Statistics can, to say the least, be misleading. They often are - and are often deliberately misleading. (Even when they tell the truth, they can be - and often are - used to give a false impression.) They can also be slanted by the precise wording of the question.
To add to the problem, polling companies are hired to do polls. Unlike Santa Claus, somebody pays them for what the they - and that somebody often makes it clear what sort of results he or she would like to see. A good reporter or a good news editor should know that.
Evidently, The Moncton Times and Tribune is short on good reporters and good editors. Today's lead story is that the Alward government's popularity is up, with the support of 57% of NBers. The Liberals got 28%, the NDP 23%.
Oops! That doesn't add up to 100%. It adds up to 108%. But that's not all. Not by a long shot.
A later part of the report says that 20% either refused to reply or didn't know; ( it isn't clear whether this was referring to a particular question or to to the whole thing.) In any case, the conservatives did not get got support of 57% of all New Brunswickers - or even of 108% of all New Brunswickers. They got the support of 53% of those who answered. But those who answered represented only 71% of New Brunswickers.
That means real Conservative support was more like 42% - and there's over a three percent margin of error. Nor is even that the whole story.
The company hired to do the research is Corporate Research Associates, a purely commercial outfit frequently employed by large corporations. Is it possible CRA might have a bias? Is it possible it might, for example, skew the results with clever wording of the questions? (We aren't told the wording of the questions.) Is it possible they might be selective in their choice of districts in which to conduct the survery? There's a hint of some, considerable bias in paragraphs two, three, and four of the front page story.
The CEO of Corporate Research associates told the rerorter that the party's handling of the shale gas issue might be the reason for it's good results. "The way they've handled shale gas has been pretty even-handed, " he said. Even-handed? What - they've provided full information? They've given both sides of the issue? They've prosecuted SWN for deliberately breaking the law in its most recent exploration in Sussex? Get real.
He also said proof of the government's even-handedness is shown in its promise to bring down the toughest regulations of any jurisdiction to protect the environment.
We've had no regulations to speak of for a dozen years - from either Conservatives or Liberals. This Conservative government has had power for over a year. It's been promising tough regulations since the start. We still haven't seen any.
It has taken no significant action against SWN, even though SWN publicly admitted it broke the law, and did so to save money.
This, says CEO of Corporate Research Associates, is proof of even-handedness. Gee. I wonder which party he supports.
Like many statistical reports, this one is not to be trusted.
Even the CEO of Corporate Research Associates must know that 57% support in a poll in which 29% of those questioned refused to answer does not represent 57% support from all New Brunswickers. And even if all the polling methods were honest and competent (- the CEO's statement does not make this reader confident of that -), it still would not support the claim of 57% of all New Brunswickers.
Trained statisticians would know that. Trained journalists would know that. There are only two explanations for such a poll being reported as this one was. Some people are unethical or some people are incompetent. Possibly, some people are both.
This sort of reporting (combined with the triviality of the reporting in general, the manipulation and sloppiness of editors, the bubblegun silliness of its City Views and Hump Day on the op ed page, the obvious bias and rant of much of its editorializing and commentary) is what makes The Moncton Times and Tribune the worst paper (in a lump with the rest of Brunswick Media) in Canada.
It has also and consistently been deplored by parliamentary studies of the quality of news media in this country. The only print media that the majority of New Brunswickers get are designed to keep them in ignorance of what is going on in the world, in Canada, in New Brunswick, and ieven in Moncton. It is designed to distribute propaganda to keep people obedient to their real masters, but happily absorbed in reading horoscopes, advice from Miss Manners, and an op ed page that is largely children's stories for adults. Try the two gems on today's op for examples.
Oh - Norbert let his enthusiasm for buzz words and bias slip in today's column. As a major leader in setting up social programmes, Britain is often criticized, especially by the rich, as a "nanny" state, one which spoils the poor with things they don't deserve - like health care.
Nannay state. Good choice of words. Sets up a clear image. People like Norbert pick up words of that sort - and use them instead of thinking.
In today's column, Norbert refers to Britain as a nanny state, That buzz term, in the view of Norbert's of this world, say all there is to say.
Evidently, Norbert doesn't know that Britain has the largest wage gap between rich and poor of any developed country. Yes, substantially larger than either the US or Canada. And, like the US and Canada, the rich of Britain are getting even richer, and the poor poorer.
That, of course, is because it's a nanny state. Even worse than New Brunswick, Britain has massive poverty and indebtedness because it's a nanny state - for corporations.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Dec 6: addendum
I note that our esteemed natural resources minister, Mr. Northrup, has hired an oil industry lobbyist as his aide. Boy.I bet that'll scare SWN.
Let's see. We have an ex-Irving executive as finance minister who is advised by a team of business execs picked by Irving, and an oil industry lobbyist hired to advise on government policy toward the oil industry. And most of the news media owned by Irving.
Democracy in action.
Let's see. We have an ex-Irving executive as finance minister who is advised by a team of business execs picked by Irving, and an oil industry lobbyist hired to advise on government policy toward the oil industry. And most of the news media owned by Irving.
Democracy in action.
Nov. 6: read todays Times and Transcript in 4 to 5 minutes...
Worth a read - Alec Bruce column, David Suzuki column, letters to the editor (some very good ones today.)
That' s pretty much it. Most of the news is either trivial or uninformative.
Norbert Cunningham column is a good story for ranting grouches in bed with a tummy ache. This is is about civil servants who live high on the taxpayers' dime. (Where does he think Mr. Irving gets his dimes from? Where does he think CEOs on million dollar salaries get their dimes from? Do theirs come from people who don't pay taxes?)
Their is nothing ( again) on Mr. Northrup's investigation into SWN (which long ago admitted it broke the law when it began exploration for shale gas in Sussex.) The TandT has paid more attention to some person who's been stealing sex toys than it has to this abusive behaviour by a corporation.
So - this is a good day to to start a promised look at school rankings - a practice now all the rage in Canada and the US. We'll start with the granfaher of school rankings in Canada, the MacLean's annual rankings of universities.
For a start, there is no such thing as a best university. As teaching institutions, all Canadian universities are much the same. For a start, almost all university teachers in the US and Canada have exactly the same training in teaching. That is - they have none.
They are trained in their subjects. They are not trained in how to teach them. To know how to teach is kind of important. But, generally, across Canada and the US, few universities have the faintest idea what teaching means. They should, one would think, be teaching students how think for themselves, how to express themselves, how to make judgements. But, for the most part, they don't. And it has never occured to them to even think of how it could be done.
All the typical history teacher knows, for example, is to is how to recite historical "facts" to be memorized for an exam. It's a waste of time. Six months after the exam, the students, having no use for the "facts", will have forgotten most of them.
That's why The Canadian Council on Learning (a federal body) just weeks ago reported that Candian universities are "dysfunctional".
So far as most undergraduates are concerned, there is no significant difference between any two Canadian universities.
However, if you are going for a master's degree or, especially, a doctorate, then it pays to go to a university with a big name. It's not that it will be any better than another. But the snobbery of the academic world (and of the business world) will make your degree more admired.
So how can magazine editors become the experts who decide which is the best university? Simple. All they do is copy the educational ignorance and the snobbery of the academic world. So a good university has lots of research grants. What good that is to most students is not clear. But it is something you can measure.
Something else you can measure is the size of the library. The best university has the biggest library. In fifty years of being a student and then a professor, I spent my life in libraries with hundreds of thousands of books. (Never did get around to all of them.)
Yes, of course, you want a library with a good selection - of the books you need. The average undergraduate does not need hundreds of thousands of books.
Another thing you can measure is class size. So MacLean's looks for small classes as a measure of quality. Look - a class whether small, medium or big - will be good if it is taught by a good teacher. I have been in large classes taught by good teachers - and they were worthwhile. I have been in small classes taught by bad teachers (one, at the doctoral level, was a top expert in his field) - and they were a waste of time.
Then, there is another problem. All students have different needs. A university whose snobbery is inspiring to one student will be distasteful to others.
The MacLean's survey looks for, as it must, things it can measure. Alas! Most of the things one can measure have nothing to do with whether a university is the best one for you or for anybody.
But the impact of the MacLean's survey on universities has been strong and destructive.
In their scramble to do well in the survey, and so to draw more students, universities scamper to design their education systems the way magazine editors, of all people, tell them they should be designed.
They demand ever more research from their professors, for example, which results in thousands of articles that have to be published in subsidized journals because few will read them. Why should they? Many of them are research for the sake of research, and have no value whatever. But publications are something MacLean's can measure - the heat is on profs to publish - publish anything. But publish.
As result, teaching - never a strong point in our universities - has sunk to abysmal levels (without ever being half-decent to start with.)
Historically, universityies were a last fling at childhood (irresponsibility with beer thrown in) for rich kids. Professors and the few serious students went about their studies wtihout paying much attention to the party kids.
That changed about 1950 as our society required more highly trained people. And so the universities became really an extension of public schooling. The professors couldn't just stand there reciting facts. They had to learn how to teach.
But they didn't. The old snobbery and egoism of research ignored the need for teaching. The MacLean's pseudo-scientific surverys have made it far, far worse. We are spending a lot of money on universities - for pretty meagre returns.
Meanwhile, if you're going to university, forget the MacLean's survey. Pick the one you think will suit you.
Just don't expect great teaching, no matter which one you choose.
On the next slack day, we'll look at the drive for school ratings of public schools, the greedy reasons behind it, and the damage it has done to our schools.
That' s pretty much it. Most of the news is either trivial or uninformative.
Norbert Cunningham column is a good story for ranting grouches in bed with a tummy ache. This is is about civil servants who live high on the taxpayers' dime. (Where does he think Mr. Irving gets his dimes from? Where does he think CEOs on million dollar salaries get their dimes from? Do theirs come from people who don't pay taxes?)
Their is nothing ( again) on Mr. Northrup's investigation into SWN (which long ago admitted it broke the law when it began exploration for shale gas in Sussex.) The TandT has paid more attention to some person who's been stealing sex toys than it has to this abusive behaviour by a corporation.
So - this is a good day to to start a promised look at school rankings - a practice now all the rage in Canada and the US. We'll start with the granfaher of school rankings in Canada, the MacLean's annual rankings of universities.
For a start, there is no such thing as a best university. As teaching institutions, all Canadian universities are much the same. For a start, almost all university teachers in the US and Canada have exactly the same training in teaching. That is - they have none.
They are trained in their subjects. They are not trained in how to teach them. To know how to teach is kind of important. But, generally, across Canada and the US, few universities have the faintest idea what teaching means. They should, one would think, be teaching students how think for themselves, how to express themselves, how to make judgements. But, for the most part, they don't. And it has never occured to them to even think of how it could be done.
All the typical history teacher knows, for example, is to is how to recite historical "facts" to be memorized for an exam. It's a waste of time. Six months after the exam, the students, having no use for the "facts", will have forgotten most of them.
That's why The Canadian Council on Learning (a federal body) just weeks ago reported that Candian universities are "dysfunctional".
So far as most undergraduates are concerned, there is no significant difference between any two Canadian universities.
However, if you are going for a master's degree or, especially, a doctorate, then it pays to go to a university with a big name. It's not that it will be any better than another. But the snobbery of the academic world (and of the business world) will make your degree more admired.
So how can magazine editors become the experts who decide which is the best university? Simple. All they do is copy the educational ignorance and the snobbery of the academic world. So a good university has lots of research grants. What good that is to most students is not clear. But it is something you can measure.
Something else you can measure is the size of the library. The best university has the biggest library. In fifty years of being a student and then a professor, I spent my life in libraries with hundreds of thousands of books. (Never did get around to all of them.)
Yes, of course, you want a library with a good selection - of the books you need. The average undergraduate does not need hundreds of thousands of books.
Another thing you can measure is class size. So MacLean's looks for small classes as a measure of quality. Look - a class whether small, medium or big - will be good if it is taught by a good teacher. I have been in large classes taught by good teachers - and they were worthwhile. I have been in small classes taught by bad teachers (one, at the doctoral level, was a top expert in his field) - and they were a waste of time.
Then, there is another problem. All students have different needs. A university whose snobbery is inspiring to one student will be distasteful to others.
The MacLean's survey looks for, as it must, things it can measure. Alas! Most of the things one can measure have nothing to do with whether a university is the best one for you or for anybody.
But the impact of the MacLean's survey on universities has been strong and destructive.
In their scramble to do well in the survey, and so to draw more students, universities scamper to design their education systems the way magazine editors, of all people, tell them they should be designed.
They demand ever more research from their professors, for example, which results in thousands of articles that have to be published in subsidized journals because few will read them. Why should they? Many of them are research for the sake of research, and have no value whatever. But publications are something MacLean's can measure - the heat is on profs to publish - publish anything. But publish.
As result, teaching - never a strong point in our universities - has sunk to abysmal levels (without ever being half-decent to start with.)
Historically, universityies were a last fling at childhood (irresponsibility with beer thrown in) for rich kids. Professors and the few serious students went about their studies wtihout paying much attention to the party kids.
That changed about 1950 as our society required more highly trained people. And so the universities became really an extension of public schooling. The professors couldn't just stand there reciting facts. They had to learn how to teach.
But they didn't. The old snobbery and egoism of research ignored the need for teaching. The MacLean's pseudo-scientific surverys have made it far, far worse. We are spending a lot of money on universities - for pretty meagre returns.
Meanwhile, if you're going to university, forget the MacLean's survey. Pick the one you think will suit you.
Just don't expect great teaching, no matter which one you choose.
On the next slack day, we'll look at the drive for school ratings of public schools, the greedy reasons behind it, and the damage it has done to our schools.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Dec. 5:
The lead story on p. A1 sets the tone for this whole issue of The Moncton Times and Transcript.
"Metro Moncton lights up for Christmas" Gee. LIghts at Christmas.Who would have noticed? But you can't fool the staff of the TandT. No, sir. They spotted those lights, and their investigative reporters found out why they're up.
Inside, there's even more exciting news and opinion. The editorial, for example, lays it on the line, "Moncton Council should set prudent fiscal course". Damn right. Nothing worse than an imprudent fiscal course.
(Going on the basis of earlier editorials and opinion pieces in the Tand T, the prudent thing would be to go in the hole for a couple of hundred million to build a hockey rink.)
The crises of Pakistan, Syria and Iran have us on the edge of World War Three, if not already in it. But there's not a word on them.
Canada is destroying what 's left of its international reputation by blocking any progress to international agreement on climate change. There's a story on the fast and steady increase of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. But nothing on how Harper has opposed taking any action. (If he supported action, it would displease his corporate sponsors.)
Enjoying our mild December? It's melting our permafrost up north, and releasing unprecedented amounts of CO2 - to join the CO2 from our shale gas - which will make it even warmer. Arctic ice is melting at the fastest rate in 1400 years.
Thank you, Mr. Harper, for protecting our billionaires.
In the whole paper, there is only one, real story. Performing Arts NB is shutting down for lack of government funding. In this province, where so much of artistic performance consists of acts like farting to the tune of White Christmas, this shutting down of real Arts is a serious loss - especially for rural New Brunswick which has little enough to enrich it.
However, we have to cut some budgets so we can finance cheap electrcity and other gifts for Irving, McCain, Ganong et al.
A reader has asked me to write a piece about why school and university ratings are a scam - and who's behind them. I have some writing on this in my earliest blogs. But it may well be a good idea to repeat it, perhaps in more conpact form. If the TandT continues non-news as it has today, I'll make it a section of a regular blog. If not, I'll write a couple of extra blogs in the evenings.
The blandness of the TandT is no accident. The whole purpose of that paper is to keep us in ignorance of what is happening, and how we are affected by it. The only exceptions are things that in no way affect our corporate masters.
That's why we are so well informed about sports, horoscopes,and how to throw a great cocktail party.
Oh, and Christmas lights.
"Metro Moncton lights up for Christmas" Gee. LIghts at Christmas.Who would have noticed? But you can't fool the staff of the TandT. No, sir. They spotted those lights, and their investigative reporters found out why they're up.
Inside, there's even more exciting news and opinion. The editorial, for example, lays it on the line, "Moncton Council should set prudent fiscal course". Damn right. Nothing worse than an imprudent fiscal course.
(Going on the basis of earlier editorials and opinion pieces in the Tand T, the prudent thing would be to go in the hole for a couple of hundred million to build a hockey rink.)
The crises of Pakistan, Syria and Iran have us on the edge of World War Three, if not already in it. But there's not a word on them.
Canada is destroying what 's left of its international reputation by blocking any progress to international agreement on climate change. There's a story on the fast and steady increase of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. But nothing on how Harper has opposed taking any action. (If he supported action, it would displease his corporate sponsors.)
Enjoying our mild December? It's melting our permafrost up north, and releasing unprecedented amounts of CO2 - to join the CO2 from our shale gas - which will make it even warmer. Arctic ice is melting at the fastest rate in 1400 years.
Thank you, Mr. Harper, for protecting our billionaires.
In the whole paper, there is only one, real story. Performing Arts NB is shutting down for lack of government funding. In this province, where so much of artistic performance consists of acts like farting to the tune of White Christmas, this shutting down of real Arts is a serious loss - especially for rural New Brunswick which has little enough to enrich it.
However, we have to cut some budgets so we can finance cheap electrcity and other gifts for Irving, McCain, Ganong et al.
A reader has asked me to write a piece about why school and university ratings are a scam - and who's behind them. I have some writing on this in my earliest blogs. But it may well be a good idea to repeat it, perhaps in more conpact form. If the TandT continues non-news as it has today, I'll make it a section of a regular blog. If not, I'll write a couple of extra blogs in the evenings.
The blandness of the TandT is no accident. The whole purpose of that paper is to keep us in ignorance of what is happening, and how we are affected by it. The only exceptions are things that in no way affect our corporate masters.
That's why we are so well informed about sports, horoscopes,and how to throw a great cocktail party.
Oh, and Christmas lights.
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Dec. 3: addendum to Dec. 3 blog....
sorry. I forgot two things.
1. Our Current Events group meets at the Moncton Library at 7 p.m., Tuesday, Dec. 6.
I have to mention it here because The Moncton Times and Transcript won't include it on their weekly events page.
We'll begin with why school ratings, like those in MacLean's Magazine, are a fraud - and why the ranking of public schools in New Brunswick is not only a fraud, but a scam. As well, both the MacLean's ratings and the AIMS ratings of public schools are doing damage.
Then we'll switch to topics you would like to raise.
2. I unpardonably forgot to mention the Whatever Section with its columns written by students. As usual, all of them are thought-provoking and worth a read. The one by Tess Allen particularly struck me because it brought back painful memories of my undergraduate years.
Ms. Allen argues that it is very important in university not to skip class. She's so right.
Part of the reason she's right is a sad one. But it's a reality. Many, perhaps most, university undergraduate classes are really about memorizing what the professor says. It's too bad. But it's true. University should be about developing the mind. But most of it is about memorizing information for an exam, information you will forget forever within six months. That's reality.
But going to classes, in any case, is not the whole story.
To do well in university, it's also essential to set a rigid schedule of study, and to stick to it EVERY DAY, no matter what. If you have nothing assigned, study anyway. Go back over lecture notes. But set a time every day.
Give yourself free time. Have a schedule for free time, too. You won't learn any more by overdoing the study.
In my BA years, I often skipped classes. I rarely studied until the night before the exam. My average was so low that professors referred to it as beneath contempt.
So I did another undergraduate year. This time, I took it seriously. I went to classes. For a half hour each day, I went over the notes for that day, for the classes three days earlier, for those seven days before that, and again on the thirtieth day. In the last two weeks, I went over all my notes.
The night before an exam, I didn't study. I relaxed so I wouldn't be walking into the exam all tense.
Result - straight As.
University isn't hard. Just don't skip classes - and don't leave study until the night before.
1. Our Current Events group meets at the Moncton Library at 7 p.m., Tuesday, Dec. 6.
I have to mention it here because The Moncton Times and Transcript won't include it on their weekly events page.
We'll begin with why school ratings, like those in MacLean's Magazine, are a fraud - and why the ranking of public schools in New Brunswick is not only a fraud, but a scam. As well, both the MacLean's ratings and the AIMS ratings of public schools are doing damage.
Then we'll switch to topics you would like to raise.
2. I unpardonably forgot to mention the Whatever Section with its columns written by students. As usual, all of them are thought-provoking and worth a read. The one by Tess Allen particularly struck me because it brought back painful memories of my undergraduate years.
Ms. Allen argues that it is very important in university not to skip class. She's so right.
Part of the reason she's right is a sad one. But it's a reality. Many, perhaps most, university undergraduate classes are really about memorizing what the professor says. It's too bad. But it's true. University should be about developing the mind. But most of it is about memorizing information for an exam, information you will forget forever within six months. That's reality.
But going to classes, in any case, is not the whole story.
To do well in university, it's also essential to set a rigid schedule of study, and to stick to it EVERY DAY, no matter what. If you have nothing assigned, study anyway. Go back over lecture notes. But set a time every day.
Give yourself free time. Have a schedule for free time, too. You won't learn any more by overdoing the study.
In my BA years, I often skipped classes. I rarely studied until the night before the exam. My average was so low that professors referred to it as beneath contempt.
So I did another undergraduate year. This time, I took it seriously. I went to classes. For a half hour each day, I went over the notes for that day, for the classes three days earlier, for those seven days before that, and again on the thirtieth day. In the last two weeks, I went over all my notes.
The night before an exam, I didn't study. I relaxed so I wouldn't be walking into the exam all tense.
Result - straight As.
University isn't hard. Just don't skip classes - and don't leave study until the night before.
Dec. 3: A mixed bag...
The ftont page carries its usual free ad for the casino - disguised as a news story. Otherwise, section A carries its usual load of trivia ---except---
On p. 2, there is an important story, and one I would not expect to find in the TandT. It's easily missed because its print size and style are different from those of most stories. It looks, in fact, like one of those "clarifications" that nobody reads. But the story is important.
Wikileaks has announced it will release documents showing that 125 companies around the world - including three Canadian ones - are helping governments to spy on citizens through monitoring their phone calls, e-mail, and web browser history.
That's no small deal. Such spying without a warrant is against the law. And for good reason because it means goodbye democracy; hello police state. It also raises interesting questions about who is paying these companies for their service.
This should be a front page lead, not a dinky note hidden on p. 2. Will the TandT be saying anything about what this means? Will it assign reporters to get opinion from legal experts? Will it follow up on the story?
I doubt it. I mean, it hasn't mentioned the case of one of the contributors to Wikileaks who has been well over a year in solitary confinement in an American military prison (without trial), and has been subjected to daily torture such as sleep deprivation. UN human rights inspectors have been denied permission to see him. So who cares if we're being spied on?
Three important stories in NewsToday.
1. The disaster of our new, F-35 fighterbomber continues. More problems in its design have been found. Originally, the cost was to have been 9 billion, and that is the fiture given in the Postmedia story. In fact, the price is already some four times that - and this latest problem will drive it much higher.
As the story says, the US and Canada will not back out of the project because so much money has already been spent on it that withdrawal would be politically embarassing. Gee. We certainly wouldn't want to embarass anybody.
2. Harper and Obama will meet to discuss security issues. People concerned about civil rights are worried about this one. We have already erased the Canada-US border so that armed police and other law agents from the US can operate freely in Canada. In effect, that means that in law enforcement terms, a separate Canada no longer exists.
This meeting will take it even further to bring us into line with American practices. (Hint - a US president now has power to imjprison and even assassinate with no legal process. Over a million Americans are on a "no fly list" - without any legal process, without even a reason.) Watch for a 'no-fly list on Canada. And don't kid yourself that you would never be put on such a list.
Why is Harper doing this? Does it benefit you and me in any way? Not likely. But it does represent the coporations in the Canadian Council of CEOs who want a more open US Canada border for their goods. And if we all surrender control of our own country to do that - so be it. After all, so far as corporations are concerned, what globalism means is that we no longer have governments - or democracy. That's so that corporations can do what they like.
3. Are you on a low sodium diet? Harper is pretty much killing our ability to check the accuracy of the labelling on foods in the stores.
Well, gotta save money to pay for those F-35s and all that illegal spying on Canadian citizens.
On D3, Reuters has its usual uninformative story about Pakistan. Here are the real elements of it -
1. The US has been invading Pakistan air and land space for at least a couple of years to hunt down Taliban. In the process, it has killed large numbers of Pakistani civilians and soldiers.
2. Recently, US helicopters attacked a Pakistan military base on the border, within Pakistan territory. Pakistan says it frantically radioed US commanders to stop the attack. But it went on for almost two hours, killing a large number of Pakistan soldiers. The US has refused even to apologize.
3.The democratically elected president of Pakistan was killed by army leaders who took over the government.
4. The US iimmediately announced its support of the military government - and has been paying it off ever since. Thus the ability of US forces to get away with so much espionage and killing in Pakistan.
5. Pakistan is the only Moslem country to have a nuclear arsenal.
6. China cannot possibly allow the US to get control of Pakistan.
7. China has a nuclear arsenal.
Now, connect the dots.
On D 4, a favourable story about shale gas. What a surprise! A professor thinks it's a good idea. The professor is employed at University of Calgary School of Business, and academic director for petroleum land management.
Wow! Isn't Calgary in Alberta where all that oil is? Don't big businesses normally fund schools of business?
How about connecting those dots?
On D5, in a long list of school announcements, Disctrict Two director Karen Branscombe has, for the second year in a row, been named by The Women's Executive Network as one of Canada's Most Powerful Women.
That must be a mistake. Last year, when she won the same award, the editorial writer said she was gallivanting around picking up awards instead of doing her job. This year, no editorial.
Now, if Mr. Irving gave a starving child in Somalia a bag of peanuts, we'd have a big picture of him shaking hands with somebody - and a headline saying Philanthrophist feeds the starving. You know, the kind of photo story we see almost every day in the TandT.
What ms. Branscombe has accomplished deserves more than two sentences on a back page.
The editorial is on sewers, again. (It's one of those topics that loses its charm quickly.)
Bill Belliveau's column is bang on about how Harper is destroying Canada. Too bad he never writes similar ones about the Liberals.
I am disturbed by the rampant socialism in Norbert's column. He wants to see TV dramas without ads. This is precisely the sort of attitude that destroys the creativity of the capitalism that God gave us. The purpose of TV (and newspapers) is to sell ads. The purpose of the drama is to get people to watch the ads.
Sheesh. Next thing thing you know, this closet Marxist/Occupy Moncton/hippie will be praising the CBC.
Good column, and an amusing one, by Brent Mazerolle.
And it wraps up with a very clear explanation from Gwynn Dyer on what is happening at the climate change conference in Durban. What's happening is that we our abandoning our children to a self-destructing world. And Canada is leading the way. And we're doing it to protect the profits and high executive salaries and perks of the corporate world.
On p. 2, there is an important story, and one I would not expect to find in the TandT. It's easily missed because its print size and style are different from those of most stories. It looks, in fact, like one of those "clarifications" that nobody reads. But the story is important.
Wikileaks has announced it will release documents showing that 125 companies around the world - including three Canadian ones - are helping governments to spy on citizens through monitoring their phone calls, e-mail, and web browser history.
That's no small deal. Such spying without a warrant is against the law. And for good reason because it means goodbye democracy; hello police state. It also raises interesting questions about who is paying these companies for their service.
This should be a front page lead, not a dinky note hidden on p. 2. Will the TandT be saying anything about what this means? Will it assign reporters to get opinion from legal experts? Will it follow up on the story?
I doubt it. I mean, it hasn't mentioned the case of one of the contributors to Wikileaks who has been well over a year in solitary confinement in an American military prison (without trial), and has been subjected to daily torture such as sleep deprivation. UN human rights inspectors have been denied permission to see him. So who cares if we're being spied on?
Three important stories in NewsToday.
1. The disaster of our new, F-35 fighterbomber continues. More problems in its design have been found. Originally, the cost was to have been 9 billion, and that is the fiture given in the Postmedia story. In fact, the price is already some four times that - and this latest problem will drive it much higher.
As the story says, the US and Canada will not back out of the project because so much money has already been spent on it that withdrawal would be politically embarassing. Gee. We certainly wouldn't want to embarass anybody.
2. Harper and Obama will meet to discuss security issues. People concerned about civil rights are worried about this one. We have already erased the Canada-US border so that armed police and other law agents from the US can operate freely in Canada. In effect, that means that in law enforcement terms, a separate Canada no longer exists.
This meeting will take it even further to bring us into line with American practices. (Hint - a US president now has power to imjprison and even assassinate with no legal process. Over a million Americans are on a "no fly list" - without any legal process, without even a reason.) Watch for a 'no-fly list on Canada. And don't kid yourself that you would never be put on such a list.
Why is Harper doing this? Does it benefit you and me in any way? Not likely. But it does represent the coporations in the Canadian Council of CEOs who want a more open US Canada border for their goods. And if we all surrender control of our own country to do that - so be it. After all, so far as corporations are concerned, what globalism means is that we no longer have governments - or democracy. That's so that corporations can do what they like.
3. Are you on a low sodium diet? Harper is pretty much killing our ability to check the accuracy of the labelling on foods in the stores.
Well, gotta save money to pay for those F-35s and all that illegal spying on Canadian citizens.
On D3, Reuters has its usual uninformative story about Pakistan. Here are the real elements of it -
1. The US has been invading Pakistan air and land space for at least a couple of years to hunt down Taliban. In the process, it has killed large numbers of Pakistani civilians and soldiers.
2. Recently, US helicopters attacked a Pakistan military base on the border, within Pakistan territory. Pakistan says it frantically radioed US commanders to stop the attack. But it went on for almost two hours, killing a large number of Pakistan soldiers. The US has refused even to apologize.
3.The democratically elected president of Pakistan was killed by army leaders who took over the government.
4. The US iimmediately announced its support of the military government - and has been paying it off ever since. Thus the ability of US forces to get away with so much espionage and killing in Pakistan.
5. Pakistan is the only Moslem country to have a nuclear arsenal.
6. China cannot possibly allow the US to get control of Pakistan.
7. China has a nuclear arsenal.
Now, connect the dots.
On D 4, a favourable story about shale gas. What a surprise! A professor thinks it's a good idea. The professor is employed at University of Calgary School of Business, and academic director for petroleum land management.
Wow! Isn't Calgary in Alberta where all that oil is? Don't big businesses normally fund schools of business?
How about connecting those dots?
On D5, in a long list of school announcements, Disctrict Two director Karen Branscombe has, for the second year in a row, been named by The Women's Executive Network as one of Canada's Most Powerful Women.
That must be a mistake. Last year, when she won the same award, the editorial writer said she was gallivanting around picking up awards instead of doing her job. This year, no editorial.
Now, if Mr. Irving gave a starving child in Somalia a bag of peanuts, we'd have a big picture of him shaking hands with somebody - and a headline saying Philanthrophist feeds the starving. You know, the kind of photo story we see almost every day in the TandT.
What ms. Branscombe has accomplished deserves more than two sentences on a back page.
The editorial is on sewers, again. (It's one of those topics that loses its charm quickly.)
Bill Belliveau's column is bang on about how Harper is destroying Canada. Too bad he never writes similar ones about the Liberals.
I am disturbed by the rampant socialism in Norbert's column. He wants to see TV dramas without ads. This is precisely the sort of attitude that destroys the creativity of the capitalism that God gave us. The purpose of TV (and newspapers) is to sell ads. The purpose of the drama is to get people to watch the ads.
Sheesh. Next thing thing you know, this closet Marxist/Occupy Moncton/hippie will be praising the CBC.
Good column, and an amusing one, by Brent Mazerolle.
And it wraps up with a very clear explanation from Gwynn Dyer on what is happening at the climate change conference in Durban. What's happening is that we our abandoning our children to a self-destructing world. And Canada is leading the way. And we're doing it to protect the profits and high executive salaries and perks of the corporate world.
Friday, December 2, 2011
Dec. 2: Ho-hum
This motning, I found a flyer - just one page - in my mailbox. It spoke of a senior's nursing home in Moncton in which an elderly man was kept in restraint in a specialized chair designed to keep him immobile. He was kept in it for 545 days. When he was released, he could not walk - and he will never be able to walk again.
It's an easy way to handle troublesome, elderly people.
The flyer said that is also illegal; but that minister of justice, Marie-Claude Blais has said not a word about it.
It was signed John Heffler.
Across North America, indeed across most of the western world, there is a profound dissatisfaction with politicians and with news media. The blog is a product of it. The Occupy movement is a product of it. The wide use of tweeter is a product of it. The flyer in my mailbox this morning is a product of it.
It is no coincdence that all these things are developing at the same time. Nor are they happening simply because of the invention of the computer. (The personal computer has been around for a good forty years, now. But it's wide use for news and comment is much more recent.)
No, it's not computers are making us angry and dissatisfied. What's making us angry and dissatisfied are politicians and news media that are obvious puppets of large corporations and very wealthy individuals who use them to rob us - and to keep us in ignorance of what they are doing.
Just yesterday, we learned that Mr. Alward indicated he might be favourably disposed to a federal proposal to pay EI ONLY to high school graduates. That is surely a bizarre response.
1. Those who lack education are the ones most likely to get laid off and to need PEI.
2. It seems to assume that it is their own fault if they don't finish high school. In fact, every study I have ever seen shows that the children most likely not to finish high school are the poor. It's not being stupid or lazy that made them drop out. It's being born poor.
(This is a subject I feel strongly about because I was born poor; and I didn't finish high school. It was pure luck that got me out of that dead end. None of my childhood friends finished high school, either. They weren't stupid. They weren't lazy. They were poor.)
What this bill does is to turn the poor into a sort of race, an inferior people who deserve whatever happens them.
But our politicians don't call it that because racism is out of fashion. Today, few in the US or Canada would say, "Make the Blacks Pay. Make Jews pay. Make orientals pay.) But it's perfectly acceptable to say "Make the poor pay. They deserve it."
3. The poor, the uneducated did not cause this recession. It was caused by rich and well-educated people. Surely, if someone must suffer, it should be those who caused the problem. But, far from them suffering, we have been handing over even more money to them.
There's a topic for an editorial. But you'll never see it in most of our mainstream newspapers - and certainly never in The TandT.
So what's happening is that people are taking the responsibility for spreading the news. They have to do it because most of the news media are simply propaganda sheets for their owners.
Today's A section of TandT does have one important story It's about a new liquor store in Dieppe. So y'all get down there, y'hear? Do your patriotic duty The more you drink, the more the goverment can give tax breaks to the rich.
There's a noteworthy story on the first page of NewsToday. It looks as though Defence Minister Peter McKay may have been caught lying to the House of Commons about the reasons for a trip he took in an armed forces helicopter. (He claimed it was a training flight. Documents suggests it was simply for his personal convenience.) Now what?
Time was - not long ago - that lying to the house was the most serious crime an MP could commit. He could attend the House drunk (John A. often did). He could accept bribes. (It seems clear that Brian Mulroney did; but nothing has happened to him.) But lying to the House was unacceptable. The only proper thing for a gentleman to do was to resign. In fact, a British defence minister resigned just recently for a lesser crime.
Somehow, though, I suspect our democracy has slid so far down that Peter MacKay will not resign. And Harper won't force him to.
There is still not a word about the crisis in Pakistan which could well draw us into a war. In Pakistan, the government is the military. It acts for the US because the US supplies the military with what it calls "aid". (Actually, it goes largely for bribery to the leading officers of the military and their friends.)
American troops and drones and manned bombers have reoutinely entered Pakistan, klling hundreds of civilians and Pakistani soldiers, along with the occasional Taliban. As a result, the country is tearing apart, and is on the edge of civil war. It's made even worse by the American refusal to apologize for the lastest attack that killed at least 25 Pakistanki soldiers, possibly more than 30.
Gee! Is it possible the US wants an excuse to invade Pakistan so it can take out the only nuclear arsenal in Moslem country? Gee! Just guess which country might be asked to contribute troops to make it look like a legitimate, peace-keeping venture. Guess who we might be remembering next Nov. 11.
Their nothing about the crises in Syia and Iran - not even a mention that China has threatened war if there is an attack on Iran. I know that's not as important as the question of Moncton sewerage. But such a war might have an effect on Moncton. D'ya think?
On the editorial page, the first editorial is almost good. But it loses it for the reason that editorials so often lose it. Editors assume that because they are editors they are therefore experts on a wide range of subjects. I've met a lot of editors. Very few are expert at anything but editing - and a substantial number not even good at that.
This editorial suggests that students getting bursaries should be required to have exceptionally high grades from high school. However, as I pointed out at the start of this blog, the records shows that kids who get poor grades in high school usually get them because they're poor - not because they're stupid. Those who get high grades usually get them because they come from higher income families - not because they are especially gifted in any intellectual way. So, giving bursaries to students with high grades would simply mean giving more money to people who already have it. (Which sometimes appears to be the official policy of the Tand T.)
Norbert writes a column that starts well on the problem of climate change - then drops the ball when it comes to solutions. The reason some governments (like ours) do not react to the problem of climate change is because the corporations who do most of the polluting that cause climate change fear that slowing it would hurt their profits. The problem, then, is not just climate change; the problem is the power that big business has in what we fondly call "democracies).
For his final inanity, Norbert suggests we could improve things by walking to work. Norbert, read the NewsToday section of your own paper. The Arctic and Antarctic are warming at the fastest rate in recorded history, releasing methane into the atmosphere which creates warming. (Methane - that's the stuff we're releasiing into our atmosphere under the name of shale gas.)
Yes, I'm sure if I walk to work that will solve the problem.
Ii began reading the op ed column by Bill Brewer with interest and sympathy. But then he falls into the trap that the government, assisted by the TandT, has set.
When Premier Alward suggested reducing the number of MLAs as a cost-saving measure, he knew damn well that the saving would take us not an inch on the miles we have to go to balance our budget. The problem is not the number of MLAs we have. The problem is the billions we have given away to the Irvings and the McCains and the Ganongs in grants, gifts, interest-free loans, and absurd tax breaks.
It's not the MLAs that made us poor (except in the sense that they allowed it to happen.. And in that case the answer is not to reduce them in number. The answer is to vote them out.) No, the cost of a few MLAs is not what makes us poor. So cutting down by a few MLAs will save very, very little. And it will still leave us a legislature full of MLAs who purr when the Irvings, McCains and Ganongs tickle their chins.
So why did Alward suggest such a cut? Well - he knows people have no great respect for politicians. So most people will think getting rid of some is a great idea. That will take their attention away from the real problem, the enormous economic, social and environmental problems being caused by our Irvings, etc.
Meanwhile, Mr. Alward will still have enough flunkies left to do what his bosses want. And our deficits will continue to rise.
It's an easy way to handle troublesome, elderly people.
The flyer said that is also illegal; but that minister of justice, Marie-Claude Blais has said not a word about it.
It was signed John Heffler.
Across North America, indeed across most of the western world, there is a profound dissatisfaction with politicians and with news media. The blog is a product of it. The Occupy movement is a product of it. The wide use of tweeter is a product of it. The flyer in my mailbox this morning is a product of it.
It is no coincdence that all these things are developing at the same time. Nor are they happening simply because of the invention of the computer. (The personal computer has been around for a good forty years, now. But it's wide use for news and comment is much more recent.)
No, it's not computers are making us angry and dissatisfied. What's making us angry and dissatisfied are politicians and news media that are obvious puppets of large corporations and very wealthy individuals who use them to rob us - and to keep us in ignorance of what they are doing.
Just yesterday, we learned that Mr. Alward indicated he might be favourably disposed to a federal proposal to pay EI ONLY to high school graduates. That is surely a bizarre response.
1. Those who lack education are the ones most likely to get laid off and to need PEI.
2. It seems to assume that it is their own fault if they don't finish high school. In fact, every study I have ever seen shows that the children most likely not to finish high school are the poor. It's not being stupid or lazy that made them drop out. It's being born poor.
(This is a subject I feel strongly about because I was born poor; and I didn't finish high school. It was pure luck that got me out of that dead end. None of my childhood friends finished high school, either. They weren't stupid. They weren't lazy. They were poor.)
What this bill does is to turn the poor into a sort of race, an inferior people who deserve whatever happens them.
But our politicians don't call it that because racism is out of fashion. Today, few in the US or Canada would say, "Make the Blacks Pay. Make Jews pay. Make orientals pay.) But it's perfectly acceptable to say "Make the poor pay. They deserve it."
3. The poor, the uneducated did not cause this recession. It was caused by rich and well-educated people. Surely, if someone must suffer, it should be those who caused the problem. But, far from them suffering, we have been handing over even more money to them.
There's a topic for an editorial. But you'll never see it in most of our mainstream newspapers - and certainly never in The TandT.
So what's happening is that people are taking the responsibility for spreading the news. They have to do it because most of the news media are simply propaganda sheets for their owners.
Today's A section of TandT does have one important story It's about a new liquor store in Dieppe. So y'all get down there, y'hear? Do your patriotic duty The more you drink, the more the goverment can give tax breaks to the rich.
There's a noteworthy story on the first page of NewsToday. It looks as though Defence Minister Peter McKay may have been caught lying to the House of Commons about the reasons for a trip he took in an armed forces helicopter. (He claimed it was a training flight. Documents suggests it was simply for his personal convenience.) Now what?
Time was - not long ago - that lying to the house was the most serious crime an MP could commit. He could attend the House drunk (John A. often did). He could accept bribes. (It seems clear that Brian Mulroney did; but nothing has happened to him.) But lying to the House was unacceptable. The only proper thing for a gentleman to do was to resign. In fact, a British defence minister resigned just recently for a lesser crime.
Somehow, though, I suspect our democracy has slid so far down that Peter MacKay will not resign. And Harper won't force him to.
There is still not a word about the crisis in Pakistan which could well draw us into a war. In Pakistan, the government is the military. It acts for the US because the US supplies the military with what it calls "aid". (Actually, it goes largely for bribery to the leading officers of the military and their friends.)
American troops and drones and manned bombers have reoutinely entered Pakistan, klling hundreds of civilians and Pakistani soldiers, along with the occasional Taliban. As a result, the country is tearing apart, and is on the edge of civil war. It's made even worse by the American refusal to apologize for the lastest attack that killed at least 25 Pakistanki soldiers, possibly more than 30.
Gee! Is it possible the US wants an excuse to invade Pakistan so it can take out the only nuclear arsenal in Moslem country? Gee! Just guess which country might be asked to contribute troops to make it look like a legitimate, peace-keeping venture. Guess who we might be remembering next Nov. 11.
Their nothing about the crises in Syia and Iran - not even a mention that China has threatened war if there is an attack on Iran. I know that's not as important as the question of Moncton sewerage. But such a war might have an effect on Moncton. D'ya think?
On the editorial page, the first editorial is almost good. But it loses it for the reason that editorials so often lose it. Editors assume that because they are editors they are therefore experts on a wide range of subjects. I've met a lot of editors. Very few are expert at anything but editing - and a substantial number not even good at that.
This editorial suggests that students getting bursaries should be required to have exceptionally high grades from high school. However, as I pointed out at the start of this blog, the records shows that kids who get poor grades in high school usually get them because they're poor - not because they're stupid. Those who get high grades usually get them because they come from higher income families - not because they are especially gifted in any intellectual way. So, giving bursaries to students with high grades would simply mean giving more money to people who already have it. (Which sometimes appears to be the official policy of the Tand T.)
Norbert writes a column that starts well on the problem of climate change - then drops the ball when it comes to solutions. The reason some governments (like ours) do not react to the problem of climate change is because the corporations who do most of the polluting that cause climate change fear that slowing it would hurt their profits. The problem, then, is not just climate change; the problem is the power that big business has in what we fondly call "democracies).
For his final inanity, Norbert suggests we could improve things by walking to work. Norbert, read the NewsToday section of your own paper. The Arctic and Antarctic are warming at the fastest rate in recorded history, releasing methane into the atmosphere which creates warming. (Methane - that's the stuff we're releasiing into our atmosphere under the name of shale gas.)
Yes, I'm sure if I walk to work that will solve the problem.
Ii began reading the op ed column by Bill Brewer with interest and sympathy. But then he falls into the trap that the government, assisted by the TandT, has set.
When Premier Alward suggested reducing the number of MLAs as a cost-saving measure, he knew damn well that the saving would take us not an inch on the miles we have to go to balance our budget. The problem is not the number of MLAs we have. The problem is the billions we have given away to the Irvings and the McCains and the Ganongs in grants, gifts, interest-free loans, and absurd tax breaks.
It's not the MLAs that made us poor (except in the sense that they allowed it to happen.. And in that case the answer is not to reduce them in number. The answer is to vote them out.) No, the cost of a few MLAs is not what makes us poor. So cutting down by a few MLAs will save very, very little. And it will still leave us a legislature full of MLAs who purr when the Irvings, McCains and Ganongs tickle their chins.
So why did Alward suggest such a cut? Well - he knows people have no great respect for politicians. So most people will think getting rid of some is a great idea. That will take their attention away from the real problem, the enormous economic, social and environmental problems being caused by our Irvings, etc.
Meanwhile, Mr. Alward will still have enough flunkies left to do what his bosses want. And our deficits will continue to rise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)