Some suffered, I believe, from a simple lack of exposure, which to me translates as a lack of experience. Others put up a pretty good fight but had to concede defeat. Notables include:

Adam Giambrone – Finishing his term as head of Toronto’s Transit Commission and toppled over a sex scandal in February. I didn’t lose any sleep over it. Plus, Jammers is what, like, 18? He’s got plenty of politics ahead of him if he wants to stay in the game.

Giorgio Mammoliti – Had a bit of momentum but in July decided he’d rather try to stay on as a Toronto Councillor for his current ward. No mistaking Giorgio as being anything but 100% bona fide Ai-talian, but I guess it takes more than that these days. I don’t think he even has any mob connections.

Sarah Thompson – Strangely, not yet on the list of mayoral casualties, but Sarah gets an extra star next to her name for being the feisty (previously unknown) newcomer who demonstrated she could play with the big kids. She hung in for quite a while before throwing in the towel about a month ago and joining forces with George Smitherman. She’s a self-made businesswoman and has her own magazine — I think she’ll be fine.

Rocco Rossi - The man with the million-dollar smile is also not on the drop-out list but this was only a couple of weeks ago (the paperwork to update a government website probably takes as long). Rocco was the ringleader behind John Tory’s campaign — the one other man who might’ve broken through in this selection had he chosen to run. Unfortunately, Rocco’s beaming smile and charisma didn’t carry him through and he left quietly without endorsing anyone else.

As many people expected, the race was mostly just casual mud flinging until September or so when the media got in high-gear. Then it was one debate and town hall after another, none of which I attended. To be honest, I think the websites of the top three candidates should be enough, though trying to make out the candidates hollering over each other has its charm.

George Smitherman

When this all started I mentioned that George, “is gay and looks like a bulldog. Both, I believe, in his favour.” I still expect that he’ll probably win although I’m not convinced I’ll be ticking off his name. Some of his key promises include:

• 100-day tax, hiring, spending freeze while the city budget is re-evaluated. Sounds kinda nice but I sure hope nothing happens during those 100 days that might require hiring or spending. And, let’s face it, 100 days later, we might all be paying even more.
• Fair tenant taxes. Apparently I pay more in property taxes through my rent than a homeowner — who knew? However, the $50 / year savings isn’t making me pee myself with excitement.
• Transit. Everyone loves this issue — for a city the size of Toronto, we are pretty damn far behind when it comes to public transit. We only have 3 main subway lines and most of our subway cars / streetcars are antiques. On top of this, streetcars take up literally 50% of the roads downtown but the roads can’t be expanded — we’ve got light rail-infrastructure but not enough room. George wants to phase in updates over 10 years starting with getting transit going along the lake shore for the Pan Am Games in 2015. After that he wants to start construction on East-West lines in the north and update the Scarborough LRT (an eastern extension to the Bloor Subway line). Generally speaking, I’m not against this idea, but it seems incredibly wasteful to essentially scrap Transit City.
• Creating about 500 jobs through an Economic Ambassador program and prodding businesses to hire locally. Most of the city’s  financial troubles will be addressed through attrition (not replacing people who retire), and by combining fire and emergency services. Electricity provider Toronto Hydro would stay in public hands. Sounds long and tedious, possibly necessary.

Rob Ford

Rob has been so easy to criticize during this campaign. He’s well known for making off-colour public remarks and sticking his foot into his mouth on a regular basis. I don’t think he’s a bad guy, he’s just not very diplomatic. The beefy football coach’s campaign was managed by his brother (not dissimilar in many ways), and was unsurprisingly dotted with all manner of scandal and accusation. Still, Rob weathered the storm and he’s neck-and-neck with George; most polls agree it could easily go either way today.

Some of what Rob says he’ll do includes:

• Cut City Hall. Just generally, cut it. Rob’s “stop the gravy train” message resonates with many people who think politicians have been getting a free ride for too long. Councillors like Sandra Bussin, who think nothing of making anonymous phone calls to radio stations, Paula Fletcher who screams down opposition, or my own ward’s now-retired Kyle Rae who probably shouldn’t have thrown himself a $12,000 going-away party, have really helped to cement Rob’s line. While I like the rigour with which Rob approaches this, and cutting back City Hall is just a good idea anyway, most of the plan seems way too small to make a significant difference. Good try, Rob, but you need to think bigger!
• Make the TTC an essential service. Right now transit can be shut down by a strike, something that wouldn’t happen if it was designated to be essential. Mostly, though, Rob wants to end the “war on cars” he says is being perpetrated by the city so it’s obvious where his heart lies on this issue. Incredibly myopic and with few details. Sorry, Rob, another miss.
• Eliminate Land Transfer and Vehicle Registration Taxes. Obviously this one’s for the burbs. Good on Rob for reaching out but I’m feeling a bit left out here. No love, Rob, no love.
• Consider privatizing garbage collection. After last year’s strike, this is certainly something to consider. But I’m starting to sense a bit of a theme here…garbage strike pissed people off, traffic pisses people off, City Hall spending pisses people off, etc. While I’d be happy to see these things addressed, this is definitely reactionary politics; I don’t see a long-term plan here.

Joe Pantalone

If you didn’t know Joey Pants before, you do now. If nothing else can be said about this dimunitive Deputy Mayor, he’s the most eminently qualified — he’s almost mayor now. However, and perhaps because of his height, Joe’s had to jump up and down and wave twice as hard as anyone else just to be heard.

Even though the chances of him becoming mayor are slim at this point, you gotta give the little guy credit for hanging in there; only he and George stayed on for the full ten months. Plus, everything I’ve heard about him indicates he’s genuinely a nice guy with a good head for this sort of thing. He just falls below the radar, that’s all.

Here’s what Joe promises our fair city if he’s elected:

• Improved transit and everyone’s welcome on the roads. Of all the candidates, Joe has the most complete plans I’ve seen (and fanciest Powerpoint slides too). In this area he’s taking the sanest most middle-of-the-road approach, but puts most of his weight behind bikes (rentals, better lanes, etc.), and public transit. He’s a fan of Transit City, the big plan put in place by current Mayor Miller to expand transit both out of town and fix what we have here. If you ask me, this is the most sensible approach — Transit City is already underway and the plan extends out to all of Toronto. Tearing it down and starting something new would be a massive waste.
• Reducing poverty and homelessness. Again, Joe has solid numbers he wants to see year over year, including building of new affordable housing units, finding housing for homeless people, and so on. I have no idea if any of these numbers are realistic but I’m thinking that Joe probably had a pretty good idea by now.
• Predictable taxes and fare increases. No promises of tax reductions here, just that tax and fare increases should be transparent and predictable. Joe wants Community Councils to run their own budgets while pushing some provincial service costs to the province. Currently, they say how stuff gets run but we in the city pay for it. How the hell did that happen?!
• Sustainable / environment initiatives. Pantalone’s got a green thumb, it seems. He’s one of the few candidates mentioning this topic and is demonstrating that he’s both a tie-dyed hippie and a bleeding heart. Besides investing in so-called green programs, Pantalone also want the city to get more involved in food production, increase support services for women, children, and families, and he’s got a whole section on helping out the elderly.
• Support diversity and youth, and tackle bed bugs. Generic, general, and really? Joe’s not the only candidate to mention bed bugs but news on this has been fairly sparse lately — and you know media love bed bug stories. Well, here’s the deal, I don’t have bed bugs and I didn’t see any mention of rent reductions so that about does it for me.

I don’t believe in the throw-away, lesser-of-evils, vote-by-fear approach. Anyone who trudges out that old pony should quickly be reminded that a minority win is just as significant on the make up of City Hall. Or Parliament. Or whatever. We should vote for the best candidate even if they’re a long-shot.

In another four years we’ll be doing this again so that little bit of support could make the difference next time around. And it’s note-worthy to point out that City Hall isn’t just the mayor, there are 44 Councillors representing the various wards of this sprawling metropolis, and they all get a vote just like the Mayor. Plus, the Council vote is just as crucial; it’s traditionally been the Councillors that have been the biggest dicks at City Hall.

Share / save this post

Okay?

Good.

So let’s talk about this concept of the straight and narrow, shall we?

What a load. Seriously. They (I’ll explain who they are below), had a chance to convince me that being a law-abiding, tax-paying, run-of-the-mill citizen is what’s best. What they ended up doing instead is convincing me that the law has nothing to do with justice, rules and morality are unrelated, and that anyone trying to convince you otherwise is either hopelessly ignorant or in on the racket.

The racket is, of course, the money game, extending all the way down from the corporations, through their (sometimes our) subservient government, and onto us minions, all upheld with thinly veiled lies and hypocrisy. Oh, and police, operating under a ridiculously precedent-laden law.

“Hang on just a second!,” you might say, “weren’t you poking fun at the G20 protesters for standing up against exactly this?!”

Nope. It wasn’t the message I had a problem with, it was the method. Breaking a few windows and spray painting illegible slogans is idiotic. Blocking the streets to prevent fellow citizens from using them is childish. And if you read a newspaper, or have half a brain, you’ll note that Starbucks and the major banks et al. suffered not one iota. Big surprise!

But I’ve done my fair share of G20 railing myself, plenty around this blog to back me up on that.

And the G20, really, is a perfect example of corporate dominion over government. All Torontonians are acutely aware of the ridiculous security measures the G20 were provided with during that eventful weekend, something that would never be extended to individual heads of state. When the Queen comes to visit people can run up to her and shake her hand for heaven’s sake! And the G20 isn’t a governmental body, or a policy body, or anything of the sort. It’s 100% about money. It’s about financial stability – how to make life comfortable for those for whom life is already too comfortable.

To be fair, this isn’t anything new. I mean, how long have bankers, financial analysts, and all these overfed con men (the reason markets require confidence to operate), been telling us to be frugal with our money in order to make modest gains through savings or measly investment accounts. Right … and where exactly are they urging us to save / invest our money? Their banks, credit unions, investments funds, and so on. Shocker, that one. And I wonder if these same people would ever put their money where their mouths are. You know, be satisfied with a 0.01% compound rate with a $50 monthly fee for the privilege.

And, really, have a stroll down to King and Bay downtown one day and have a look around. I dare you to argue that frugality and savings and all the other bullshit we’re still being shovelled built all that.

Like I said, you either have to be ignorant or in on the racket.

The concept of profit is another one that’s deeply flawed. The bank / business establishment would have you believe that profits are the end-all be-all. After all, don’t they constantly demand profits each and every quarter? That’s kinda like you walking into your boss’ office every three months and demanding a twenty-percent raise (for doing nothing, I should add). Your boss would probably laugh at you, right? Yet his / her boss expects exactly this – at least. So, every quarter, the people at the top make more and more while you get to wait a whole year before finding out that you have to “tighten your belt” because profits are down. Not that the company is losing money, let’s be clear – in that case you’d be laid off. They’re just not making as much as they’d like to, and since their ravenous mouths must be fed first (because they’ve obviously done the most to earn it), it comes out of your paycheque.

Yup, profit is a set of scales. If someone has a lot, someone else must necessarily have little. Or the government prints more money, thereby devaluing it and starting massive inflation. That’s no good for anyone so the status quo stays. And if it was just a little profit, as the same two-faced bankers / investors / financiers tell us to expect, it wouldn’t really be a big deal; those who lose in order for others to gain wouldn’t lose that much. But we all know that it’s never enough – they’ll take your fingernails if they think they can get two pennies for them.

And they’re insidious about it too.

Have you tried to rent a hotel room in, say, the last thirty years or so without a credit card? Damn near impossible. Last time I tried, it went a little something like this:

“Why do I need a credit card to rent a hotel room?”

“We need to make an imprint just in case there are damages or extra charges.”

“So you’d arbitrarily charge any amount on the card? What if my limit is two-thousand and I do four grand in damages?”

“We’d rather you didn’t, sir.”

“So would I, but I’m trying to make a point here.”

“No, we would only go up to $500. Our insurance would have to cover the rest.”

“Ah, now we’re getting somewhere. Okay, here you go, five-hundred in crispy new bills. You can hold on to this deposit and I’ll pick it up tomorrow once you say the room’s kosher.”

“Sorry, sir, we need a credit card imprint.”

“But I’m offering you legal tender here, up to the limit that you just stated. Money up front and no extra processing fees for you. Better than going through the credit card company if I wreck the place, so what’s the problem?”

“Sorry but that’s our policy.”

End of conversation. You must do business with Visa or Mastercard or whoever if you want to stay in a hotel.

And it’s the same with the government.

My sister recently got a traffic ticket, as we all do from time to time. Payment instructions for credit cards only. No cheques, no cash. No shit. Some government agencies no longer accept legal tender as payment. In other words, government won’t accept government-issued money. You must do business with a credit card company, or a bank (not a government entity last time I checked!), yet you can’t pay using a form of payment issued by the payee.

And this wouldn’t be particularly bothersome to me except for the outrageous fees that are foisted on us by these institutions. In this regard, any fees are outrageous. If we want a job, if we want to conduct affairs with the government, if we want to just live our lives, we are beholden to unrelated private enterprise and are charged for doing so. In other words, we are forced to give up our money to private interests by law.

Mind you, that doesn’t stop the government from pulling its own tricks in lock-step. Most Ontarians have recently started enjoying the new Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), combined from the previous Goods and Services Tax (GST) and a federal tax. For a lot of things this hasn’t meant much change, but new items were introduced for taxation so that the government could misappropriate even more of our money. We’re now required to pay 13% on funerals, for example – assholes won’t even let you die in peace.

Then there’s the Eco Fee that was introduced along with the new tax, and it shows just what a travesty all of this is. No level of government seems to know exactly how much stores should be charging, but that didn’t stop them from passing the law anyway (and then temporarily rescinding it after discovering that they didn’t really know how their own fucking law worked!). Had we been overpaid, we would of course be required to return the money. Giant private enterprise, of course, is under no such similar obligation.

Stores happily started to charge anywhere from a buck to five dollars on everything that might fall under the “hazardous waste” category, the excuse being that the fee would be used in the safe disposal and recycling of said hazardous waste. But you have to bring the waste to a drop-off site yourself. Okay. And what the fuck are you bringing back anyways? The fee covers stuff like dishwashing soap and paints and other consumable stuff – things you use. The soap goes down the drain, the paint goes on the wall. What you’re bringing back are empty recyclable containers. So, you get to pay for recycling something that you have to bring back that, really, you’re not bringing back because you’ve used it up.

And the HST is applied on top of the fee! It’s called a fee so they can put a tax on it since it’s still illegal to tax a tax – at least for now.

I know, I’m already bald from all the hair-pulling.

And this, this is what I get for forking over half my paycheque to the government?! All these taxes that we’re all paying into because, supposedly, they’re being used for our benefit? Yeah, I’ve had some experience with these so-called “benefits”, I take the ancient transit system every day that I support through both orifices, I ride my bike on the pot-holed roads that I also pay for, and I walk on the broken sidewalks that come out of my pockets. And you know what? I call bullshit. They’re fucking lying to us and stealing from us – it’s no more complicated than that.

This is why people who say “there are no certainties in life but death and taxes” deserve to be slugged. They’ve basically equated a natural process that’s an actual certainty to something completely artificial and potentially escapable. And these people usually say it with a smile and a shrug, urging you to accept their wonderfully lackadaisical take on the rape we’re all experiencing. They’re either aggravatingly ignorant or in on the racket.

People who tell me that I need to express myself at the ballot box get a wallop as well. There is not a single party out there that doesn’t perpetuate this shit. PC, Liberal, NDP, doesn’t matter. I’ve voted for all of them and they’re all assholes once they get into power. For fuck’s sake, it’s only been four years, are people’s memories that short? They’re all crooks!

And to all the people who think you can make a difference with your dollar – have you not been paying attention? Look, let’s say you buy at the local mom ‘n pop. Okay, so there’s a little community benefit, true. But – you pay taxes. They pay taxes. You buy brand-name products, profits of which go right up to the behemoth corporations in control. What? You only buy hand-made? And prithee tell, where did the raw materials for those hand-made products come from? There are only a handful of things, usually agricultural, that you can buy that are partially outside of the system of corporate control, and Monsanto is trying to make sure you get fucked on those too – taxes not included. Basically, you’re simply shuffling around pieces of paper, allowing mom and pop to pay rent, stay afloat, exist for another month. In the grand scheme of things, you might as well be at Walmart buying a $7 Coke (taxes and fees included) with your credit card.

Don’t even get me started about Apple.

Welcome to the corporate dystopia of 2010 – came a bit sooner than I thought.

But there is hope.

The one thing that I find laughable in the G20 protesters’ arguments is the thought that there are a handful of megalomaniacal men sitting at the top of the food chain pulling all the strings and reaping all the benefits. Megalomaniacs exist by the thousands if not millions – we’ve all probably met one or two. You know, God’s gift to this earth, can do no wrong, etc.

It’s clear that these people won’t stand to be anything less than number-one asshole, and since there are so many of them, it’s a constant climb over the bodies of predecessors. Yesterday’s top dog is today’s dog food. So while I’m certain that megalomaniacs exist at high positions, they tend to do so only for brief periods. That alone could help to explain why the need for quick profits is so prevalent – they know their time is limited so they’d better scrounge up as much as they can. As the world’s population increases, this will only become more tumultuous; law of averages.

So I’m generally unconcerned about any singular overarching regime controlling the globe. Even if we ended up with one world corporation / government, there’d be too much infighting to make it the Orwellian 1984 that so many people fear. Besides, such broad-ranging, active surveillance requires that 50% of the population is being watched while the other 50% watches. After all, those not being watched are potential wrenches in the machinery – the criminals, saboteurs, and everything else that Big Brother can’t abide. Who’s left to run things? Nah, the numbers just don’t work.

The system we’re involved in, as I mentioned, requires confidence. It’s a con, a ruse – make-believe. Money is a mere representation. There used to be a time when a dollar bill was a promissory note; you could go to the central bank and exchange it for a dollar’s worth of gold. Now it’s merely a concept. If you don’t believe it’s worth a dollar’s worth of goods, services, or whatever you plan to exchange it for – it’s not! You sure as hell can’t exchange it for gold at any bank. Only coins, in fact, have intrinsic value, and they’re slowly being phased out. Paper money is probably next.

It’s the same with law. Law was at one time a standardized representation of justice; you kill someone, you get punished. It used to make sense. However, because the law needs to apply to everyone equally, every idiotic judgement got thrown into the books as precedent. If a judge ruled a specific way, a future judge is duty-bound to rule the same way; the law must not only be fair but must be seen to be fair — sure you’ve heard that one. That’s why people are more and more frequently getting off on technicalities and precedent. The hubris of the legal system and its judges specifically is, ultimately, the instrument of its own demise.

While these systems are imploding on themselves, it’s incumbent on us to lose our fear of them. And maybe pick up some useful trades while we’re at it. Big Brother isn’t watching. Those cameras aren’t for our safety or protection. The police are enforcing law, not justice. Money is a suggestion, credit cards are an insult, and government is a subsidiary.

Look, I’m not gonna tell you to break the law. The law insists that I don’t. But when you start to look at the whole ball of wax for what it is, you start to get the idea that maybe a little side-stepping is in order. That’ll be my excuse when I’m before the courts. :)

Get off the straight and narrow if you want to live as anything more than a subservient stooge. Do it to a lesser degree for the benefit of your kids. Oh, the lofty will try to convince you of how wrong you are for doing so (usually while doing exactly the same thing), but don’t let their crap fly unless you’re planning to let it hit the fan. As the bard once said, “don’t believe the hype!”

Share / save this post

After researching what the G-20 does, I have to say, I really don’t think that they’re this evil body of leaders bent on taking over the world that some people suggest. I mean, I suppose it’s possible, and I guess you need to have some megalomaniacal qualities in order to get to that level in global politics, but it just seems like they spend most of their time sitting around eating munchies and making nice-to-do lists. I can’t begrudge them that, it’s what I aspire to myself.

But does it deserve the amount of money that our government is throwing at it? Will the, at present, C$1.2 billion be the sound investment that they’re saying it is?

Yes, that’s billion. I know, seems pretty high to me too, but to be honest I’ve never held an international summit so I wouldn’t know how much to ask for at the door. And, yeah, if we’re going to have global leaders here, we should probably buy them the good munchies, not the dollar-store crap. Presumably this second option is what was chosen in Pittsburgh, the location of the last summit, where they spent US$12.2 million (roughly C$13 million).

The costs over the past few summits (these are estimates because, apparently, these figures didn’t warrant detailed tracking or further study), are:

• 2009 (U.K) – US$30 million (C$30,000,000)
• 2009 (U.S.) – US$18 million (C$18,000,000)
• 2010 (Canada) – C$1.2 billion+ — projected

It’s estimated that about half of this, or C$500 million, is being spent on security. That’s gonna be some security!

According to a recent article in the Sun, security guards can earn up to C$1,000 for two weeks’ worth of work. With 1,100 people being hired for this task (and let’s assume they’re all earning top dollar), that’s about C$1.1 million. The security fence will cost about C$5.5 million … ah what the heck, let’s say an even C$6 mill. So, fences and security are costing just over C$7 million, which leaves about C$490 million (note how I’m being generous with a few million here and there).

Let’s say that the police are getting an even C$100 million just for staff, and the same for their new toys. No, let’s say C$200 million for new toys; we want nothing but the absolute best! So, a total of C$300 million for the Toronto Police.

Presumably this will include the new security cameras as well as that sound cannon thing. That’s new cameras on 20 intersections, and let’s assume they put four cameras per intersection just for fun. So, 80 new units plus a sound thingie comes out to an average of C$2.5 million per unit. So, like, really expensive cameras (even if installation for each unit costs a million).

Okay, so so far we’ve got four jewel-encrusted cameras being installed by millionaires (a good idea really—they have considerably less reason to steal the equipment) on each street corner, police who can easily retire after the event, and private security that can certainly afford to get paid better. I suppose some of that money could go toward even better security fencing, though apart from automated gun turrets I’m not sure how they could improve it.

And we’ve still got C$190 million left over.

Let’s toss another C$100 million into the “miscellaneous security” pile just for good measure. In Winnipeg they purchased a new police helicopter at C$3.5 million, so that should leave our own force with enough dough (factoring in operating costs), to purchase at least 20 brand-new birds. That should still leave enough “miscellaneous” money to provide the entire G-20 security detail with diamond-studded uniforms and suh-weet pensions.

Shit, we’ve still got C$90 million left over. I’m at a loss to suggest how else this money could be spent; maybe a small security satellite launched into orbit?

Overall, if you break down the costs over a two-week period, we’re spending about 4 times as much on security as we are on national defence. In other words, G-20 security have the resources to easily take over Canada; our own army couldn’t stop them. Okay, I know, the Canadian army gets funding throughout the year so the financial comparison probably isn’t fair, but with most of those resources holed up overseas, a coup d’état would be relatively easy. And well funded.

At this point we’re at the halfway point in the spending. The rest, presumably, will go toward making everyone’s stays here comfortable and enjoyable.

The National Post estimates that about 10,000 people will be flying in for the summit, or about 500 people per country. That leaves ample room for each representative’s assistants to each be responsible for producing, spell-checking, and revising one word in the resulting G-20 publications (which might explain why they can’t seem to spell the organization’s name the same way).

It’s my understanding that the delegations will be paying their own way while they’re here over the weekend (plane trips, hotel rooms, etc.), so the C$50,000 per head price tag will be going toward some nifty grab bags and a frickin’ awesome convention room light show. Maybe some fancy napkins to go with the summit dinner too. Unfortunately, this part of the expense is the most hush-hush (national security, no doubt), so it’s tough to say exactly where and how the city will be spending C$25,000 on each person per day. What is quite clear, however, is that this expense will be roughly equal to the security expense for each person.

The fence and the security cameras are the only expenses that citizens will be able to actually account for.

In fact, Canadian citizens, the same people paying for all of this, will be barred from even a hint regarding spending until after the fact. After that, when the money’s been spent and we’re all making up for it with a new tax, we may be allowed to know where some of that billion dollars went. Not all of it, mind you; that would be a breach of security for the next summit, and it’s why there are no hard facts or figures on G-20 spending since the thing started.

Okay, now, to be fair, we’re also hosting the G-8 summit at the same time. Correction, Huntsville is.

I have to be honest, that is a nice location for the G-8 meeting. It’s in the heart of Ontario’s cottage country, picturesque countryside that typifies the idyllic Ontario summer. I’ve spent a good amount of time up there (about an hour and a half north of Toronto), and as a backdrop for photo-ops, I don’t think we could do much better. The area (more commonly known as the Muskoka Lakes region, or just the Muskokas), is our version of The Hamptons – million dollar houses amusingly called cottages, unbelievably cute and (at this time of year) busy tourist towns, just the right amount of wildlife so that people can pretend to be out in nature, etc.

So while the statement that the summits will put Toronto on the map is utter bullshit (finally people outside of Canada will know about the city’s existence!), in the case of Hunstville I tend to agree. And the town has been granted C$50 million by the feds to do it up for the visitors.

The calculations I did for the G-20 only went up to the one billion mark so this amount is easily included in the 1.2 billion. Hell, they could quadruple their budget and still come in under the gun.

But I can’t help but wonder if any of the delegates or the international press will have a chance to see Ontario’s natural beauty, what with the fake lake that’s being built here in the city to mimic the Muskokas. There’s some debate whether the lake will cost C$2 million as initially reported, or C$57,000 according to recent statements, but that doesn’t really seem like the real issue here, does it?

Nah, says our government, it’s worth it. It’s not a lake, they say, it’s a reflecting pool, and it’s for all the media who won’t be allowed to go to Huntsville for the G-8. Plus, it’s not just for the pool, they continue, it’s also for a replica of the Toronto Stock Exchange — literally three blocks up the street – and other representations of Toronto. In other words, they’re re-building replicas of parts of Toronto, in the center of Toronto, to represent Toronto to visiting journalists. And, unfortunately, the citizens of Toronto won’t get to see how their “city” looks because it’ll all be torn down after the summits.

In the meantime, citizens will be barred from the area, businesses will be forced to close, and residents need to apply for special ID and be prepared to give security “good reason” for entering the security perimeter. Furthermore, police will be discouraging people from even coming close to the security fence, with traffic being diverted for several blocks outside of the outer security zone. In fairness, the fact that the roads in the area will be closed makes it, at least for this reason, sensible.

I asked police guarding the fence what laws I’d be breaking if I were to wander into the perimeter. What would I be charged with, in other words? Their answer was, “resisting a police officer’s orders”. I replied by saying, well, sure, I understand if I’m being rowdy or destroying property, even trespassing on private property or endangering my/someone else’s life, but what laws would I be breaking that would allow them to order me around in the first place, and hence charge me with resisting?

The answer, as far as they knew: none. There are no laws that say I may not cross the security barrier, that say I need to apply for special ID/etc., or that say I’m doing something illegal simply by being within the perimeter. But, if I do find myself there, I’m assured that the police can and will detain me.

It’s not exaggerating to say that this is the same (exactly the same, in fact), as the police telling you to get off a public sidewalk for no reason whatsoever, and if you don’t comply with their arbitrary demand, you will be arrested and charged – not with being on the sidewalk, but with not obeying the officer’s demand that you get off the sidewalk, which they had no right in making in the first place. And if they can demand that you follow some imaginary laws that they’re making up as they go along, what’s to stop them from making up other laws on the spot so that they can then charge you with not following them, and hence for resisting their orders to follow those made-up laws?

And I consider myself a supporter of the Toronto Police so it’s not like I want to butt heads with them.

There’s a legal precedent called “probable cause” under which police can do something like this – if it looks like you’re about to cause trouble, if you’re carrying a weapon, about to or in the process of breaking some law – but police need to show good cause for doing this, and for obvious reason. Once police stop you, they must have some legal basis for detaining you (again, you were causing trouble, carrying a weapon, trespassing on private property, etc.), but for them to hold you further, eject you from the area, or even charge you with resisting arrest, even though there’s no clear reason for them to have detained you in the first place, that’s setting an extremely unsettling precedent. And that’s what the police will be doing openly and publicly during the summits.

Without exaggeration, it’s fair to say that the police will be (and are), stripping Canadian citizens of their rights, without a basis under the law (let alone actual laws), to justify their actions. In other words, the police are making up their own rules and are enforcing them. I mean, if the cops guarding the fence don’t know the laws they’re supposedly enforcing, who does? And if they can’t cite the rules they’re enforcing, how am I supposed to be following them?

Moreover, why isn’t the Supreme Court of Canada stepping in and stopping this or trying to introduce some laws so that the police have something to lean on? Not like it’s a big secret or anything.

Pretty scary.

While I was having this chat with the cops (who were admittedly friendly and helpful), a construction chief working on the security fencing walked up to me and called me a “jerk” for questioning “the rules” (though she couldn’t tell me what, exactly, “the rules” are). I thought I was being polite and courteous – I’m sure I smiled and tried my best to assure the group that I had no intention of breaking any laws; I’ve never had a problem with the police and was simply asking what laws they were enforcing. I guess I was way out of line.

Maybe those protests aren’t quite so crazy after all.

Share / save this post

It’s so nice to have the pleasure of your company for another instalment of the Guide. I do hope that life has treated you kindly and that during the odd times when it hasn’t that you’ve had some opportunities to practice being practical. And, more importantly, that that practice has brought you some satisfaction.

In this edition I’d like to pull back from street level and look at a couple of larger forms of urban insolence: government and transit. It’s certainly not necessary to go into any sort of detail; insolence comes in many forms from both sides at this level, from new taxes to higher bus fares, and these are not necessarily local or even urban issues. In fact, as I hope you’ll find, the topics covered here have broader applications.

However, for the practical gentleman this poses a profound conundrum: does one take up arms and revolt against increasingly unjust overlords at great risk to oneself and one’s family, or does one resort to enjoyable but much less effective flaming paper bags (with surprise) left on doorsteps?

Alas, neither option seems agreeable, does it? On the one hand we must choose between radical criminal action, on the other classically amusing but ultimately ineffectual pranks. What’s the practical gentleman to do?

A great deal of wisdom has been scratched onto the walls of prisons as regards these matters, but please allow me to at least get the ball rolling:

The Continental

When one can’t be direct but wishes to nonetheless improve a situation, one must think outside the box. If more money is involuntarily leaving our pocket, more must come in to replenish it. It’s a simple balancing act. Thus, the practical gentleman takes his case directly to the people, bypassing the tight-fisted upper echelons altogether.

In this approach, we simply ask passersby to donate for charity, and I must stress strongly that this is not the same as asking for hand-outs. That would be most ungentlemanly and besides, this is an investment. To convince our fellows of this, however, we are required to present our case with a little more flair. Some call this marketing.

We simply invest in a nice colour print-out of the charity we’re representing, a nice binder to put it on the cover of, and a few hundred charitable donation “receipts” to give to anyone who requests them, to go in said binder. And a pen :) The charity is of course you, only jazzed up a bit; marketed better. Try some interesting twists on your name, combine it with a slogan, borrow a nice logo, but keep it all simple. For example, “The Patrick Fund – Fighting poverty at hom e and abroad”. The name must always be entirely truthful and you should always have a full explanation at the ready. In this case, it is a fund that is in my name and to be used to fight poverty in my home, possibly also to fight that woman I don’t much care for. With minor typographical errors.

For the logo, simply take an existing one from anything around you (using a cell phone camera, for example), and cut off everything but a quarter of the image. For simpler logos, like the Nike swoosh, you may have to use a half of the photo. Or, if cutting doesn’t produce satisfactory results, simply flip the image around horizontally or vertically. The McDonald’s golden arches easily become William’s golden catch basin — for money!

But, most importantly, you must add a prominent outline of the African continent on the logo (hence, “The Continental”). This lets people know you like geography. If you don’t, maybe now’s the time you gave it another try! People aren’t going to give their money to just any old schmuck on the street. Let them know how worldly you are, what a great investment you’ll be, why they should believe. Africa, the symbol of hope.

In this way you don’t hide behind any small print and your honesty and commitment to being upfront will shine through. The donations will come pouring in! At the end of the day you can go home satisfied that your fellow human beings have helped you because of a shared sense of civility. Take that, government!

The Convenient

Did you know that local businesses often provide instant financial support to anyone who strolls in through their front doors? It’s true. In most convenience stores, for example, often placed clearly and visibly in front of the cash register is the leave-a-penny take-a-penny bowl. Most store owners don’t contribute to it so they have no say in how it’s apportioned; it’s a social support system by the people, for the people. Including you.

Penny contributions can be made when pennies are abundant in your life. When they’re scarce, you can of course take. But be sure to do so a penny at a time, thus affording someone else the opportunity to take every alternate penny if they wish. A two-second wait period is customary unless no one else is in front of the counter with you.

The only drawback of the take-a-penny system is that some stores carry larger caches than others. I suggest carrying a strong bag (the pennies will get heavy!) and visiting as many shops as you can. Remember, those pennies already belong to you so you’re not required to make idle chit-chat with the shopkeeper. If they give you any trouble, simply threaten to call police. If this is not your style, you may instead opt to dress provocatively. Ladies will have an advantage over the gentlemen here, I’m afraid. Sorry fellas, we can’t win ‘em all.

The Economic

Many economic pundits have been putting forth the idea that being environmentally conscious and being profitable don’t necessarily have to be exclusive of each other. In fact, an amazing array of novel ideas is beginning to surface during these difficult financial times, many of them designed to produce environmental benefits, and many of those turning in tidy profits for anyone willing to put in some effort. The concept of carbon credits, for example, is ingenious but it hasn’t quite caught on yet. The problem is simply a dearth of mass adoption. This means that the market is still very much wide open … for anyone willing to roll up their sleeves and work for it.

Honest rewards for honest labour.

The further upshot of this is that the practical gentleman may rest well at night knowing that he’s earning an income from a noble pursuit, its influence continuing well into the future. The only requirement is a nice smile and a number of carbon credit certificates. There is no currently accepted standard for these – be creative, but keep the initial batch inexpensive. The idea is not to lose money here :)

Now the hard part: we go door to door selling carbon credits. There’s no trick here, you just have to shake hands, sip tea, and sell the hell outta that carbon!

Eventually, you may want to to invest in some fancy paper certificates — set yourself apart from the competition. Just work the cost into the price of the credits.

You can promise clients that each carbon credit they buy will be used to directly sequester a certain amount of green (in your pocket), ‘n house gasses. Not sure exactly what those gasses would be, but probably natural (this is a good, light-hearted jest to open the conversation with – and be sure to hug the potential client).

Of course, you must guarantee each and every certificate. Should the client ever wish to redeem it, you must exchange the credit for the appropriate amount of carbon. Although it’s difficult to get pure carbon, rough carbon (mixed with impurities) may be produced simply by burning something to ashes. This is your contractual obligation so you must honour the request within a reasonable time frame.

One of the biggest arguments against buying credits in this way is that (it is claimed) they are really used to prevent the environmental effects of burning stuff. Haha! What nuthouse did that escape from? If you buy a carbon credit, you should be able to exchange it for carbon. Who’s going to pay for not getting something? When the customer understands that this certificate is worth something, then it becomes a lot more valuable. Treat each buyer like the intelligent human being they are; logic will always wins the day ;)

You’ll have to do some research into going carbon credit prices but, since you probably won’t have any immediate competition in your neighbourhood, you may just be able to set whatever price you want. Just be sure not to price yourself out of the market! :D

I hope, dear reader, these points will help you through the tough times. They were inspired by a certain form of insolence, but their application turns out to be much broader. If the challenge was to think outside the box, hopefully that has been achieved. Certainly they are merely a spot from which to cast off, but hopefully they’ll chart a course to some pleasant tropical island with nice beaches, nice people, and nice drinks with little umbrellas in them. Even Mexico might be a nice escape.

Wishing you a bon voyage!

Share / save this post