Make to an Employer? What Difference Will You Make to an Employer?

What Difference Will You Make to an Employer? By Nick Kossovan It’s common knowledge that companies don't hire the most qualified candidates. Employers hire the person they believe will deliver the best value in exchange for their payroll cost. Since most job seekers know the above, I'm surprised that so few mention their Employee Value Proposition (EVP). Most job seekers list their education, skills, and experience without substantiating them and expect employers to determine whether they can benefit their company; hence, most resumes and LinkedIn profiles are just a list of opinions—borderline platitudes—that are meaningless and, therefore, have no value. Job seekers need to better explain, along with providing evidence, how they'll contribute to an employer's success. Employers don't hire opinions (read: talk is cheap); they hire results. You're not offering anything tangible when you claim: · I'm a great communicator. · I'm detail oriented. · I'm a team player. Tangible: · "At Global Dynamics, I held quarterly town hall meetings with my 22 sales reps, highlighting our accomplishments, identifying opportunity areas, and recognizing outstanding performers." · "For eight years, I managed Vandelay Industries IT department, overseeing a staff of 18 and a 12-million-dollar budget while coordinating cross-specialty projects. My strong attention to detail is why I never exceeded budget." · "While working at Cyberdyne Systems, I was part of the customer service team, consisting of nine of us, striving to improve our response time. Through collaboration and sharing of best practices, we reduced our average response time from 48 to 12 business hours, resulting in a 35% improvement in customer feedback ratings." These examples of tangible answers provide employers with what they most want to hear from candidates but rarely do; what value the candidate will bring to the company. Typically, job seekers present their skills, experience, and unsubstantiated opinions and expect recruiters and employers to figure out their value, which is a lazy practice. Getting hired isn't based on "I have an MBA in Marketing and Sales," "I've been a web designer for over 15 years," "I'm young, beautiful and energetic," blah, blah, blah. Likewise, being rejected isn't based on "I'm overqualified," "I'm too old," "I don't have enough education," blah, blah, blah. Getting hired depends entirely on showing employers that you can add value and substance to their company; that you'll serve a purpose. When you articulate a solid value offer, the "blah, blah, blah" doesn't matter. Job seekers focus too much on the "blah, blah, blah," and when not hired, they say, "It's not me, it's..." The biggest mistake I see job seekers make is focusing on the "blah, blah, blah"—their experience and education—believing this is what interests employers. Hiring managers are more interested in whether you can solve the problems the position exists to solve than in your education and experience. Not impressive: Education Impressive: A track record of achieving tangible results. You aren't who you say you are; you are what you do. If you want to be somebody who works hard, you have to actually work hard. If you want to be somebody who goes to the gym, you actually have to go to the gym. If you want to be a good friend, spouse, or colleague, you have to actually be a good friend, spouse, or colleague. Actions build reputations, not words. The biggest challenge job seekers face today is differentiating themselves. To stand out and be memorable, don't be like most job seekers, someone who's all talk and no action. Any recruiter or hiring manager will tell you that the job market is heavily populated with job seekers who talk themselves up, talk a "good game" about everything they can "supposedly" do, drop names, etc., but have nothing to show for it. More than ever, employers want to hear candidates offer a value proposition summarizing what value they bring. If you're looking for a low-hanging fruit method to differentiate yourself, do what job seekers hardly ever do and make a hard-to-ignore value proposition. 1. Increase sales: "Based on my experience managing Regina and Saskatoon for PharmaKorp, I'm confident that I can increase BioGen's sales by no less than 25% in Winnipeg and the surrounding area by the end of 2025." 2. Reduce cost: "During my 12 years as Taco Town's head of purchasing, I renegotiated contracts with key suppliers, resulting in 15% cost savings, saving the company over $450,000 annually. I know I can do the same for The Pasta House." 3. Increase customer satisfaction: "During my time at Globex Corporation, I established a systematic feedback mechanism that enabled customers to share their experiences. This led to targeted improvements, increasing our Net Promoter Score by 15 points. I can increase Dunder Mifflin's net promoter score." 4. Save time: "As Zap Delivery's dispatcher, I implemented advanced routing software that analyzed traffic patterns, reducing average delivery times by 20%. My implementation of this software at Froggy's Delivery can reduce your delivery times by at least 20%, if not more." If you want to achieve job search success as soon as possible, structure your job search with a single thread that's evident and consistent throughout your résumé, LinkedIn profile, cover letters and especially during interviews; clearly convey what difference you'll make to the employer. Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com

Looking for Loopholes

 Direct Answers
from Wayne & Tamara

Looking for Loopholes
Q My boyfriend and I had a great start to our relationship. We were medical students then. We trusted each other and were both clear that cheating is a dealbreaker for us.
     When we moved to different cities to start our specialty training, we saw each other less. Things got busier but we tried working things out, always thinking about the light at the end of the tunnel. Nonetheless, we felt really happy once we met.
     Two years ago, someone anonymously messaged me on a networking site saying my boyfriend was seeing someone else. There was no evidence, but I immediately called him and he denied it.
     One day, I went into paranoid mode and checked his phone while he was asleep. I saw flirty messages. The next morning I confronted him and asked who she was. He said they were coworkers and friends, and he was just helping her review. That was our first big argument.  Of course, I believed him. We even got engaged last year!
     Fast forward to three months before our wedding. Another person messaged me, this time with proof! Turns out, their relationship became physical both before and after he proposed to me.
     Bit by bit, he told me the truth. He admitted they were friends, part of a group who went out together and reviewed in his apartment, until the two of them were left alone. But he never once mentioned this group of friends to me. He said he was afraid I wouldn’t give my permission to hang out with them.
     He said the girl made a move and kissed him first, and his lust took over. After that, they had sex for a few more meetings until he realized what they were doing was wrong. He claims he ended it with the other woman three months ago and was going to tell me.
     My life crumbled. The person I thought I knew best and trusted most, suddenly became a stranger. We broke up and our wedding was canceled.
     A month and a half after D-day, we still communicate. He’s remorseful and readily answers my calls, even though he knows I just want answers.
     I will be flying to another country for 18 months of further training, while he’ll be staying in our home country for his training. He says he’ll fly to see me once he’s done and court me again. He says I’m the person he wants to live with in this lifetime.
     Can a person really change? Will I be able to get past this feeling of betrayal?
Heidi

A Heidi, a loophole is defined as an exemption that can be used to avoid the effect of a law. You and your boyfriend are both looking for a loophole.
     In this case, the law you want to avoid is a law of human nature.
     Your boyfriend’s first line of defense was to lie. His second line of defense was to blame you. (You wouldn’t approve of his group.) His third line of defense was to blame the other woman. (She started it.)
     If you stay with him, his final defense will be, “It couldn’t have been all that bad because Heidi stayed.”
     Of course it isn’t all that bad to him. He’s not the one betrayed. Proceeding as before is what a cheater wants because they are not the injured party. But if you had cheated on him, would he be so lenient on you? Of course not.
     His excuses are the archetypal responses of a cheater who is caught. It’s the classic pattern, but because you haven’t been through this before, you don’t recognize the pattern. Still, your gut told you to cancel the wedding.
     When he blamed the other woman, he admitted he can “fall prey” to any other woman. In trying to wriggle off the hook, he set the hook. He admitted, “I cannot control myself and you cannot trust me.”
     You were not paranoid when you checked his phone. You smelled gas and looked for the leak. That’s realism, not paranoia.
     Perhaps you’ve had to explain to a patient that they have a terminal disease. Now you’re on the other side of that. You must face that your relationship with this man is terminal.
    Reactions to cheating—the disgust, the outrage at the unfairness, the suspicion, the traumatic response—are not something a skillful counselor can talk you out of. They are part of your human nature.
     Counseling can be helpful in many areas, but it cannot overcome the basic needs built into us for trust, for justice, and for love.
     In a marriage, there can be no loopholes. Why? Because with people who belong together, none are needed.
 Wayne & Tamara  

write:  Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com

Afghanistan the new Vietnam

Afghanistan the new Vietnam by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East It seems that we have learned nothing from the past. The quick failure of Afghanistan is a repeat of the failure of the intervention in Vietnam. On April 29 1975 the evacuation of Saigon was very similar to the evacuation of Kabul in August 2021. After almost a half century and two generations, we are getting the same result. The problem in Afghanistan started with the Soviet invasion on Christmas day in 1979 and ended in mid February 1989 with the withdrawal of the Soviet troops. The Soviet Union intervened in support of the Afghan communist government in its conflict with anti-communist Muslim guerrillas. The aim of the Soviet operation was to prop up their new but faltering client state, headed by leader Babrak Karmal. However, Karmal was unable to attain significant popular support. Backed by the United States, the mujahideen rebellion grew, spreading to all parts of the country. The Soviets initially left the suppression of the rebellion to the Afghan army, but the latter was beset by mass desertions and remained largely ineffective throughout the war. The Afghan War quickly settled down into a stalemate, with more than 100,000 Soviet troops controlling the cities, larger towns, and major garrisons and the mujahideen moving with relative freedom throughout the countryside. Soviet troops tried to crush the insurgency by various tactics, but the guerrillas generally eluded their attacks. The Soviets then attempted to eliminate the mujahideen's civilian support by bombing and depopulating the rural areas. These tactics sparked a massive flight from the countryside; by 1982 some 2.8 million Afghans had sought asylum in Pakistan, and another 1.5 million had fled to Iran. The mujahideen were eventually able to neutralize Soviet air power through the use of shoulder-fired antiaircraft missiles supplied by the Soviet Union's Cold War adversary, the United States. Now back to the future. In 2021, after a presence for 20 years of US lead NATO troops including our Canadian Forces, the result is the same as the Soviets then experienced. The quick disintegration of the Afghan Army supposedly trained by the US and its NATO allies is the failure of an intervention ill conceived and ill managed with lives and resources lost to a cause that was unclear from the beginning. Saigon 1975 (United States), Kabul 1989 (Soviets), Kabul 2021 (US and NATO) seems that something went wrong in that part of the world and that the leaders of the western world just gloriously ignored the lessons of history. No one thought in 2021 that by mid-August the Taliban would be in Kabul. The Taliban's ability to link their cause to the very meaning of being Afghan, was a crucial factor in America's defeat. For Afghans, jihad, better translated as "resistance" or "struggle", has historically been a means of defense against oppression by outsiders, part of their endurance against invader after invader since the time of Alexander the Great. In more recent times, they have first exhausted, then repelled the British, the Soviets and now the Americans. The 'forever war' for Americans was also a long war for Canadians. Never mind that apparently the NATO decision to invoke, for the first time, the collective security provisions of Article Five - that an attack on one is an attack on all - was the initiative of then Canadian NATO ambassador David Wright. That decision launched the US-led NATO intervention that is only now concluding in a controlled disaster. As a result, more than 40,000 Canadian soldiers served in Afghanistan including myself in 2007, with 158 killed between 2001 and 2014. More came home injured or psychologically wounded, and the Canadian Armed Forces reported that as a follow up 191 veterans have taken their own lives since 2011. It is a sad story for generations of Afghani people and a sad result of the Canadian efforts to try to build a responsible society. The Afghan experience is a cautionary tale for future Canadian interventions. The western experience in Afghanistan will oblige policy-makers to think hard about future interventions. Without an appreciation of the history, culture, geography and local politics, we may win battles but we lose the war. As the evacuation of Afghani who worked and supported the Canadian Forces continue at this moment it is a time to reflect. Unlike during the Cold War when Canada was a leading middle power within one of two bounded geopolitical blocs, today it faces the prospect of becoming a marginal state in an integrated - yet pluralistic - international order of global scope. The new era and the rapidly evolving world calls for a Canadian foreign policy that requires a drastic change in attitude. We need to embrace pragmatism over ideology, and strategic thinking over the endless invocation of platitudes. Canada's second consecutive failure in our bid for a UN Security Council seat should make us rethink the notion that the world cares at all about who we are. We need to have qualified people in leadership positions, be proactive internationally, regain the edge we have lost in science and technology and develop expertise in diplomacy. It is time to start the Great Canadian Awakening both domestically and internationally!

Hey where are we going with this!

hey where are we going with this!

By Rosaldo Russo Allow me to introduce begin this column by thanking the newspaper for allowing me the opportunity and access to the press. Not to many if any allow an average person like me to tell the world what I see and think. My name is Rosaldo Russo. I came to this great country to make a better life for myself and my family. I thank Canada for everything it has allowed me to do. I worked construction all my life. I know the value of hard work and honesty. I remember as a boy my father always telling me to work hard and buy land. I remember days when I did not have enough to eat or go to work... but I did not wait for hand outs. I rounded up my pride my skill and my determination to succeed and went to work. In those days the only benefits we received was the fact we were employed. Before retiring I was the owner and operator of local material supply company that allowed me to retired without worry. Now that I have time to enjoy life. I look around me and have some concern for future generations. I see that the world is finished. Opportunities for our youth are hard and few. The type of hard work I use to put in is hard to see. It appears we all have become robots of a system that does not appreciate honesty and hard work. I remember my motto when it came to my customers. Customer satisfaction comes first. I made millions of the fact that I treated my clients with respect and courtesy. It appears that in today’s world. Customer satisfaction is gone. Look at anyone doing business with companies like Bell or Rogers. They are not about customer satisfaction and or service. These giants treat their customers like cattle. A number in a sea of millions. You do as they say or they cut you off. Where are we going here... How can this happen. I tell you how it is happening. We Canadian people have no choice. When we allow this giants to not fear loss of clients. They treat us like cattle. Their meaning of convenience cost us. They want to get paid at a particular date and in particular way. No credit card. No service. Mis a payment. You get cut off. How dot these companies stay in business. Come on people. Wake up. Unfortunately we can’t do nothing about it as there is no other choice. What is happening to our Canada that we allow these giants to openly rape us? If anything they should be charged for false advertising as they claim 1G speeds and no one gets them. Or 1000 channels that are all repetitive.

WHEN THERE IS ONLY ONE CHOICE IS IT STILL DEMOCRACY?

 WHEN THERE IS ONLY ONE CHOICE IS IT STILL DEMOCRACY?
By Joe Ingino
Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”   

   The news briefing read:    Prime Minister Justin Trudeau plans to call election for Sept. 20: sources - Trudeau aides have said for months that the ruling Liberals would push for a vote before the end of 2021, two years ahead of schedule.
  For the last 100 years we have been hiding behind false ideologies.  In North America we have been brought up to defend democracy and freedom at all costs.   Sadly many have fallen during wars in the name of the preservation of a political phantom.
Allow me to explain:  We the people all want the same.  To live free of persecution and to be able to support our families.  For our children to grow up in a society that offers opportunity based on achievements, not sexual preference, race and or ethnicity.
Democracy by definition means:  a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.   
Now the question on the table is.... If in a so called democracy there  is only one choice is that still democracy?
After all Communism by definition means: a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.
Now if we read this correctly on the first we have a choice as determined by our education/opportunity and stature in society.  On the latter you have no choice and are pigeon holed into a place in society.
  I do not know about you.  One thing both ‘isms’ share is that it is a government system to control/oppress the masses.  
In both cases you have no choice, as in democracy your choices are mandated by situation/environment/economic stature.  In Communism you are pigeon holed without any real perceived choice.  In part one could say that both “isms” are one of the same.  The only difference is the path taken to the same control.   Could this be why in many countries the traditional “isms” are failing.   Could it that this is the Chinese secret to economic success?   Unified greed.  Unified goal.  One choice in the name of national prosperity.
Now back to Canada.  In Canada we have three major political parties.  And about 30 other official unrecognized parties.   In a country with so much choice and so much freedom it appears that we may have choice but no real purpose in the selection we make.   No matter who wins.  Someone is always unhappy.   The left the right. Once in office it is business as usual.  Government in Canada has become nothing short of a marketing ploy.  People do not vote on values and principles.   On what is best for them.  Instead we as Canadians vote on nostalgia, popular thought and name recognition.   Our political system much like that in the United States is broken.   It is about greed and living through your term to possibly win again.   Now I must say that under the Liberal government during the pandemic.  Not one citizen can say they did nothing.  Sure they could have done more but that is the usual battle  cry.  With this said on has to wonder if the Conservatives had been in office if they had not done the same.   Unfortunately the conservative party in Canada has lost it’s way and in part it’s purpose. To much infighting.  The Liberals with the Trudeau flag will run with it for as long as they can.  Then we have the NDP.  A cloud in between two major storms.  Very unlikely.  Then there is the PPC proving that political ideology need change in Canada.  In Canada it appears we have no choice as no matter who we elect the same old same old will continue.  Is this democracy when we only have one choice in our wide selection?

WORTHLESS WORDS

WORTHLESS WORDS

By Joe Ingino

Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”

What is happening across the world? What an exciting and yet concerning times we are living through. Believe me I have heard this cry before.... Change is good. The future holds only one end and so on and so on. Depending on who you are talking with the outcome becomes more doom and gloom.

In reality our educational systems are making us more aware of our environments. Educating us on things that in the past we were ignorant of even having a thought about. It appears we are all experts in our own fields. To me our educational systems compounded with high tech. We are producing specialist instead of free thinkers. We are creating a social culture based on perceptual norms and not facts.

The rule of thumb appears to be, that the more people you can sway to believe a particular thought... That thought becomes reality. Even though irrational.

Take for example language.... All languages suffer from the same. We today are communicating at a much higher awareness level then ever before.

Take for example simple words like ‘LOVE’. If this basic common word can have so many uses and make so much impact on the human profile. Imagine words like Democracy, Equality.

Language in modern society is being used as a weapon to control the masses. Historically, governments and the church had that domain monopolized as one the other could not exists.

Our laws and our social/civic principles are all rooted in the 10 commandments. God is used as tool to force conformity amongst the masses. After all who wants to end up in Hell.

Unfortunately that card has been played once to many times and the game has been exposed to be nothing short of a words switch and bait type of card game.

People are today bringing to light the validity of the word of God. They question and defy law in the name of a right that in reality they do not have but have been fed the line that they do.

Our rights and freedoms are not mandated by anyone. No place does it say that this is a human right other than man saying so.

In reality we are nothing but animals. The human race. Governed by basic instincts and drives.

What is the difference between a drive and an instinct? As nouns the difference between drive and instinct is that drive is (senseid)self-motivation; ability coupled with ambition while instinct is a natural or inherent impulse or behaviour. Are these not what religion and government so tailored their laws and norms around. They like to give us the impression that we have the right while at the same time oppressing our natural impulse and keep us civil?

What is Freud's instinct theory?

Definition: Instinct. INSTINCT. A pre-lingual bodily impulse that drives our actions. Freud makes a distinction between instinct and the antithesis, conscious/unconscious; an instinct is pre-lingual and, so, can only be accessed by language, by an idea that represents the instinct.

Sigmund Freud, 1891. Freud, early in his studies, took the biological view that there are two basic instinctive forces governing life: self-preservation and reproduction.What is the flaw of instinct theory?

What is the flaw in instinct theory? Instincts don't explain behavior; they simply label it. Drive Reduction theory. A theory that states that some physiological need occurs that creates a state of tension which in turn motivates you to reduce the tension or satisfy the need.

If this stands true. Modern day norms can be said to be manipulated by the media and high tech. Could it be that world governments turn to the media in order to cast sublime messages of compliance in the future. But wait. Places like CNN and FOX are they not already doing this. God is being removed from most of society as any trace of history. Governments are still pushing the national pride line only to be denounced.

How is democracy to survive when love between man kind can’t be accomplished. Does this mean that we are looking at a world of misinformation or tailored information enforced by force disguised as law?

Wait in part it is today. Will the message remain the same. Just the delivery method change?

I remember growing up hearing of the many evil that the future would bring. From the end of time as the clock clicked midnight in 1999 to 2000 to the many religious devoted calling on followers to prepare in 2012.

The reality of existence is not based on events. I believe that our destiny has been predestined by our existence.

We are nothing but part of something much bigger.

We the human race create all these system to survive. To thrive in an environment that has limitation and an expiry date.

Much like our own lives. Many make it to 80. Not realizing that we sleep 40 of those years in the name of rest/health.

We communicate in part to oppress our rooted drives and instincts.

We go around professing based on confused opinion.

Even those that swear by science only to be proven to fault in their method.

I think the best thing we can take from life, society is fact that we are on this planet for a short time and during that time we must enjoy and live every moment as if it was our last.

Achieve and believe that you are not the one that is important. Your contributions to humanity are. Your compassion and understanding in the enlightenment of understanding who you really are. Worthless words or are they?

Tales from the war in Afghanistan

 

Tales from the war in Afghanistan
    by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East
   The military Canadian mission in Afghanistan officially ended in May 2014. There are many memories of it and we always will remember the sacrifices made by the 158 comrades fallen. As I was deployed in 2007 at the beginning of the most violent phase of the war I remember with pleasure working with the Afghani people on the Kandahar base.
The evolution of the situation in Afghanistan and the new political events there with the Taliban rising again it is important that we think about these people who helped our mission with dedication and do something for them and their families.
As Afghanistan is on the brink of descending into a civil war we should set out to rescue those Afghans who worked with Canada's diplomats and soldiers before Taliban assassins find them and kill them. We should have envisaged a prospective of this, when Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan's first president after 9/11, who was forever pleading with the Taliban, his "brothers," his fellow Pashtuns, his "sons of the soil," to talk peace. However, you cannot make peace with mass murderers, as history has repeatedly shown.
The surviving leaders of the resistance during the dark Taliban years warned loudly and often that any effort to reconcile with Mullah Omar's mass murderers would end in disaster and here we are.  Unfortunately their warning fell on deaf ears of politicians who might have done something about it. Down through the years as I followed the events after my deployment there among Afghans, the woolly idea of peace talks was dismissed time and again as a dangerous folly.
The Afghani diaspora have said so, as many Afghani associations and especially Afghani women's associations have expressed their deep concern about dealing with the Taliban for peace. Burhanuddin Rabbani, who headed up Afghanistan's High Council for Peace before the Taliban assassinated him, also said so.
But the unfortunate wisdom in the NATO capitals purported to know better as well as former U.S. president Barack Obama who thought he knew better. Even former President Donald Trump, thought that a peaceful reconciliation between Ashraf Ghani's tenuously democratic government in Kabul and the Taliban's Islamic Emirate, comfortably domiciled in Quetta, Pakistan would be possible.  So the US has bet on the wrong horse again, because the Taliban, supported covertly and sometimes quite openly by Pakistan, has taken a step by step operation to recover the lost territories and influence. Pakistan is a principal participating factor in this equation, but nobody seems to take this into consideration.
President Joe Biden proceeded into this fantasy world with a determination that anticipated a full American withdrawal by September 11 of this year, which quickly accelerated to the objective of having American troops out before the end of the summer, and all NATO forces out with them.
It is clear now that when the foreign forces leave the country without bringing about a positive change in the security, the situation will unfold as predicted. First there will be a civil war and regional instability, and then the Taliban will rule again.
It was known that training more than 300,000 Afghan soldiers and police was never going to be enough as the rule of the Taliban has already been extended over much of the country. The Taliban have taken control of most of Afghanistan's border posts and a bloody civil war is already in the offing.  So that is the reason that Ottawa should continue to set out to rescue those Afghans who worked with Canadians and a network of military veterans who were left behind after 2011 now that the Taliban are closing in.
In 2011, when the last Canadian troops finished their combat operations, a special federal program had allowed about 800 interpreters to emigrate and settle in Canada. But many were left behind.  As the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating at a rapid rate, the first planeload of Afghan refugees who supported the Canadian military mission in Afghanistan has arrived in Canada. It is the first of a number of flights that the government is promising to spirit refugees out of Afghanistan as the resurgent Taliban retakes control of some districts in the country following the withdrawal of American troops.
The government last month announced a special program to urgently resettle Afghans deemed to have been "integral" to the Canadian Armed Forces' mission, including interpreters, cooks, drivers, cleaners, construction workers, security guards and embassy staff, as well as members of their families. Applicants must still meet all the usual admissibility requirements, including security, criminal and health screenings.
In a statement last week, Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino, Foreign Affairs Minister Marc Garneau and Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said the government is working "around the clock" to identify eligible individuals. "The government has been seized with the urgency on the ground and is working as quickly as possible to resettle Afghan nationals who put themselves at great risk to support Canada's work in Afghanistan," the ministers said.
They said a team is on the ground in Afghanistan to help Afghans submit applications and provide the necessary documentation. "We are doing everything we can to get every Afghan refugee out as swiftly as possible but we recognize that the security situation can change rapidly."
Hoping for the best for the people who helped Canadians in Afghanistan, we should however never forget our fallen Canadians who fought there for democracy.

MICRO SOLUTION TO A MACRO PROBLEM

 MICRO SOLUTION TO A
MACRO PROBLEM
By Joe Ingino
Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”   

    Why is it that it appears that  our elected official will not do something without some sort of political gain.    This week The Region of Durham is partnering with Lakeridge Health, Ontario Tech University and Durham College on the Oshawa Micro-Housing Pilot Project.
  A 10 modular home complex smack in an already economically depressed area of Oshawa.   Does that sound to you like good planning.  It is obvious that in Oshawa we have a huge homeless problem. Not to mention all the folks living on the edge of economic bankruptcy as they can’t afford the exuberant rents landlords are asking now a day.
  The attempt to find a solution is nothing short of an insult to those that need homes now.  To me this is nothing but yet another attempt by the University to use the people of Oshawa for their benefit.
Durham Regional Chair John Henry says the partnership between the region and Lakeridge Health, Ontario Tech University and Durham College will support the success of the Oshawa Micro-Housing Pilot Project by ensuring participants have access to the supports and services they may need.
“No one should get left behind or fall through the cracks, and, by working collaboratively with our community partners, we can end chronic homelessness in Durham Region,” says Henry.
  He has to be kidding.   ‘NO ONE SHOULD BE LEFT BEHIND’.  Really.   So with 10 modules you will serve the need of the homeless?
When the need is 1000 time more to say the least... but wait let’s let the good self appointed academia treat our people like ginea pigs in order to extract research grants from the Feds.  
This insane micro solution does not even come close to alleviating the real Macro problem we are facing in Oshawa.   
The evaluation plan will be led by Dr. Tyler Frederick, associate professor at Ontario Tech University, who is partnering with the region in-kind to develop this plan and apply for research funding.
Here is the truth.  This is not about the poor of Oshawa. This is not about the homeless.  This is about the OTU looking for ways to bleed the government for grants.
  This is what I would do.  First we have to assure that whatever we do.  We do it with the notion of maintaining the integrity of the area and the property values around it.  I propose we take back our lands that GM claims to be theirs.   DID YOU KNOW THAT THE GM LANDS ARE THAT OF THE PEOPLE OF OSHAWA.   THE DEAL WAS THAT FOR AS LONG AS GM PRODUCED CARS.  THEY HAD A ONE DOLLAR A YEAR LEASE AS THE PROPERTIES WERE GIVEN TO THE CITY BY MCLAUGHLIN.   With this said. I as your City Mayor would take back the lands from GM.   Primarily the GM pain line.   Turn that whole area into 20-30 level complex and offer them scheduled rental amounts.  This eliminating the treatment of less fortunate as second class citizens.  Take the rent right out of their social service cheques.   Offer the opportunity to dig themselves out of poverty by helping them secure a proper way of living.  Standards would be set in order to assure the property would be kept up.  The current security force the City employ would be used to assure safety and security.  Those suffering from addiction or mental health issues would become by mandate awards of the hospital until such time as the hospital would take liability in the event of an episode at the stated facility.  As it stands... sure the hospital the university will partner up... they have nothing to loose and all to gain.  This Micro solution is an insult to those suffering the real Macro problem.

TO BE OR NOT TO BE ELECTIONS

 TO BE OR NOT TO BE ELECTIONS
    by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East

With political parties itching for an early election, the question is whether an election at this point will warrant the attention of the people. With the Covid pandemic in recess, Canadians are starting to focus on the recovery of the economic.
However, many factors beside political ambitions are in place, which will determine the call for elections sooner or later. Indicators are strong, now that Canada has a Governor General and the minority government is starting to believe strongly that that they might have a good chance of getting a majority. Supported by the Conservative opposition's lack of ideas and the NDP's further drift to the left, an early election call is very close to reality. Pollsters say there is a window this fall in which the Liberals could win a majority, as Canadians embrace the freedom of being vaccinated and the latest budget injects billions of dollars into the economy.
Of course the timing of the election is important, since the pandemic seems to be a highlight in the Liberal government's performance in the eyes of Canadians who are now naturally starting to shift their focus towards economic recovery. In fact, attention shifting to the economy will not favor the governing Liberals who have spent, and continue to spend recklessly. So the window for an election favorable for them seems to be now rather than later.
Earlier this month the Bank of Canada also painted an optimistic picture of growth heading into the second half of the year, before the economic storm which is bound to come, will hit.
Another potential source of trouble is that with cold weather approaching, instead of fading from peoples' minds, COVID-19 will come roaring back as more contagious virus variants spread.
This is happening in the United States and elsewhere.
Despite the variety of issues on the carpet, the ultimate decision to ask the Governor General for an early election will be with the Prime Minister. How this will play out remains to be seen. The long-standing tradition of the Governor General acceding to Canadian Prime Ministers' requests to dissolve Parliament will practically push Mary Simon to accept a plea from Justin Trudeau to call an election. However, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has asked Simon to refuse any requests from Trudeau that would send voters to the ballot box, noting that the fixed-election law states that every general election must be held on the third Monday of October four calendar years after the last one.
In a letter to the Governor General Singh has stated that the law allows for an early election if  the government has lost the confidence of the House, but the Trudeau government has won every confidence vote it has faced, including the one on the speech from the throne and the budget. As usual, the NDP leader is telling half truths, in that the prime minister has the right to ask the Governor General to call an early election under the Constitution and the fixed-election law brought in by the Harper government did not change that.
However, surprises during election campaigns are not uncommon, in fact they often happen.
Who is to say that there won't be distressing news on the pandemic or the economy just around the corner, or some other unknown issues of the day for that matter? Who's to say the polling, an increasingly hazardous enterprise, is accurate or that it won't change after the writ is dropped? There is one very big constant in Canadian political history that plays strongly to the Liberal advantage and should not be overlooked. They have been and they still are the natural governing party. Other things being relatively equal, they will win. The Liberals have been in power for 71 of the last 100 years, 31 of the last 50. They have emerged victorious in 25 elections, compared to the 18 Conservatives victories.
In their political orientation, Canadians are predominantly progressive. It is evident in almost every election, wherein the combined vote of centre-left parties easily surmounts that of the conservative vote. However, that might change in view of the rise in globalist trends that work against national interests. That might give a real chance to new political parties who are more nation oriented. With a weak Conservative weather vane leader and a party lacking in constructive ideas, there is a real possibility that the Liberals will win a majority right now. To stop the Liberals, they'll
need a series of fortuitous campaign surprises which are less likely to occur. Then, as expected,
the natural governing party, the Liberals, will win again. Modern history also shows roughly 10-year governing stretches for parties before fatigue sets in. The Trudeau Liberals have only been in power for six years, suggesting that voter fatigue likely won't put the Conservatives over the top this time. A loss or a poor showing in the upcoming election for the Conservatives will signal a crisis in the party similar to that of the Liberals' Dion, Ignatieff fiasco. With Scheer's shredding of conservative values, followed so closely by O'Toole erring left right and center, there is some danger of a similar scenario unfolding for the Conservative Party. Maybe it is a time for Canadians to look for new parties to support. Parties with more Canadian oriented than globalist views, such as the emerging Peoples Party of Canada. In conclusion, we seem to be gearing up for an early fall election. Do not forget to vote for what you believe in.
Till then, continue to have a good summer.

Final Curtain

 Final Curtain
  Q My girlfriend Jessie and I were together four years. Recently, she went on a two-week family holiday. During those two weeks, I went for a night out with my work colleagues. I got extremely drunk and kissed a girl from work.

     I felt guilty the next day, but a few days later I told my friends, who are also her friends, that I wanted to break up with her. I didn’t, but I was confused at the time.
     The following Saturday, she came home. We went out that night, and I was so confused I told her we should break up. She thought I was playing games.

     She left the pub, and I followed. I told her, “I met somebody else.” I shouldn’t have said it that way, as I did not meet another girl. I just kissed her. It was the biggest mistake of my life.
     Over the next few weeks I tried contacting Jessie, but she would not answer her phone or reply to my texts. In the end, sometimes after work I drank too much and sent her text messages, some of which I’m not proud of.

     Because I was hassling her, she changed her phone number. I met up with her a few weeks later, and she talked to me for 20 minutes. She said we may be friends again, but that will be it.
     I was with Jessie four years, and we had a great relationship. I know we had our arguments, but every couple has arguments. The problem is, sometimes when we went out drinking, I would humiliate her about her weight, her makeup, or something else.
     I know I screwed up. I used to mess with her clothes when we were out in the pub, for example, lifting up her skirt, but that’s just me messing around.
     I have seen her a few times since we broke up. I send her a letter every week begging or groveling to give me a second chance. I know the mistakes I made and would not make them again.

     When I called Jessie’s house last Saturday, she wasn’t in. She rang me 30 minutes later and asked why I was still writing to her. I asked, could we meet up for a coffee?, but she said she didn’t want to as I would cry into my coffee, which is what happened last time.

     She says she is happy, and if she went back with me, she would go backwards. She said the next time she sees me in the street, she might say hello or she might not.
My heart inside was crushed. Is there anything I can do to get Jessie back?
Robert

A Robert, how is this a mistake?
     You kissed a girl in a bar. Perhaps you had too much to drink, but you weren’t drunk when you told mutual friends you wanted to break up. And when you broke up with Jessie in a pub, you said you had someone else.

That’s three “mistakes” in a row. That shows intent.
What you didn’t tell us is what you were trying to gain. Did you want to make her jump through hoops to get you back? Were you paying her back for an imagined sleight? We don’t know.
But she did not come crawling back, you did not get makeup sex, and your plan went awry.

     Often with letters like yours, the letter writer thinks they could do better. But the way you went about it, made it impossible for her to take you back. It would make her the beggar in the relationship.

She did what we would have told her to do, had she written us. Don’t take calls from him; don’t let him whisper in your ear; don’t let him wheedle his way back in.
You say you were confused, but you staged such a convincing show it was believed by all. Now you claim it was only an act, but what a great act it was. The audience applauded wildly, and you took a curtain call.

     Your letter is about how you didn’t get what you wanted, not about how you injured her. All your sorry is for yourself. Why are you concealing why you did it? Because it is not something you can say out loud.
     This was the classic breakup intended to hurt, and she was the last to know. You sealed the deal with a kiss. If you can’t be honest with us, at least be honest with yourself.
Wayne & Tamara                                             write:  Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com

Our 2021 Civic Holiday

 

Our 2021 Civic Holiday
    by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East
   As we are approaching our Civic Holiday on August the 2nd let us think for a moment of relief from the pandemic blues. Let us celebrate with our family and friends in this beautiful but short Canadian summer. Let us be optimistic about our future.
The Civic Holiday is not a statutory holiday although it's a day off for many employees across the country. The Civic Holiday is commonly referred to as the August long weekend. It is probably the busiest day on highways as tens of thousands of families go camping and to cottages on that weekend.
So let us see a little bit of history of the Civic Holiday in Ontario. The origins of a holiday on the first Monday in August appear to date back to 1869 when Toronto City Council organized the first "day of recreation."
In Ontario, the first Monday of August is technically a municipal holiday, as it is not designated as an official statutory holiday by provincial legislation even thought various private member's bills have been introduced in the Ontario Legislature attempting to make it official, but none has passed to date.
As such, the holiday takes on different names and celebrates different subjects according to municipality. Many Ontario municipalities have chosen to honour a significant local person or organization in order to localize the celebration; when not given a local name (such as in Mississauga), the day is often generically referred to as "Civic Holiday" or "August Civic Holiday".
In 2008, the Ontario Legislature passed a law identifying the first of August as "Emancipation Day", as the British Parliament abolished slavery in the British Empire as of August 1, 1834. It still does not make it an official holiday, however.
The Civic Holiday is now known by one of a number of local appellations, including, among others:
-"Founders' Day" in Brantford (named in 1982): each year, the Brantford Heritage Committee submits a report to City Council with the name or organization that is to be recognized on that day.
-"Joseph Brant Day" in Burlington (): celebrating Joseph Brant, the Mohawk Chief who became known for his treaty negotiations and loyalty to the British.
-"James Cockburn Day" in Cobourg (1999): celebrating James Cockburn, one of the "fathers of Confederation".
-"John Galt Day" in Guelph (2006): celebrating John Galt, the Scottish novelist and businessman who founded the city.
-"George Hamilton Day" in Hamilton: celebrating George Hamilton, the eponymous founder of the city.
-"McLaughlin Day" in Oshawa (1983): celebrating Robert Samuel McLaughlin, who brought General Motors to Oshawa.
-"Colonel By Day" in Ottawa (1996): celebrating Colonel John By, who led the construction of the Rideau Canal and founded Bytown, which became the city of Ottawa.
-"Peter Robinson Day" in Peterborough: celebrating Peter Robinson
-"Alexander Mackenzie Day" in Sarnia (1998): celebrating Alexander Mackenzie, the 2nd Prime Minister of Canada.
-"Simcoe Day" in Toronto: celebrating John Graves Simcoe, the first Lieutenant-Governor of Upper Canada and the leading proponent of the Act Against Slavery.
-"Benjamin Vaughan Day" in Vaughan: celebrating the eponymous Benjamin Vaughan
Here in Durham Region in Oshawa let's have a look at who  Robert Samuel McLaughlin was.
Colonel Robert Samuel McLaughlin, CC ED CD (September 8, 1871 - January 6, 1972) was a Canadian businessman and philanthropist. He started the McLaughlin Motor Car Company in 1907, one of the first major automobile manufacturers in Canada, which evolved into General Motors of Canada.
McLaughlin was born in Enniskillen, near Bowmanville Ontario, to Robert McLaughlin and Mary Smith. As a young man, he worked briefly in a local hardware store, then in 1887 became an apprentice in his father's company, McLaughlin Carriage Works, which had opened in 1867. At one time it was the largest manufacturer of horse-drawn buggies and sleighs in the British Empire.
In 1892, McLaughlin and his brother George become junior partners in their father's company.  In 1898, he married Adelaide Mowbray.
He started producing the McLaughlin-Buick Model F with engines bought from William C. Durant of Buick, incorporating the McLaughlin Motor Car Company on November 20, 1907. In its first full year of operation, 1908, it produced 154 cars. By 1910 he was a director of General Motors. He sold his Chevrolet company stock in 1918, becoming president of General Motors of Canada, which continued to sell cars under the McLaughlin-Buick brand until 1942.
Though he retired in 1945, he remained chairman of the board until his death and remained on the board of General Motors until the early 1960s. He was replaced by Royal Bank of Canada president Earle McLaughlin, his first cousin once removed.
His older brother, chemist John J. McLaughlin (1865-1914), founded the Canada Dry company. After his brother's death in 1914, McLaughlin became president of this company until it was sold around 1923. The longest continuously-serving colonel in the history of the Canadian Forces, McLaughlin was appointed as honorary lieutenant-colonel of the 34th Ontario Regiment (1921 - 1931), when he was appointed as honorary colonel of the same unit, later designated as The Ontario Regiment (RCAC), a reserve armored regiment based in Oshawa. Affectionately known as "Colonel Sam", McLaughlin served as honorary colonel until 1967.
In 1967, McLaughlin was appointed a Companion of the Order of Canada.
A great Canadian, McLaughlin made a lot of charitable contributions.
In 1951, he established the McLaughlin Foundation which, donated nearly $200 million between 1953 and 2003 to the University of Toronto and other educational causes, including the McLaughlin Planetarium at the Royal Ontario Museum.
At Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, the university's Mechanical Engineering Department is housed in McLaughlin Hall, his donation in 1948. McLaughlin Hall in Queen's University's John Deutsch University Centre is also named for him. Queen's honored his wife, Adelaide McLaughlin, in 1957, by naming the women's residence Adelaide Hall.
In 1947 McLaughlin and his wife donated land for "Camp Samac", a Boy Scout camp on the outskirts of Oshawa.
McLaughlin donated $1 million to the 1968 library building at the University of Guelph, which bears his name.
He provided partial funding to build McLaughlin College at York University in Toronto, opened in 1968. In recognition for his contributions to St. Andrew's College in Aurora, Ontario, McLaughlin Hall is named after him, which he unveiled in 1971 at the age of 99.
He endowed the Regimental Foundation of the Ontario Regiment (RCAC) and quietly paid the salaries of some of the regiment's soldiers during times of severely curtailed government funding. McLaughlin House at the Lester B. Pearson United World College of the Pacific also bears his name.
He gave generously to the art community, donating paintings from his personal collection. Among other gifts, he gave Lawren Harris`s Pic Island, Arthur Lismer`s Bright Land, and Emily Carr`s Old Tree at Dusk to the McMichael Canadian Art Collection in Kleinburg.
So get ready to celebrate but remember that here in Durham region in Oshawa, we have history to tell. Have a safe celebration.

CAN WE AFFORD TO GIVE AWAY 17.7 MILLION?

 

CAN WE AFFORD TO GIVE AWAY
17.7 MILLION?
By Joe Ingino
Editor/Publisher

“I live a dream in a nightmare world”   

    I don’t know about you.   But I keep seeing and hearing of all the people undergoing economic hardships across the region.  Stores keep closing, people keep loosing jobs, mortgages and hope.  
  It seems as the gloom and doom cloud can’t be shaken.   On top of that we could be yet be facing another wave of the Delta variance.
How much more can the people of Canada take.   I must admit that the Federal government has been quick to respond by extending numerous plans to assure everyone in need gets some sort of assistance.
Sadly many people I talk to do not know that they are entitled to apply or for that matter even know how to.
Others get entangled in red tape only to become discouraged and given up.
This week a news item came across my desk.  It read:  Canada donating 17.7M AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines amid global disparities.
Canada continues to rapidly ramp up vaccinations against COVID-19 but there remain stark inequities in vaccine access globally, the WHO has warned.
  Now don’t get me wrong.  Nothing wrong with being generous and giving.... but should we not be thinking about our people first?
We have a record number of homeless people walking our streets.  We have a record number of people loosing their homes, jobs.   Should we not invest that money in our people?
I know the cry.  The government is doing all they can to assure people do not go without.
I can respect that.  My question is then why the need to give away 17.7 million that could go as a top up to those in need?
This covid thing is not over.  The number are being managed but the threat is still very real.   
I must acknowledge that in th covid model it appears that we found a magic bullet with possible two outcomes.  On the one.  It appears to have an impact on the spread of the virus.  On the other we are yet to uncover the true and real side ramifications of all jumping in front of the silver bullet.
 Will it hit its mark or will it end up killing us.   Did we just prolonged life only to come to realize that the cure is worst than the infection.
The theorist amongst us are already ramping up all kinds of things from the coincidence of the G5 network implemented across north America at the same time as everyone is being forced through fear of illness to vaccinate with nano-tech activator as inhibitors.   The reality of it is.  That we need to assure we Canadians lives quality of life is preserved and that before we give away any money in the name of charity or humanity to other nations, that we Canadians are taken care.

Challenging times for Canada's democracy

 Challenging times for Canada's democracy
    by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU E. CHISU, CD, PMSC,
FEC, CET, P. Eng.
Former Member of Parliament
Pickering-Scarborough East
  The latest accelerating events connected to the residential school generated crisis, amplified by toppling and destroying statues of historical figures and the churches burned down represent a new trend on the political landscape of Canada. All these atrocities are happening with the political establishment closing their eyes to recent events and the total absence of law enforcement.  How is democracy served or protected by the selective application of democratic rights already curtailed by the erratically established Covid -19 pandemic legislation?
Our nationhood is under threat by recent events. Instead of uniting the nation the political establishment is dividing it in pursuit of selfish and power hungry personal interests. They are interested only in keeping power at all costs.
The globalist declaration of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau that: "Canada has no core identity" is already infamous.   
As a reaction of this declaration many of the political establishment found it imaginative, evocative, even dangerous.  It was, in effect, telling the world that the Canada everyone thought they knew was going through a transformation. What kind of transformation is the big question.
It's clear we are in a dangerous moment, one where a new direction is entirely possible under a reincarnation of newly found Marxist values and where going back to learning from the past seems unacceptable.  
Trudeau informed the New York Times that this "new" country is no longer defined by our history or European national origins but by a "pan-cultural heritage," he ran the risk of overlooking much of what made this country one of the most respected in the world and the results were seen recently in events that rapidly evolved in a divided nation.
We might be heading in a new direction, but where we have come from, despite our many failures, has helped prepare us to preserve a society for inclusion and respect for our fellow Canadians.
We have been more open than closed and more accommodating than militant and the world noticed and respected it.
Recently the term "identity" has morphed into numerous meanings, including "identity politics," and the outcome is more dangerous and dividing than tried to be defined.  
The ideals that once held this country together are now under increased threat.  It's not wrong or unpatriotic to ask how Canada will fare with so many groups seeking recognition and redress, all seeking action at the same time. Is this new identity politics going to push us past the national breaking point?
The main political parties in Canada, with the exception of the emerging Peoples Party of Canada, seem to embrace this dangerous threat to democracy. There is a general acknowledgement that the issues surrounding the residential schools, gender inequities, the casual acceptance of racism, even the trivial manner in which we treat the nation's poor can no longer be accepted and have tainted the very history we have come to accept.  But this does not mean that we should extirpate our history instead of learning from it.
All of these artificially amplified injustices actually give support to Trudeau's claim that Canada is now a "post-national" state, a globalist one, one seeking to transcend its history and supersede the nation-states.  But that sounds more like we are trying to run away from our history rather than accommodating these new directions with our abiding long applied resiliencies.
Until recently, our political world was viewed as a giant struggle between the left and the right.  The left concentrated on wealth disbursal, meaningful work, equity and equality, and democratic reform.  The right rallied around smaller government, fewer restrictions in the marketplace and moral rigour in decision-making.
Suddenly, a new concept has entered the picture, seeking to eliminate past experiences and rejecting the very foundation of this nation called Canada.
Identity is now the great pursuit of the moment and dominates the thoughts of people seeking something different, something more equal.  It makes some sense, given that all these identity-driven forces were most often ignored in our past pursuits of prosperity and respect.  
The confluence of greater indigenous experience and wisdom integrated in our future evolution can only be a good thing since they are a constituent part of our nation. Greater recognition of women's rights and proper place in the workforce is long overdue, as is the acknowledgement that the discrimination of various types that had been present in our past need not be embedded in our future.
But the fact remains that we should remain a nation a special one where we continue to live in peace and prosperity.  We have a story to tell and a world in which to tell it. Should we become a land of opposing factions seeking recognition, we can risk being motivated more by anger and pride than reason and compromise.
The Canadian experience, while never complete, can be torn apart in a time of ill motivated political ambitions. So it is time to have an intelligent political management in paying due respect from all Canadians towards each other if we are to navigate the unchartered waters ahead.
The recent identity politics is becoming more and more a disturbing and manipulative element in a democracy with its competing ideas.  It remains every group's right to seek equal recognition for the groups that have been neglected in our history. However great care must be taken that such a desire not morph into a sense of superiority and ruin the democratic pursuit of our nation.
Democracy has been improved and enhanced the more egalitarian it became which required those in privilege and power to open the access to such things to the marginalized.  But it can become toxic when those seeking inclusion then seek power to delegitimize the state.
So for of the potential challenges we live at this moment in time and, if we are not paying attention as citizens, it can quickly become one of the most dangerous moments in our country's journey, where our hegemony declines and our divisions rule our actions.
What do you think?

The Foibles of Money

 Direct Answers
from Wayne & Tamara

The Foibles of Money
Q I am a career banker with a nice little sideline as an investor. My style is not high risk with bitcoins, penny stocks, and the like. I try to buy the best companies when they temporarily stumble.
 I try to advise others. When my aunt would call and ask, “What do you have for me, son?” I was able to help her make some money.  I have not had results that were as good with my best friend. I was helping him run some money, and at the one-year mark, he had a 95% return; $8,000 turned into $15,600. His portfolio was doing better than mine on a percentage basis, because he was far more aggressive and less risk averse than me. Even so, we could have done better if he had listened to me.  The thing is I advised him to sell one position, or at least one part of it, in which he had a big gain. He and his wife love the industry and she would not let him.

 This stock is down. One stock he bought without us talking, and another he bought against my advice. Now, the $15,600 is down to $13,800. At one time, he was holding cash from a stock sold for a gain. I said sit tight until we find a bargain, but that cash was burning a hole in his pocket. Why?  I advised my younger cousin to buy a pot stock that I have a huge gain in. He researched the industry, and told me he bought another one just like mine. But he lost his ass on the one that was “like mine”. Why? It reminds me of an old episode of The Mary Tyler Moore Show (showing my age here). Lou Grant was losing on football bets with his bookie. Then, he began winning using Ted Baxter’s system but it wasn’t any fun anymore.

Lou then bet his entire  bankroll on the Super Bowl, even though Ted’s system did not allow for any bet on the Super Bowl. Lou lost but was happy. It was fun again.
What part of human nature is this? Is it just a guy thing, because my aunt did not have it?
Cameron

A Cameron, let’s talk about your aunt first. Her attitude is, “Money is good, it makes my life more secure, and listening to Cameron is way easier than laying bricks for a living.” She doesn’t care if she is betting on the guy with the hot hand or betting on a guy smarter than the rest. She just wants the money. We would call her a realist.

Then there are your cousin and your best friend. We have a general comment about them. When you realize people usually act from their most base nature, it becomes easier to understand their behavior. Your cousin wants a sense of mastery. He wants to control something. Investing successfully will give him that feeling, the feeling of a do-it-yourself project done well.
He’s also troubled by FOMO, the fear of missing out.  “Cameron had fantastic success betting on a Canadian marijuana stock. How hard can it be? The sector is booming. I don’t need due diligence. I simply need to throw my hat in the ring so I don’t miss out.  “But I want my own pick, so when I get my big win, it isn’t due to Cameron.”

     In addition, if he felt you were bragging, he feels envy (he wants to possess what you possess), threatened (my mastery is in doubt), and competition (I’ll show that smarty pants Cameron). Then there’s your best friend; money burns a hole in his pocket. That sounds like the itch of the gambler. It’s the excitement! Your friend and his wife “have a good feeling” about an industry, the way some people have a good feeling about “sectors” in a casino. They prefer poker to blackjack or craps to slots. Much of their preference is simply good, old-fashioned greed. They want to take advantage of your advice, but they still want more. However, your best friend and his wife haven’t made any money yet. Their chips are still on the table. It won’t be money until they cash out.   
  And honestly, if you examine your own motives, you feel possessive about their winnings, as if they are losing your winnings. What would you like? You’d like your little ducklings to follow you and thank you for their success.
     People are funny about money. Some are more likely to tell you about their sexual life than about how much money they make. When it involves money…money often doesn’t have a bonding effect on relationships, it has a breaking the bond effect.

     What’s in it for others in giving you credit? For most people, the answer is nothing. Your guidance becomes their savvy decision to invest their money.

     That goes back to our first premise. When you realize people usually act from their most base nature, it becomes easier to understand human behavior.
Wayne & Tamara                                             write:  Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com

Addressing Your Cover Letter to the Right Person Is Vital

 

Addressing Your Cover Letter to the
Right Person Is Vital
By Nick Kossovan
    A well-written cover letter, which is non-negotiable if you're a serious job hunter, starts with your header and a greeting an actual person.
Most job postings don't indicate a name to whom you send your resume. Application instructions are usually along the lines of clicking on an 'Apply Now' button or a website link. Ever-increasingly rare: "Please email your resume and cover letter to Gia at hr@tonyspizza.ca."
Personally, I think employers purposefully omit the hiring manager's name/contact information. They want to see which candidates have the hunger and ingenuity to find the hiring manager or department head's name, office address and contact information. With the Internet, especially LinkedIn, you don't require Sherlock Holmes investigative abilities to locate such information. Therefore, not doing so shows laziness and is an easy way to have applicants self-select themselves.
A clear signal of an employer wanting to have candidates self-select is when the posting mentions to whom the role reports to (Reporting to Chief Revenue Officer). This is an indicator to see which applicants will make the effort to find the person's name/contact information and reach out to who may be their future boss.
Look at hiring from the employer's view. Say a nation-wide furniture retailer posts on LinkedIn, Indeed and Glassdoor a Merchandise Planner position. The posting instructs applicants to apply on the company's website. Conservatively, given today's job market, this posting will attract between 400 to 600 applicants. What percentage of applicants do you figure will include a well-written cover letter, even if instructed to do so?  
Sadly, lazy job searching is common and what clogs up employers hiring pipelines.
As I've mentioned in previous columns, but worth repeating, you need to maximize your job-hunting activities by making sure you're stacking the odds of getting a "yes" to move forward in the hiring process in your favour.
There have been times when I posted a job online, instructing to apply through the company's website, and received around 400 applicants. Those applicants who reached out to me got my attention, and I gave their resumes a serious read. Unless detrimentally unqualified, those who reached out to me got an interview invitation - they'd demonstrated initiative, which I value in an employee. I wouldn't be hazarding a guess if I stated, "Employers like to see initiative."
With the above, the head-scratcher is I always mention my name and job title in my job postings, yet still few contact me directly which makes my which applicants to invite for an interview decision much more manageable.
NOTE: Always follow the employer's application instructions. After having applied accordingly, then reach out to the hiring manager. In your cover letter, indicate you've applied (I applied to the Principal Technical Analyst position posted on Glassdoor. This role speaks directly to my skill set and experience. I hope to be part of the hiring process, thus why I'm reaching out to you directly.) and then move into your cover letter.
You want your cover letter's heading/greeting to be:
Ms. Betty Cooper
Vice President Marketing
Gringotts Wizarding Bank
4305 Pine Street
Breton, AB T0C 0P0
Re: Customer Service Representative Opening [Ref. ID: CS300-Breton]
Dear Ms. Cooper:
Finding the hiring manager or department head's name, office address, and contact information is usually simply a matter of entering the company name and some keywords (Acme Inc., head of operations, sales) into the search bar of LinkedIn (start here). Then, after you've tried Google, try various search engines such as Yahoo, Bing, DuckDuckGo and Ask.com. Respective search engines use different search algorithms; therefore, a search of "Adrian Dobrow, Director of Finance, MomCorp" on Yahoo will yield different results than Ask.com.
TIP: When emailing your resume, your cover letter needs to be in the body of your email, not as an attachment. The purpose of your cover letter is to get the reader to read your resume. Having your cover letter in your email body will significantly increase the odds that your cover letter being read and giving it a chance to do its job.
Next week I move onto how to craft the first paragraph (introduction) of your cover letter by grabbing the reader's attention with 2 - 3 of your top achievements.
Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Prison of Her Own Making

 Direct Answers
from Wayne & Tamara

Prison of Her Own Making
  Q I’ve never tried this before, but what the hell. A few years ago my husband of 10 years left me out of the blue. It was awful for my sons and me, though it was not a happy marriage. He was verbally and mentally abusive, and I went into an angry shell. I changed from the happy person I once was into this monster. When he left I realized it was the best thing he could have done for me. It was hard to meet people, so I tried online dating. I met two great guys. I let dating go on way too long because I couldn’t let go of either one. It was selfish of me and wrong, but I never wanted to hurt anyone.
Well, they found out. One left, never to be seen again. One stayed, but with a price. It has been over a year now and he won’t let it drop. He says he will never trust me enough to marry me. But it’s also like I am carrying his cross for the rest of the girls who screwed him over.
 I keep jumping through hoops, and nothing seems to work for him or please him. He is a hard man to deal with. He is a cop and has an awful mouth. Most of the time, it is all his way or nothing at all.
 My friends say dump him, I’m too good for him, I don’t need this, and I don’t deserve it.
 I feel I made a terrible mistake, and I am so sorry. But enough is enough. What do you think? Am I wasting my time?
Zena

A Zena, you couldn’t make up your mind between two men. The better one left, as well he should have, because he knew you didn’t see him as the right one for you.
The second man saw you as his opportunity. He judged you as not good enough. He’s a cop and he’s been around the block. You proved yourself untrustworthy, and he deals with untrustworthy people every day. He knew how to treat you, so he put you in his cuffs.
You seem to attract abusers, and this cop is your first husband all over again. Your husband did you an enormous favor by leaving you, yet now you are desperate to marry the same sort of man.
 Nothing predicts that the two of you will ever have the healthy relationship of two people in love with each other. He thinks you are not good enough for him, and you know he will never marry you. How is that not your answer? But your letter isn’t about love. It’s about trying to rescue yourself from what you did. You basked in the attention of two men, stringing them along. Now you hope to deny the reality of what you did by triumphantly landing one of them.
No one wants to be in a competition like that. That’s why people are careful their employer doesn’t find out when they are looking for another job. They know employers might fail to promote, or even fire, someone who is disloyal.
You are loath to admit that neither man was right for you. You hoped one of them would be, because that was better than the alternative—going back to the dating site and starting over again. But love is not a competition. Love is not an auction. Rewarding the highest bidder is the opposite of love.
The first man thought, how could she love me if she was trifling with him? His honest heart got a shock. The second man is a foul-mouthed bully. He wasn’t even your choice. Treat this as a lesson learned. Trust is difficult to earn. It can be lost in an instant and lost forever.
Wayne & Tamara                                             write:  Directanswers@WayneAndTamara.com

Eat Healthy Without Breaking the Bank

  

Eat Healthy Without Breaking the Bank

 W. Gifford-Jones, M.D. and Diana Gifford-Jones
 How would you like to have a cart full of healthy foods and still save money? Anyone who does the grocery shopping will tell you, it is more expensive to buy the ingredients for a healthy diet like vegetables, nuts, fruit and fish than the refined grains, processed prepared foods and meats of an unhealthy diet. Is there a way to buy healthy and keep costs down?

Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, Professor of Nutrition at the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, emphasizes that it is worth spending the time to spend your grocery dollars wisely. “We have seen again and again that people who eat more fruits and vegetables have a lower risk of heart disease, diabetes, cancers and other chronic diseases.”
His colleague, Dr. Jeffrey Blumberg, notes that planning makes a big difference in the food budget. He says, decide what you need for a week’s meals and buy only those items. Try to incorporate healthy meals that advantage of store deals. Build meals around items you already have in your pantry, and plan menus that are suitable for cooking extra portions that can be easily reheated for another meal.
Blumberg adds, look into the refrigerator to make good use of the things you already have. For items that have a long shelf life, buy bulk. Remember, when buying perishable foods consider what you will use promptly and freeze the rest.
Avoid purchasing ready-made meals. They are invariably more expensive than buying the ingredients.
There’s also a myth that organic selections are more nutritious than conventional counterparts. Dr Alice H. Lichtenstein, professor of nutrition and science policy, also at Tufts, says all fruits and vegetables (whether fresh, frozen, cooked or raw, organic or conventional) are health promoting choices from a nutritional standpoint.
Another misconception is that gluten-free foods are better for health than those that contain gluten. But Dr. Mozaffarian says replacing refined wheat products with refined rice and corn products may have some health gains but also possible harms. Gluten-free diets, according to studies at Tufts, were significantly lower in protein, magnesium, vitamin E, dietary fiber and higher in calories that most people do not need.
The point is that unless you are in the one percent of the population that suffers from celiac disease or the six percent that are thought to have non-celiac gluten sensitivity, there is no need for gluten-free foods. Save your money.

A few years ago, researchers showed that, on average, it cost $1.50 a day more to choose healthy foods when shopping in a supermarket. They also wisely suggested that you could save that much by saying “no” to coffee, dessert or some other goodie. These savings translate to better health for individuals and tremendous savings for families and governments in terms of health care expenditures down the road.
Finally, consider the impact of smarter shopping in terms of food wastage and environmental concerns. It is estimated that 30 to 40 percent of the North American food supply goes unconsumed every year. That is a matter of disgraceful waste and economic inefficiency. But the amount of food and food packaging that terminates unused in landfills is also an environmental problem that industry, governments and consumers all share. As consumers, when you shop, make a point of refusing to buy products in excessive or nonrecyclable packaging.
While there are still big challenges around easy and equitable access to nutritious and affordable food, you can take steps toward smarter shopping. In this uncertain world, remember this sage advice: a dollar saved is also a dollar earned.
Sign-up at www.docgiff.com to receive our weekly e-newsletter. For comments, contact-us@docgiff.com. Follow us Instagram @docgiff and @diana_gifford_jones

Don't Underestimate What Your Cover Letter Can Do

  Don't Underestimate What Your Cover Letter Can Do
By Nick Kossovan
Hopefully, you've been reading this column religiously. If you've been implementing my suggestions, you'll now have a stellar resume and LinkedIn profile. Congratulations, you're almost ready to conduct a serious job search. Yes, I said "almost."
With fingers-crossed, hoping the answer will be "No," every job seeker asks: Is a cover letter necessary?
Do hiring managers read cover letters in 2021? Not all of them, but many, such as I, still do.
Whether the hiring manager reads your cover letter shouldn't be your focus. Your focus should be, why take a chance? In previous columns, I've mentioned there's no universal hiring methodology; thus, there's no hard rule a cover letter is essential; however, why wouldn't you want to give yourself every competitive advantage possible?
A cover letter will never be held against you by a hiring manager who doesn't read them, but for those who do, not having a cover letter can mean your resume will not be read. As much as possible, throughout your job search, you want to stack the odds in your favour of getting a "yes" to move forward in the hiring process.

A cover letter is non-negotiable if:
- the job posting instructs applicants to include a cover letter with their resume (Many job seekers will still apply without a cover letter.),
- if you're applying directly to a particular person whose name you know, or
- if someone has referred you for the position.
Cover letters have one job-to get the reader to read your resume. Suppose your resume's recipient doesn't know you (a likely case). Why should they read your resume over the hundreds of other resumes they receive, many accompanied with a cover letter?
I read cover letters to assess your writing skills, a skill I value highly, and how well you can sell yourself-it's a critical component of my decision-making process. Call me old school, but I view not having a professionally written cover letter accompanying your resume as being lazy. I don't hire lazy, and I don't know any hiring manager who does.
The power of a cover letter is such that it's worth noting there've been several times where I've granted an interview based on the candidate's cover letter, even though their resume was far from impressive. Yes, a cover letter can make up for flaws in your resume.
Most importantly, use your cover letter to tell me something that isn't on your resume that'll help me decide you're worth my time to interview-convince me!
How do you make your cover letter convince the reader to call you in for the interview? First, grab them at "Hello." Next, draw them into your professional story, making sure you're coming across as a solid "Yes" to each of these questions:
- Can this person do the job?
- Will this person be liked?
- Will this person fit in? (Are they "one of us"?)
Your cover letter is your first opportunity to explain your value proposition (What you're able to bring to the employer.) and therefore stand out from the many other candidates just as qualified as you. It's also your chance to explain the reason(s) for any gaps in your employment and what you've been doing during the gap(s).

There are 5 parts to a cover letter:
1.Header (your contact information)
2.Greeting the hiring manager
3.First paragraph (introduction) - Grab the reader's attention with 2 - 3 of your top achievements.
4.    Second paragraph (sales pitch) - Persuade why you're the right candidate for the job.
5.    Third paragraph (closing, call to action)
TIP: When writing your cover letter, get into a headspace of writing to provide the reader with a sense of who you're going to be should they meet you (presuming you're invited in for an interview). Don't be afraid to convey your personality; it's your most straightforward high yielding approach to standing out from your competition.
Next week I'll be covering the first two parts (header, greeting the hiring manager) of crafting a cover letter that'll get the reader to read your resume. In subsequent columns, I'll discuss how to write the first, second and third paragraphs. Yes, there'll be plenty of examples.
Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job. You can send him your questions at artoffindingwork@gmail.com.