The man behind the mask

Power in Numbers

A mob mentality can be a very powerful thing. One of the most powerful of all mobs is when a protest turns to a riot. Protests have a tendency to turn from signs and chants to homemade bombs and riot shields. The violence behind the riots usually stems from only a few extreme individuals, but seems to influence the majority into engaging in the violence. I find it funny how individuals who are in a protest can so easily adopt the philosophy that if everyone else is doing it, it must be okay. Isn't that one of  the most cliché sayings we hear from teachers and parents alike? "If they jumped off a bridge, would you jump off to?' How easily individuals in a riot seem to forget what they were taught as children. However, the Canadian government may have just made it a little more difficult for rioters to turn to violence so easily.

Off come the masks

Photo credit: Artur Coelho

The House of Commons just voted to implement a bill that bans rioters from wearing masks, among other things. The goal of the ban on masks is to allow police to determine those individuals who are breaking the law and place the appropriate charges on them. Presumably by eliminating masks from riots it will deter individuals from escalating their protests to violent levels. You would have to assume most individuals would think twice about committing a crime if they thought they were going to get caught. The mask of a rioter serves as a confidence booster and provides them with a sense of untouchability. Wearing a mask gives a rioter the belief they can commit crimes without dealing with the consequences. Hopefully this bill will reduce the number of violent conflicts that develop from protests or at the very least increase the number of rioters who have to deal the consequences of their actions.

Don't get me wrong I support individuals attempting to have their voice herd. I believe it's important to stand up for what you believe in and a good protest can be one of the most effective ways to show people how important an issue is. The larger the better, and greater numbers make a protest appear more intimidating and powerful. Although I may support a good protest I just don't think that because a large group of individuals can be powerful means that they have the right to become violent and cause serious damage to public and personal property.  I believe the new bill passed will help reduce the amount of individuals who use riots as an excuse to commit crimes under the pretence that they won't be caught. In my mind that is a good thing for our society. 

The future of Chinese/Canadian business

China is the worlds next super power. Is Canada about to be it's new super slave? 

Photo Retrieved from http://www.public-domain-image.com

A new FIPA ( Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement) with China has been signed

and begun its process through parliament. The opposition to this treaty is loud and in full force. Although we would expect the opposition parties to object to any major decision made by the conservatives, it's the public who's apprehension over the details of the treaty that raises concern.

The details of the treaty have begun to surface now that it has been brought to parliament. If the regulations and obligations of this treaty are truly as described by Gus Van Harten, Canada could be putting itself in a risky position. The basic idea of a treaty such as this is to ensure that business and investments by each country within the other are treated the same as investments from any other country. The major concern however, is that this treaty allows corporations who believe to have been treated unfairly the ability to sue outside of Canadian courts. Using arbitrators, behind closed doors. If these arbitrators found Canadian government at fault, of treating Chinese investors wrongfully Canadian tax-payers could be caught footing the bill.

The opposition of this bill is fuelled by the lack of information given to the public. Just because the Harper administration has the right to keep talks a secret dosen't mean they should. With so much at stake for Canadians, you think they would have been brought into the discussion sooner.  Although the definition of democracy can mean something different to each individual. I believe the government should be working for the best intrest of the population and thusly should be giving the public a voice on this issue.

This appears to be a deal based on money, but then again what isn't. It seems from my perspective that this treaty is being put into place to benefit large multinational corporations, by helping them gain international investments and doing so at the risk of the canadian taxpayers. Feel free to read the legal details of this new FIPA with China and come to your own conclusion.

Judge Throws Out Occupy Chicago Arrests

Photo Credit: Nick Hogman

Cook County Associate Judge Thomas Donnelly has ruled that the arrests of more than 90 Occupy Chicago protesters last October were unconstitutional. Many of the arrests were enforced under reason of having a city wide curfew; a curfew that Donnelly says is often not enforced on events that the city supports. In his ruling he stated that the arrests last October came after hundreds of members of Occupy Chicago refused to take down tents and leave Grant Park when it closed at 11 p.m.

Donnelly compared the protests to President Barack Obama's victory rally in the same park in 2008. Which didn’t clear out until the early hours of the next morning around 1:30 am. "The city arrested no one at the Obama 2008 presidential election victory rally, even though the Obama rally was equally in violation of the curfew," Donnelly wrote. Roderick Drew, spokesman for Chicago's Law Department, said the city will file an appeal of Donnelly’s ruling. "The city is disappointed with the decision," Drew said.

“The activists were legally participating in free speech” said Sarah Gelsomino, a People's Law Office attorney representing the protesters. "Hopefully this sends a clear message to the city that they must better respect the First Amendment rights of protesters no matter what their message might be," Gelsomino added. The protesters were an off-shoot of the Occupy Wall Street movement, Occupy Chicago, and were demonstrating against corporate greed.

Earlier this year, the city decided to settle a lawsuit for $6.2 million in connection with the arrest of 700 people during a 2003 Iraq wardemonstration. The settlement came after a federal judge called the department's handling of the protests "idiotic." These rulings are a clear embarrassment to the police department, which has come under fire for its handling of protests dating all the way back to the 1968 Democratic National Convention. The 1968 DNC is known for the violent police brutality that was inflicted on peacefully resisting demonstrators.

Day of Indigenous Resistance!

Photo Credit :Jonah Gindin

Photo Credit: Luis Noguera

 October 12 2012 the people of Caracas made an effort to change the course of history and pride in Venezuela. 

October 13th used to be celebrated as Columbus Day in Venezuela in commemoration of the discovery of America, but now it shall be known as the Day of Indigenous Resistance as a group of young men and women tore down the statue of the 15th century explorer as a symbol of overthrowing oppression. The Pro-Chavez website, aporea.org, reported that several groups openly claimed responsibility for the action.

Protestors used thick yellow climbing ropes to pull the statue down off of its thirty foot pedestal located in downtown Caracas, and dragged it towards a local theater, the Teresa Carreño. Hundreds of people gathered and commemorated October 12th by preforming songs and dances for one another. Angel Montel, a member of the Organization of Indigenous Youth of Venezuela spoke with reporter Robin Nieto at venezuelanalysis.com.  "It was an act of symbolic justice".  Montiel said that the statue of Columbus symbolized colonialism on the continent.  "It represented invasion and genocide in our land”.

The tearing down of the Columbus statue has been compared with that of the fall of the Saddam Hussein statue in Iraq by aporrea.org.  "Just like the statue of Saddam in Bagdad, that of Columbus the tyrant also fell this October 12, 2004 in Caracas," the website advertises. aporrea.org, and several other left-wing websites have sprung up showing support, for the act of civil disobedience displayed by the indigenous peoples, such as Occupy News’ official Facebook page publishing a description of the day, as well as many popular bloggers commenting on the topic, causing it to go viral particularly at Tumblr.com.

Extremists

Religion's biggest enemy may well be their biggest fans. Extremists are those individuals who take the teachings of their own religion beyond that of what a normal individual would believe. These individuals go to extreme extents to push their beliefs and prove themselves to their god.  I believe that these are the people that lead to religious wars and the same individuals that cause someone like myself to look at religions in a dark light.

Photo retrieved dimland.com

It happens in every religion, and is skewed by the media and our perception of other cultures. In North America we typically see the Islamic religion being shed in a negative light. Especially after 9/11, the attention has been focused on the Islamic extremists. The media shows this religion in a manner that allows people to develop prejudices. Through the concentration on the wars taking place in primarily muslim countries and the acts of groups such as al-qaeda. A prejudice that all subscribers of the Islamic faith wish ill for western countries and establishments is an easy prejudice to adopt.

The problem however is the fact that these are, well prejudices. When we use the actions of extremists to make up an opinion of an entire culture we are simply being ignorant. This happens of course both ways. A recent low budget film (if you can call it that) had a trailer released on youtube. The ignorant and disrespectful film caused an uproar. This is an example of a select few causing an entire nation to be hated and looked at in a negative manner.

These type of individuals lead to so much tension and hatred based solely from the expression of ignorant views in a public light. In 2010 a church in Florida proposed a "Burn the Qur'an Day". A debate between the advocator of the day and muslim provides the perfect example of ignorance of extremists causing international problems.

I believe that extremists are causing most religions to loose the respect of the mainstream population and is causing a movement to an atheist world. Weather or not you subscribe to a religion or not it's clear that the extremists of each religion are a problem, and as a society we should not allow them to be used as examples for the rest of the population.

"God hates..." no he doesn't.

Photo credit: "Top Dog" (hyperlink below)

I believe everyone has the right to their own beliefs and practices as long as they don’t infringe on other people’s rights. As long as you can back up what you believe with fact rather than just opinion, you have a right to argue whatever position you want. But there are a couple of problems I have with people justifying hatred of homosexuality with their “proof” being religion.

The first problem is how many people tend to emphasize the statement in Leviticus 18:22 which reads, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination." But then disregard the many other no-no’s of the bible, chopping them up to being no longer relevant in today’s society. Many of these forbidden things are stated in Leviticus, which I think emphasizes the fallaciousness of this “proof”.

• Gossiping: You can’t wait to call up your best friend and gossip with her about the news of Tom cruise and Katie Holmes divorce? Well better keep it to yourself  according to the bible!  Leviticus 19:16 states: “Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbor”.

• Eating Shrimp, Lobster, and Other Assorted Seafood: But wait, didn't Jesus feed an entire village with just one fish? Looks like he sinned... “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.” - Leviticus 10-11.

• Men with Injured or Cut off Private Parts Entering Houses Of God: Poor guy went to the wrong doctor for his vasectomy, now he can’t even confide his pain to God! Talk about kicking a guy when he’s down. Deuteronomy 23:1 states: “He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.”

These few examples are only to add to a multitude of things that the bible forbids, that people do anyways; such as seeing a psychic (Leviticus 19:31), tattoos (Leviticus 19:28), getting a divorce (Mark 10:9), and many others. If it is obvious to see that these so called “abominations” are no longer relevant to avoid in our society, then why is homosexuality such a big deal?

My second issue falls particularly with Christian people (which is pretty interesting to say considering I was raised Christian). The problem with Christians using Leviticus 18:22 to justify hatred of homosexuals is that, Leviticus is from the Old Testament. After Jesus died his disciples created the New Testament, where in Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, not once. The only time he got close was when he said “Love thy neighbor”, he didn't say “blindly hate thy neighbor for their sexual preferences”. 

Christians are supposed to follow the word of Christ and the New Testament. After all, wasn't the point of Jesus coming to earth to give people the message of the new loving and forgiving god, as opposed to the old vengeful god of the Old Testament? If this is the case, then god realized that his original laws were a little bit too harsh and unpractical. If he, the holiest of holly’s can change his mind set, realizing that certain rules no longer apply today, then why can’t his followers?

Sources:
http://www.11points.com/books/11_things_the_bible_bans,_but_you_do_anyway
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/ot?lang=eng

Photo source:
http://monsoux.blogspot.ca/2007/06/funny-things-about-gayfest-2007-in.html

The Rules For Being Human

Photo credit: Photographs of Museums in Newcastle 

upon Tyne including Life Interactive World, 

Laing Art Gallery and the Hancock Museum.

 “People are just as happy as they make up their minds to be.”

― Abraham Lincoln

I know it’s hard to picture that the world we are living in is inherently perfect; it’s hard for me too! But that is because we forgot the rules, The Ten Rules for Being Human. I tried to find the origin of the rules and it took me quite some time because so many people claim to have created them, but it’s clear that the 10 Rules for Being Human were first published by Cherie Carter-Scott for her book If “Life is a Game, These are the Rules”, And were originally adapted from Ancient Sanskrit. Because they were living in a much less-cluttered world, these peoples were better-tuned to understanding life’s purposes than most religions to come after them. Perhaps this is because it wasn't so much a “religion” as an ideological way of life.

So what are the rules and how do we apply them?

• 1.   You will receive a body. You may like it or hate it, but it’s the only thing you are sure to keep for the rest of your life. Our bodies are our temples so we must respect them and value them. Although we all have areas in which we dislike, we are unique and that makes us beautiful. 

• 2.       You will learn lessons. In every aspect of our life we will learn and take the knowledge we have acquired to another aspect of our lives. Beyond high school and post secondary we will learn life lessons, like the dos and don’ts of relationships, or what not say around our children.

 

• 3.        There are no mistakes, only lessons. We cant change the past but we can change our perspective on the future and use the lessons we have learned from our past to influence our future for the better.

• 4.       A lesson is repeated until learned. Sometimes we may ask our selves “why does this keep happening to me?” when the answer may be right in front of you. For example, a boy might ask “why does every girl I date cheat on me?” well maybe the answer can be arranged from the question to “every girl I choose to date cheats on me, therefor i am choosing for them to cheat because I keep going after the same type of girl.” Untill this lesson is learned it will keep happening.

 

• 5.        Learning lessons does not end. There is no part of life that does not contain lessons, even if it takes a days, months or years too see it. We can take knowledge from every experience in life.

 

• 6.       “There” is no better than “here”.  The grass isn’t really greener on the other side, be thankful for where you have and where you want to go will come more readily.

 

• 7.       Others are only mirrors of you. You cannot love or hate something about another person unless it reflects something you love or hate about yourself. We must also realize that we cannot truly love another until we learn to love ourselves.

 

• 8.       What you make of your life is up to you. Your life is a blank sheet, you can mark it up, design what you want it to look like, and if you make a mistake that’s what erasers are for! Although you can’t actually erase the past, it doesn't have to continue to your future!

 

• 9.       The answers are inside you. The answer to any of life’s questions are within you, like “what is the meaning of life?” ask yourself and whatever you think, will be the answer, because it will be the meaning of your life.

 

• 10.   You will forget all of this. You may be surprised to find out that you used to know the Rules for Being Human. That was before you were born, so you may not remember them. According to legend, an angel kissed you on the forehead at birth so you would forget them.

Death, despair, famine, genocide and other inhumane abominations plague our world on a daily basis. Although in North America it is easy for us to think “those things don’t happen here”, but it is our unwillingness to see that prevents us from seeing the tragedies occurring every day around us. With all of this it is hard to imagine that we are living in a perfect world, but we are. By God’s design, everything happens for a reason, a bigger picture is in play that we could never even attempt to fathom. But this doesn't forgo our responsibilities in our own life, believing we have no control… instead we need to realize that our happiness is in our attitude towards life and the way we think of things.

Sources: 

"If life is a game, these are the rules" By. Cherie Carter-Scott

http://autumninsanskrit.tumblr.com/post/3100638721/10-rules-for-being-human

Where's the limit?

I find it alarming that the model that most countries try to follow in their economy is that of the growth economy, or Adam Smith's capitalist model.  My issue with it is that we are always talking about how much our economies are growing, how much we are producing or consuming.  

What nobody ever seems to mention, is how are we supposed to perpetually keep growing when we live on a planet with finite resources?  There is only so much land, water, minerals, and air on this planet, and at some point we will reach that limit.

There are studies and research into global warming, new contagions and diseases, and food shortages, but not once do I hear a solution that addresses the cause, and not just the symptoms.  Let's find ways to use less fuel, find new cures, and grow more food, but how about making less people?  It's not a very politically correct standpoint, but I think we need to start looking at how to control our population.  

There's a reason that some events throughout history have been so catastrophic.  Diseases hit highly populated areas and can't be stopped from spreading throughout those areas.  Mankind is basically ensuring that if something big hits, it will take out a lot of us.  But I guess that's just nature's way of dealing with a problem that we just don't know how to solve.

Monotheism, are all one-god religions related?

Are all one-god religions related?

Photo Credit: Ashley Hagley

Monotheism: “The belief that there is only one God, as found in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam”. (Encarta Dictionary: English)

Is it possible that three of the most common religions in the world are actually basically the same? It is interesting to see that even in the definition of Monotheism the three main one-god religions are used as examples. The fact that they are all grouped together in one category seems to suggest that there are extensive similarities between the three religions. Now of course there are differences as well, anyone following each of these ideologies would likely be glad to explain why their religion is the right one.  In this blog I intend to compare the policies and beliefs of each faith on a few key factors of religion.

So what is the nature of God? Christians would say there is one God, who exists in three distinct persons (The Trinity): Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). Muslims would say there is one God (Arabic: Allah). The Islamic view of God is called strict Monotheism (Quran 112:1). Jewish people would say that there is one God (known in English as 'Yahweh' or 'Jehovah') - "...Hear Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one." (Deuteronomy 6:4).  So it is safe to say that all three of these religions are monotheist, they all believe that there is only one god.

Does each religion believe in the existence of a Holy Spirit? Christians believe the Holy Spirit to be the third person of the Trinity, truly divine: "....with the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified"(Nicene Creed). While Muslims believe the spirit is identical with the Angel Gabriel (an angle which Christians also recognize), who appeared to the Prophet Mohammed giving him the Quranic text. Jewish people say the spirit is not a distinct person, but a divine power which for example, was given to the Prophets. In short answer yes, however there are great variations on the definition of the Holy Spirit.

Is there an afterlife, a heaven or hell? Christians believe salvation is granted by grace through faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9) and that damnation is a place of everlasting punishment for the unrighteous (Matthew 25:46).  Muslims believe it is achieved through good works, thus personal righteousness must outweigh personal sin (Quran 23:101-103). They also believe that Jahannam (hell) is a place of torment and fire (Quran 25:65, 104:6-7). In Judaism it is believed that one is brought to heaven through good works, prayers and the grace of God. While hell is the concept of Gehinnom - those who die in sin may suffer temporary punishment, but certain sins merit eternal punishment.

Because Islam and Judaism share a common origin in the Middle East through Abraham, both are considered Abrahamic religions. Christianity comes from Judaism in the fact that their prophet Jesus was Jewish, and also that The Hebrew Tanakh has many of the same passages as the Christian Old Testament. There are also many other similarities between the three, such as; the existence of Jesus Christ, the belief in the Ten Commandments, and recognition of the same angles. The three religions probably can’t be defined as “the same” but it is easy to see that there are many shared aspects between Judaism, Islam and Christianity. Islam and Christianity were strongly influenced by Judaism in their fundamental religious outlook. Because of this similarity, there has been considerable and continued theological, and political overlap between the three faiths in the last almost two thousand years.

Sources:http://christianityinview.com/
http://www.holybookonline.com/
http://www.quranexplorer.com/quran/

On the Offensive

In any competition there are ways to out shine your opponent, depending on the type of competition there are certain strategies which yield the best results. In a political setting it appears to me there are two primary strategies which are commonly used when running for office. The first is gaining support and votes based on your party's platform and policies while promoting the beliefs that you yourself hold. The second is trying to tare down your opponent by digging up dirt and sullying their name rather than running on their policies. I believe that most people would prefer that politicians run a clean race where they build themselves up, rather than constantly putting out attack ads and searching for dirt on their opposition that has nothing to do with the policies and plans that would be in place if they were elected. Topics like the middle name of the candidate, the fact that Barack Obama's middle name is
Hussein has no baring on wether or not he is the best candidate for presidency.

In recent years I've noticed that political campaigns seem to be getting more and agressive, the ads we see on T.V. seem to be attacks on the other party for the majority of the time and rarely focus on the plans of the party. We can look to the American election in process right now for a number of current examples that showcase the types of ads most voters are subject to. Both parties have a number of a attack ads, this ad uses great imagery to portray Obama in a dark light but at no point mentions how the Republicans expect to resolve the problems they highlight. Democrats are no victim in this case as the run plenty of attack ads themselves. The first video on this page endorsed by Obama highlights personal finances of Mitt Romney in an attempt to make him look like an elitest who pays minimal taxes despite his great wealth. Whether or not this is true that ad has nothing to do with Obama or the policies he enforces or even the policies of Romney. These sort of ads are seen in Canadian politics as well more and more.

I realize that certain flaws in the policies or tactics of the other party should be brought to the attention of the public, but I don't need sinister music and dark imagery to go along with it. I need the facts and how you pan to do it better. I find this campaigning strategy, of taring down the opponent rather irritating. As a voter all I want to know are the facts, what are you going to do if you get elected? I don't care if you have a lot of money or what religion you believe in. (An issue we saw in the forefront of the republican primaires that had a few publicly mormon candidates.) The only thing that I as a voter want to know is how you are going to help me and the rest of the public if you are elected.

What is heaven?

What do you think of when you imagine Heaven? 

Photo credit: Jocelyn Mathews

I usually start out with a superficial heaven. With all of the objects and trinkets that would make it perfect for me. Maybe a beautiful room, with lovely IKEA furniture, a crazy amount of adorable kittens and a never ending supply Slurpee machine. Then, I usually realize that’s not appropriate, and I try sift those things out and try to imagine all the important things like seeing my loved ones and being at eternal rest and peace. If you are anything like me then you might start to consider how it lasts forever. This isn't just “forever” Like the last five minutes of a dreadfully drab math class that just seems to last for an eternity. This isn't even the “forever” in “I will love you forever till death do us part” that we say at our weddings. No this is Forver-forver, until the end of actual time, when the universe ceases to exist and nothing exists, no earth, no hell no heaven.

Well, perhaps Heaven isn't actually forever- forever, until the end of time and all that stuff. What if heaven is going on right now? I don’t know… there are allot of problems in the world, people are getting hurt and dying every day, just trying to stand up for their inherent rights. Pretty lame excuse for heaven in my opinion. Most people would agree it feels more like hell more than anything else sometimes. It’s so bad that usually I think we don’t need a real hell because everyone has made a hell on earth for themselves.  Maybe if we can bring about hell on earth, maybe we can bring heaven to earth too! I think that John Lennon guy was on to something.

“Imagine there's no heaven.. It's easy if you try. No hell below us, above us only sky. Imagine all the people living for today!”(John Lennon, Imagine)

There sure are allot of different ideas here… we went from imagining heaven as a room full of kittens and Slurpee’s to quoting a dead Beatle on his ideological perspectives… Maybe we should just ask Jesus... Jesus what is heaven?

“Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:21)

When Jesus speaks about the Kingdom of God, it’s the same “Kingdom of Heaven” from the Gospel of Matthew. “Heaven” was a polite way of saying “God” that didn't offend the Jewish people of Matthew’s audience. So, Heaven equals God, But what about the word “Kingdom”?  In the bible Mark and Luke use the term “Basileia” that we translate as Kingdom. But the Greek word “Basileia” is actually closer to meaning “kingship,” “kingly rule,” “reign”, or “sovereignty.” We can now deduce that Kingdom means a state of rule. So therefor, Kingdom of Heaven equals Kingdom of God equals Reign of God.

What if instead of the superficial heaven we initially imagine, heaven means inviting the reign of love within us? Well then that love would overturn the reign of hell in our lives. Perhaps heaven isn't a self-absorbed universe constructed desire for material possessions. What if accessing heaven exists within all of us already? After all, life is only something we are given and participate in, then give away again to the next generation, as-well as death is nothing more than the cessation of breath. I believe the Kingdom of heaven is now, within all of us and if you don’t think its in you I suggest you figure it the hell out!

Learning to share

Pipeline makes little progress

As adults sometimes we can forget the things we learned as children. The lessons that our parents and our teachers taught us from the very beginning  Stuff like, manners or sharing are sometimes forgotten as we grow up. Perhaps it is the fact that we aren't reminded by our parents everyday or maybe it's just that sometimes we feel we have to be mean or agressive to get what we need. In any case, today two provincial governments got together in an attempt to find some common ground.  The northern gateway oil pipeline project, is going to run through both British Columbia and Alberta. Before this pipeline can begin however there is a lot that needs to get done.

Without going into the all the legal workings and fine details that comes along with a large project such as this, we can see some of the first steps that need to be taken. For starters having both premiers and both provinces come to some agreements. Both premiers have verbally committed to striving to take all the necessary steps to look after the environment. Which is always a top priority when dealing with any pipeline or for that matter any project that can effect the environment. You can read exactly what both Alberta's Alison Redford and B.C.'s Christy Clark had to say at http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/10/01/calgary-bc-alberta-alison-redford-christy-clark-northern-gateway.html. Despite the common goal for the environment, there still remains one issue on which the two sides don't see eye to eye.

Not overly surprisingly the disagreement revolves around money. The issue stems around revenues and royalties that would be generated by the pipeline. B.C. wants to have "fair" distribution of the economic benefits the pipeline would provide. Alison Redford however says Alberta is not willing to give up any of the projected royalties. Now being an Albertan it's not as though I'm suggesting we hand over the fiscal benefits of this project to B.C., I do however believe there is common ground to be found. This project could be a huge boost to our economy and beneficial for not only Albertans but all of Canada from growing our GDP, providing a mass number of job opportunities and bringing in added revenue for all sectors of government. With a project that could do so much good, I find it frustrating to see two adults so stubborn in their opinions that they are hardly even willing to talk about a compromise. With so many environmental obstacles already slowing the process you would think all parties involved would be willing to make some sacrifices to help the project along.

The End of a SuperPower

The End of a SuperPower?

First it was Greece, then came Rome, succeeding them was The Kingdom of Great Britain, and now it's the United States, or should I say was? Since they gained their independence on July 4th, 1776, the United States has been the obvious superpower of the world. Leading the way, for the most part, in technology advancements, wealth, and overall world presence. It appears as though their reign may be coming to an end for various reasons.

C.E.O's across America are in a state of panic, living in fear of a complete economic collapse. The main reason is the recent debt crisis and the falloff it has had for most major companies countrywide. Top executives are worried about the fiscal deficit and the current tax policy. Washington plans to decrease the federal budget and cut spending by 600 billion. The plan also includes a tax hike, which seems like a continuing trend. Over the last three years, the U.S has watched their AAA credit rating diminish along with the highest unemployment rate ever recorded in American history. The economic crisis that is currently plaguing Europe is not helping matters; the U.S export sales have seen a steady decline over the last quarter. Approximately 34% of U.S C.E.O's plan to cut jobs over the next six months, which is up 20% over the last quarter. (America sweats as U.S nears fiscal cliff-Reuters) It's not just major corporations feeling the effect; hospitals, rehab center’s and nursing homes are also expecting at least a 2% cut by January of 2013. 

It seems that all good things come to an end. Where will the U.S be in ten years? Who is next to reign? Perhaps it's China's turn, or possibly a Middle Eastern country like Dubai. Whoever it may be, one thing is evident; America is dabbling in dangerous territory. In my opinion, China will soon control the world's economy. They already have the world's second largest economy and it is growing at average rate of 10% annually. In recent years China has implemented a number of different strategies that have contributed to their growing success. One of these being the introduction of new management systems that drastically increased productivity. This has lead to greater foreign trade and a substantial growth in overall GDP (gross domestic product). While the U.S struggles to stay afloat, China continues to ride the wave towards economic dominance.

Is the End Near?

Is the End Near?

It seems as though the gas industry isn't as powerful as they once were. For what seems like an eternity gas and oil companies have been running the world. They are at an economic standpoint where nothing can touch them. There have been many attempts at regulating the use of gas; most have failed. This is due mainly to the fact that they are so rich and powerful that they are able to crush these challenges simply by “throwing money” at the problem. Why would the C.E.O of a major gas company want to see automotive advancements such as, solar powered cars, electric, even hybrids? Simple, they don’t therefore; they make it as difficult as possible for these technologies to succeed. The same is true for Natural Gas; technology has advanced to the point where there are alternatives such as solar power. It seems as though these technologies may finally be coming to the forefront. Canadian Gas prices are predicted to be at record lows, long term. 

Encana stock has dropped 40% over the past two years. (Discontent seen for Canadian Gas Producers) The cause? Demand is diminishing; many investors don’t see a bright future for Encana and many other Canadian Gas Companies. In my opinion, this is a bright outlook on the future for Canadians. Especially, Canadian entrepreneur’s looking to get into the energy business. Gas companies have ruled for too long, squashing the little guy time and time again. It’s time to move forward, let technology advance and bring us the “next big energy source.”