So what else is new? Typical of Canadian business to be slow, at least in part to squeeze the maximum return out of their now-outmoded systems and processes.
I bet the biggest delay in implementing this business process technology is the arm-wrestling between the banks, Interac, VISA, wireless providers, to see who'll own the solution - because who owns the solution will own the revenue stream to gouge out of consumers and retailers.
I loved that part in the Globe & Mail article about leaving home and only needing your car keys & cell phone, implying no wallet necessary - will they be doing away with drivers' licenses, loyalty cards, other credit cards etc?
Gotta love those marketers...why not put an identity chip under the skin on the back of your hand - let it communicate with everything - then you really won't need a wallet...
Thursday, June 25, 2009
China Goes Shopping with Fists Full of US$
China is buying hard assets everywhere - what will be very interesting to see if when China comes shopping in the US - buying real estate, farmland, industrial capacity, technology, big corporations - whether the US will allow those purchases or deny them based on 'strategic' reasons like the denied Continental Oil bid of several years ago. I wouldn't want to be the US official that has to say to China "your US dollars are no good in the USA"...
If China buys Canadian assets with US dollars, we'd better turn those dollars around real fast - get them back out the door again before they drop in value.
LOL - holding US dollars will eventually become like a game of hot potato - who'll get burned holding them? LOL
If China buys Canadian assets with US dollars, we'd better turn those dollars around real fast - get them back out the door again before they drop in value.
LOL - holding US dollars will eventually become like a game of hot potato - who'll get burned holding them? LOL
Monday, April 13, 2009
No, Really - You Are What You Eat
I remember, when I was very young, an ageing relative slicing a big fatty hunk off the Sunday roast beef and with a conspiratorial grin, whispering to me "this is the very best part" before popping it into his mouth and chomping it down. Back then and in the centuries prior, that would have been the most commonly-held attitude - nothing better for one than a big hunk of fatty red meat.
Fast-forward to the current day. Anyone paying attention to modern nutrion facts knows that big fatty hunk off the Sunday roast beef is near #1 on the scale of 'food that'll kill ya'. Funny, too, how over the years a certain fast-food standard is described coloquially as 'heart-attack-in-a-box'. Of course fast-foods are everywhere - some are designed & constructed with low-fat, low-sodium, low-sugar objectives, while many pile in the tempting (addicting?) ingredients with the predictable destruction-of-your-health result. And its not only fast foods, is it? Most folks know what's bad for them, but sometimes the urge for fats & salts & sugars is overwhelming, we cave in and feel the guilt after the fact, the damage done.
Food designers employed by mass-market food companies with profit objectives repeatedly push our culinary hot buttons with the same combinations - fat, sugar, salt - it's ingrained in us to crave these things. To be sure, in the distant past those built-in cravings were probably a good thing, providing incentive to hunt & gather more effectively and satisfy the cravings. The meager amounts of fats, salt & sugars ingested were probably exactly right, taking into account the remainder of the nuts & berries diet and rigorous lifestyle.
Modern healthcare struggles to combat many after-the-fact diseases in the population. Some - like obesity leading to diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, colon cancer - are practically epidemic and contribute to huge morbidity and mortality numbers. The drain on every part of society is gigantic, not forgetting the sorrow and heartache in families where health problems take centre stage.
When George H. Bush (the first one, remember him?) said on network TV that he hated broccoli and would never eat it, by far preferring to crunch away on a bag of deep-fried pork rinds, I thought his comment sealed the fate of thousands of future-but-unnecessary sufferers of colon cancer across America. Jeez, talk about blowing a leadership opportunity!
In my opinion, pro-active measures need to be taken on every front to slow the growth of, indeed, to roll back the tide of an unhealthy population at large. Of course there are some things that have been recommended since the beginning of time (well, since Health class in Grade One at an rate) like the Canada Food Guide's dietary recommendations - well nigh impossible for a kid to comply with. Fitness levels too. One problem with best-practices is diet & exercise regimens still don't reach a substantial portion of the population - a majority even, I am guessing, and nothing changes those predictabe morbidity / mortality results.
What do we need? Like with most things, intervention is required to effect real change. Yes - I'm talking government here, the approach we love to hate. Here's how it goes, with a sliding scale of either taxes levied or credited based on what the food business at all levels contributes positively or negatively, to the relative healthfulness (is that a word?) of the food products that reach the consuming public.
Products that would attract more taxes would be any 'serving' of food that includes statistically disproportionate amounts of daily fat, salt or sugar intake as part of a typical daily menu. Like when one hamburger patty makes for 44% of daily fat intake. Or when a kid's boxed drink has 35% of daily sugar intake. Or when a restaurant menu is regularly inordinately heavily-salted to induce purchase of more beverages. Businesses selling the product would be required to collect & remit a health incentive tax on each qualifying product.
Products that would attract tax credits could include increased undetectable fibre in 'white bread' burger buns, reduced sugars & salts in sauces, grilling or broiling instead of frying, moving to 'no-salt' alternatives or promoting healthy fresh foods as part of a fast-food meal. Imagine receiving a shiny crisp MacIntosh apple or a ripe juicy Niagara peach or pear with every drive-thru meal? And there's no one better at handling & distribution of such foods than the fast-food folks. Sure would put a smile on the Ontario fruit-growers' faces. And with lower costs via tax credits, I have no doubt the consuming public would respond positively to such initiatives.
Our governments tax liquor, tobacco and a host of other 'bad' stuff. It's time to tax bad food stuff - and to offer tax credits for 'good' food stuff. Call it the healthcare surtax and send the revenues directly to the publicly-funded healthcare providers and researchers. Let's make it easy for the public-at-large to make good nutrition decisions at all levels and as a society we can reap the rewards that accompany a healthier population. A healthy win-win for all.
Season's Greetings - eat your vegetables!
Fast-forward to the current day. Anyone paying attention to modern nutrion facts knows that big fatty hunk off the Sunday roast beef is near #1 on the scale of 'food that'll kill ya'. Funny, too, how over the years a certain fast-food standard is described coloquially as 'heart-attack-in-a-box'. Of course fast-foods are everywhere - some are designed & constructed with low-fat, low-sodium, low-sugar objectives, while many pile in the tempting (addicting?) ingredients with the predictable destruction-of-your-health result. And its not only fast foods, is it? Most folks know what's bad for them, but sometimes the urge for fats & salts & sugars is overwhelming, we cave in and feel the guilt after the fact, the damage done.
Food designers employed by mass-market food companies with profit objectives repeatedly push our culinary hot buttons with the same combinations - fat, sugar, salt - it's ingrained in us to crave these things. To be sure, in the distant past those built-in cravings were probably a good thing, providing incentive to hunt & gather more effectively and satisfy the cravings. The meager amounts of fats, salt & sugars ingested were probably exactly right, taking into account the remainder of the nuts & berries diet and rigorous lifestyle.
Modern healthcare struggles to combat many after-the-fact diseases in the population. Some - like obesity leading to diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, colon cancer - are practically epidemic and contribute to huge morbidity and mortality numbers. The drain on every part of society is gigantic, not forgetting the sorrow and heartache in families where health problems take centre stage.
When George H. Bush (the first one, remember him?) said on network TV that he hated broccoli and would never eat it, by far preferring to crunch away on a bag of deep-fried pork rinds, I thought his comment sealed the fate of thousands of future-but-unnecessary sufferers of colon cancer across America. Jeez, talk about blowing a leadership opportunity!
In my opinion, pro-active measures need to be taken on every front to slow the growth of, indeed, to roll back the tide of an unhealthy population at large. Of course there are some things that have been recommended since the beginning of time (well, since Health class in Grade One at an rate) like the Canada Food Guide's dietary recommendations - well nigh impossible for a kid to comply with. Fitness levels too. One problem with best-practices is diet & exercise regimens still don't reach a substantial portion of the population - a majority even, I am guessing, and nothing changes those predictabe morbidity / mortality results.
What do we need? Like with most things, intervention is required to effect real change. Yes - I'm talking government here, the approach we love to hate. Here's how it goes, with a sliding scale of either taxes levied or credited based on what the food business at all levels contributes positively or negatively, to the relative healthfulness (is that a word?) of the food products that reach the consuming public.
Products that would attract more taxes would be any 'serving' of food that includes statistically disproportionate amounts of daily fat, salt or sugar intake as part of a typical daily menu. Like when one hamburger patty makes for 44% of daily fat intake. Or when a kid's boxed drink has 35% of daily sugar intake. Or when a restaurant menu is regularly inordinately heavily-salted to induce purchase of more beverages. Businesses selling the product would be required to collect & remit a health incentive tax on each qualifying product.
Products that would attract tax credits could include increased undetectable fibre in 'white bread' burger buns, reduced sugars & salts in sauces, grilling or broiling instead of frying, moving to 'no-salt' alternatives or promoting healthy fresh foods as part of a fast-food meal. Imagine receiving a shiny crisp MacIntosh apple or a ripe juicy Niagara peach or pear with every drive-thru meal? And there's no one better at handling & distribution of such foods than the fast-food folks. Sure would put a smile on the Ontario fruit-growers' faces. And with lower costs via tax credits, I have no doubt the consuming public would respond positively to such initiatives.
Our governments tax liquor, tobacco and a host of other 'bad' stuff. It's time to tax bad food stuff - and to offer tax credits for 'good' food stuff. Call it the healthcare surtax and send the revenues directly to the publicly-funded healthcare providers and researchers. Let's make it easy for the public-at-large to make good nutrition decisions at all levels and as a society we can reap the rewards that accompany a healthier population. A healthy win-win for all.
Season's Greetings - eat your vegetables!
To Those Who Think Obama's Bank 'Stress Tests' are Stupid...
‘Stress Test’ is new-speak for Risk Analysis, right?
Now, to be fair, Risk Analysis performed by the banks & others on themselves hasn’t yielded the best results in recent quarters - kind of like having bad cops investigate themselves isn’t it?
Maybe the folks (the Obama team, primarily) trying to keep the world afloat and fix the problems aren’t so sanguine about the veracity of the banks’ own Risk Analysis so they think it prudent to do their own - on behalf of those pesky taxpayers…?
And - if you think the finance & economic problems are all behind us - Ha!! - just wait 'til the stress test results are announced!
Now, to be fair, Risk Analysis performed by the banks & others on themselves hasn’t yielded the best results in recent quarters - kind of like having bad cops investigate themselves isn’t it?
Maybe the folks (the Obama team, primarily) trying to keep the world afloat and fix the problems aren’t so sanguine about the veracity of the banks’ own Risk Analysis so they think it prudent to do their own - on behalf of those pesky taxpayers…?
And - if you think the finance & economic problems are all behind us - Ha!! - just wait 'til the stress test results are announced!
What US President Hasn't Used a Teleprompter?
What the heck is up with this teleprompter bulls***t? Hasn't every president in recent years used a teleprompter? If a guy is to give a speech, is it somehow un-presidential to not have it memorized, word for word? Would you rather Obama spend several hours memorizing & rehearsing a speech in front of a mirror, or is his time better spent continuing to meet and interact with his cabinet and others to get the business of the day done?
Jeez, next it'll be a scandal all about why the president's shoelaces aren't washed daily.
Isn't it enough all the bad actors outside the US are sniping away - do Obama's fellow-citizens have to talk s**t all the time too?
Pathetic.
Jeez, next it'll be a scandal all about why the president's shoelaces aren't washed daily.
Isn't it enough all the bad actors outside the US are sniping away - do Obama's fellow-citizens have to talk s**t all the time too?
Pathetic.
Canadian Foreign Staffers Need to Speak the Host Country Language.
IMHO it doesn't matter what country our staffers are appointed to - they should always have a better-then-working knowledge of the host-country language for a number of good reasons.
No sensible national government sends diplomats to a foreign-language country without proper language training. To send untrained staff (and it doesn't matter which Canadian government does it) cripples their efforts on our behalf, is an unnecessary insult to the host country and is just plain bad form all 'round. Shows us as a country that 'muddles through'. Not good.
No sensible national government sends diplomats to a foreign-language country without proper language training. To send untrained staff (and it doesn't matter which Canadian government does it) cripples their efforts on our behalf, is an unnecessary insult to the host country and is just plain bad form all 'round. Shows us as a country that 'muddles through'. Not good.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Mercenaries: the Only Effective Solution to the Somali Pirate Scourge
Keeping elements of the world's navys on-call to fight pirates is ludicrously expensive and an overkill approach that misses the heart of the matter. Rather than trying to cover hundreds of thousands of square miles of open ocean, this is a real business opportunity for mercenaries (read 'private security organizations like Blackwater').
Mercenary teams, armed to the teeth (including nicely-sized bangers like shoulder-launched missiles in addition to their 'regular' armament) can be dropped onto cargo ship decks by helicopter to defend the ships as they enter the problem area. Then, 1-3 days later when the cargo ships have passed out of harm's way, the mercenaries are removed by helicopter and taken to their next cargo ship assignment. Simple. Cost-effective. And a great gig for contract tough-guys - maybe the ones getting a little long-in-the-tooth and want to survive their careers to be with families they care for back home.
If mercenary teams established by the likes of Blackwater are good enough to 'supplement' the US Army in Baghdad and elsewhere, they'd be the perfect force to warn away or fight off pirate aggression in the gulf. And having mercenaries riding shotgun temporarily focuses the resources where & when they're needed. No need then to arm the freighters or expect innocent crew members to periodically become professional soldiers to save someone else's cargos and/or their own lives.
Mercenary teams, armed to the teeth (including nicely-sized bangers like shoulder-launched missiles in addition to their 'regular' armament) can be dropped onto cargo ship decks by helicopter to defend the ships as they enter the problem area. Then, 1-3 days later when the cargo ships have passed out of harm's way, the mercenaries are removed by helicopter and taken to their next cargo ship assignment. Simple. Cost-effective. And a great gig for contract tough-guys - maybe the ones getting a little long-in-the-tooth and want to survive their careers to be with families they care for back home.
If mercenary teams established by the likes of Blackwater are good enough to 'supplement' the US Army in Baghdad and elsewhere, they'd be the perfect force to warn away or fight off pirate aggression in the gulf. And having mercenaries riding shotgun temporarily focuses the resources where & when they're needed. No need then to arm the freighters or expect innocent crew members to periodically become professional soldiers to save someone else's cargos and/or their own lives.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
The Christian Right by its Frightening Real Name - Dominionism
Most people who do not belong to what is loosely described as 'the Christian Right' think of those folks who do belong as nice enough, regular churchgoers, bible-reading and upholding family and societal values. Fair enough. What most people don't know is what I would call the iron hand of rigid fundamentalist Christian theocracy inside the velvet glove of Christian fundamentalist practitioners - called Dominionists and their movement Dominionism (see Wikipedia).
The Christian Right holds perhaps one of the best-kept out-in-the-open secrets and sponsors a relentless movement toward establishing (or re-establishing, in their minds) America (and Canada too, thanks to Mr. Harper and his religious-political allies) a religion-based government with all the hallmarks of an intolerant, fundamentalist, even fascist society, based on their interpretation of the bible and all the re-written history one could imagine. These people are deadly serious and constitute perhaps the single biggest threat to democracy as we know it, because, oddly enough, they lack the most obvious differentiators of other groups that constitute threats of various types to our society. Further, they are keenly aware of the need to operate 'under the radar' and ordinary people have not yet identified them widely as a threat.
Most recently that really wacky fringe organization - Westboro Baptist Church, from Topeka Kansas - has grabbed headlines again with its announced plans to cross the border into Canada and establish pickets at a high-school drama production of a play about a murdered gay guy. Most everyone thinks these folks are overstepping, beyond the pale, out of line - or whatever other ways you'd describe it. But you can bet your ticket to heaven that right-wing Christians are right there with 'em, seeing the Westboro folks as the front line, the strike force, the shock troops, the forefront of the battle line, carrying the banner forward. "Onward Westboro soldiers!" they'd cheer.
The population at large needs to understand the stark differences between nice people who believe in God and attend church regularly, and these frightening fundamentalists who yearn for the return of Jesus and the end of civilization ('Revelations') as we know it - those who look at unbelievers smugly & unsympathetically while waiting patiently to be 'raptured up' to their eternal reward, watching the sinners and the uncoverted die in the horrible torment of the end of the world.
The Christian Right holds perhaps one of the best-kept out-in-the-open secrets and sponsors a relentless movement toward establishing (or re-establishing, in their minds) America (and Canada too, thanks to Mr. Harper and his religious-political allies) a religion-based government with all the hallmarks of an intolerant, fundamentalist, even fascist society, based on their interpretation of the bible and all the re-written history one could imagine. These people are deadly serious and constitute perhaps the single biggest threat to democracy as we know it, because, oddly enough, they lack the most obvious differentiators of other groups that constitute threats of various types to our society. Further, they are keenly aware of the need to operate 'under the radar' and ordinary people have not yet identified them widely as a threat.
Most recently that really wacky fringe organization - Westboro Baptist Church, from Topeka Kansas - has grabbed headlines again with its announced plans to cross the border into Canada and establish pickets at a high-school drama production of a play about a murdered gay guy. Most everyone thinks these folks are overstepping, beyond the pale, out of line - or whatever other ways you'd describe it. But you can bet your ticket to heaven that right-wing Christians are right there with 'em, seeing the Westboro folks as the front line, the strike force, the shock troops, the forefront of the battle line, carrying the banner forward. "Onward Westboro soldiers!" they'd cheer.
The population at large needs to understand the stark differences between nice people who believe in God and attend church regularly, and these frightening fundamentalists who yearn for the return of Jesus and the end of civilization ('Revelations') as we know it - those who look at unbelievers smugly & unsympathetically while waiting patiently to be 'raptured up' to their eternal reward, watching the sinners and the uncoverted die in the horrible torment of the end of the world.
We must always remember the Conservative party leadership (intolerant right-wing Christian fundamentalists, make no mistake) wants all moms to stay at home to raise their kids; thinks home-schooling is a good idea because public schools are hotbeds of socialist thought; that didn't fund the scientists doing stem-cell research - remember that in the stimulus a few weeks ago? The same government whose members have 'an informal discussion group' determining if the time is right to bring up repeal of abortion rights; who think the earth is 6000-odd years old as calculated from bible stories?
This Harper government is determined to implement its agenda to steer Canada to becoming an intolerant right-wing Christian fundamentalist regime - watch for it - and find out more about Dominionism soon.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Paper Lids for Paper Cups - The Impossible Dream...
OK - we all agree on this, right? - that everything we humans produce but don't actually consume needs to be compostable and returned to the environment, or recyclable for reuse many times over. And general use of anything non-compostable needs to be reduced or eliminated.
The recent kefuffle about non-recyclable coffee-cup lids in Toronto drives me nuts. For the city to not have a comprehensive recycling capability seems stupid - there is still a long list of stuff we still can't put into the blue bin - and needs to be improved asap. The flip side argument - about having to use plastic lids on coffee cups because paper-product lids don't exist and are impossible to make strikes me as totally ludicrous, along the lines of 'may as well try to fly to the moon' or 'why would I use a telephone when there are so many messenger boys about?' Don't the people involved know how silly they sound citing use of paper lids as 'impossible'?
So, why aren't forest-products companies all over this one - creating a snug-fitting cardboard lid to go on top of a paper coffee cup. The cups are robust enough to hold the hot liquid indefinitely (well, until it gets really cold and eventually leaks onto one's desk) and the rolled rim really is pretty strong - couldn't a lid that incorporates some kind of rolled-edge strength do the job? There's gotta be a way, and I figure some smart kid coming out of university will solve this one and put the issue to rest. I can't wait! And just this week came the news that a Seattle-based company has indeed been producing just such a fine product for the US Navy - go figure, problem solved already, maybe. Now that's yankee ingenuity at work - how un-Canadian eh?
But speaking of solvable problems, how about the epidemic use of non-recyclable styrofoam fast-food containers, cups and generally speaking the plethora of non-recyclable plastic containers? Remember when take-out food or grocery & produce came in paper cartons, wrapped in newsprint or on heavier formed-paper trays? They worked fine except if one was packing something really sloppy, in which case the container was lined with a piece of waxed paper. Paper-based containers worked fine then but are largely superseded now by plastics of several varieties. Don't get me started on kids' toy containers or other egregious deployments of big, hard, impenetrable plastic packaging!
That's gotta stop. Bad enough the raw material for plastic is non-renewable petroleum products. Especially worse if they're non-recyclable. Use of petroleum-based materials must be changed out for renewable paper-based where possible. Again, you'd think forest-products folks would be all over this and I am guessing they are already. Problem is if the petroleum-based products are cheaper or the industry lobby is more effective not much will change.
So - what to do? Call me a 'big-government' guy for suggesting a tax-based solution - more taxes on the production and use of products that need to be discouraged, tax incentives for production and products that need to be encouraged. Could even make it almost balanced - 10 cent tax on a styrofoam container, 8 cent reduction on a paper container (inefficient gov't would probably keep 2 cents for admin). Makes the same food 18 cents cheaper served in paper. Simple eh? Truth is, people will not respond en masse except when they see the difference in the their wallets. Just like so many other things....that's life.
The recent kefuffle about non-recyclable coffee-cup lids in Toronto drives me nuts. For the city to not have a comprehensive recycling capability seems stupid - there is still a long list of stuff we still can't put into the blue bin - and needs to be improved asap. The flip side argument - about having to use plastic lids on coffee cups because paper-product lids don't exist and are impossible to make strikes me as totally ludicrous, along the lines of 'may as well try to fly to the moon' or 'why would I use a telephone when there are so many messenger boys about?' Don't the people involved know how silly they sound citing use of paper lids as 'impossible'?
So, why aren't forest-products companies all over this one - creating a snug-fitting cardboard lid to go on top of a paper coffee cup. The cups are robust enough to hold the hot liquid indefinitely (well, until it gets really cold and eventually leaks onto one's desk) and the rolled rim really is pretty strong - couldn't a lid that incorporates some kind of rolled-edge strength do the job? There's gotta be a way, and I figure some smart kid coming out of university will solve this one and put the issue to rest. I can't wait! And just this week came the news that a Seattle-based company has indeed been producing just such a fine product for the US Navy - go figure, problem solved already, maybe. Now that's yankee ingenuity at work - how un-Canadian eh?
But speaking of solvable problems, how about the epidemic use of non-recyclable styrofoam fast-food containers, cups and generally speaking the plethora of non-recyclable plastic containers? Remember when take-out food or grocery & produce came in paper cartons, wrapped in newsprint or on heavier formed-paper trays? They worked fine except if one was packing something really sloppy, in which case the container was lined with a piece of waxed paper. Paper-based containers worked fine then but are largely superseded now by plastics of several varieties. Don't get me started on kids' toy containers or other egregious deployments of big, hard, impenetrable plastic packaging!
That's gotta stop. Bad enough the raw material for plastic is non-renewable petroleum products. Especially worse if they're non-recyclable. Use of petroleum-based materials must be changed out for renewable paper-based where possible. Again, you'd think forest-products folks would be all over this and I am guessing they are already. Problem is if the petroleum-based products are cheaper or the industry lobby is more effective not much will change.
So - what to do? Call me a 'big-government' guy for suggesting a tax-based solution - more taxes on the production and use of products that need to be discouraged, tax incentives for production and products that need to be encouraged. Could even make it almost balanced - 10 cent tax on a styrofoam container, 8 cent reduction on a paper container (inefficient gov't would probably keep 2 cents for admin). Makes the same food 18 cents cheaper served in paper. Simple eh? Truth is, people will not respond en masse except when they see the difference in the their wallets. Just like so many other things....that's life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
