Sign in to follow this  
Jaydee

Reality 2020

Recommended Posts

We like you but we don't want to pay for you, Canadians tell Prince Harry in new poll

Ryan Flanagan

Ryan FlanaganCTVNews.ca Writer

@flanaganryan Contact

Published Thursday, January 16, 2020 12:40PM EST
 
 

TORONTO -- Canadians aren’t especially thrilled by the part-time relocation to Canada of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, despite being big fans of Prince Harry himself, according to a new poll.

In the poll, 69 per cent of respondents reported that they hold favourable views of Harry – a higher level of support than any other prominent royal.

Older Canadians are slightly fonder of some of Harry’s relatives than they are of him. Sixty-nine per cent of respondents aged 55 or older said they have a favourable view of him, compared to 77 per cent for his brother, Prince William, and 75 per cent for his grandmother, the Queen.

Harry was also more likely to be viewed as a celebrity than a working member of the Royal Family, in stark contrast to his brother, his father Prince Charles and the Queen.

CANADIANS AND THE ROYALS

The poll, which was released Wednesday, is based on an online survey of 1,154 Canadian adults – representative of the general population in age, sex, income and education – that took place earlier this week, during the height of the royal drama. It was commissioned, paid for and conducted by the Angus Reid Institute, and carries a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

It comes at a key moment in the relationship between Canada and the Royal Family, as Buckingham Palace announced this week that Harry and Meghan will divide their time between the U.K. and Canada while they step back from their official duties as senior royals.

Many questions about the move remain unanswered, including where in Canada the couple plan to live and if they will continue to receive the security protection typically afforded to senior royals.

The RCMP has paid to protect royals during past visits to Canada, but nothing has been said publicly about what security might be in place for a longer-term stay or who will pay for it. The Prime Minister’s Office has told CTVNews.ca that there are “still many discussions to be had” on the topic.

If the Angus Reid poll is any indication, however, it seems Canadians may prefer those discussions to be brief and firm. According to a commentary that accompanied the poll, Canadians are not “eager to subsidize the couple’s living costs when they’re in the country.” Only three per cent of respondents said the Canadian government should pick up the entire tab for Harry and Meghan, while 73 per cent said the Sussexes should pay for their own security and other costs.

Despite the lack of interest in taxpayer-funded security for the royal couple, the poll suggests Canadians are watching the developments playing out among the Royal Family with great interest. Seventy per cent of respondents reported following the stories out of Buckingham Palace closely, with that number rising to 84 per cent among those aged 55 or higher.

Women are a little more likely than men to be invested in the royal drama. Interest in the ongoing tumult was also found to increase with age, income and education level.

Canadians’ current curiosity in royal affairs also seems to be more about the journey than its destination. A full 50 per cent of respondents said they don’t care if Harry and Meghan settle in Canada, while 39 per cent said they would be pleased and 11 per cent said they would be upset.

This support was generally consistent across each region of the country, with the exceptions of Quebec and Atlantic Canada. In Quebec, where monarchist sentiment is low, only 27 per cent of respondents said they would be pleased to have Harry and Meghan in Canada, while only two per cent of Atlantic Canadians said they would be upset by it.

BUT WHAT COMES NEXT?

The vast majority of Canadians have only ever known one sovereign. Only about 15 per cent of the current Canadian population was alive at the time of the Queen’s coronation in 1952.

Given that so many of us have always seen the monarchy and the Queen as one and the same, it’s perhaps not surprising that Angus Reid’s findings suggest uncertainty about what Canada’s relationship with the Royal Family should look like after the Queen’s death.

A majority of respondents – 57 per cent – said they would oppose Canada recognizing Prince Charles as king, even though he is the Queen’s natural heir. There was more support for the next royal in line to the throne, Prince William, to succeed the Queen, but it was still somewhat muted at 58 per cent. Younger and lower-income respondents were more likely to oppose either Charles or William ascending to power.

Overall, 41 per cent of respondents described the monarchy as no longer relevant at all and 25 per cent as becoming less relevant, while only four per cent said it is more relevant than ever. Again, age and income played roles, with older and more affluent Canadians being more invested in the monarchy’s future.

There was also a notable skew in the results in B.C., where Harry and Meghan spent time over Christmas and Meghan has been spotted several times this week, drawing speculation that the couple might be planning on making it their Canadian home. Here, 53 per cent of respondents described the monarchy as losing relevance – a big number, but a far smaller one than was reported in any other part of the country.

“As an institution in Canadian life, most in this country say the Royal Family has lost relevance,” Angus Reid’s commentary reads.

When asked whether Canada should remain a constitutional monarchy generations into the future, 39 per cent of respondents said yes and 45 per cent said no. Support for constitutional monarchy remained the preferred option in most parts of the country, but the national number flipped largely due to strong opposition in Quebec (69 per cent) and more muted opposition in Manitoba and Saskatchewan (47 per cent).

Most of those who preferred to retain the monarchy said it was because they enjoy being part of the Commonwealth. Another 31 per cent cited tradition, while 11 per cent – including 19 per cent of younger respondents – said it was because it would be too difficult to change Canada’s constitutional structure.

Among those who wanted to bring an end to constitutional monarchy at some point, there was no clear consensus about what should replace it.

The uncertainty was consistent across most demographics, although men were much more likely than women to prefer an elected head of state and head of government, similar to the U.S. president, while women were twice as likely as men to say that they don’t know what should replace the monarchy.
RELATED IMAGES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conrad Black: Ontario families deserve better than their so-called education system

Teachers have to stop swaddling their avarice and negligence in a fog of pious claptrap about putting the interests of the schoolchildren first

The renewed agitation by teachers in Ontario highlights the debacle of the whole public teaching and school administration apparatus that is possibly the greatest and most universal public policy failing in modern Western civilization. It is one of the richest and most distressing ironies of our times that all of our Western societies consecrate more and more funding resources to education to produce steadily less educated and ostensibly less informed and less usefully intelligent graduates of secondary schools and graduate university programs. Not surprisingly, we are also focusing on fewer and fewer real subjects of authentic study. As my learned and much-harassed friend Jordan Peterson has often said, any course calling itself something that ends with the word “studies” is not a real subject. It is just a part of a larger subject and generally implies the exclusion of most of the real subject (and I write this as a former lecturer at McGill University in “French Canada Studies,” which was in fact the history of Quebec).

Possibly the greatest and most universal public policy failing in modern Western civilization

 
 

Illustrative of the endless and debilitating problem of the public education system in Ontario is the announcement on Wednesday of a one-day strike planned for Monday Jan. 20 of the public elementary school teachers in the Toronto and Ottawa areas. (Similar one-day rotating strikes have already closed public secondary schools across the province; Monday’s threatened strike would be the first to directly close elementary schools.) The announcement of the planned stoppage was accompanied by the breezy announcement by the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario (ETFO): “Please know this decision was made with student safety as our first priority.” Hapless parents of the locked-out children may want to reflect on the implications of the fact that the teachers to whom their children are entrusted feel that the best guaranty of the schoolchildren’s safety lies in closing them out of their schools. The response of the Ontario Minister of Education, Stephen Lecce, seems to me very appropriate: the province will compensate affected parents with cash allocation for daycare services on strikebound days. Since, as far as I can deduce, the pupils don’t learn any more at their schools than they would at daycare centres, the schoolchildren are no worse off and the province will economize as long as the striking school personnel are not paid for the days they take off.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/conrad-black-ontario-families-deserve-better-than-their-so-called-education-system


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The definition of subliminal is something that is not easily perceived; but may be remembered due to constant repetition. An example of subliminal used as an adjective is the phrase "subliminal message," which means a message that may be remembered even if the person was not consciously aware of the message.
Teach our students, don't indoctrinate them

Education or indoctrination?

At a time of much labour turmoil between teachers and the provincial government, it’s difficult to tell in some classrooms.

For example, students at St. Agnes Catholic School in North York were given an assignment to write a letter to Premier Doug Ford about their opposition to education cuts.

“Budget cuts mean one subject must be cut from the curriculum,“ said a handout.

“Pick a subject and write a letter to Premier Doug Ford arguing why it should not be cut. Your letter should have 2-3 arguments (reasons) why the subject should not be cut. Each reason should be a separate paragraph. Make sure to include all the parts of a letter (greeting, body, closing etc.,) This will be in first person (I, my).”

Grade 5 students at Guelph’s Fred A. Hamilton school were given an assignment about anti-bullying.

It talks of de-escalating bullying situations but also alleges that government spending cuts are making the situation worse.

“The cuts will eliminate 10,000 teaching positions,” the assignment reads.

“This will increase class sizes and give students fewer caring adults to turn to if they find themselves in a bullying situation.”

Needless to say, some parents upset about this kind of partisanship finding its way into the classroom.

“I don’t think it’s right the teachers are teaching my kids about politics,“ said one.

“I have debated about making a complaint to the teacher, principal or the school board but I know I’ll only be complaining to people who are liberals and it will go nowhere.”

This may very well be true, but one group of people who are not impressed are those inside the Ford government — who feel getting an even message out to the public is already a difficult task without having to contend with teachers poisoning the well by strong-arming impressionable kids into supporting their quest for greater financial compensation.
 

https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/warmington-teach-our-students-dont-indoctrinate-them

 

59D6DB53-6F7C-4915-825D-3EE7976F52BB.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statement from HM The Queen.

Following many months of conversations and more recent discussions, I am pleased that together we have found a constructive and supportive way forward for my grandson and his family.

Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved members of my family.

I recognise the challenges they have experienced as a result of intense scrutiny over the last two years and support their wish for a more independent life.

I want to thank them for all their dedicated work across this country, the Commonwealth and beyond, and am particularly proud of how Meghan has so quickly become one of the family. 

It is my whole family’s hope that today’s agreement allows them to start building a happy and peaceful new life.

ENDS

Statement from Buckingham Palace

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex are grateful to Her Majesty and the Royal Family for their ongoing support as they embark on the next chapter of their lives.

As agreed in this new arrangement, they understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties, including official military appointments. They will no longer receive public funds for Royal duties.  

With The Queen’s blessing, the Sussexes will continue to maintain their private patronages and associations. While they can no longer formally represent The Queen, the Sussexes have made clear that everything they do will continue to uphold the values of Her Majesty.

The Sussexes will not use their HRH titles as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have shared their wish to repay Sovereign Grant expenditure for the refurbishment of Frogmore Cottage, which will remain their UK family home.

Buckingham Palace does not comment on the details of security arrangements. There are well established independent processes to determine the need for publicly-funded security.

This new model will take effect in the Spring of 2020.

ENDS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lesson re Socialism....
Venezuela reportedly has less than $1 billion in cash, which is less than rapper Jay-Z's net worth

  • Venezuela's cash supply has dipped below $1 billion, according to a report by Bloomberg. 
  • That's less than the net worth of many entrepreneurs and celebrities, including rapper Jay-Z and reality star Kylie Jenner. 
  • The country has had limited access to funds since governments around the world enacted sanctions to try to force the country's embattled president, Nicolás Maduro, from power after he faced accusations of rigging elections. 

Venezuela's cash supply has fallen below $1 billion as the country faces sanctions from governments around the world, limiting its ability to access funds and sell off the tons of gold it has in storage. 

The South American country now has less than $800 million in cash and $200 million in other liquid assets, people familiar with the Venezuelan central bank's finances told Bloomberg

The drop means Venezuela's cash balance has dropped below the net worth of many billionaire entrepreneurs, including Jay-Z, who is worth more than $1 billion, according to Forbes.

Joining the list of people worth more than Venezuela's supply of cash are Kylie Jenner, who Forbes ranked as the world's youngest self-made billionaire, and ultra-wealthy founders like Jeff Bezos of Amazon and Bill Gates of Microsoft. 

While Venezuela has around 73 tons of gold held locally, worth around $3.6 billion, the country has struggled to turn that gold into cash because the US has limited buyers and banks from doing business with the country's embattled presidential administration, the report said. 
 

https://www.businessinsider.com/venezuela-reportedly-has-less-than-1-billion-in-cash-2020-1

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe there is too much money floating around. Capitalism does have a few examples of trickle down economics.....this yacht had a crew of 63, let alone countless yard workers employed to keep it ship shape.....and a ship it is. A steal at $327 mill!

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2003/lurssen-octopus-3581040/

This yacht was commissioned by Paul Allen (Microsoft) in 2003.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, st27 said:

Maybe there is too much money floating around. Capitalism does have a few examples of trickle down economics.....this yacht had a crew of 63, let alone countless yard workers employed to keep it ship shape.....and a ship it is. A steal at $327 mill!

https://www.yachtworld.com/boats/2003/lurssen-octopus-3581040/

This yacht was commissioned by Paul Allen (Microsoft) in 2003.

Yachts are used by corporations and individuals as Tax Write offs.  You see it in Miami and places like that.  

Company or individual buys boat...(BIG BOAT).  Sets up a shell company to manage "chartering" said boat.

The company / individual then sets about partying and cruising and paying all of the staff required and maintenance etc. all to the tune of millions of dollars but never actually Charters the boat.  This causes said company to declare a huge loss.  They do this for 3 years at which point they sell the asset to another shell company, kill the first company  and do it all over again. This triggers some tax relief for the corporation / individual.

I may not have the specifics correct but a few years ago this was explained to me on a pleasure cruise in Florida by someone who actually does this.  Apparently VERY common practice.  Private Jets are sometimes used in the same fashion but to a lesser extent.

Ever wonder why those Canaadian and American Jets carry a VR Registration?  TAXES and how to evade paying them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yachts have evolved over the last 20 years or so.....the classification growing from “yacht” to “super yacht”, “mega yacht” and now the “giga yacht”.

Quote

William Mathieson, the editorial and intelligence director of the Superyacht Group, the leading analyst of the industry, said there are about 3,500 active vessels in the world that meet the loose definition of a superyacht by measuring more than 100 feet; just 55 top 330 feet.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/style/superyachts-billionaires.html

Most yachts have home port of  Georgetown, CI......Cayman Islands   Or     Majuro, MI .... Marshal Islands (not Michigan)  for the tax advantage.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, boestar said:

Yachts are used by corporations and individuals as Tax Write offs. 

If you work for a company that thinks that is sound financial management then you should find another job because that theory is just nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i DON'T work for trhe company that does this.  However it is Lucrative when they do apparently.  It becomes, essentially a free boat.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY ??
 

Is this the best we have to offer as an example to our university kids? A bloody terrorist for some one to look up to?? 

D7A7F395-75FE-4C40-9274-066C795503BA.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, boestar said:

i DON'T work for trhe company that does this.  However it is Lucrative when they do apparently.  It becomes, essentially a free boat.

 

I didn't think that you did.

The only reason to spend money is to hope that you can DEFER taxes not pour it down a hole in the ground (or water)

The only tax write-off that I know about was when people could invest in oil exploration and get 110% back in taxes.  I don't think that is available anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well all I know is that there are hundreds of if not thousands of people doing it and making money at.  At least in the US.

All I have is the explanation as it was given to me while admiring all of the super yachts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than raising the bar,,,,Society in 2020 dragging expectations of “normal” down to the lowest common denominator....Considering Societies penchant for making everything about being GAY...this is hardly surprising.

96A5B0D6-9E78-4C46-91E8-44AC67B9BBAD.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2020 at 4:27 PM, Jaydee said:

WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY ??
 

Is this the best we have to offer as an example to our university kids? A bloody terrorist for some one to look up to?? 

D7A7F395-75FE-4C40-9274-066C795503BA.jpeg

I'm trying to figure out the best response to this.  I'll throw the floor open to suggestions from the intellects that frequent these parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is indeed troubling.  

With anti-Semitism on the rise, Auschwitz liberation commemorated

 

4 MIN READ

  •  
  •  
 

WARSAW/OSWIECIM, Poland (Reuters) - World leaders join aging Holocaust survivors in Poland on Monday to mark 75 years since the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp by Soviet troops, amid concerns over a global resurgence of anti-Semitism.

 
 
Auschwitz survivors Kseniia Olkhova and Lidia Turovskaya, visit the Auschwitz museum a day prior to the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Nazi German concentration and extermination camp, Auschwitz, in Oswiecim, Poland January 26, 2020. REUTERS/Aleksandra Szmigiel

More than 1.1 million people, most of them Jews, perished in the camp’s gas chambers or from starvation, cold and disease.

Set up by Nazi Germany in occupied Poland in 1940, at first to house Polish political prisoners, it became the largest of the extermination centers where Adolf Hitler’s plan to kill all Jews - the “Final Solution” - was put into practice.

Speaking before Monday’s ceremonies, David Harris, head of the American Jewish Committee, said groups ranging from far-right white supremacists to jihadis and the far-left were fuelling anti-Semitism worldwide.

“Jews in western Europe think twice before they wear a kippa, they think twice before they go to a synagogue, think twice before they enter a kosher supermarket,” he told Reuters.

A 2019 survey by the U.S.-based Anti-Defamation League showed that about one in four Europeans harbor “pernicious and pervasive” attitudes towards Jews, compared with 19% of North Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Adulting” shows what society has won - and lost

PUBLISHED FRI, JAN 24 202010:24 AM ESTUPDATED FRI, JAN 24 202010:47 AM EST
 
 
 
 
KEY POINTS
  • I’ve often been the first to roll my eyes at the way millennials talk about “adulting,” and the churlish way it’s covered in the media.
  • Now that women of childbearing age are overwhelmingly in the workforce, I’d argue the next battle is going to be over the home front as our generations struggle to balance the two.
 

CNBC: Kelly Evans - 106349917

CNBC’s Kelly Evans
CNBC

I’ll admit it: I’ve often been the first to roll my eyes at the way millennials talk about “adulting,” and the churlish way it’s covered in the media.

This week’s case in point: UC Berkeley is now offering a class on adulting, making it one of the more “serious” academic institutions to join this growing trend. This letter to the editor of the L.A. Times typifies the reaction:

 

“These kids mean to say that they are capable of earning a degree from one of the world’s foremost academic institutions, yet they cannot figure out by themselves how to read a cookbook, get to work on time or how not to outspend their income?”

The writer added, “This is one more puzzlement facing this octogenarian in today’s world gone mad.”

Well, I’ve been thinking a lot about this lately. Because I’m on maternity leave trying to figure out how to juggle two little kids while keeping everyone fed and the house in some semblance of order (short answer: thank you mom!) and let me tell you, it doesn’t just come naturally. At least not to me*!

As I’ve noted before, learning home economics is just as hard, and takes just as many hours of work, as learning “macro” econ. Except you only get one shot at family life, and failure isn’t really an option. And you kind of want to enjoy it and not just be stressed out and upset all the time because you haven’t exactly mastered the art of meal planning just yet.

In other words, “adulting” is hard, and it doesn’t hurt to be taught some skills before you’re thrown into the fire. I, like probably many, was not at all interested in learning any of that a kid. I loved school and sports, and thankfully those are the two things society values most right now because they can get you into a good college. Worked for me!

 

Cooking and cleaning and “homemaking,” on the other hand? Shudder. And I’m hardly alone in that regard. My mother-in-law is an amazing cook. Amazing! So I had always just assumed it was her forte in life. But oh, no. Turns out her mother had made her stay inside and learn how to cook for the family while her brother got to play outside with his friends. Horribly sexist? Sure. But is it really “empowering” for me to not have her cooking prowess, and instead have to rely on expensive, unhealthy food delivery for my family while I try to figure it out?

I was thinking all this over as the latest J.P. Morgan research note landed in my inbox. “Prime-age female [labor force] participation could keep rising,” it says. It’s currently just below 77% for 25- to 54-year-old American women, and has hovered around there for almost two decades now. The firm says it could rise above 80%, closer to rates in Germany, Japan, and Canada, as more family-friendly work policies (like paid parental leave) gain traction.

To which I say: great, but the gains have largely been made. To the women of past decades who fought and sacrificed so that I could be in the workforce: thank you. Does more still need to be done on that front? Perhaps. But now that women of childbearing age are overwhelmingly in the workforce, I’d argue the next battle is going to be over the home front as our generations struggle to balance the two.

I absolutely expect parental leave policies to get more generous very quickly. It’s not because we millennials are “soft”--it’s because we’re all expected to both work and raise our kids, instead of splitting up the tasks. And since those kids are society’s future, there’s more than just our own sanities at stake in getting this right.

But it’s not just about having enough time to be at home--it’s also about having the skills necessary to “keep house” and raise kids properly. So either we go back to making kids learn this stuff in school (like the “home ec” of yore), or it should be part of any “general education” college requirements, since college has become the holy grail crowding out everything else.

Or, make it your new go-to wedding gift: cooking classes and a session with a financial planner for the happy couple. Home life is really hard, and it deserves more emphasis and respect than it’s been getting in our professional achievement-obsessed culture. I’m glad it’s starting to get more attention, however sardonic. So don’t roll your eyes the next time you see an “adulting” class pop up in the headlines. Tell your kids about it! OK, boomer?

God bless,
Kelly

Twitter: @KellyCNBC

Instagram: @realkellyevans

*And I should note: my parents actually made me do chores growing up, and my mom made sure I knew how to at least whip up some spaghetti or Kraft mac ‘n’ cheese. I used to feel pretty self-sufficient 😉

P.S. And is there a “long ‘adulting,’ short ‘convenience economy’” pair trade here to consider? Hmmm....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Marshall said:

“Adulting” shows what society has won - and lost

First I've heard of the term, I had to look it up. Clearly we have lost more than I thought.

adult·ing
/əˈdəltiNG,ˈaˌdəltiNG/
noun
INFORMAL
the practice of behaving in a way characteristic of a responsible adult, especially the accomplishment of mundane but necessary tasks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this