Race to the finish! (Smash Bros. reference)

Geopolitics of the far North

















We're running out of oil, so everyone is panicking. Quick, to the Far North where there will be resources aplenty for us to exploit!

So for a long time now, though probably more prominent now than it has been in the last two decades, sovereignty over the Arctic is becoming a part of the Canadian political discourse. Every political party in Canada has taken a similar stance, declaring that Canada will fight for it's right to own land, but will do so in a democratically acceptable fashion (whatever democratically acceptable means i.e., assassination has been argued to be democratically acceptable).

Internationally, each country involved in this debate has reacted how most would except. The United States, using Alaska as their proxy, wants a part of the Arctic just like they want a part of everything in world. The Scandinavians want an EU-esque agreement/cooperation between all countries and resources allocation would be determined through deliberation and summits. Russia remains cool, but drops hints that it will take whatever actions necessary to get what land is deserved. Oh right, and Canada, who just asks politely for what we've ignore until now minus the establishment of a military base and a few science research stations.

I am not vindictively leaving the First Nations out of this, but rather, I find it inappropriate that I should not force the idea of Canada as a sovereign nation on the First Nations community.

The problem I find in the Arctic soap opera is defining what sovereignty would entail because despite all the political noise, I don't think any country actually wants to govern this land and build people-oriented institutions and infrastructure. Every country really just wants to use the resources available to expand their currently established homes (sounds like colonialism?). At least within Canada, no one has proposed any plans to define what ownership of the territory would actually look like. No drawing of new ridings (not like the North has any ridings), no proposals for government offices, no discourse about how this will change our national politics and democratic system and certainly no plans to allow occupation of the land. Nothing. What seems to be proposed is that we guard the land against other people trying to take it from us; essentially, a top down model of sovereignty instead of using your constituency and public to support the claim over the Arctic.

So does sovereignty equal use of resources then? If you ask any Canadian you'll find that, traditionally, Southern Canadians have always viewed Northern Canada as a frontier to be explored as opposed to a home for the North's residents. We understand nothing about the North except that there is a lot of snow, gas, oil and polar bears up there (though the polar bears will be gone soon, so who cares about them anyways). We see the Territories and Arctic as a cornucopia of resources, not as Canadian land and certainly not as a possible source of Canadian homes, cultures and livelihoods.

Additionally, the environmental problems that will undoubtedly come from Arctic exploitation and development will stretch beyond all political boundaries. Is any one country that wants to declare sovereignty over the area ready for the political repercussions of these events. Given our current ignorance, or arrogance, towards the negative global effects of dirty local production, I don't expect that any national government is really ready to take the reigns on this issue. In addition, if we follow ideas of bioregionalism, the Arctic should be sovereign in its own right and not be owned by any pre-existing nation.

I don't think that Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic will ever reach its "passion potential" for Canadians until we learn more about the land and its history. Until then, this issue will either be met with apathy or a support that stems from an American-looking from of Canadian patriotism.

PANIC! BIODIVERSITY!

Poisonous spider extends her web to GTA


In recent news (or maybe not so recent, given some previous sightings), the Northern Black Widow has appeared in Toronto parks. Given that Toronto thrives on panic and a lack or logic, people are instantly blaming the recent pesticide ban for the appearance of the spider.

It always astounds how quickly will assume causation because of correlation, but this is ridiculous. In fact, given that the number has not been seen to either decrease or increase as pesticide use changes, correlation cannot even be assumed; but, given the lack of rational thought that actually runs through the veins of urban societies, one cannot be surprised either by these connections made.

I wonder how many more surprises Torontonians will find in the coming years as temperatures and climates change, shifting biome and territory lines. The Southern Ontario environment will become a different home and therefore, will house different critters. It's important to keep in mind that without our ability to build micro-climates, we would too have to move as our environment shifts. It's logical and natural.

But a spider, on the horror.

Besides...it's kind of cute.

Test

Testing out the blog from my BB.
Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry

Because we all want to bank sick days...

Illegal dumping starts

The first Service Toronto strike in seven years...not too bad, except for the fact that picket lines are complete and utter shows of jack-assery.

Honestly, I don't mind if you fight for your wants. I believe that it is a fair step for you to walk off the job if your union permits it. However, do not stop other people from throwing out their trash. Do not get in the way of other people throwing out their trash. They are doing your job for you. Step back and let off.

Honestly, the concept of unions is a bit archaic and similar to most political/public institutions and processes in our great country of Canada, their actions, beliefs and purpose are out of tune with the times. They no longer represent a force that struggles to gain fair compensation for the negative externalities of their jobs; rather, they demand concessions strictly isolated to their own situation and ignored the economic and social environments outside of their sphere. Moreso what pisses me off is their emphasis on seniority and lack of appreciation for skill sets possessed by new individuals. Anyone new is forced to do contract work, with risk of being let go or fired, without any of the benefits and salaries that unions for taxpayers to generate.

You'd think people claiming "job security" to be an issue, would be a bit more sensitive to those forced into work contracts.

In conclusion, a big eff-you to CUPE.

Sexual selection comes to a grinding halt...

The 'man-girdle' is coming


The world is now met with another barrier to natural selection (well, beneficial selection anyways). Women (and I would say men, but they don't produce biological young) will have to be a lot more careful now when choosing their baby-daddy. Girlfriends, the muscular and fit man you see the on street may in fact, be a lard-belly in reality. Note that in the above photo, those are already fit men wearing girdles so the effect is null.

I just wonder what happens when you have to go to the beach...

It's no surprise...

Federal deficit to top $50 billion


While spending is recommended in a recession economy to avoid depression, I have to wonder whether or not this is a Conservative monetary policy. I personally don't think it is, but what would that mean for the Conservative Party of Canada? Does it mean that they are leaving their prudent fiscal ways, or is this the party "crossing the floor"?

Given the GST cut they gave us earlier, I have to think this is more of a frac up than a friendly gesture to the left.

Though I am a Liberal at heart and would love to poke fun at the Conservative Party any chance I get, I have to admit that spending isn't exactly the worst thing to do right now. Spending freeze is what made the Great Depression, Great and if people aren't spending in this economic climate, it really is up to the government to pick up the extra slack. This is an extremely liberal belief and most likely, a Liberal or NDP majority would have guaranteed a deficit of the same or greater amount.

The problem most people seem to have is the rosy economic predictions Flaherty and Harper had on the economic recession. Not only did they predict a lower deficit than now expected (about $16 billion less), they also did not properly predict or forecast for the crunch we are in now. Now, I agree that no one can predict the future, but if you're going to frac it up as much as the next guy, why should I vote for you.

The thing I still do not understand is the GST reduction. It was a tax cut, which is conservative in name, but it was given to the completely wrong people. It is a cut that is not clearly aimed at big corporations to invest in labour or capital nor is a large enough tax cut that would promote large purchases within in consumers. The party has essentially reduced their tax revenue and now, has to spend to make up for the investment and spending that their "stimulus" did not bring to fruition.

Decreased tax revenue combined with more spending...doesn't seem much like a Conservative policy does it?

In recent Conservative ads attacked Ignatiaff, the party claims that Iggy wants to raise taxes. That's probably true given the nature of the Liberal party, but given the projected deficit and the lowered revenue that will follow in the next year, isn't that a god thing?

The Sinking Aquifer

Water shortages plague Mexico City




"Even when water flows from his faucet, Sandana says it's brown and "terrible" quality, despite pipes being replaced several months ago."

"Three times this spring, water has been cut off for hundreds of thousands of people due to dangerously low reservoir levels."

Centuries of irresponsible water (that let's face, it plagues any country trying to develop) use and extraction from wells has depleted the lake sized aquifer under Mexico City. Anyone who has taken basic geology knows that as you deplete and aquifer, the ground above moves in to fill the empty space essentially causing a "sinking" effect. Apparently Mexico City sinks about 10cm a year, bending existing infrastructure pipes and gradually placing it below sea level (though the city is about 22km above sea level).

Water conservation has for a while been a way of life for Mexicans, particularly those in lower socio-economic classes due to the price of water, but estimates show that on average daily water usage is twice that of Europeans. This is attributed to the heat in the country and the ever growing population. However, as reserves continuet to run dry Mexico is now fighting the domestic price war for water that most other countries are fighting for oil.

I don't see how anyone, except maybe the Canada and United States, cannot take this as an immediate wake-up sign to initiate water conservation policy, preferably through education and admittedly, endoctrination. Higher prices in response to scarcity, without proper tax breaks or subsidies wreck havoc on lower income marginalized populations and the distribution of water becomes essentially classist in nature. Lack of responsbile use combined with ever depleting supply tends to cause acts of desperation such as war over control of resources. Mind you this can be international war or even civil war.

Though this picture is incredibly dreary and macabre, it's not completely unfathomable Remember the crazy scramble for canned food, water and money when the Toronto blackout hit? Or even the Black Friday scarmble for rare cheap goods at that Wal-mart? Imagine all THAT on a world scale for the one resource we actually need to survive.

AND with only Canada left with fresh water.

Yikes Canada, yikes.

Perhaps we should create a Canadian Fresh Water Defence Force? CFWDF, anyone?