question it. Seniors don’t even get looked at anymore. They’re too slow, too stiff, too “in the way.” So they get nothing. Not even a chance.
But you know what? Even then, the heart still beats. I’ve seen an old man with a limp and a split lip put himself between a junkie and his girlfriend because he couldn’t stand to see her hit again. He didn’t have a home, didn’t have clean socks, but he had enough strength to take a beating for a stranger. That’s who these men and women are. They’re not a problem. They’re the people who once built this country with their hands. And now they sit in doorways holding a paper cup they can barely grip. They don’t beg. They just ask. And even then, some can’t reach out to take the coin because arthritis has locked their hands shut.
Meanwhile, we’ve got months for everything now. Black History Month. Pride Month. Heritage days. Every culture gets recognition—and rightfully so. But where’s the month for seniors? Where’s the public funding to make sure they have warm food and a safe place to sleep? Where’s the respect? Because when they were younger, they had it. We gave it. But now? Most people look away, mutter something about pensions, or worse, joke about how they should just “get with the times.”
It’s sickening, really. These are the same people who fought wars, built roads, stocked shelves, cleaned schools, raised kids, ran farms, and did every job that younger folks now scoff at. “Let someone else do it,” the new attitude says. Well, these seniors were someone else. And they did it without complaint. So now that their hands can’t lift anymore and their legs barely carry them—what, they’re supposed to just disappear?
This isn’t just a sad story. It’s a warning. Because we’re all heading there. If we’re lucky, we grow old. And if we’re really lucky, we grow old with dignity. But that dignity is vanishing. Fast. And once it’s gone, good luck getting it back. You laugh at the elderly now—until you're them. You brush them off—until it’s you on the bus with no one offering a seat. The difference is, when they were young, they had respect for their elders. Now, they are the elders, and all they get is silence.
So what can we do? Start here. Don’t look away. If you see a senior on the street, don’t assume they’re an addict or a lost cause. Look again. That could be a retired carpenter, a grandmother, a war vet. Someone who paid rent for 45 years before one bad turn knocked them over. If they hold out a hand, don’t overthink it. Just help. Not because they asked—but because they shouldn’t have to.
The seniors of today were the workers, soldiers, parents, and builders of yesterday. Their pride was earned, not given. And while it may keep them quiet, it’s still there, holding them together, even when everything else has fallen apart. They are not a burden. They are not the past. They are us—just a few years ahead. And the way we treat them now is the exact way we’ll be treated later. So maybe it’s time we stop blaming them and start honouring them—before it’s too late.
Saturday, June 7, 2025
THE TOKEN SQUAD (The Oshawa Community C.D.E.I.C)
THE TOKEN SQUAD
(The Oshawa Community C.D.E.I.C)
B.A. Psychology
Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers
ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000
Published Columns in Canada and The United States
Excuse me for my ignorance.... but how are we all to be equal when we practice such discrimination though forced acceptance committees.
This week a online post read:
Share your voice to create a more inclusive and equitable Oshawa
The City of Oshawa is recruiting community representatives to join its Community Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Committee (C.D.E.I.C.).
The C.D.E.I.C. includes individuals from all backgrounds who are dedicated to creating a welcoming and inclusive environment for everyone. Whether you have experience in advocacy, community organizing, program or policy development, or simply a passion for social justice, we welcome your unique perspective and talents.
Are you kidding me... ‘create a more inclusive and equitable Oshawa’. The same Oshawa that is so discriminatory to the bone. The same Oshawa that favors one company over another. That discriminates against it’s own City Newspaper for not following the City political agenda.
The same City that patronizes supporters and all other are openly ignored and discriminated!!!
The City is not recruiting community representative to join no committee. What the City is recruiting is people with a chip on their shoulder that like to champion race. Tokens, that will align to the City political correctness agenda. There is no Diversity and Equity or Inclusion. Then why have a committee of racial tokens.
They have no real voice at council. They have no real agenda other than that of the City political interest. I feel for it’s members as they are being used due to the color of their skin.
We should not have to have a committee to treat each other with respect and dignity. There should be no governing body or committee forcing us to comply with politically correct agenda.
That in itself is oppressive and prejudice.
If anyone has a problem with that concept. It is simple. You can’t be accepted to anything if you keep claiming you are different and you expect those around you to make special provisions for you difference.
You can’t expect to be a diverse community when everyone wants to be accepted with special provisions and acknowledgment. True diversity comes through a united people respecting the difference but conforming to the national social status quo.
The city can’t expect ‘EQUITY’ when they openly practice such discrimination toward their own city newspaper for example. Imagine all the others they discriminate against of not such magnitude.
Bye definition Inclusion: the practice or policy of providing equal access to opportunities and resources. Really, Oshawa..... I feel for the members of this so called committee. They are being used as tokens for political gain.
And for those ignorant amongst us... blinded by hate. Put the pitch fork down. There is nothing prejudice for bringing forth questioning of the system. So save it. Educate yourself on the reality that is forcing you to believe something that is not true.
Stop letting them use you as a token for their gain.
I like to see how the (C.D.E.I.C.) will help me get through the City of Oshawa to support a local small Canadian business operated by a minority. Or do I not qualify for the same diversity, equity and inclusion?
I will await the CDEIC reply... waiting... waiting... waiting...waiting...waiting...waiting...
Thank God I am not going to hold my breath on hearing from this TOKEN committee.
Christians Told to Stay Quiet: Why Free Speech Feels One-Sided
Christians Told to Stay Quiet: Why Free Speech Feels
One-Sided
By Dale Jodoin
Across Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Europe, many Christians feel like they are being told to sit down, be quiet, and not speak their beliefs. People say, "You can go to church. You can pray. Just don’t talk about it in public."
That may sound fair to some. But for those who believe deeply in their faith, this is not freedom. It is silent. Christians are allowed to worship privately, but if they speak up on issues like assisted suicide or abortion, they are called far-right, hateful, or even dangerous. This double standard is hard to ignore.
In England, a woman was arrested for standing silently and praying near an abortion clinic. She didn’t block the entrance. She didn’t shout. She just stood there. The police said she was breaking a law. But how can silent prayer be a crime? This is not the freedom people fought for.
In Canada and the U.S., Christian charities run food banks, addiction centres, and shelters. They help anyone in need, no questions asked. But the Canadian government is now considering removing their charitable status. If that happens, it will cost the country millions. It would also hurt the poor, the hungry, and the homeless who rely on these programs. Is this about fairness, or about punishing Christians for their beliefs?
Christians are not the only ones facing problems. Today, Jewish people are being attacked more often in many countries. In the past, Christians were often the ones to speak up for them. But now, many Christians are afraid to speak at all. They worry about being called names or targeted for simply having a different view.
When people on the political left protest, they sometimes damage buildings or take over streets. Still, the media often says, "They are passionate. They care about justice." But when Christians hold a sign or speak at a peaceful rally, they are called bigots or extremists. That’s a double standard.
The government says we have free speech. But it doesn’t feel that way when one group is told to stay silent while another can say or do almost anything. Free speech means everyone should be able to share their views—even when we disagree.
Many people forget that most of the soldiers who fought in World War I and World War II were Christians. They believed in freedom, in God, and in standing for what was right. Today, those voices are fading. Fewer people stand up for their beliefs, especially if they are Christian. Some fear losing their jobs. Others fear attacks online. Some just feel alone.
Jesus once said, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." This meant that governments have power, but not all power. Our beliefs, our hearts, and our souls do not belong to the government. They belong to God. But today, it feels like the government wants everything—including your faith.
Christians do not want to control others. They want the same rights as everyone else. They want to help their neighbours, speak their beliefs, and live with honesty and love. They are not trying to hurt anyone. They are trying to live true to their faith.
If Canada takes away Christian charity rights, thousands of people will suffer. The homeless won’t get meals. Addicts won’t get support. Families in crisis will be left without help. These charities have been serving the country for decades. And now, they’re being told they might not be allowed to do so anymore.
This is not about one religion being better than another. It’s not about pushing faith on others. It’s about fairness. It’s about letting Christians speak, serve, and believe without fear.
We live in a time when people say they want equality. But real equality means protecting everyone’s voice—even the ones you don’t agree with. Christians are not perfect. No group is. But they deserve the right to speak without being punished.
The sad truth is many Christians now stay quiet. They go to church. They go home. They keep their faith private. But that’s not how it used to be. Christians used to speak for those who had no voice. Now, they are being told they have no right to speak at all.
So what happens next? Will we keep quiet out of fear? Or will we speak with kindness, with care, and with courage?
Christians are part of this country. They work hard, pay taxes, raise families, and help neighbours. They are not asking for special treatment. They are just asking to be heard. Isn’t that what free speech is really about?
Friday, May 30, 2025
World Fatigue: Blame the People
World Fatigue: Blame the People
By Dale Jodoin
There’s a quiet illness spreading across the Americas. It’s not the kind you can cure with a pill or vaccine. It’s called world fatigue, and it’s affecting millions of people—especially the regular, everyday folks who work, pay taxes, and try their best to live honest lives. World fatigue isn’t about being tired from work or chores. It’s a deep emotional tiredness. A kind of sadness mixed with frustration. It builds up every time you turn on the news or look at your bills. It’s the feeling of being blamed, day after day, for problems you didn’t create. And it’s wearing people down. Ask anyone around you, and they’ll tell you the same thing: “I’m just done. I don’t care anymore.” But they do care—they’re just overwhelmed. That’s world fatigue. And it’s growing.
So where is this coming from?
Part of it starts with the government and the media. They say they’re trying to inform us, but more and more, it feels like they’re trying to guilt us. We’re told that everything wrong in the world is somehow our fault. There are too many homeless people? It’s our fault. Is the planet changing? It's our fault. Minorities aren’t treated fairly? Again, our fault. The list goes on. The message is always the same: if you don’t feel bad, if you don’t do more, then you’re part of the problem.
And while it’s important to care about others, what about us? Who’s looking out for regular Canadians—people who are barely making it through the month? Who’s caring for the seniors, the young families, the people who never ask for much?
Instead, we’re called selfish. We’re told we’re the problem. But the real problem is this: people are burning out. Not because they don’t care, but because they’ve been pushed too far.
Even schools are becoming places of confusion. Kids don’t learn basic life skills anymore. Many can’t read a map, balance a budget, or understand how taxes work. Teachers say their hands are tied. They spend more time explaining political ideas and social movements than they do teaching reading, writing, and math. Our kids are growing up with strong opinions—but no tools to live in the real world. And again, who gets blamed when test scores drop? Parents. Taxpayers. Regular people.
One of the biggest signs of world fatigue is how cold people are becoming. Neighbours don’t talk. Families drift apart. People don’t wave hello anymore. It’s not that people have lost all compassion—it’s that they’re tired of always being told what to feel, who to support, what to say, and what to believe. And if you don’t follow along exactly, you’re labeled as hateful, old-fashioned, or worse. Even the gay community, which once stood for love and understanding, has now become a political symbol in many ways. Regular people aren’t anti-gay—they’re just tired of being told they’re bad people if they don’t cheer loud enough.
We used to give more to our neighbours, to strangers, to people in need. But now, everything costs so much that people are forced to pull back. Groceries have doubled. Rent has tripled. Hydro bills climb while wages stay the same. People aren’t being greedy. They’re in survival mode.
Meanwhile, the government sends billions to other countries. Billions more go to foreign aid, international programs, and global projects that have nothing to do with the average Canadian. By the time they finish giving it all away, there’s nothing left for us. Our roads crumble. Our hospitals are full. Our veterans sleep on the streets. And when we ask why, we’re told to be more generous. More kind. But what’s kind about ignoring your own people?
World fatigue shows up in our minds and bodies. People are more anxious, more depressed, and more isolated than ever before. Psychologists are starting to talk about it, even if the media doesn’t. They say the human brain can only take so much pressure, so much bad news, and so much guilt before it shuts down. That’s what’s happening now. People aren’t angry because they hate—they’re angry because they feel powerless. They’re tired of being told they’re the cause of all suffering in the world. They’re tired of politicians pointing fingers. They’re tired of media stories that divide instead of unite.
At the root of it all is one big truth: most people just want their lives back. They want to go to work, raise their kids, enjoy their weekends, and not feel like they’re under attack all the time. They don’t want to fight with neighbours. They don’t want to argue about politics. They don’t want to be called names just for speaking their mind.
They want peace. They want fairness. And they want someone to finally say, “We hear you. We see you. And we’re sorry.” But that hasn’t happened yet.
Instead, the government pushes more rules. More taxes. More lectures. And every time a new problem comes up, they say, “If only the people had done more.”
But we have done more. We’ve carried the weight for too long. We’ve stayed quiet. We’ve played along. Now we’re tired. Not because we’re cruel—but because we’re human
This is the truth about world fatigue. It’s not a lack of love—it’s too much heartbreak. It’s not that we stopped caring—it’s that no one cared for us. And it’s time we said it out loud.
We are not the enemy. We are not the problem. We are the people.
And we want our lives back.
Saturday, May 24, 2025
Job Seekers Stop Talking About Your Past. Employers Do Not Care!
Job Seekers Stop Talking About
Your Past. Employers Do Not Care!
By Nick Kossovan
We all know the adage, "What's done is done," which savvy hiring managers cite to themselves as a reminder that a candidate's past achievements do not guarantee future achievements. From experience, I'm now cognizant that while a candidate's past behaviour and results offer insight into their likely future actions, they aren't a foolproof predictor of performance, hence why I don't ask behavioural questions. Such questions complicate the hiring process, favour candidates who can easily conjure up stories—true or not—and don't reveal what I really want to know: how the candidate thinks and their career aspirations.
Most job seekers mistakenly position themselves by referring to their past achievements instead of painting an "I want to deliver the results you need" picture for their interviewer. An underused interview strategy is to not dwell on where you've been (water under the bridge); instead, talk about where you're going career-wise and how you'd like the employer to be part of your journey. I call this future-oriented anchoring a powerful narrative strategy that puts you in control of your career story.
Frame your trajectory in terms of where you're headed, not where you've been. When you only discuss your past, you anchor yourself to what you've already been paid for and the roles you've already had. However, when you talk with enthusiasm (key) about where you see yourself in the future, you create a positive 'future you" impression, influencing how your interviewer perceives your potential and value. Trying to gauge a candidate's potential is why interviewers often ask, "Where do you see yourself in five years?"
Instead of dismissing the 'five-year question' as a cliché, acknowledge its significance. Your response to this question, when answered with precision and backed by your current actions, can speak volumes about your ambition, work ethic, and if you have any sense of entitlement. A meticulous approach to answering the 'five-year question' will set you apart from other candidates.
"Five years from now, I see myself overseeing the social media team at a major film entertainment studio such as DaVille Studio. I'm currently pursuing a Digital Strategy and Communication Management certificate from the University of Toronto School of Continuing Studies. Additionally, I read as much as I can about social media management. I just finished The Art of Social Media: Power Tips for Power Users by Guy Kawasaki, a book advocating purposeful engagement, which I wholeheartedly agree with."
Since you know you'll likely be asked, "Where do you see yourself in five years?" there's no excuse not to have a prepared answer in advance, something along the lines of the
aforementioned, that’ll make your interviewer sit back and think to themselves, "[You] is serious about their career."
One of the most common complaints I hear from job seekers is, "Employers aren't seeing my potential!" Here's the thing: you can't expect employers to see (read: envision) your potential if you don't provide a narrative that conveys your potential. It's your responsibility to help employers recognize your potential and value instead of expecting them to perceive it magically.
Future-oriented positioning communicates to an employer that your most significant contributions lie ahead. Consider these two statements
1. "I successfully led our company-wide cloud migration, reducing costs substantially."
2. "I'm focused on enterprise-wide digital transformation that proactively, as opposed to reactively, prepares companies for the next decade of technological change. I want to be part of keeping Burns Industries ahead of the digital curve and deliver no less than an annual 30% cost savings due to adopting an early adoption approach."
The first statement merely reiterates what the interviewer already knows from your resume and LinkedIn profile; the second statement is much more compelling. The first statement limits your value to your past, while the second offers the interviewer insight into your potential future contributions to the company. A candidate's potential future value is a significant factor that employers consider when making hiring decisions, which highlights a harsh reality: a candidate's "future" (read: remaining working life) is one reason employers sometimes take a candidate's age into account when hiring.
Talking about your career aspirations and how you plan to get there is how you sell employers your potential and value. While employers need to know what you've accomplished, what is more important for an employer to know is how your experiences are influencing your future actions. I don't know a hiring manager who doesn't want to know—better yet, feel— whether a candidate is ambitious, proactive, and ready to take on challenges.
If you've executed a successful marketing campaign, don't just stop there. Expand on how that experience influences your vision for future campaigns. You might say, "The marketing campaign I led last year for Jojo's Ice Cream's newest flavour, Banana Karenina, taught me the importance of data-driven decisions. My goal is to leverage this insight to develop even more engaging strategies that boost brand loyalty."
When interviewing, don't just discuss your past or career aspirations; an interview isn't solely about you. Interviews are your opportunity, one that few job seekers capitalize on, to showcase your potential value-add, which, as I mentioned, is your responsibility to ensure your interviewer sees and feels.
___________________________________________________________________
DURHAM REGION TO ENTER INTO A GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT COLLABORATION WITH SCUGOG FIRST NATIONS
DURHAM REGION TO ENTER INTO A GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT
COLLABORATION WITH SCUGOG FIRST NATIONS
This week’s column will delve, briefly, into the complex realm of First Nations involvement in Canadian civic affairs, but first, I thought it best to provide some background as to the relationship between governments and Indigenous communities in Canada and within the province of Ontario before arriving at home base, being Durham Region.
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT has tripled its annual Indigenous spending, from $11 billion to over $32 billion, since The Trudeau Liberals took office in 2015. During that time, Canadian taxpayers have been made to support several significant settlements between the federal government and First Nations, totaling well over $57 billion.
The Province of Ontario has also settled claims with First Nations, paying out a total of $14.9 billion in compensation, and has reached 65 land claims and other agreements, settling for close to $11.1 billion up to March 2024. Significant funding has been committed to reforming First Nations Child and Family Services, including $8.5 billion in a landmark agreement to reform the program here in Ontario.
With regard to ongoing treaty negotiations, a proposed $10 billion settlement was reached to compensate for unpaid past annuities, with the Ontario government contributing $5 billion. Additionally, the Province has committed over $3 billion for loans, grants, and scholarships to encourage Indigenous participation and ownership in the mining sector, and also funds various programs and initiatives through Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
That’s a lot to take in, and the dollars involved are nothing less than staggering. But it doesn’t end there.
CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS have been filed, including a $1.1 billion suit by a northern Manitoba tribe, the Shamattawa First Nation, over access to clean drinking water which the federal government claims is the responsibility of the Indigenous communities.
Another class action lawsuit against Canada has been filed by the St. Theresa Point First Nation in Manitoba and Sandy Lake First Nation in northwestern Ontario for failing to provide adequate housing on First Nations land. That class action is seeking $5 billion in damages.
In 2023, an alliance of First Nations in northern Ontario argued they were owed upwards of $100 billion over certain aspects of a 173-year-old treaty.
Future such actions on the part of Canada’s indigenous population seem highly likely.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT AT COUNCILS AND ELSEWHERE have become the norm. The Region of Durham started incorporating land acknowledgments, which recognize the traditional territories of Indigenous peoples, in 2020, based on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report. Specifically, Pickering adopted a land acknowledgment statement in November 2020, and the Region of Durham began reading land acknowledgments at its meetings in January 2021.
The City of Oshawa also began incorporating a land acknowledgment statement, which is now delivered at the start of every city council meeting, every standing and advisory committee meeting, and has been mandated for delivery at every City event with opening ceremonies, such as the Tribute Communities Centre when fans gather together for the purpose of watching a hockey game.
The investments made by Canadians, both financial and ceremonial are beyond dispute, and are quite considerable.
MEMBERS OF DURHAM REGIONAL COUNCIL will be meeting on May 28th to consider a report by the Region’s ‘Chief’ Administrative Officer in which a bilateral agreement has been proposed in an effort to establish a “Government-to-Government Collaboration” between the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation and the Region of Durham.
Among the goals set out in the report is a plan for the Parties to meet quarterly, as well as the establishment of an ‘Indigenous advisory committee’ to ensure Indigenous input on a range of Regional initiatives. Further, there is a proposal to co-ordinate service delivery for what the report identifies as “investments in poverty prevention, housing solutions, and homelessness supports.” Finally, there are provisions to ensure an “accountable and transparent” decision-making process in order to serve community needs, while responsibly managing available resources.
As justification for these measures, reference is made to the 1923 Williams Treaty, which the report says resulted in the denial of rights and a “lack of proper compensation and additional lands.” The area encompassed by the Treaty includes lands that stretch from Lake Ontario's northern shore all the way to Lake Simcoe.
A 2018 Settlement Agreement with the Crown facilitates the addition of up to 11,000 acres to each of the seven First Nations in the area covered by the Williams Treaty.
KAWARTHA FIRST NATION which identifies itself as Member 62 of the ‘Alliance of Indigenous Nations’ recently issued a press release in which they state their intention of “actively reclaiming 15,000 square kilometres of unceded land and waters – an area roughly the size of Georgian Bay.” They assert the territory and its resources include The City of Kawartha Lakes, Minden and all of Durham Region.
GOVERNMENTS AT ALL LEVELS in this country appear ready to continue enacting policies with regard to ever-increasing claims for land, money, and oversight on the part of Canada’s indigenous population.
I wrote in a previous column about Olivia Chow, the Mayor of Toronto, having formed the opinion that the affairs of her community may be better served by adding an unelected indigenous member to serve on city council. A motion was brought forward by the Mayor that would see Toronto’s City Manager look into opportunities to ‘deepen meaningful representation of the Indigenous community in City decision-making… including through advisory bodies and other mechanisms.’ Those ‘other mechanisms’ are seen by many Toronto councillors as an attempt to add one or more members of council who would be appointed based on their ancestry, without having been given a mandate by the electors.
There is unquestionably plenty of evidence to show mistreatment of this country’s First Nations communities dating back to the arrival of the first Europeans, and there is certainly justification in expecting financial and other supports to continue up to and including the present day. To say otherwise is to deny history. At the same time, the sheer magnitude of the resources expected to be transferred in this ongoing effort is staggering, and in this columnist’s view, unsustainable.
Readers must judge for themselves what may be deemed as necessary or otherwise unreasonable in terms of where this is all going, and what it means for our nation, our culture, and our economy.
Is there a point at which one can say, enough is enough?
If Nothing Is Something. Then He Is An Accomplished Leader…
If Nothing Is Something.
Then He Is An Accomplished Leader...
B.A. Psychology
Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers
ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000
Published Columns in Canada and The United States
A recent quote from Mayor Carter of Oshawa regarding crime, drugs, and the homeless read, We’ve done everything we can: Oshawa mayor calls for aid from senior levels of government in the wake of a gun tragedy.
Well, if EVERYTHING is to be taken to mean NOTHING, then he is truly an accomplished NOTHING. This is exactly what he has done. All of the programs he has attempted to implement have ended up making matters worse. He cries that we don’t have the money to invest in our own people, that it is the Provinces' and the Feds' responsibility.
WRONG, Mr. Mayor. It is your responsibility to ensure that every citizen has a humane level of quality of life. People sleeping on our streets is not doing everything he can. People shooting up drugs in our parks and on our streets is not doing everything he can. Crime is at an all-time high, with people getting shot in our downtown park.
That is doing everything he can?
In his two terms, he has destroyed Oshawa. He has let GM walk out without any benefits for Oshawa, leaving our City in an environmental mess. Carter cries he has no money to help those living on the streets. Yet, he has 2 million dollars for personal and city staff security contracts. Yes, you are paying for his personal bodyguard. Why would he need a bodyguard if he is doing such a great job and the people appreciate him? He and his staff needed one due to the fact that Oshawa’s quality of life is at an all-time low. People are pissed off... But let’s continue on the premise that there is no money for programs that will assist the poor. Yet, there is 50 million to give to a local hockey team.
Or how about wasting 30 million on a park next to a park that no one visits (Lakeview Park next to Broadbent Park)? There is no money for the poor, but there is money for a 20 million dollar (Rotary Park) pool. An outdoor pool in Canada. Really! And we don’t have 20 million to fix the homeless problem?
What is more bothersome is the fact that the Mayor was a former homeless drug addict himself. One would have thought that he would understand the needs of those living on the streets.
No, I guess the drugs he used to be on fried his brain, as the quality of life for those living on our streets is getting worse.
Downtown businesses are closing at an alarming rate due to the fact that people do not want to park their cars downtown for fear of being attacked.
My question to Mr. Resilience: How do you sleep at night, knowing that fellow citizens are sleeping on the street?
I guess, knowing his character, he just shrugs his shoulders and makes some politically correct comment. It is shameful what is going on.
The problem can be solved with very little or no money. What you need is real leadership that can negotiate partnerships with industry, trade, and commerce to create real programs that will open the door to housing to accommodate their no-income needs. To work with the local hospital to have special units for anyone caught overdosing or using drugs... a treatment center paid by OHIP. But what am I saying?
We have an achieve NOTHING running a corporation, something that he is not qualified to do. We get what we get: despair, suffering, and a lot of resilience make-believe. Sad.
We keep voting for the status quo. We keep slipping in standards.
It is evident on the quality of our lives.
We need real change...Wake up, people.
The Sad Truth About Canada's Military: From Proud Force to Forgotten Joke
The Sad Truth About Canada's Military: From Proud Force to Forgotten Joke
By Dale Jodoin
There was a time when Canada’s military stood tall. Our soldiers were respected across the world. They were trained, ready, and proud to serve. But today, something has changed. Our military is no longer what it used to be. It’s been left to fall apart by the very governments that were supposed to protect it.
Today, many Canadians are starting to ask: Why did our leaders let this happen?
From One of the Best to a Shell of the Past
Canada once had a strong, trusted military. We played a big role in World War II, in peacekeeping missions, and in NATO. But now, we’re barely hanging on. Much of our military equipment is older than the people using it. Some of our tanks and vehicles date back to the Vietnam War era. Our planes are so old they need parts that are no longer made.
Instead of giving our troops the tools they need, governments—both Liberal and Conservative—have cut budgets, delayed upgrades, and let morale fall. It’s become a clown show, where the military is rolled out only for show on Canada Day or emergencies, but rarely respected or taken seriously the rest of the year.
Troops Are Leaving in Record Numbers
Our men and women in uniform are quitting. Not because they don’t love this country—but because they feel abandoned. The equipment is old. The pay is low. The training spaces are crumbling. New recruits, especially women, often leave within a year. Why? Because the military isn’t what it used to be. It doesn’t support them the way it should.
Many feel disrespected. They see that the government cares more about politics than protecting its people. That hurts. It tells our troops: “You don’t matter.”
And so, they leave.
Liberals Won’t Fight for This Country
Let’s be honest. A Liberal government has never shown the heart to fight fully for this country. They act like defence is someone else’s job. They’d rather put money into social programs and global issues, not national defence. They expect other countries—like the U.S.—to carry the weight for them.
When Canada went to Afghanistan, we didn’t even have the right gear. We had to borrow equipment from the United States. Later, we gave away some of our own outdated stuff to Ukraine—not because it was helpful, but because it was all we had. That’s embarrassing. A country as big and rich as ours should be able to supply its own military.
The NATO Joke
Canada is a member of NATO. That means we’re supposed to help defend not just ourselves, but our allies too. But let’s be real—every other NATO country sees us as the weak link. We don’t spend enough. We don’t send enough. We don’t prepare enough.
We’re a joke.
And every year we fall further behind. Countries half our size—like Poland or Finland—are building strong, modern forces. Meanwhile, Canada shrinks and shrinks.
The Will to Serve Is Still Here
But here’s the hopeful part: Canadians still want to serve. We have brave men and women from coast to coast who would give everything to defend this land. That includes new Canadians—immigrants—who would gladly join the military if it helped them earn citizenship.
Imagine a program where someone could earn full Canadian citizenship after 5 years of military service. The response would be massive. Thousands would sign up. We have the people. We just need leadership.
But that’s what we don’t have.
Our Fallen Soldiers Deserve Better
Every year, we honour the memory of the soldiers who gave their lives for Canada. But with each year, fewer and fewer people show up. Fewer parades. Fewer moments of silence. Fewer
stories told.
It’s like the government would rather forget.
But we won’t forget. We remember their sacrifice. And we know they would be ashamed of what the military has become.
The Rich Don’t Have to Care
In this new Canada, the people in charge don’t worry about defence. They have private security. Their kids don’t go to war. They live in safe homes, far away from any danger. So they don’t think about rebuilding the army. To them, the military is just another budget line.
But for the rest of us—for the families with someone in uniform—it’s personal.
We know the truth.
Other Countries Are Passing Us By
Here’s something scary: smaller countries now have more powerful militaries than Canada. Poland, Israel, South Korea—even Norway and Estonia—have more modern gear and better-trained troops.
Why? Because they take defence seriously. Canada does not. And until that changes, we’ll keep falling further behind.
Rebuilding Is Possible—But Will Anyone Try?
We can rebuild. It’s not too late. But we need a government with courage. One that understands that national defence matters. One that doesn’t treat the military like a circus act to be dragged out during disasters and then locked away again.
We need real investment in equipment. Real care for our troops. Real training and recruitment.
And most of all, real respect.
Because the people who defend this country deserve more than old trucks and broken promises. They deserve a country that believes in them.
Canada has some of the finest people in the world. Strong. Brave. Loyal. Willing to stand up and serve. But they need a reason to stay. They need leadership that doesn’t see them as leftovers or extras. They need support that lasts beyond one photo-op.
If we don’t act soon, we may not have a military left to fix. And when the next emergency comes—whether it’s war, natural disaster, or terrorist threat—Canada may not be ready.
And that, sadly, will be on us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)