Stop Asking Your Interviewer Cliché Questions

By Nick Kossovan Most job search advice is cookie-cutter. The advice you're following is almost certainly the same advice other job seekers follow, making you just another candidate following the same script. In today's hyper-competitive job market, standing out is critical, a challenge most job seekers struggle with. Instead of relying on generic questions recommended by self-proclaimed career coaches, which often lead to a forgettable interview, ask unique, thought-provoking questions that'll spark engaging conversations and leave a lasting impression. English philosopher Francis Bacon once said, "A prudent question is one half of wisdom." The questions you ask convey the following: · Your level of interest in the company and the role. · Contributing to your employer's success is essential. · You desire a cultural fit. Here are the top four questions experts recommend candidates ask; hence, they've become cliché questions you should avoid asking: · "What are the key responsibilities of this position?" Most likely, the job description answers this question. Therefore, asking this question indicates you didn't read the job description. If you require clarification, ask, "How many outbound calls will I be required to make daily?" "What will be my monthly revenue target?" · "What does a typical day look like?" Although it's important to understand day-to-day expectations, this question tends to elicit vague responses and rarely leads to a deeper conversation. Don't focus on what your day will look like; instead, focus on being clear on the results you need to deliver. Nobody I know has ever been fired for not following a "typical day." However, I know several people who were fired for failing to meet expectations. Before accepting a job offer, ensure you're capable of meeting the employer's expectations. · "How would you describe the company culture?" Asking this question screams, "I read somewhere to ask this question." There are much better ways to research a company's culture, such as speaking to current and former employees, reading online reviews and news articles. Furthermore, since your interviewer works for the company, they're presumably comfortable with the culture. Do you expect your interviewer to give you the brutal truth? "Be careful of Craig; get on his bad side, and he'll make your life miserable." "Bob is close to retirement. I give him lots of slack, which the rest of the team needs to pick up." Truism: No matter how much due diligence you do, only when you start working for the employer will you experience and, therefore, know their culture firsthand. · "What opportunities are there for professional development?" When asked this question, I immediately think the candidate cares more about gaining than contributing, a showstopper. Managing your career is your responsibility, not your employer's. Cliché questions don't impress hiring managers, nor will they differentiate you from your competition. To transform your interaction with your interviewer from a Q&A session into a dynamic discussion, ask unique, insightful questions. Here are my four go-to questions—I have many more—to accomplish this: · "Describe your management style. How will you manage me?" This question gives your interviewer the opportunity to talk about themselves, which we all love doing. As well, being in sync with my boss is extremely important to me. The management style of who'll be my boss is a determining factor in whether or not I'll accept the job. · "What is the one thing I should never do that'll piss you off and possibly damage our working relationship beyond repair?" This question also allows me to determine whether I and my to-be boss would be in sync. Sometimes I ask, "What are your pet peeves?" · "When I join the team, what would be the most important contribution you'd want to see from me in the first six months?" Setting myself up for failure is the last thing I want. As I mentioned, focus on the results you need to produce and timelines. How realistic are the expectations? It's never about the question; it's about what you want to know. It's important to know whether you'll be able to meet or even exceed your new boss's expectations. · "If I wanted to sell you on an idea or suggestion, what do you need to know?" Years ago, a candidate asked me this question. I was impressed he wasn't looking just to put in time; he was looking for how he could be a contributing employee. Every time I ask this question, it leads to an in-depth discussion. Other questions I've asked: · "What keeps you up at night?" · "If you were to leave this company, who would follow?" · "How do you handle an employee making a mistake?" · "If you were to give a Ted Talk, what topic would you talk about?" · "What are three highly valued skills at [company] that I should master to advance?" · "What are the informal expectations of the role?" · "What is one misconception people have about you [or the company]?" Your questions reveal a great deal about your motivations, drive to make a meaningful impact on the business, and a chance to morph the questioning into a conversation. Cliché questions don't lead to meaningful discussions, whereas unique, thought-provoking questions do and, in turn, make you memorable. _____________________________________________________________________ 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

The Right Choice

By Joe Ingino B.A. Psychology Editor/Publisher Central Newspapers ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States It is about time that the people win one. It is no secret that North American style politics is in severe need of repair. No matter where you look. Corruption, collusion prevail. Not to mention wealth. This past week we witness the pushing of a reset button by the people through what we deem to be a democratic process. Democracy much like the many other political systems are in danger of extinction and or severe change. With the recent win by Donald Trump. The world is watching to see him clean out the old and bring in the new. A new system that will punish those that take part in the rat race and reward those that are intellectually capable to work truly in the best interest of those that elected them to office. Kamala, was a poster child for all that is wrong in politics. A person that would tell you anything you wanted to hear. She would promise the world and deliver excuses. The question that will linger in her mind for years to come. ‘I SHOULD HAVE TOLD THEM MY PLAN’. Something that until today no one knows what it was.... all we know is that she wanted to be elected to the highest office on a promise of turning some fictional page. She promised to do what she failed to for the past four years. She vowed to make changes after she got in and failed to do anything while she was in office. Well, the people have spoken and they have turned a page in the right direction. What are we to expect. As promised by Trump. World peace will be re-instated. No more Middle East conflicts. No more Ukraine war. Finally, peace will come to reign in all foreign conflict. Including the mess along the South Pacific rim. A silent cancer that has been beaten back time and time... Alone they are harmless. In unity they may pose a serious threat. The U.S. will soon boom economically. As always Canada will follow. Our Canadian dollar will once again start climbing up. Gas prices will start coming down. Food prices will come down and immigration put under control. No more open taps on immigration. No more wasting taxpayers dollars to subsidize refugees. Canada will soon go through similar political transformation. It is the natural law of Canadian politics. We go red for a while. Then blue and eventually back to red.... What North America needs is a new political system. Hopefully, Trump this time around will rise with the system to implement for generations to come. It is like that saying goes. Time will tell. Let’s hope Trump does not waste this golden opportunity for positive change.

The True Bullies of Pickering: How the Mayor and Council are Abusing Power, Silencing Dissent, and Wasting Your Tax Dollars

By Lisa Robinson For over a year now, the mayor and fellow councillor’s of Pickering have relentlessly attacked me—not because I’m failing the people who elected me, but because I refuse to bow down to their political games and pander to their special interest groups. I’ve been sanctioned, stripped of my pay yet again for daring to speak up for the people of Pickering, for exercising my right to free expression under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This latest sanction—another three months without pay—marks a total of six months of financial punishment. This isn’t about accountability; it’s about intimidation. They want me to fall in line, but I refuse. The truth is, they’ve weaponized the Integrity Commissioner as their personal attack dog, pushing a one-sided narrative designed to discredit me. They twist my words, manipulate my actions, and suppress the voices of my constituents. Let me be absolutely clear: There was no legitimate investigation. This is a political hit job—a calculated attempt to silence me, to paint me as the problem, when the real bullies are sitting in council chambers. Think about it: if I didn’t care, don’t you think I’d just shut up and fall in line? Why would I keep working for free while they drag my name through the mud? I have nothing to gain from this fight, but they have everything to lose. I’m standing up for common sense for common people, while they cling to power and their self-serving interests, while catering to developers and special interest groups. The mayor himself has abused his power, using city staff on your dime—paid by Pickering’s taxpayers—to craft his 75 page witch hunt of manufactured complaints against me. And his bias is no longer just behind closed doors. On September 3, he openly stated he is biased towards me and that he doesn’t want to hear anything I have to say. What does that tell you? He is not just dismissing me—he’s also dismissing every voter who believes I have the right to be heard on their behalf. While they’re busy orchestrating this smear campaign, I’m out there doing the job I was elected to do. The day after they voted to strip me of my pay, I was the only member of council to show up at the “Pickering Forward” meeting, an important forum to hear what the people had to say about our city’s future. And where were the rest of them? They didn’t show because they don’t care about what you, the voters, have to say, and it wasn’t a photo opportunity. They’re more interested in silencing dissent and consolidating power than in listening to the people. What kind of leadership sanctions a single mother’s pay, knowing full well I have bills to pay, a mortgage to cover, and a family to support? They don’t care. Just imagine someone taking away your ability to pay for the roof over your head or to feed your family because they don’t like what you have to say. They would rather see me suffer, hoping to break me down so I’ll finally cave to their demands. This is not just an abuse of power; it’s vindictive harassment. They are unfit to lead—not just for their bullying and intimidation, but for their brazen attempt to lobby the Provincial government to change the Municipal Act. They want the power to remove elected officials who disagree with them—an assault on democracy. Worse still, they want to ensure that anyone they oust is banned from running in future elections, silencing the people’s choice even further. Their actions are not just authoritarian; they’re downright dangerous. They don’t want a council of diverse voices; they want an echo chamber where only their views reign supreme. Each of their characters should be seriously questioned, not just for what they’re doing to me, but for what they’re doing to you—the people of Pickering. The draconian measures they are putting in place is to stifle public input and are designed to rig future elections, to ensure only those who agree with their power-hungry agenda get a seat at the table. They don’t care about democracy or free speech—they care about control. And let’s not forget the staggering misuse of taxpayer dollars in this vendetta. Instead of returning my rightful salary—just $15,000+ for three months of lost pay—they’ve decided to burn up to $200,000 of your money fighting me in a judicial review. $200,000 of your hard-earned tax dollars that could be better spent on the community is being flushed down the drain to prop up their lies. And if you think it stops there, think again. When I take them to court again for another judicial review, I bet they’ll be more than willing to waste another $200,000, bringing the total to a disgraceful $400,000 of your hard earned tax payers money just to silence one voice. Do they care? Of course not—it’s not their money. It’s yours. Through all of this, I have never stopped fighting for the people of Pickering. I show up. I listen. I push back against corruption and collusion, even when they come after me with everything they’ve got. The mayor and his council have shown that they are not fit to serve—they are power-hungry, vindictive, and have zero regard for the voices of the people. And let me be clear, this isn’t just happening in Pickering – it’s happening in Municipalities across the Country. So it needs to stop immediately. Personally, I won’t back down. I will continue to stand with you—because that’s what real leadership looks like. Even when they try to silence me, I will not be bullied. The people of Pickering deserve better, and I will fight to give them the representation they elected me for. It’s time to hold these bullies accountable.

ANSWERS TO WHY ?

ANSWERS TO WHY ? WHY, WAS THE QUESTION - ARE THESE THE ANSWERS ? 1. Could it be that we the people who elect these others into power have neglected our duty. We voted and then fail to follow what they do until it’s too late. Then we vote them back in. 2-5. Could it be that the happening across many municipalities of the reducing of car lanes, the creating of bus lanes which are unused the better part of the day, the increase of bike lanes, the set up of these rental stations for bike and scooters are part of the planned 15 minute cities also known as smart cities. 6. Babies are born with blank brains ready to learn. Babies first learn pain by means of hunger & gas. Discomfort is learned by wet and dirty diapers. Babies learn comfort and love by being fed, burped, cleaned, hugged, and comforting voices. As babies grow they absorb and copy everything, they investigate everything around them and we as parents watch over them, encouraging their learning while protecting them from potential dangers. 7. We are careful to only provide our children topics and objects that are age appropriate to learning. e.g. we would not give and expect a toddler to safely balance and ride a bicycle 8. Teaching a child, suggesting to that child that he or she is in the wrong body simply because of things they like, or like to do, is nothing more than manipulation and should be considered child abuse. Remember these are children, their young brains have not yet developed fully and they tend to believe what they are told as these children have not yet learned to question why or what they are being told. It’s no wonder there is a rise in children and teens are having mental problems and suicide attempts. 9. It is not okay to provide children puberty blockers and then when a teenager, mutilate that child? A teenager is still a child in the eyes of the law till the age of majority. When a child, who’s young brain has not fully developed, is encouraged and manipulated by teachers, doctors and other adults into making a life adulterating decision that could also mean a lifetime of medications, then those teachers, doctors etc should be criminally charged with bodily harm and indignity to an underage living person. 10. Governments did not give birth to our children. The government says, we the parents are responsible for our children until they reach adulthood. We, the parents, pay the government to educate our children, reading, writing, arithmetic, history, geography and science, NEVER did we the parents, give the government the right to confuse our children about their gender, about their sex or the how to of various sexual activities. 11. People are either a male (boy, man, father, brother, he, him) or a female (girl, woman, lady, mother, sister, she, her). How a person feels internally is not to be confused with what they were born. 12. Death by drug overdoses has increased since so called “safe drug sites” were provided. What we should be providing is help to overcome addiction. 13. Common sense, we, or most of us, have it, common sense and need to get back to using it instead of standing by and letting these things happen. 14. When the opposition doesn’t have answers to your questions and can’t have a civil conversation with you they attack you as being racist, homophobic, transphobic etc. 15. When the your opposition doesn’t have an answer to your question they label it as hate? 16. Electricity is not sole salvation of this world, ask anyone who has been in a two or more day blackout and having no other means then electricity for cooking, heating, communicating & transportation 17.– 20. We seem to have lost our ability of critical thinking and have been conditioned to believe the media and government tells us the truth. When if fact if we had paid attention we would know that the world is and has been slowly governed by non-elected parties who have no part in Canada, the UN (united nations) the WHO (world health organizations) and the WEF (world economic forum) who want to control us. Check out Bill C-63, C-293 for starters. Remember, Silence Solves Nothing, you’re not alone, speak up and others will too. Stand Up, Speak Up For Your Rights, Keep Democracy Alive

The Rise of Cancel Culture: A Threat to Free Speech and Open Debate

By Dale Jodoin In recent years, the rise of "cancel culture" has sparked intense debate across the globe. While initially seen as a method for marginalized groups to call out harmful behavior or historical injustices, it has morphed into a movement that many critics argue stifles free speech, limits open debate, and threatens the very essence of democracy. Cancel culture finds its roots in the academic circles of universities, where ideas of social justice, identity politics, and progressive values began gaining traction. What initially started as a well-meaning push for equality and inclusion has, according to some critics, transformed into an extreme ideology that demands conformity and punishes those who dissent. Universities, once heralded as places of free thought and the exchange of ideas, are now seen by some as breeding grounds for the cancel culture movement. Professors and educators, who subscribe to progressive ideologies, are accused of brainwashing students into a one-sided worldview. They teach young minds to embrace a belief system that some argue prioritizes feelings over facts, and ideologies over open discussion. One of the most concerning aspects of cancel culture is its tendency to "cancel" historical figures, events, and ideologies without considering the context of the time. Statues of past leaders and historical figures are torn down, and names are scrubbed from buildings because they no longer align with the values of today. However, this approach to history is dangerous. By erasing or revising the past, we lose the opportunity to learn from it. Canceling the past, as some argue, is not about progress, but about control. If history is wiped clean, future generations have nothing to anchor their understanding of societal development. This erasure, according to critics, leaves a vacuum that can easily be filled by those in power with their own version of the truth. It’s as if the leaders of cancel culture believe that by eliminating the past, they can shape the future in their own image. The concern here is that this process destroys the essence of learning from history’s mistakes, which is vital for progress and growth. The most alarming consequence of this culture, according to detractors, is its impact on young minds. Critics argue that educators—those who should be teaching students to think critically and question everything—are instead indoctrinating them with narrow ideologies. In these environments, students are taught not to engage in meaningful debate but to "cancel" anything or anyone they disagree with. This trend creates a generation of young adults who lack the ability to think critically, who refuse to entertain opposing viewpoints, and who see disagreement as a personal attack rather than an opportunity for growth. Rather than fostering an environment of intellectual curiosity and diversity of thought, critics believe universities have become echo chambers for progressive ideologies, which in turn fuels cancel culture. One of the cornerstones of any democracy is free speech—the ability to express ideas and opinions without fear of retribution. However, cancel culture seems to threaten this fundamental right. In today’s climate, people fear speaking out on controversial issues, not because they are wrong, but because they might be "canceled." When individuals or groups are canceled, they are often shunned, boycotted, or ridiculed on social media and in public discourse. This has led to a chilling effect where people, particularly those in the public eye, are careful about what they say, often avoiding topics that could be seen as contentious or politically incorrect. This suppression of free speech is problematic for a functioning democracy. Without open debate, society cannot progress. Constructive disagreement allows us to challenge our ideas, reevaluate our beliefs, and come to more nuanced understandings of complex issues. When debate is stifled, society becomes stagnant, with one ideology dominating the narrative. Critics of cancel culture often point to the role of the elite—those in positions of power, wealth, and influence. They argue that these individuals use cancel culture as a tool to maintain their control over society. By manipulating public opinion and silencing dissenting voices, the elite ensure that their ideologies remain unchallenged. This has led to concerns that cancel culture is less about social justice and more about power. Politicians and influencers who align themselves with progressive causes are seen as gaining favor with these elites, while those who challenge the status quo are pushed to the margins. In this way, cancel culture serves as a method of social control, allowing the powerful to maintain their dominance over societal discourse. An ironic aspect of cancel culture is the contradiction within its ranks. Critics argue that the movement, which claims to fight for the rights of marginalized groups, often perpetuates the very forms of discrimination it seeks to eliminate. For example, many leaders of cancel culture movements are themselves from privileged backgrounds, and yet they claim to speak on behalf of minority groups. Additionally, while cancel culture condemns racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination, it often engages in these very behaviors by demonizing and silencing those who hold differing opinions. Some argue that cancel culture is a form of reverse discrimination, where one group is canceled in favor of another. One of the most controversial areas where cancel culture rears its head is in the debate over immigration and cultural identity. Some argue that immigrants should adopt the culture and laws of the country they move to, while others believe that countries should adapt to the diverse cultures that immigrants bring with them. Critics of cancel culture argue that it often pushes for the erasure of native cultures in favor of a new, homogenized society. This, they argue, is akin to soft population replacement, where the dominant culture is slowly replaced by another. The result is a loss of cultural identity, a disconnection from history, and a society that is constantly in flux, with no clear sense of direction or purpose. In conclusion, cancel culture presents a significant threat to free speech, open debate, and societal progress. While it is important to call out harmful behavior and address historical injustices, it is equally important to engage in open dialogue, respect differing viewpoints, and learn from history rather than erase it. To move forward, we must reject the extremes of cancel culture and instead foster an environment where ideas can be debated, where history can be understood in its context, and where individuals are free to express their beliefs without fear of retribution. Only then can we build a society that values true progress—one built on the foundation of free speech, critical thinking, and mutual respect.

A NEW COLUMN THAT PUTS THE SPOTLIGHT ON COUNCIL

Welcome to my new column in The Central entitled News From City Hall, a weekly look at all that does and doesn’t make sense from the Oshawa Council chamber, a place where decisions are made, personalities collide, and uninspiring theatrics often dominate. I have watched and recorded all aspects of city hall for 40 years, spanning six mayors and an ever-revolving door of councillors too numerous to mention. I have witnessed true statesmen dominate local politics, all the while having to tolerate some who seemed destined to be remembered as nothing more than an opportunistic interference in an otherwise valuable institution. Heroes like Ed Kolodzie and his brother Joe, long-time statesmen like Brian Nicholson, Jim Potticary and John Aker, and of course one or two local embarrassments most people would like to forget, such as Amy England who undoubtedly tops the list. As council returns from their summer recess, some of the issues I hope to be highlighting in future columns include the challenges that surround the downtown such as the struggles being faced by businesses who, on the one hand have seen much of their on-street parking simply disappear, and on the other have witnessed recent violence that is turning the heart of the city into a veritable war zone. Affordable housing initiatives come a close second with major projects such as the Fittings land redevelopment and the Oshawa Clinic transformation into a massive residential complex. Added to the list is the homeless problem, the use of Strong Mayor Powers, and the never ending struggle of Oshawa taxpayers trying to meet the demands of inflation and a voracious city hall always looking for more of your money. The next 12 months will surely be significant for the city and the region as these and other issues play out. COUNCILLOR GIBERSON IN BREACH OF CODE OF CONDUCT Readers will recall last week’s exclusive front page story where The Central was the first news outlet to publish the results of an Integrity Commissioner’s report that found Ward 4 councillor Derek Giberson in breach of the municipal Code of Conduct. This was based on a complaint that I filed earlier this year. The I.C. report found that Giberson, by commenting publicly regarding an issue that will be before the courts, contravened the obligation of elected officials to refrain from remarking on such matters. As such, his post on social media was considered contrary to the Code of Conduct. The report will be made public once Oshawa councillors have had a chance to review it and take action. To that end, I would like to share the following open letter to council that I prepared. “To Mayor Carter and Members of Council – You will soon be giving consideration to a report by the Integrity Commissioner as to one of your members having been found in breach of the Code of Conduct. The decision by councillor Giberson to allow himself the liberty of bringing into question the reputation and character of a private citizen by seeking to cast doubt on that person’s past activities, without any supporting evidence, was an abuse of his office and a total disregard as to the damage it could cause the individual affected. Councillor Giberson assumed far too much in deciding what was or was not “newsworthy” in a matter that will be before the courts. Further, it was not within councillor Giberson’s scope of office to try to affect the public’s opinion of a private individual in the first place. Based on the Integrity Commissioner’s decision, it would seem paramount for council to, not only demand councillor Giberson write a letter of apology to the individual concerned, but to ensure he is sanctioned in such a way as to show the citizens of Oshawa that council, as a whole, does not associate itself with such reckless activity on the part of councillor Giberson. The people of this city will be watching closely as council makes its decisions on this issue.” THIS WEEK IN COUNCIL HISTORY 1988 The Oshawa Times reported on Sept 21 that 300 homeowners were planning to gather at city hall to protest a proposed plaza at the NW corner of King St. and Harmony Rd. 11 Aldermen took turns shooting down the proposal, which was ultimately denied. Ward 3 Alderman Ed Kolodzie suggested a new library be built instead, however a five story Co-op building was eventually erected on the property, now known as the Harmony King Co-op. 1992 The Oshawa Times reported on Sept 17 that Durham Region councillors voted themselves a 4% pay hike over four years. Councillor Margaret Shaw said she was “appalled by the increase” and would refuse it, while councillor Brian Nicholson said “Don’t you realize we have to pay bills and taxes?” The raise would mean an extra $840 per year for councillors. 2018 The Oshawa This Week reported on Sept 19 that 200 people attended an all-candidates meeting for the Durham Regional chair election to be held that year. Candidates included Tom Dingwall, Oshawa Mayor John Henry, John Mutton, Muhammad Ahsin Sahi, and Peter Neal. John Henry would eventually win the election with 55% of the vote.

Canada and the issue of productivity

by Maj (ret'd) CORNELIU. CHISU, CD, PMSC, FEC, CET, P. Eng. Former Member of Parliament Pickering-Scarborough East In the last quarter of century we have observed a slow but continuous deterioration of our living standards. There are many factors that have contributed to this, but one stands out as a major one, and that is the decline in productivity. Today, the majority of Canadians believe that Canada is broken after years of stagnant incomes, affordability challenges, rising crime rates, government failures on basic functions like healthcare and immigration, and a deepening cultural malaise. Productivity refers to how efficiently we use our resources to produce something of value. Productivity growth makes Canada richer, allowing us to access better healthcare, education, living standards, and even environmental outcomes. Decline in productivity is a choice, not a phenomenon that cannot be controlled. Canada can overcome productivity decline through better public policies and political leadership, which are missing in action. It is abundantly clear that Canada’s productivity growth is dismal, but no one in the current political establishment is considering it seriously. Without a drastic change in policy, the OECD forecasts that our productivity growth will rank last among its 38 member countries. Canada’s GDP per capita has advanced more slowly than leading economies in recent years. It has barely reached pre-COVID levels and the gap with the United States has widened. This is strongly linked to a relatively weak productivity growth. A slump in Canada’s resource-sector investment following the 2014 oil-price collapse has been particularly influential in this. Weakening productivity and investment performance echoes longstanding concerns that Canada is tapping less successfully than other economies, into opportunities to increase output through capital investment and innovation in products and processes. A wide range of policy actions can potentially increase business-sector productivity. There are proximate policy levers, such as tax breaks on investment and R&D that deepen capital and technological progress. In addition, there are less direct instruments, such as improvements to infrastructure and market efficiency, and reforms that strengthen vocational education and skills. Influences on market efficiency include competition policy, red tape in setting up businesses and bankruptcy processes. Barriers to foreign direct investment via foreign ownership restrictions continue to be high in Canada relative to those in other OECD countries, particularly in network sectors. For instance, in telecommunications rules state that both ownership and board composition must be at least 80% Canadian in operations with more than a 10% share of the market. Rules applying to the aviation sector also need reconsideration because they are essential to providing better mobility for the work force in a country whose territory is the second largest in the world. Though it has not yet created significant policy issues, teleworking should remain on watch for policymakers. According to Canada’s Labour Force Survey data, as of October 2022, 9% of workers reported that they usually worked both at home and at locations other than home (hybrid working) while 15.8% reported working exclusively from home. A priori, teleworking has widened labour markets and options on where to live. There may also be productivity gains; one survey of Canadian employees has found that 63% of respondents feel they are more productive working from home. The potential downside to teleworking may be losses in productivity from reduced in-person contact. A permanent shift to teleworking may need to be considered in some areas of policy, for instance in transport planning. Data continue to show that movement through transit stations in Canada remains below pre-COVID levels Lowering internal trade barriers remains one of the most effective ways policy can help boost Canada’s productivity and living standards. Canada appears unusual in her lack of universal regulations and technical standards across sub national jurisdictions. This hampers the flow of goods and services and compromises the labour market. Perhaps the best known example is the restriction on the movement of alcohol and tobacco products between provinces. Such barriers extend across many activities, including the dairy sector, engineering, healthcare professionals, legal and accounting services, and many others. The non-recognition of qualifications remains an issue notably in some areas of the healthcare sector and compulsory trades, where only members with the relevant official qualifications (or apprentices) can legally be employed. These include electricians, plumbers and crane operators. The Federal and Provincial governments seem bewildered or are intellectually blocked in dealing with this issue. Evidence continues to mount on the economic cost of internal trade barriers, yet nothing is done to eliminate them; nothing but lip-service.. Furthermore, federal government debt ballooned from $660 billion to $1.37 trillion between 2015 and 2024.. During the same period, the value of machinery and equipment in Canada decreased by 5 percent. Excessive government spending hinders economic growth by crowding out private investment and requiring higher taxes to support increased spending. It leads to a heavier regulatory burdens, which can stifle business activity. Government programs also adjust more slowly to changing economic conditions, reducing economic flexibility. Moreover, larger government expenditures encourage rent-seeking behaviour by businesses, diverting resources from otherwise productive activities. Collectively, these effects reduce productivity and economic growth. Another factor that influences productivity is qualified labour shortages, which cost small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) over $38 billion in lost sales annually. Meanwhile, between 2015 and 2024, federal public-sector employment has grown 43 percent, nearly three times faster than private-sector employment. m Had the federal public sector maintained the same growth rate as the nation’s population, there could potentially be up to 72,000 more workers available for private sector employment. m Assuming two out of three workers were employed by SMEs, and using an average of $450,000 revenue per employee, SMEs could have generated over $21 billion in additional annual revenue. Taxation policy is another tool that influences productivity. In 2016, the federal government raised the highest federal marginal tax rate by 4 percent. Combined with provincial rate increases, seven out of ten provinces now take over 50 percent of marginal earnings in taxes from high-income earners. This gives Canada the fifth-highest combined marginal tax rates among 38 OECD nations. Compared to the United States, our largest competitor for skilled workers, all provinces except Alberta and Saskatchewan have higher marginal tax rates than any U.S. state. These tax hikes have negative consequences besides spending taxpayers’ money on futuristic and useless projects. Every tax increase makes Canadian entrepreneurs think twice about starting companies in Canada. In conclusion, action on productivity is needed immediately. Let us see if the political class is up to the task. For now it is up to you to ask them. This is about our future. Help secure it!

Friends, Neighbours, and fellow Canadians

By Lisa Robinson I stand before you today, not just as an elected official but as a deeply concerned citizen who believes that our beloved city—and municipalities across Ontario and Canada—are heading in a dangerously wrong direction. It is with a heavy heart and a clear sense of duty that I address the serious concerns and allegations I must make against my Council, the Corporation of the City of Pickering, and other levels of government. Some of our city leaders have strayed far from the principles they were elected to uphold. They have shown a blatant disregard for the constitutional rights of our citizens—freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press are being trampled upon in pursuit of ideological and personal agendas. Our bylaws are being broken repeatedly, catering to special interest groups and developers while the voices of ordinary citizens are being silenced. In recent months, Pickering council has introduced draconian, undemocratic policies that limit public participation and transparency within our beloved chambers. Delegation time limits have been slashed from 10 minutes to 5, the public is no longer allowed to record public meetings, and the media too is barred from recording unless given a two-thirds majority of the council's approval. And already council has shown their true colours by voting against a media outlet who holds opposing views. Residents from outside of Pickering, including Durham residents, are prohibited from participating in our meetings unless the topic is approved by a two-thirds majority—this, despite we contract with their government and the fact that four of our council members sit on Durham Region Council. Even Pickering residents are now silenced from speaking openly, freely in our chambers unless their topic has been scrutinized under a microscope and approval given by a mover and seconder and a 2/3rds vote. Let's be clear: if the council doesn’t want to hear what you have to say, or if they don’t like your opinions, they will silence you. They are effectively forbidding you from having a voice. This is not just a disregard for free speech—it's an outright attack on your right to be heard. Let’s talk about the new, nebulous trespass policies—what I call the “hurt feelings bylaw.” These draconian rules give the council the power to banish anyone based on flimsy excuses like social media posts, language, tone of voice, or even what someone is wearing if it offends someone. This isn’t just a policy; it’s a blatant attempt to silence dissent, crush opposing views, and manipulate the narrative to fit their agenda,views, and control the narrative. We’ve seen what looks like outrageous manipulation in the city's YouTube feeds of our council and committee meetings—time jumps, white noise, and possible signs of audio tampering. When I pushed for an independent third party to record our meetings to ensure moving forward that these recordings were accurate and transparent, since the public is no longer allowed to record, the City of Pickering flatly refused. This isn’t just poor governance—it’s outright tyranny. Our councils and governments are intoxicated with power. It seems to give them a perverse pleasure to divide us, to make us feel helpless, to instill fear in those who dare to hold opposing opinions. This toxic culture is ruining relationships, tearing families apart, and forcing people to live in constant fear of speaking their minds, their truths. This nightmare needs to end, and it will only end if we, the people, rise above the nonsensical nonsense they are trying to impose. It’s absolutely scandalous how taxpayer dollars are being squandered on frivolous spending at every level of government, while critical needs like providing clean drinking water to our First Nations communities are callously ignored. Despite countless failed promises of keeping our duty to consult, as of this past July, 31 First Nations communities remain under long-term drinking water advisories. This is not just a failure—it's a betrayal. We hear endless land acknowledgments, but these are nothing more than empty words, lip service, when not backed by real action. Our First Nations people deserve access to clean, safe drinking water, and it is our solemn duty to push and deliver on that promise no matter what level of government. But the disgrace doesn't stop there. Our homeless population is increasing and our food banks are struggling to keep food on the shelves while our governments and city officials, who are supposed to protect and serve us, are instead taxing us deeper into poverty. Yet, their wages and benefits continue to increase, while they sit idly by, letting our most vulnerable citizens suffer in silence. Our government continues to waste taxpayer dollars on lavish perks for elected officials and city staff, sending funds abroad to other Countries without addressing the suffering of our own people. Millions of dollars are being funneled into consultants and reports that are hidden from the public, and thousands are spent on politicians to attend events that serve only to benefit the politicians and the vendors who wine and dine them for future business. Maybe the Premiere could put legislation in place that would disallow any elected official and city staff from receiving gifts and benefits from developers, vendors, special interest groups or anyone lobbying the governments for business. Maybe Politicians should wear these lobbyist logos on their jackets to show transparency of who supports them, so the people can keep track of how they vote and see where their loyalty lies. Rob Ford was a true champion of fiscal responsibility, unafraid to call out the wasteful perks enjoyed by city employees. He was determined to keep politicians and public servants in line, ensuring that every dollar of taxpayer money was spent wisely. This corruption must end. The City of Pickering on top of all of their wasteful spending is also vindictive, hateful and voted to spend $200,000 of tax payers dollars to fight me in a judicial review, instead of paying me $15,000 plus in lost salary that I was financially sanctioned on the recommendation by Principles Integrity for doing my job on behalf of my constituents. It's deeply troubling that Integrity Commissioners, who hold significant power over elected officials, are themselves unelected and paid by the very municipalities they oversee. This creates an inherent conflict of interest, where their loyalty may lie more with those who sign their paychecks than with the principles of fairness and accountability. I ask, do we really need them, They have only been implemented in the last few years, yet they wield immense influence over our democratic processes. Council and the Corporation of the City of Pickering and all levels of government need to remember that it is your money, meant to be used judiciously for the common good, not for self-serving agendas. This is not just mismanagement—it’s a criminal neglect of duty. In Pickering, the Integrity Commissioner has audaciously pushed for and was granted changes to our policies and procedures to ensure their Integrity reports cannot be questioned. This is nothing short of a blatant effort to shield their actions from scrutiny and undermine transparency and public trust. When you realize that Principles Integrity, the firm the Corporation of the City pays and relies on, is serving 65 other municipalities, it’s evident that their impartiality is severely compromised. In my personal experience, the Integrity Commissioner has proven to be untrustworthy and biased. They have repeatedly lied, failed to investigate complaints thoroughly, and refused to answer any questions from those they accuse, effectively preventing individuals from clearing their names. Let me be absolutely clear: this is a rigged system. The integrity of a process where those responsible for upholding fairness are instead serving the corporation's interests, not ours, is fundamentally flawed. It’s high time our Premier steps in and enacts legislation to protect the public’s interest and prevent officials from manipulating the system to shield their misconduct. We need reforms that ensure accountability and transparency, not a façade of integrity designed to protect the corrupt. In Pickering and throughout Canada we are also witnessing a disturbing trend where the right to personal dignity is being stripped away from men, women, boys, and girls in spaces that should be safe bathrooms, change rooms. People are being forced to share these spaces with members of the opposite sex, leading to widespread discomfort and real psychological harm to some. What’s even more troubling is that only members 18 years and older at our Recreation Complex are protected to use spaces aligned with their biological sex, leaving children and those who can’t afford memberships vulnerable and unprotected from these same rights. This is not just unfair; in my opinion it’s disgusting. We are discriminating against the most vulnerable among us—our children and those who lack the means to protect themselves are having to beg to use a biological changeroom. This is inhumane It’s absolutely absurd that these changes have only emerged since COVID. For as long as we’ve existed, nobody has ever had to beg for the basic right to use their biological washroom. It’s disturbing beyond belief that anyone ever thought this was a good idea. What we’re witnessing is a catastrophic lapse in common sense, leading to dangerous consequences. Globally, there have been too many tragic incidents in these spaces - these aren’t isolated events, and they can’t be ignored. This isn’t about politics; it’s about the safety and well-being of our citizens. We must safeguard their right to personal dignity and stop sacrificing them on the altar under the guise of political correctness. I urge Premier Ford and all members of parliament to implement common-sense legislation before it’s too late. I am certain that neither Premier Ford nor any other parliamentarian want to change in spaces with children, let alone children of the opposite sex, and if you do then your values will become questionable. Our citizens absolutely deserve to be safe and our children protected, and we cannot allow this misguided policy to continue With all of the bullying, intimidation, threats, attacks on my character, sexual harassment, and psychological harassment that I have had to endure, and the corruption, collusion, and what I consider bribery that I have witnessed, I have suggested that all members of the council be investigated for wrongdoing. Yet not a single member—not even the mayor—would second that motion. What does that tell you? It’s very telling when those who cry the loudest about integrity refuse to have their own actions scrutinized. If they have nothing to hide, why didn’t they support an investigation? The silence from council speaks volumes. We are also witnessing a troubling trend of our city catering to special interest groups at the expense of our own procedures and bylaws, principles of fairness, and equality. Time and again, procedures and bylaws have been selectively enforced or outright ignored to serve the agendas of a few, rather than the common good. Rules for me, but not for thee. This selective enforcement has not only broken the trust between the government and the people but has also erode the rule of law in our city. Over the past few months, my mayor and fellow councillors have been participating in a downright dangerous game to lobby the provincial government to change the Municipal Act so they can remove a sitting elected member. This is a direct attack on democracy, where the people—not politicians—should have the power to decide who represents them. If this change is allowed, it opens the door to unchecked abuse of power, where dissenting voices can be silenced at will. It’s a blatant attempt to consolidate control and eliminate opposition, turning our councils into echo chambers for those in power. It's not only happening in Pickering but in other municipalities, and any elected official pushing for this should step down immediately for betraying the very democratic process they were elected to protect. This move isn’t just undemocratic; it’s authoritarian. We must fiercely oppose any effort to strip the people of their right to have a voice and to choose their leaders. Our duty is to serve, not to rule. It is also disgraceful to see politicians at all levels of government using name-calling and shameful rhetoric to silence and intimidate those who dare to speak up. These tactics are designed to stop people from expressing their concerns and to create an environment of fear. Let me be absolutely clear—this disgraceful behavior starts at the top with Trudeau and you, Premier Ford. You've set the tone, and now my mayor and fellow councillors think it’s perfectly acceptable to stoop to your level and It’s no wonder that this garbage has trickled down to fake Facebook accounts and keyboard warriors who think they can hide behind screens and hurl insults without consequence to those with opposing views within our communities. You’ve all set a shameful example. It is absolutely appalling to see my fellow politicians behave this way spreading vile rhetoric to silence and intimidate anyone who dares to oppose them and speak their truth. These pathetic tactics are nothing but a coward's way to stifle free speech and breed fear. Only spineless cowards hide behind such childish nonsense. Real leaders engage in real conversations, they listen, and they address issues with respect and integrity. Those who stoop to name-calling and character assassination have no place in leadership. If Politicians can’t uphold thedignity of their office, then step down. Because this kind of toxic behavior is a stain on our democracy, and we are better than that. I have personally faced relentless bullying, intimidation, and threats from my mayor and fellow councilors, including financial sanctions, name-calling, and persistent lies attacking my character—all because I am standing up for what is right – just like I am here today. But these are not just attacks on me; they are attacks on the very principles of integrity, honesty, and accountability that should guide all Politicians actions. In my opinion, our municipality, like many others, needs to be torn down and rebuilt, giving power back to the people, where it rightfully belongs. And The rot doesn’t stop at our city councils, provincial, federal government, or other institutions. Historically, Canada had defamation laws and journalistic standards that aimed to prevent the spread of false information. However, with the rise of digital media and the push for sensationalism, these standards have eroded, allowing biased and misleading reports to flourish. The CBC and other journalists have become a disgrace, promoting rumors using clickbait titles instead of investigating the truth. They have become another group paid to report certain narratives that fit their agenda, rather than the facts. This is not journalism—it is sensationalism, or if I may be so crude to say BS, and it’s nothing other than a betrayal of the public’s trust. I call on Premier Ford to bring back Legislation that demands accurate reporting by all journalists based on facts and hold media accountable for their role in spreading misinformation. I would also like to ask Premier Ford, to have a serious conversation with Prime Minister Trudeau about the millions of dollars being funneled into the CBC. This government funding looks more like bribery than support for unbiased journalism. If we're truly committed to media transparency and integrity, we need to stop propping up an organization that increasingly serves as a mouthpiece rather than a check on power. Let's put an end to this questionable financial relationship and restore faith in our public institutions. It is also disheartening to see how DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives, which were intended to foster inclusivity, have instead become sources of division and exclusion. Globally, DEI policies are being banned as they are increasingly recognized for their counterproductive effects—fostering division rather than unity and indoctrinating individuals to adhere to a specific narrative. In Pickering, DEI is being enforced across all areas of the corporation, including the hiring process, which is deeply troubling. Such policies should not lead to discrimination based on skin color, religious beliefs, or sexual preferences. I was the only one who voted against its implementation because, as a leader, I recognize the importance of seeing what everyone else can see but I can think differently and question if what is being presented is universally beneficial or not. Our approach must reflect true inclusivity, promoting equality and respect for all individuals. The solution is straightforward: treat everyone equally and fairly based on merit and character, united under the red and white flag of our country—the Canadian flag. We should not be segregating people into groups by the colour of their skin, religious beliefs, or sexual preferences which are only designed to divide us. This approach will ensure that our policies genuinely serve the common good rather than creating new forms of exclusion. It’s our duty as politicians to remain in a state of neutrality and not cause division by a hierarchy of beliefs and chaos. This is not about being left or right—it is about what is right and what is wrong. It is about common sense for common people. The name-calling we see from politicians at all levels of government used to silence and shame those who dare to speak up, is disgusting. Only cowards hide behind such childish rhetoric, not leaders. And those who engage in it should apologize or step down, for they are not fit to lead. Our municipalities need to be torn down and rebuilt with integrity, transparency, and respect for the people they serve. We must return power to where it belongs—in the hands of the people Our children deserve to grow up free from political agendas that impose adult issues on them, especially when it comes to making life-altering decisions about their bodies. We cannot allow children to be pressured into choices that involve irreversible hormone blockers or surgeries that remove healthy body parts. These are decisions with lifelong consequences that no child should be forced to make. Let our children be children. Let them learn and grow in an environment of respect, dignity, and safety, where their innocence is preserved and their well-being is prioritized. It's our duty to protect their future, ensuring they have the time and freedom to discover who they are without the weight of adult controversies on their young shoulders. We should be teaching our children that no safe adult will ask them to keep secrets. As for our government claiming transparency and accountability these have become mere buzzwords, not practices. We were not elected to cater to developers, special interest groups or make friends with those with deep pockets following along with the status quo. Yet, we see our leaders doing exactly that, pushing through agendas that benefit the few at the expense of the many. We need to be a government that serves the people, not one that serves itself. We need to be leaders who listen, who act with integrity, and who put the public good above all else. We need to restore transparency, accountability, and trust in our institutions. And we need to stand up to the bullies, the corrupt officials, and the special interest groups who are trying to take away our rights and freedoms This is not a fight I take on lightly, but it is one that must be fought. For the sake of our city, our province, and our country, its people, and future generations to come. We must stand up against this abuse of power, this corruption, and this betrayal of public trust. We must restore integrity and trust in our government, and I am committed to leading that charge. Together, we can bring about the change that is so desperately needed. Serving the people, not ruling them. Strength does not lie in the absence of fear but in the courage to face it head on and rise above it "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

“EXPOSED” - MUNICIPAL Councils Are Working Against Constituents S-O-S, S-O-S - PEOPLE OF ONTARIO PAY ATTENTION TO THIS ALERT

EXPOSED - YOUR MUNICIPAL MAYORS & COUNCILLORS ACROSS ONTARIO ARE PLOTTING TO DEPRIVE YOU, THE PEOPLE OF YOUR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS. YES, the Municipal Councils, the people you elected, are working against you, the public. They want the right to have a council member fired from council, they also want the right to have that person who you elected, banned from running in the next election, why? So you the people can’t vote that person back in. In other words, municipal councils want the right to deny you the public your democratic right to who you can vote for. This is the First Step in Killing Democracy. Ontario Municipal Councils have been writing the AMO (association of municipalities of Ontario) which is an elected board consisting of members from the different municipalities of Ontario. The Municipal Councils are begging the AMO to have Premier Doug Ford amend Bill 5, re the ‘Municipal Act 2001’ to allow Municipal Councils to fire a colleague (one of your elected members), and to do it by having the Integrity Commissioner be the one to say a council member should be fired there by absolving the council of being the ones doing the firing. The council will tell you the public that they didn’t fire your elected member. Just another way of hiding by covering the eyes of the public with half truths. The real question is, why would a council want or need to fire an elected colleague? Crimes, sexual harassment, harassment & abuse etc all have ways to be dealt with, example, Human Rights, Criminal Courts etc. Could it be that the fellow elected members, who does not follow the council’s agenda, who does not rubber stamp things but actually works in favour of the people is showing up the rest of the council and exposing what’s happening? I have to wonder? Who are these council members that are running your municipality, who are making decisions that affect your life, your city, town or community,? Who are theses councils who want the right to fire a colleague, an elected member? Do these municipal councils know anything about democracy? If they do not know the difference between a hired employee (staff) by a business -vs- a person elected by the people, then should they really be running your municipality? PEOPLE IT’S TIME, STAND & SPEAK UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS, KEEP DEMOCRACY ALIVE Email Premier Doug Ford at both ….. premier@ontario.ca and correspondence.premier.gov.on.ca Email AMO, Pres Colin Best at ….. amopresident@amo.on.ca Email the city clerk of your municipality (call your council office and get the clerks email and tell the clerk to copy every member of council with your email.) Write the following to the Premier, the AMO and your Municipal Council, let them know how you feel. 1. How dare municipal councils ask for this right to fire an elected person. Only we, the public (voters) have the right to fire an elected member and we will do this in the next election by using our democratic right to vote for our choice. 2. Tell them you are watching and that their voting and decisions will have a direct way on how you vote in any upcoming elections. Citizens of Ontario and Canada, Your “Silence Solves Nothing” It’s Time for Action, to Stand Up For Your Rights Before They Are Gone

Dear Premier Ford

By Lisa Robinson - Pickering City CouncillorPickering’s Mayor Kevin Ashe labels residents of Durham as racists. Dear Premier Ford and Minister Calandra, I am writing to you today to address and unequivocally rebut the false and misleading allegations made against me by Mayor Kevin Ashe and other members of the Pickering Council. It is deeply troubling that I have been consistently denied the opportunity to present my side of the story simply because certain members of the Council do not appreciate the truth I am bringing to light. First and foremost, let me clarify that the Integrity Commissioner’s report, which has been weaponized against me, is currently under judicial review. This process underscores the fact that the findings are not final, and I have every right to challenge them. It is imperative to note that the review is a legal and legitimate recourse, which should not be dismissed or undermined by political actors who are eager to silence dissent and undermine democratic processes. The hypocrisy of the current mayor and certain council members cannot be overstated. They have engaged in a pattern of behavior that is far more egregious than anything they have accused me of. Their tactics include maligning the character of Pickering residents by labeling anyone who opposes their views as “racists,” “Nazis,” “transphobic,” or “homophobic.” These baseless accusations are not only harmful to the individuals targeted, but they also serve to stifle free speech and legitimate criticism within our community. The attempt to label my supporters—and indeed, anyone who dares to question the actions of the mayor and Council—as being aligned with hateful ideologies is both unjust and deeply irresponsible. The real issue at hand is not my conduct but rather the fact that I am uncovering and exposing the truth about what is happening within the City of Pickering. This transparency is unwelcome by those who prefer to operate without scrutiny, and they are doing everything in their power to have me removed as a sitting councillor. Furthermore, the mere consideration of such authoritarian measures, which threaten to undermine democracy in our community, is unacceptable. If the municipal laws were ever changed to allow the removal of an elected official by there colleagues, democracy would fail to exist in the Western world. This is a direct attack on the democratic process, and we must stand firm against any such encroachments. The Toronto Sun recently shared a video of mine where I condemned the actions of the host, Kevin J. Johnston, whose podcast I appeared on. Despite my clear denunciation of his actions and the overwhelming support I have received from the community, my fellow councillors continue to weaponize this against me. Meanwhile, they conveniently ignore the fact that Councillor Brenner should be charged criminally for his violent rhetoric, including saying he wants to “sharpen his sword and decapitate the mayor.” I have included a video below that captures how I and members of the community are being treated by the Mayor and my colleagues. In this video, you will see how I have been threatened and bullied, and I have made claims of sexual, psychological, and workplace violence. This kind of violent rhetoric and behavior is unacceptable, and it highlights the lengths to which they are willing to go to silence me and anyone who opposes them. They have spread many lies, all of which can be proven, starting with the three draft motions my constituents asked me to bring forward, which I will also include below. These motions reflect the will of the people I represent, yet they have been met with hostility and deceit by those who fear transparency and accountability. These continuous attacks on my character and integrity are part of a broader effort to discredit my work and silence my voice. However, I remain steadfast in my commitment to serve the people of Pickering and to uphold the principles of transparency and accountability. In light of these considerations, it is clear that the mayor and council should step down from their positions for even contemplating such communist asks that threaten to destroy democracy here in the Western world. We need leaders who truly represent democratic values and prioritize the welfare of our community over personal vendettas. I urge you to consider the broader context of these attacks and recognize them for what they are: an attempt to suppress a voice challenging the status quo and advocating for the residents of Pickering. I am confident that the truth will prevail, and I will continue to fight for what is right, regardless of the obstacles placed in my path. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please feel free to reach out to me for any further clarification. https://x.com/ShaunRickard67/status/1821962565120901197 https://youtu.be/kKNs6wVUGo0?feature=shared CAUGHT ON CAMERA: Pickering councillor responds to being on far-right podcast (youtube.com) With gratitude. "Strength Does Not Lie In The Absence Of Fear, But In The Courage To Face It Head-On And Rise Above It"

COMING OUT AND PROUD!!!

coming out and proud By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” Always Remember That The cosmic blueprint of your life was written in code across the sky at the moment you were born. Decode Your Life By Living It Without Regret or Sorrow. - ONE DAY AT A TIME - White/Black, Sad/Happy, Peace/War, Love/Hate... For the love of words... the ultimate human weapon against eternal ignorance. "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation." The outcome is nothing short of eternal bliss: Eternal bliss is the state of total peace of mind. This peace is not just for a moment or any given period of time. This state of peaceful mind has to be permanent, only then you can say it is eternal peace. To achieve such state of mind is not easy. With this said... one has truly to understand the composition of words to be descriptive of the intended message. We are upon one of, if not the most important dates in our sovereign identity. In a society of Pride. We must show our true personal pride to our family, community and our country. Some may surrender to eternal ignorance and be proud of false ideology. We may find eternal bliss in our decision, escaping the illogical agenda behind the ignorance. Not the agenda pride we are force to tolerate. The true patriotic pride. But foremost. We must dig deep and find our true essence of who we are as a people. Leaving out social agenda, political direction and or external influences. We as a united nation should not be waving all color flags and or flags of foreign nation to show either our pride or support for external conflict. We as Canadians should only fly one flag proudly and that is the good old red and white maple. A symbol of peace, unity and resillience. A symbol of valor, sacrifice and committment. A symbol of inclusivity through adaptation, assimilation and respect for Canadian way of life, culture, customs and traditions. Not forced acceptance. We as PROUD Canadians patriots are about to take a moment and celebrate our true identity. Something that needs to be our primary focus when we refer to PRIDE and not the alternative sexual lifestyle. Canada Day celebrated on July 1st of each year, holds a special place in the hearts of Canadians across the globe. It is a day of immense significance; it marks the birth of a nation and commemorates the rich history, diverse culture, and shared values of the Canadian people. For this reason on July 1st, 2024. I will be COMING OUT AND PROUDLY of support my country as a good patriot . OUR CANADA. My Canadian history. My Canadian culture, customs traditions and languages. I will be coming out in support of a nation that has given me a life of opportunity. A land that allowed me to enjoy the freedoms that our forefathers so valiantly sacrificed during world conflicts. I will stand proud with all that served and and support their causes and their well being. We are a united nation that should not be compromised by external influences, agenda nor cause. We as Canadians are for Canada first. Happy Canada Day. I hope all come out and show your true patriotic pride.

INTERNET VOTING THE LAST BLOW TO DEMOCRACY

By Joe Ingino Editor/Publisher ACCOMPLISHED WRITER/AUTHOR OF OVER 800,000 Published Columns in Canada and The United States “I live a dream in a nightmare world” This week I received a real interesting email. It read: City of Oshawa exploring internet voting. The City of Oshawa is exploring the possibility of offering internet voting for its 2026 Municipal and School Board Elections and wants to know your thoughts. First and foremost. The City does not care about your thoughts as they already made their minds. The token request for your thought is as if to give you the impression that they care. Did they care when you gave them your thoughts on the budget? No. They stuck it to us. Now this. As if it is not bad enough that the City of Oshawa has a municipal election and only one seat changes. Our democracy has come down to name recognition voting by the same 18% voters turn out. A percentage that is slowly diminishing due to natural death. Now, the City wants to go online voting. This further giving the incumbent an edge over any new comers. Last municipal election it was a disaster. Most of the new candidates or all that ran on a shoe string budget or no budget. Faced with ever declining municipal voter turnout in local elections, the City of Oshawa is considering the possibility of offering internet voting for the 2026 municipal and school board elections. Internet voting allows eligible voters to cast their ballot online. It is a proven secure method of voting since ballots can be cast anywhere with internet access using a device of the voter’s choice, including computers, laptops, tablets or smartphones. Oshawa’s turnout in the 2022 municipal election dropped to a dismal record low of 18.42 per cent of all eligible voters. It was just the latest in a declining Oshawa municipal election voter trend that saw a turnout of 24.1 per cent in 2018, 26.4 per cent in 2014 and 29.9 per cent of eligible voters cast a ballot in 2010. You have to go all the way back to the election of 1994 to find a voter turnout of over a third of all eligible voters, when 33.5 per cent cast a ballot. Contrast that with the glory days of voter participation and the highest ever turnout: 51.7 per cent in 1960. Those days are long gone, however, and most municipalities would be happy today to hit the Ontario municipal average of 36.9 per cent across the 444 municipalities of the province for the 2022 election. Voter turnout for Oshawa municipal elections rarely ever went under 33 per cent until the 1970s but has steadily slid since 1997 from a high of 29.9 per cent in 2010 to a dismal 18.42 per cent in 2022. With this in mind. Now the City of Oshawa wants to go electronic.... A way for creating new avenues to corrupt the democratic process by registering people that are either dead or not living in Oshawa anymore. This compounded with the real threat of external election influences. This is a formula for disaster. The Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, Minister of Public Safety, Democratic Institutions, and Intergovernmental Affairs, announced that the measures brought in to protect by-elections from any potential foreign interference will be applied to the Durham electoral district by-election to be held on March 4, 2024. These measures are continuously reviewed in light of the potential for new and evolving threats. The Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections (SITE) Task Force provided enhanced monitoring and assessing of foreign interference threats during the by-election period. These assessments will be provided to the Deputy Minister Committee on Intelligence Response, which will stand ready to brief and advise ministers with mandates to combat foreign interference and protect Canada's democratic institutions. How do you like them apples. If this is known. That tampering can happen and has happened. What are we to assume that will happen with City Online voting? Other Durham municipalities that have adopted internet and/or telephone voting over the last decade include Ajax, Pickering and Clarington. Ajax was the early adopter in the group, taking on internet and telephone voting — in addition to traditional paper and advance voting — in 2014. And it had a noticeable impact in voter turnout. When Ajax did not have internet voting in 2010, turnout was 25.4 per cent. In the 2014 municipal election, with internet voting added, turnout jumped to 30.4 per cent, and was 32.9 per cent in 2018. However, voter turnout in Ajax slumped back to 22.5 per cent in 2022, suggesting internet voting is not a cure-all. Pickering and Clarington opted for internet voting only in time for the 2022 election. In 2018, Pickering’s turnout was 29.17 per cent in the 2018 municipal election before the advent of internet voting. In 2022, the turnout was actually lower at 27.4 per cent. Meanwhile, in Clarington, in 2018 the turnout before online voting was used, it was 28.57 per cent. After adopting online or internet voting, it was very slightly down at 28.05 per cent. So much for transparency, accountability when all they do is look for ways to stack the deck against any new comer.

The Surprising Reality of Ukraine's Middle-Aged Soldiers

By Dale Jodoin In Ukraine, most soldiers fighting on the front lines are middle-aged, with an average age of around 43 years years old. This is surprising because we often think of soldiers as being young and fit. However, in Ukraine, many older men, often aged between 40 and 65, are the ones stepping up to defend their country. There are several reasons why Ukraine's soldiers are older. First, there are simply more men aged 40-59 in Ukraine than there are men aged 18-25. This means there are more middle-aged men available to serve. Additionally, Ukraine's conscription policies have traditionally aimed to protect younger men by setting the lower age limit for conscription at 27. The idea was to safeguard the future of the country by keeping younger generations out of the war. However, due to the ongoing conflict and high casualty rates, there have been talks about lowering this age to 25 to get more recruits. Older soldiers bring both advantages and challenges to the Ukrainian military. On the one hand, they often have more life experience and can be more psychologically stable, which is very important in the high-stress environment of war. They also tend to have valuable technical skills and professional experience that can be very useful. On the other hand, older soldiers might not be as physically resilient or quick to recover from the strains of combat compared to younger soldiers. This can impact their effectiveness in demanding roles that require rapid movement and physical endurance. If a similar situation were to occur in countries like Canada or the United States, the implications would be significant. Middle-aged soldiers might be able to provide steady, experienced presence on the battlefield, but there would also be concerns about their physical capacity to endure prolonged combat operations. One major difference in these countries, however, is the cultural attitude towards military service and resilience. In recent years, there has been a noticeable trend among younger generations in Canada and the United States to seek out "safe spaces" and prioritize mental well-being over traditional notions of toughness and resilience. This trend is often criticized by older generations who view it as a sign of weakening resolve and a lack of preparedness for the harsh realities of life, including military service. The focus on mental health and safe spaces is not inherently negative; it represents a shift towards recognizing and addressing psychological well-being. However, in the context of military readiness, this cultural shift poses unique challenges. The military environment is inherently stressful and demanding, requiring individuals to cope with high-pressure situations and physical strain. In Canada, for instance, the Canadian Armed Forces have faced challenges in recruiting and retaining personnel. The emphasis on creating an inclusive and supportive environment has sometimes clashed with the traditional demands of military service. Efforts to modernize the military culture to be more inclusive and supportive of mental health are ongoing, but they must be balanced with maintaining operational effectiveness. In the United States, similar trends are evident. The U.S. military has also had to adapt to changing societal norms and attitudes towards mental health. The integration of mental health services and support systems within the military is crucial, but it also highlights the tension between supporting soldiers' well-being and preparing them for the rigors of combat. If Canada or the United States were to face a situation similar to Ukraine's, where a significant portion of the military forces is composed of older soldiers, it would necessitate a reevaluation of current policies and cultural attitudes. The experience of Ukraine shows that older soldiers can be effective, but they also face unique challenges that must be addressed. One potential approach is to foster a culture of resilience and readiness among younger generations without dismissing the importance of mental health. This can be achieved through comprehensive training programs that emphasize physical fitness, mental toughness, and adaptability, while also providing robust support systems for mental health. Additionally, policies that encourage voluntary service and provide incentives for younger individuals to join the military can help balance the age distribution of military personnel. This could include educational benefits, career development opportunities, and other incentives that make military service an attractive option for young people. Ukraine's reliance on older soldiers highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of an aging military force. While they bring valuable experience and stability, the physical demands of modern warfare may require a reevaluation of current conscription policies to ensure a more balanced and capable military force. For Canada and the United States, the challenge lies in fostering a culture that values both resilience and mental well-being, ensuring that the military remains prepared for future conflicts while supporting the psychological health of its personnel.

A Too Uncommon Theory of Medicine

By W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford Are your health care providers trained in integrative medicine? It’s not an area of medical specialization, like gynaecology or gastroenterology. Think of it as a theory of medicine. Doctors practicing integrative medicine respect the roles of prescription drugs and surgery when the situation calls for these treatments. But they also study and embrace the potential for natural remedies, lifestyle modifications, nutrition, and traditional practices in both health promotion and disease treatment. Hippocrates, born in 460 BC, was the most influential philosopher of integrative medicine. He believed the human body should be treated as a whole, not as the sum of its parts. Benedict Lust, born in 1872 in Baden, Germany, is regarded as the “Father of Naturopathy”, a form of alternative medicine whose legitimate members promote evidence-based natural remedies. Then there is Linus Pauling. Through his research, he advanced the prevention and treatment of disease by studying how the body benefits from optimized amounts of substances which are natural to the body. Pauling was a molecular biologist. His practice of orthomolecular medicine acknowledges the body’s biochemical pathways and genetic variabilities that interact with diseases such as atherosclerosis, cancer, and brain-related conditions. Dr. Andrew Saul was the founder of the Orthomolecular Medical News Service, and with his death earlier this year, we lost one of the world’s foremost advocates for evidence-based natural therapies. He made it his life’s work to pass on a wealth of knowledge, including the message that natural remedies never killed anyone. Prescription drugs and over-the-counter drugs can’t make that claim. Saul practiced what he preached. His home included a garden full of vegetables, and he stressed that for a few dollars it would produce thousands of dollars of fresh produce for his family. Saul’s news service shares research papers from esteemed scientists from around the world. But it’s the simple messages that stick, and his reminders about the importance of vitamins are worthy of note. Take the 80-year-old tennis player who had to stop playing his favourite game due to severe leg cramps. He wasn’t getting oxygenated blood to his leg muscles. After taking natural vitamin E, he was back on the court. Vitamin E increases the oxygen carrying capacity of the blood. This is the other reason E can stop anginal heart pain. Saul chastised dermatologists for telling patients to keep out of the sun and to use sun block. He championed the need for 3,000 to 5,000 units of vitamin D daily to decrease the risk of multiple sclerosis and maintain our sense of balance as we age. What irritated Saul the most? It was the failure of doctors to accept that vitamin C carries out so many vital health functions, and that it fights the number one killer, heart disease. He pointed to medical studies showing its effectiveness in fighting viral diseases such as pneumonia, hepatitis, meningitis, polio and even the lethal bite of a rattlesnake. He repeated over and over that no one had ever died from an overdose of vitamin C. If you take more than you body can use, it is excreted in the urine. Another fact he underscored was that the dose is so important – the greater the degree of infection the greater amounts of C needed to cure it. Saul reported that in patients desperately ill with infection, in the process of dying, one decision could save them – that is, huge doses of vitamin C, such as 300,000 milligrams administered intravenously. His final advice? Hospitals are the locus of death. So stay away, or get out of them quickly. 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

Large Bowel Cancer in Younger People on the Rise

By W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford New statistics published by the American Cancer Society should be alarming. The numbers point to an increase in colon malignancy in people in their 20s, 30s and 40s. Yet, there’s been a decrease in large bowel cancer among those over the age of 65. In people under 50, the rate has been increasing by about two percent a year since the 1990s. This data goes against a basic law. Most malignancies occur in older people, and this has been true of colon cancer. This new data sends up a red flag that should not go unnoticed. Moreover, this is not just a North American trend. Large bowel cancer is on the also rise around the world. The question is, why has this occurred. Colon cancer is now the leading cause of cancer-related deaths for men under the age of 50. And it’s the second leading cause for women under 50 years of age. Large bowel cancer and rectal cancer are often linked together. And there is evidence that this increase may be related to an increase in rectal cancer. But it does not totally explain the increase. Do genes play a role in the earlier onset of malignancy? A family history of the problem is a factor for some people. For others, doctors have suspected that cell mutations may be the driving force. The presence of large precancerous polyps in the colon means a greater risk. But questions remain about why there is a rise in large bowel cancer among younger people. Could it be that changing lifestyles all over the world play a role? Despite talk of healthier diets, people are eating more red meat than ever – up over 10% in the last decade and more of it consumed after processing into convenient foods. People are eating other highly processed foods, downing too much sugar, and binge drinking alcohol. Researchers have shown that some individuals have good bacteria in their intestines, others bad bacteria. There are also questions about nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. These pain killers may have an adverse effect on the gut. Clusters of malignancies are seen in some areas. In southern Mississippi, people living near chemical plants are exposed to trace elements such as nickel, arsenic, and chromium. Could these potentially toxic materials be associated with the increase in cancer? Researchers are also aware of another pandemic, and not a viral disease lasting just three years. It’s the much worse global crisis of obesity, a long-enduring pandemic. The increase in obesity mirrors the increase in malignancies. But not all patients with colon cancer are overweight. Experts contend there is no single smoking gun responsible for cancer. Multiple risk factors need to be addressed. What can people do to decrease the risk of dying from colon cancer? People need to assist their doctors with early diagnosis. First, never assume rectal bleeding is due to hemorrhoids. Second, colonoscopy is the only way to rule out malignancy. This requires laxatives that clean the bowel of fecal material. Then doctors insert a lighted instrument to examine the large bowel. This can be done under full anesthesia or with medication to relieve the minimal discomfort. Please, do not listen to scaremongers saying colonoscopy is a painful procedure. It’s better labelled a discomfort. Sedation-free procedures are safe, and people can return to normal activities right away. How many people with rectal bleeding have said, “No one is going to a colonoscopy on me,” and now are dead? Dying from a metastatic colon malignancy is many times more painful than the temporary discomfort of a colonoscopy. Don’t make this terrible mistake. 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_jonesBy W. Gifford-Jones MD and Diana Gifford New statistics published by the American Cancer Society should be alarming. The numbers point to an increase in colon malignancy in people in their 20s, 30s and 40s. Yet, there’s been a decrease in large bowel cancer among those over the age of 65. In people under 50, the rate has been increasing by about two percent a year since the 1990s. This data goes against a basic law. Most malignancies occur in older people, and this has been true of colon cancer. This new data sends up a red flag that should not go unnoticed. Moreover, this is not just a North American trend. Large bowel cancer is on the also rise around the world. The question is, why has this occurred. Colon cancer is now the leading cause of cancer-related deaths for men under the age of 50. And it’s the second leading cause for women under 50 years of age. Large bowel cancer and rectal cancer are often linked together. And there is evidence that this increase may be related to an increase in rectal cancer. But it does not totally explain the increase. Do genes play a role in the earlier onset of malignancy? A family history of the problem is a factor for some people. For others, doctors have suspected that cell mutations may be the driving force. The presence of large precancerous polyps in the colon means a greater risk. But questions remain about why there is a rise in large bowel cancer among younger people. Could it be that changing lifestyles all over the world play a role? Despite talk of healthier diets, people are eating more red meat than ever – up over 10% in the last decade and more of it consumed after processing into convenient foods. People are eating other highly processed foods, downing too much sugar, and binge drinking alcohol. Researchers have shown that some individuals have good bacteria in their intestines, others bad bacteria. There are also questions about nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. These pain killers may have an adverse effect on the gut. Clusters of malignancies are seen in some areas. In southern Mississippi, people living near chemical plants are exposed to trace elements such as nickel, arsenic, and chromium. Could these potentially toxic materials be associated with the increase in cancer? Researchers are also aware of another pandemic, and not a viral disease lasting just three years. It’s the much worse global crisis of obesity, a long-enduring pandemic. The increase in obesity mirrors the increase in malignancies. But not all patients with colon cancer are overweight. Experts contend there is no single smoking gun responsible for cancer. Multiple risk factors need to be addressed. What can people do to decrease the risk of dying from colon cancer? People need to assist their doctors with early diagnosis. First, never assume rectal bleeding is due to hemorrhoids. Second, colonoscopy is the only way to rule out malignancy. This requires laxatives that clean the bowel of fecal material. Then doctors insert a lighted instrument to examine the large bowel. This can be done under full anesthesia or with medication to relieve the minimal discomfort. Please, do not listen to scaremongers saying colonoscopy is a painful procedure. It’s better labelled a discomfort. Sedation-free procedures are safe, and people can return to normal activities right away. How many people with rectal bleeding have said, “No one is going to a colonoscopy on me,” and now are dead? Dying from a metastatic colon malignancy is many times more painful than the temporary discomfort of a colonoscopy. Don’t make this terrible mistake. 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