I'm one of those people whose last name is the same as his mother's 'maiden' name. I'm also one of those people who, because of this, decides against using his mother's maiden name as a 'security' question. Especially when something as important as my bank account is involved.
Unfortunately, Scotiabank is one of those companies that thinks that, in today's world of everybody splattering their biographies across the internet, one's mother's maiden name is a secret that can only be transmitted through the vault door at Fort Knox with an umbilical cord.
Some time ago, I changed what I had listed at my bank for "mother's maiden name" to something else. Damned if I know what I put. So every time I call up the bank, I have to explain this so they can skip over to another set of somewhat obtrusive questions (including "employer", of which I have multiple). Invariably, they don't care because as far as they're concerned, they have to ask me a question and I have to answer it, and they needn't concern themselves with the degree of difficulty of this question or the degree of security afforded by this.
But today, I was trying to buy something online when I was presented with a "Verified by Visa" confirmation screen—ostensibly for my bank—which required me to enter my "mother's maiden name". I tried a couple things but it didn't work. There was no 'back' button so I could pay instead with PayPal, so I had to close the window. When I called up the company to see if the purchase went through, they informed me that the response from VbV wasn't even necessary unless I had set it up with my bank.
Naturally, I went to my bank website to see if I could find out whether I'd set up Verified by Visa. I didn't realize that I was on my 'new' Windows 8 laptop (which I've since relegated to secondary status under the old, reliable Windows XP beast which it had been intended to replace), and I mustn't have logged into my bank account from that computer before, because it asked me for another security question.
Damned if I knew that one, either. Let's look at the list of security questions available (from which one must pick three, and subsequently all three of which must be answered correctly if one is logging in for the first time on a new computer, or on a public computer). Remember, a good security question is one that is easy for you to understand and difficult for an identity thief to figure out. Most of these fail:
Where did you go on your honeymoon?
What was the name of your elementary school?
What was the name of the street on which you grew up?
Obviously, some of those might be obscure questions for some people, but the ones that aren't mindnumbingly obvious are, by definition, difficult for the user to remember also (the obvious ones would be like the BFF one talks to and about all the time on social media or the high school graduation year in one's Facebook timeline or LinkedIn profile). For example, I have two grandmothers (as I'm sure most do), both of whom are still alive. If I used that question, when I go to answer it, would I remember which grandmother I chose? And would I have chosen the town she grew up in, the town she lived in when I was a child, or the town she lives in now? Will I spell it right?
My paternal grandfather's first name isn't so easy either. He went by an English name, a French name, and a a nickname, and the French one had an accent. When I try to remember what I put in there, do I remember the name I called him, or since banking is formal business, did I use his formal first name?
My cousins span two generations. Did I pick the oldest of all my cousins or of my more familiar younger group of cousins? Did I put only their first name or full name?
And as for elementary school and growing-up street, I went to at least three different elementary schools; I'm sure many people grew up living on many different streets. Or maybe someone's parents still live on that street where there's only one school nearby. Either way, it's either hard for me to remember or easy for a hacker to figure out.
The rest of the questions are even more wishy-washy:
What is the name of your first employer?What was the first name of your first manager?
What is the last name of your favorite teacher in elementary school?
What is the name of your first pet?
What is your favorite hobby?
What was the name of your first girlfriend/boyfriend?
I once applied for a summer job with the Ottawa Police when I was in university. I was told to list every.single.employer on the job application, and not wanting to lie to the Police, I did. My first one was a paper route. Actually, it was a flyer route. My first 'manager' was a lady who met me once at her suburban house to tell me how to do the job and whom I never saw or heard from again. The HR person at the police service told me that I was a stellar candidate but my references didn't check out because this lady whose name I had to dig through innumerable boxes of files to find didn't remember working with me. (That taught me the dual lesson of the importance of lying to the police and lying on job applications. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever gotten a job I applied for, except for a really rotten one...)
So when it's months after I set these security questions and I'm trying to remember the answer, did I put my first.job.ever or my first 'real' job? These are the types of questions I don't have to contemplate when updating my LinkedIn profile because I don't goddamn have one.
'Favourite movie' is one of the questions I remember Blogger asking me nine years ago when I set up my account, in order to put in my public profile (go figure, it's still there). I remember this because it got me thinking, "what a stupid fucking question is that?"
Please tell me I'm not alone, and that most people don't have a single favourite movie, book, hobby, etc. that hasn't changed in decades. If you have one dominant hobby, like knitting, it'd be easy for you to remember, but chances are you talk about it a lot and maybe you have a blog about knitting, so it would be dead easy for an identity thief to figure out also, so you wouldn't really want to use it as a security question. Or maybe, a year from now, you forgot that you set up your security question when you were in your quilting phase and can't figure out why "knitting" doesn't work when you try to type it in.
Oh, by the way, Scotiabank the Canadian banking company: in Canada, it's spelled "favourite".
In fact, the only one question of that batch I can think of that is fairly definitive and that's "What did you want to be when you grew up?" It's definitive because I became that. But damned if I can remember a year from now if I typed "curmudgeonly old man" or "grumpy curmudgeon" or simply "get off my lawn".
In fact, I think I asked them to put something akin to "get off my lawn" as the answer to "mother's maiden name" and thought it was pretty clever except that I've forgotten which kin I aput it to.
***
Another flaw of these security questions is how they're presented. If you primarily use one computer to access your online banking, and that computer is your personal one, and you don't have your browser configured to kill all cookies on exit, then you can set it to remember you so you don't have to answer the security questions each time. The problem is, when it does come time to answer these questions (say, because you had to reinstall your browser, or you got a new computer, or you're checking in from a wireless café), you don't remember which of the decisions you made in how you answered these questions because you haven't had to answer them in so long because it was disabled on the primary computer from which you access it.
This is a feature, not a bug, according to the call centre agent who reset my login
tonight. She suggested that setting it to not ask me the questions again on
this one computer would mean that I wouldn't encounter the questions
again, and the implication was that I wouldn't have to worry about remembering the answers to the 'secret questions' at a. I guess the script Scotiabank gave her was written by someone who doesn't understand the philosophy of cloud computing (or Internet banking, for that matter) where you can access stuff from different computers.
***
I don't think the bank really cares about security, it just wants to have a cloak of plausible deniability in the event of fraud. I mean, who's to blame if my account gets compromised? If I went to my home branch (which evidently isn't the one I thought it was, though the phone rep wouldn't tell me which one it was) and asked them to change my "mother's maiden name" to my mother's actual maiden name—even though it's not the least bit of a security question for me—would they blame me for using security questions that are too easy if my account got compromised? Or maybe I would be protected so long as I've checked all the boxes. Not that I care. Even if the bank is responsible and reimbursed me for wrongful expenses, I would be the one who'd have to suffer the fallout from having his identity stolen, credit likely damaged, and the paranoia (or worse, the reality) that the thief might have used it to infiltrate other areas of my life.
***
I did have a security scare once. Long story short, it got me worried that my Google/Gmail account had been compromised. I discovered that Google has a feature whereby you can get it to send a six-digit number to your cellphone via text message whenever you log in, and you must enter this number into the login page before it lets you in. It can also send you the number via a phone call. As backups, it has alternate phone numbers and you can get a set of single-use codes in the event you don't have access to your cell phone. You can tell it not to do this on 'trusted' computers (you'll still need your password to log in).
Not only is this a very secure method of protecting your log in, but it also is a built-in way of telling if someone else is trying to log in to your account (it will certainly tell you they've got your password!). Not only is it secure, but it also doesn't require me to answer a bunch of silly questions.
Twitter recently enabled a similar feature, though it doesn't have the voice call or backup codes options, and naturally the first time I tried logging in to Twitter from another computer I was behind an impenetrable wall of steel and concrete, thereby missing the text message.
Why can't the bank do this?
Whenever I'm conducting a transaction at an unfamiliar retail store with my credit or debit card, I'm always worried about the security of my card. Is this a real card reader charging me 9.95 for the large pho or is it a dummy reader that's set up to record my card number and PIN? Sometimes I deliberately enter the wrong PIN the first time to make sure it rejects the bad code.
I am horrified by the 'paypass' credit cards where you just have to tap it and it takes up to $30 out of your account without having to so much as press a button, much less enter a code.
It would be much more reassuring if, each time my credit card was authenticated, I got a text message with the amount and store name.
In the meantime, I'll have to put up with the bank's ridiculous security theatre. I think I'll tell them my mother's name was Phil.
- RG>
Showing posts with label money. Show all posts
Showing posts with label money. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Friday, March 30, 2012
War on the penny: Mission accomplished
The government announced in the budget that they'll be phasing out the penny after 2012.
I was going to write a blog post declaring success in my campaign to eliminate the penny by hoarding it, but so damn many people are tweeting about it (and not about the actual news in the budget) that I don't want to add too much to it. Instead I'll rant.
Back when I wrote the post in December 2010, 55% of Canadians supported ditching the penny, which means that at least 15% of Canadians wanted to ditch the penny and weren't Conservative voters. I've seen panhandlers fish the pennies out of their cups and toss them on to the sidewalk, which leaves only penny-drive charities to cry and whine (who should have taken a hint from the march of dimes in 1938.)
Now that the news is out, people are getting the idea that prices will no longer end in anything but a 0 or a 5, which is stupid. Individual items will still have stupid prices like $14.97, and round-number prices will still be thwarted by prime-number tax rates. Only once the bill is totaled and tax is applied will the number be rounded--and even then only if you're paying cash.
People also have it in their heads that the cruddy 1998 penny in their pocket would be worth something to somebody, some day. Check the eBay listings for currency and think about it for a minute. People are selling brand new bills and coins from as recently as this year. Well, they're trying to. Brand new $50 polymer bills, launched earlier this month, can be yours for only $59.55 plus $9 shipping! Or walk into any bank and get one for $50.
By sheer coincidence, last night I sorted through the old pennies I've been collecting (as well as the newer ones in good condition). I reopened my coin book after many years of neglect to discover that many of the pennies were corroding, especially the parts of the coins that were exposed to the air. I'm still going to hold on to them, but I'm not going to delude myself into thinking that they'd increase in value any faster than if I'd deposited them into a savings account.
People are also selling old bills, like the old $1 bills. Not too many takers for those, so imagine how popular your penny will be (there are mint condition uncirculated pennies from the 1980s currently going for the grand price of a dollar). There's a $20 bill form the 1954 series that is currently bidding at $22.50 (plus $4 shipping). That's less than a quarter of a percent, simple interest, over 58 years (0.20% compounded). Compare that to inflation, where $20 in 1954 would be worth $170 today.
If you look at how the sales are going (also take a look at the different quarters the Mint has made in the last decade), you'll notice that it doesn't matter whether a denomination was discontinued. What matters is if there's something special about it. That can mean scarcity, like this Silver and Niobium 2012 $5 commemorative coin, or age.
An old penny is an old penny whether or not pennies are still in circulation. And now that everyone's hoarding them because they're going to be out of circulation soon, they're not going to be scarce. Hell, there's only an hour left on this 1958 penny in very good condition. The penny was circulated, but there are no takers for the $1.99 price tag (plus $1 shipping). How much is your tarnished 2006 penny worth?
To close off the rant, I'd like to take a swing at coin collectors. In theory, coin collecting is about ascribing added value to items that were used historically. Like the Yap stones, as they age and pass from person to person they appreciate in value due to the richness of their history. In practice, the only coins that collectors give any significant value (aside from very old and very rare ones) are ones that have never been circulated, or proof coins weren't even ever intended for circulation! Or limited-edition collectible coins made of precious metals sold for much more than their material or face value. Like the ridiculous replica of Samuel de Champlain's astrolabe created for the sole purpose of being stashed in the space shuttle's cargo hold on a trip to the International Space Station, an inordinate amount of value is given to trinkets whose sole purpose is to imitate and detract from items with actual historical value.
Having a coin collection for one's own amusement is fine, but the money that people put into it--and some people aim to get out of it--is just bonkers.
After 2012, there will be no new pennies. Just as there will be never be any new 2011 pennies, or 2010 pennies, or 2009 pennies, and so on. There will still be millions of them, in people's closets and shelves and couches. The vast majority of them will still be worth only a hundredth of a dollar, even though they cost more than that to produce. It will still be illegal to melt it down for the materials.
And it will still be fun to collect them, but fun is all it is. Don't buy into the delusion that you'll make a mint from the copper-plated coin you got in your change; it's still just a penny.
- RG>
I was going to write a blog post declaring success in my campaign to eliminate the penny by hoarding it, but so damn many people are tweeting about it (and not about the actual news in the budget) that I don't want to add too much to it. Instead I'll rant.
Back when I wrote the post in December 2010, 55% of Canadians supported ditching the penny, which means that at least 15% of Canadians wanted to ditch the penny and weren't Conservative voters. I've seen panhandlers fish the pennies out of their cups and toss them on to the sidewalk, which leaves only penny-drive charities to cry and whine (who should have taken a hint from the march of dimes in 1938.)
Now that the news is out, people are getting the idea that prices will no longer end in anything but a 0 or a 5, which is stupid. Individual items will still have stupid prices like $14.97, and round-number prices will still be thwarted by prime-number tax rates. Only once the bill is totaled and tax is applied will the number be rounded--and even then only if you're paying cash.
People also have it in their heads that the cruddy 1998 penny in their pocket would be worth something to somebody, some day. Check the eBay listings for currency and think about it for a minute. People are selling brand new bills and coins from as recently as this year. Well, they're trying to. Brand new $50 polymer bills, launched earlier this month, can be yours for only $59.55 plus $9 shipping! Or walk into any bank and get one for $50.
By sheer coincidence, last night I sorted through the old pennies I've been collecting (as well as the newer ones in good condition). I reopened my coin book after many years of neglect to discover that many of the pennies were corroding, especially the parts of the coins that were exposed to the air. I'm still going to hold on to them, but I'm not going to delude myself into thinking that they'd increase in value any faster than if I'd deposited them into a savings account.
People are also selling old bills, like the old $1 bills. Not too many takers for those, so imagine how popular your penny will be (there are mint condition uncirculated pennies from the 1980s currently going for the grand price of a dollar). There's a $20 bill form the 1954 series that is currently bidding at $22.50 (plus $4 shipping). That's less than a quarter of a percent, simple interest, over 58 years (0.20% compounded). Compare that to inflation, where $20 in 1954 would be worth $170 today.
If you look at how the sales are going (also take a look at the different quarters the Mint has made in the last decade), you'll notice that it doesn't matter whether a denomination was discontinued. What matters is if there's something special about it. That can mean scarcity, like this Silver and Niobium 2012 $5 commemorative coin, or age.
An old penny is an old penny whether or not pennies are still in circulation. And now that everyone's hoarding them because they're going to be out of circulation soon, they're not going to be scarce. Hell, there's only an hour left on this 1958 penny in very good condition. The penny was circulated, but there are no takers for the $1.99 price tag (plus $1 shipping). How much is your tarnished 2006 penny worth?
To close off the rant, I'd like to take a swing at coin collectors. In theory, coin collecting is about ascribing added value to items that were used historically. Like the Yap stones, as they age and pass from person to person they appreciate in value due to the richness of their history. In practice, the only coins that collectors give any significant value (aside from very old and very rare ones) are ones that have never been circulated, or proof coins weren't even ever intended for circulation! Or limited-edition collectible coins made of precious metals sold for much more than their material or face value. Like the ridiculous replica of Samuel de Champlain's astrolabe created for the sole purpose of being stashed in the space shuttle's cargo hold on a trip to the International Space Station, an inordinate amount of value is given to trinkets whose sole purpose is to imitate and detract from items with actual historical value.
Having a coin collection for one's own amusement is fine, but the money that people put into it--and some people aim to get out of it--is just bonkers.
After 2012, there will be no new pennies. Just as there will be never be any new 2011 pennies, or 2010 pennies, or 2009 pennies, and so on. There will still be millions of them, in people's closets and shelves and couches. The vast majority of them will still be worth only a hundredth of a dollar, even though they cost more than that to produce. It will still be illegal to melt it down for the materials.
And it will still be fun to collect them, but fun is all it is. Don't buy into the delusion that you'll make a mint from the copper-plated coin you got in your change; it's still just a penny.
- RG>
Saturday, September 03, 2011
Joseph A. Belanger research institute suggests returning to paper $1 and $2 bills
I established this blog many year ago in part to rant about the stupid stuff I read in the Ottawa Citizen newspaper, and this letter to the editor by Joseph A Belanger certainly fits the bill. He provides an irrefutable argument that Canada should scrap the $1 and $2 coins and return to paper money.
You see, metal coins aren't recyclable, but paper money is. "Really," you ask? Metal coins can't be recycled? Well, Belanger suspects that they can't, so, he concludes, it must be true. It's not like they're all made by the same organization or have dates on them to help suggest what materials were used in their manufacture. And metal is such a new substance, we still don't know how to recycle it. Will it melt down if you heat it enough? John A Belanger doesn't know, so it's safest to assume it would just crumble. You probably also can't wash them in the laundry machine.
Besides, there are practical benefits to Canadians. To make the transition back to paper $1 and $2 bills even more convenient, you'll no longer have to lug around heavy coins in your pocket. You'll just have to go to a coin-dispensing kiosk somewhere in the city to find coins to feed the parking meter (another expired technology Belanger must also want to reintroduce).
Never mind that the Royal Canadian Mint and the federal government spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually on the production of circulation currency and likely have a pretty good idea of whether paper or metal money has more efficient lifecycle costs. Even if their research says that paper money lasts a fraction of the time in circulation than coins, paper money is recyclable, and recycling doesn't cost any time, energy, or money, right?
- RG>
You see, metal coins aren't recyclable, but paper money is. "Really," you ask? Metal coins can't be recycled? Well, Belanger suspects that they can't, so, he concludes, it must be true. It's not like they're all made by the same organization or have dates on them to help suggest what materials were used in their manufacture. And metal is such a new substance, we still don't know how to recycle it. Will it melt down if you heat it enough? John A Belanger doesn't know, so it's safest to assume it would just crumble. You probably also can't wash them in the laundry machine.
Besides, there are practical benefits to Canadians. To make the transition back to paper $1 and $2 bills even more convenient, you'll no longer have to lug around heavy coins in your pocket. You'll just have to go to a coin-dispensing kiosk somewhere in the city to find coins to feed the parking meter (another expired technology Belanger must also want to reintroduce).
Never mind that the Royal Canadian Mint and the federal government spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually on the production of circulation currency and likely have a pretty good idea of whether paper or metal money has more efficient lifecycle costs. Even if their research says that paper money lasts a fraction of the time in circulation than coins, paper money is recyclable, and recycling doesn't cost any time, energy, or money, right?
- RG>
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Taxes: check
After catching up on my finances last night, I completed the first draft of my taxes tonight (ending around the same time... one of these days I'll get sleep).
I was pissed off to find out a rather significant RSP contribution wasn't processed by my bank prior to the deadline (and I don't know if they ever even received it!).
Claiming Ontario tax credit for renting is a lot more convoluted this year than it was previously. On top of the Ontario Credits form, you have to fill out the ON-BEN form at the back of the book (which isn't colour-coded pink like the other Ontario forms) whose goal is essentially to write the same numbers, without any arithmetic manipulation, that you then write again in the Ontario Credits form. (there's no addition of the numbers). On the Ontario Credits form, you then have to complete the "occupancy cost", "energy component" (for "long term care home and home energy costs on a reserve"), and "property tax component", even if, for example, you didn't pay property tax or live on a reserve.
It was sort of similar last year, but much more straightforward. Instead of being on two sheets at opposite ends of the forms book, it was all included in the Ontario Credits form, and in the "property tax credit" section it clearly asked you to enter "Rent paid in Ontario in 2009", so you wouldn't have to wonder, as I did, I didn't pay property tax; do I still have to fill out the "property tax component"?. And even though the ON-BEN form is now on a separate page, it still only gives you two lines to fill out residence information. (Not that I've had to use more than one for many years, but I've bounced around in the past).
I guess it's the bottom line that matters. I'm getting a refund, and it's not too much smaller than what I got last year, despite making more money and having fewer credits to claim. It'd have been even bigger if I tended to donate money to groups with charitable tax status, instead of contributing time and money mostly to groups that are too small (efficient; less red tape) or advocacy-oriented to qualify for status.
And with my finances and taxes done, and their respective piles of paper cleared from atop my desk, I can move on to the next pile of things to file.
- RG>
I was pissed off to find out a rather significant RSP contribution wasn't processed by my bank prior to the deadline (and I don't know if they ever even received it!).
Claiming Ontario tax credit for renting is a lot more convoluted this year than it was previously. On top of the Ontario Credits form, you have to fill out the ON-BEN form at the back of the book (which isn't colour-coded pink like the other Ontario forms) whose goal is essentially to write the same numbers, without any arithmetic manipulation, that you then write again in the Ontario Credits form. (there's no addition of the numbers). On the Ontario Credits form, you then have to complete the "occupancy cost", "energy component" (for "long term care home and home energy costs on a reserve"), and "property tax component", even if, for example, you didn't pay property tax or live on a reserve.
It was sort of similar last year, but much more straightforward. Instead of being on two sheets at opposite ends of the forms book, it was all included in the Ontario Credits form, and in the "property tax credit" section it clearly asked you to enter "Rent paid in Ontario in 2009", so you wouldn't have to wonder, as I did, I didn't pay property tax; do I still have to fill out the "property tax component"?. And even though the ON-BEN form is now on a separate page, it still only gives you two lines to fill out residence information. (Not that I've had to use more than one for many years, but I've bounced around in the past).
I guess it's the bottom line that matters. I'm getting a refund, and it's not too much smaller than what I got last year, despite making more money and having fewer credits to claim. It'd have been even bigger if I tended to donate money to groups with charitable tax status, instead of contributing time and money mostly to groups that are too small (efficient; less red tape) or advocacy-oriented to qualify for status.
And with my finances and taxes done, and their respective piles of paper cleared from atop my desk, I can move on to the next pile of things to file.
- RG>
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Le fin
I did it! I finally got caught up on my finances!
I'd been months behind for the last year or so. When I did my taxes in April 2009, I remember I only did my finances as far as December 31, 2008, and I didn't really do much to get caught up since then.
In the last month or so, I've been whittling away at it, taking bigger and bigger bites out of the pile, and now I've finished!
I made a couple of interesting observations:
- Over the last year and a half, I've had three mysterious withdrawals for which I don't have the bank machine slip. I always take the slip, so this is strange. Also strange is that these are only at the Somerset and Bronson bank machine. There's no conclusive evidence to conclusively say that I did or didn't make these withdrawals. I checked my e-mails, my photos, my Blackberry calendar (including backups of my tasks, notes, and appointments), and my known cash expenditures between the previous and next withdrawals, but nothing conclusive.
- Adjusted for contributions, my RRSP fluctuates each month as much as the equivalent of a plus or minus 20% APR (and as much as +47% in one month, if my math is right).
- I have not yet made any credit card purchases on a Saturday this year.
Of course, things are never always done. I have yet to do my taxes, and seeing as it's 2am and I have a couple other things to do, that can wait until closer to the April 30 deadline.
- RG>
I'd been months behind for the last year or so. When I did my taxes in April 2009, I remember I only did my finances as far as December 31, 2008, and I didn't really do much to get caught up since then.
In the last month or so, I've been whittling away at it, taking bigger and bigger bites out of the pile, and now I've finished!
I made a couple of interesting observations:
- Over the last year and a half, I've had three mysterious withdrawals for which I don't have the bank machine slip. I always take the slip, so this is strange. Also strange is that these are only at the Somerset and Bronson bank machine. There's no conclusive evidence to conclusively say that I did or didn't make these withdrawals. I checked my e-mails, my photos, my Blackberry calendar (including backups of my tasks, notes, and appointments), and my known cash expenditures between the previous and next withdrawals, but nothing conclusive.
- Adjusted for contributions, my RRSP fluctuates each month as much as the equivalent of a plus or minus 20% APR (and as much as +47% in one month, if my math is right).
- I have not yet made any credit card purchases on a Saturday this year.
Of course, things are never always done. I have yet to do my taxes, and seeing as it's 2am and I have a couple other things to do, that can wait until closer to the April 30 deadline.
- RG>
Monday, May 10, 2010
Advancing to 2003
So I did it. The Bell guy on the phone confirmed that my daytime usage is under the 200 minutes/month, so I can safely drop the $10/month for free incoming minutes (except for one month, where I'll have to reinstate it or pay $50 extra if my usage is the same as last year).
Then I added a $5/month texting plan, which includes unlimited incoming texts and 250 outgoing texts/month. So the bunch of fucks will be getting five dollars less per month of my money, and they won't be charging me fifteen cents every time somebody sends me a hundred and sixty-odd characters of information I'd care less about.
Since the people who complain about not being able to text me are the same people who tell me they read this blog, I figured I'd might as well mention it here, and sod the rest of 'em.
That is to say, I will now receive your newfangled text communications, but don't get the impression that I'll actually read them, much less acknowledge or respond. E-mail is still the best way to contact me. If you want to reach me, just remind yourself that grouches like to be distant.
- RG>
Then I added a $5/month texting plan, which includes unlimited incoming texts and 250 outgoing texts/month. So the bunch of fucks will be getting five dollars less per month of my money, and they won't be charging me fifteen cents every time somebody sends me a hundred and sixty-odd characters of information I'd care less about.
Since the people who complain about not being able to text me are the same people who tell me they read this blog, I figured I'd might as well mention it here, and sod the rest of 'em.
That is to say, I will now receive your newfangled text communications, but don't get the impression that I'll actually read them, much less acknowledge or respond. E-mail is still the best way to contact me. If you want to reach me, just remind yourself that grouches like to be distant.
- RG>
Monday, December 28, 2009
I'm poor again. That was easy.
I have a friend who declared earlier this month that she wanted nothing to do with Christmas. Not only did the constant reminders of rampant consumerism and religious messages bother her, but she was also averse to the ideal alternative of spending the time with family for a great meal, because her partner's turkey-eating family can't come to terms with the couple's vegetarianism.
We brainstormed ways of avoiding Christmas, especially on a nearly absent budget. This would be difficult: stores are closed, and those that are open are blaring Merry Christmas messages all over. I think we settled on "dig a hole" and "walk to Kanata" as the best options, though a few days before Christmas she gave in to celebrating the damn holiday, in some form or another.
But still, it's an interesting question for future reference: how could my friend avoid Christmas (for little to no money?)
* * *
I suffer a similar Christmas dilemma myself, because as much as I bemoan it and downplay it (for example, I keep my standard greeting instead of using a "seasonal" one when saying goodbye, except for the occasional "Happy Humbug"), I do, technically, celebrate it. That is, I go to the annual family gathering and stay a few days, and it's become a tradition for me to stay at my aunt's place where I watch Cable TV marathons of sci fi films and TV shows.
I also exchange gifts, though in a very limited fashion. My dad was kind enough this year to throw politeness to the wind and flat out asked me what I wanted, and gave me a list of gift ideas for himself (very useful, as we're both hard to shop for). This generally involved links to various products on the MEC website. I can't tell if it's superficial or transparent, but whatever it is, it seems to work.
* * *
I am also lucky enough to receive money for Christmas, plus a meagre bonus at work. Last year, I had enough to buy a new bed, and this year I was hoping to be able to replace my laptop.
Unfortunately, my savings are still low, due to borrowing from them to buy a projector in June and a camera last month (and I haven't sold the old one yet). To buy a new laptop, I'd have to borrow even more from my savings. Since my job is not secure past March 31st, replenishing my savings is the most prudent course of action.
After doing so, and deducting the price of my gifts to others, I calculated I had a hundred or two to spend on my whims. This is remarkably difficult for someone who delights in useless free shit found in the trash. So I went to Staples yesterday to gratify my consumerist desires, and noticed a bin of those big red buttons that speak out "that was easy!" when you press them. I wondered, who the hell would actually buy one of those?!? (No, I didn't)
As I left the store, I considered the total price of the new toy plus a spare camera battery from Henry's. As I returned to my bike, I muttered to myself:
"I'm poor again. That was easy!"
- RG>
We brainstormed ways of avoiding Christmas, especially on a nearly absent budget. This would be difficult: stores are closed, and those that are open are blaring Merry Christmas messages all over. I think we settled on "dig a hole" and "walk to Kanata" as the best options, though a few days before Christmas she gave in to celebrating the damn holiday, in some form or another.
But still, it's an interesting question for future reference: how could my friend avoid Christmas (for little to no money?)
* * *
I suffer a similar Christmas dilemma myself, because as much as I bemoan it and downplay it (for example, I keep my standard greeting instead of using a "seasonal" one when saying goodbye, except for the occasional "Happy Humbug"), I do, technically, celebrate it. That is, I go to the annual family gathering and stay a few days, and it's become a tradition for me to stay at my aunt's place where I watch Cable TV marathons of sci fi films and TV shows.
I also exchange gifts, though in a very limited fashion. My dad was kind enough this year to throw politeness to the wind and flat out asked me what I wanted, and gave me a list of gift ideas for himself (very useful, as we're both hard to shop for). This generally involved links to various products on the MEC website. I can't tell if it's superficial or transparent, but whatever it is, it seems to work.
* * *
I am also lucky enough to receive money for Christmas, plus a meagre bonus at work. Last year, I had enough to buy a new bed, and this year I was hoping to be able to replace my laptop.
Unfortunately, my savings are still low, due to borrowing from them to buy a projector in June and a camera last month (and I haven't sold the old one yet). To buy a new laptop, I'd have to borrow even more from my savings. Since my job is not secure past March 31st, replenishing my savings is the most prudent course of action.
After doing so, and deducting the price of my gifts to others, I calculated I had a hundred or two to spend on my whims. This is remarkably difficult for someone who delights in useless free shit found in the trash. So I went to Staples yesterday to gratify my consumerist desires, and noticed a bin of those big red buttons that speak out "that was easy!" when you press them. I wondered, who the hell would actually buy one of those?!? (No, I didn't)
As I left the store, I considered the total price of the new toy plus a spare camera battery from Henry's. As I returned to my bike, I muttered to myself:"I'm poor again. That was easy!"
- RG>
Monday, August 24, 2009
Ken Gray posts Ottawa's AMO briefing notes
Ottawa Citizen editor Ken Gray has posted on his blog, The Bulldog, a bunch of private briefing notes and related materials that the City of Ottawa brought to the recent Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) conference.
They cover a variety of topics, from transit to housing to policing to rural issues. Most deal with different ways of asking for more money, with varying degrees of believability. I believe this link should link to these briefing notes after these posts have fallen off the front page of the blog.
Some of them are really interesting, and some of them are really dry. For a policy wonk like me, This one is educational. It talks about how the Federal Government's decision to sell many of its properties and lease them back causes the City to take in less money in property taxes. The reason? Even though the Federal Government is exempt from paying property taxes, they pay payments-in-lieu of taxes as a goodwill gesture (since it still costs the City to service these buildings). But the entire amount of this went straight from the Feds to the City, now that it's private companies paying the taxes, a portion is now going to the Province to cover education taxes, resulting in a few million dollars less revenue for the City (and as much as $25 million less if the Feds sell and lease-back lots more of their properties).
So read up, and you'll know as much as Jim Watson does on these issues.
- RG>
They cover a variety of topics, from transit to housing to policing to rural issues. Most deal with different ways of asking for more money, with varying degrees of believability. I believe this link should link to these briefing notes after these posts have fallen off the front page of the blog.
Some of them are really interesting, and some of them are really dry. For a policy wonk like me, This one is educational. It talks about how the Federal Government's decision to sell many of its properties and lease them back causes the City to take in less money in property taxes. The reason? Even though the Federal Government is exempt from paying property taxes, they pay payments-in-lieu of taxes as a goodwill gesture (since it still costs the City to service these buildings). But the entire amount of this went straight from the Feds to the City, now that it's private companies paying the taxes, a portion is now going to the Province to cover education taxes, resulting in a few million dollars less revenue for the City (and as much as $25 million less if the Feds sell and lease-back lots more of their properties).
So read up, and you'll know as much as Jim Watson does on these issues.
- RG>
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Mental blocks, emotional dams, and projections
Just over a month ago, I decided I wanted an LCD projector.
I had calculated the amount of spending money I'd have left from my tax rebate. After padding my savings buffer, I was left with $600, much less than I had hoped before starting calculations.
Still, I discovered that $600 should be about enough to buy a projector.
Why a projector?
Well, a few months ago, I was in a meeting at City Hall where the projector had been left out by the previous users. We used it to put the agenda on the wall, which was very useful for all in attendance. Ever since then, I'd wanted a projector to help facilitate such meetings.
Of course, I'd be able to use it for sharing my photography, for presentations, and to lend/rent to my friends, family and colleagues for their miscellaneous uses. (bolo?) But the meeting thing was a concrete function that I know would get used. [How much of a geek do you have to be to buy a multimedia projector for volunteer meetings?!?]
I don't like to shop for yogourt.
After deciding I wanted a projector, I trotted off to the computer store and asked what projectors they carried. This is how I shop: I go to a place, look at what they have in store, see what best fits my needs, and buy it.
"We don't carry any projectors in stock," said the clerk, after scoffing at me for asking for the salesperson I'd been in contact with by e-mail (let's call him Victor) after 5pm. "Realistically, we can order anything out there."
This is not how I like to shop. A completely open-ended selection gives me no place to start. Not being able to see the thing before buying it makes the decision even harder.
A projector-owning friend of mine pointed me to this US company, whose website lists a wide selection and good product details and reviews. He also gave me a few things to look for. In addition to my own requirements for portability, price, andbrightness, my friend recommended a wide viewing angle for use in small rooms, and lauded the high resolution of his Hitachi.
A choice is made
I settled on this baby, listed for US$669 on the US site. I like the Hitachi CPX5 because it's small, versatile, and has a USB port to plug in a flash drive, so you don't even need a computer. On June first I e-mailed Victor with my selection.
He said it would come to just under $1200 (plus tax), and because it's a special order, a minimum ETA of 7-14 days. I consulted a CDW catalogue I had on hand to confirm this was a reasonable price for a projector in Canada, and chalked the price difference up to the border, the dollar, and the website's volume.
But still, yikes.
After a closer analysis of my budget, I could manage $900, and borrow the remaining $300 from my savings, to be replenished after Bluesfest.
I bit my tongue and told Victor to order it. The order was delayed until I placed a deposit the next day. Sigh. I'm supporting local business, I told myself. Victor would call his supplier the next day to get a more precise ETA than 7-14 days. Hopefully, I'd get it in time for the next meeting on June 16th.
Finally, on June 10th, he said the projector should arrive on June 18th(!). Like Eric Cartman in the South Park episode Go God Go, I had some waitin' to do.
Waiting for Hitachi; steady as she goes
Later that morning, Victor e-mailed again to say that the June 18th ETA was wrong, and that he's still working to get a correct date from Hitachi. So not only was I waiting, but I was waiting for an undetermined length of time.
On the 15th, he e-mailed me to say that (paraphrased) the Hitachi people were being total jackasses with him, and he suggested I find a different projector as a plan B. Hitachi later told him that this was a US model, and it would be a further 10-14 business days for one to get "released" to Canada. (I assume this model was bred at the Hitachi International Wildlife Preserve.)
If I ordered a different model, as Victor suggested, it would arrive in the same 7-14 day timeframe as the Hitachi, namely, during Bluesfest, when I won't have time to play with it. So time was no longer an issue. Stay the course, I said.
To which he replied (my emphasis):
I told him I didn't want to go on another wild goose chase looking for another projector from one of those companies, only to risk getting the runaround again, and I instead asked him to find one with similar specs with a lower price, as he suggested was available.
He responded in two separate messages, one suggesting this behemoth, and the other asking "is size and weight *that* important?"
Meltdown
So far I've only talked about the technical details of this transaction. But during this rigmarole, a lot was going on in my life. On the week of the 15th, I had meetings after work just about every night. On top of that, I had stuff on Saturday and Sunday very early in the morning (including the LRT forum). These last drained what little spirit I had left in me, and I became very tired, unmotivated, and unable to get anything done. In short, I burned out.
I had felt this drained last year after pushing myself too far during Bluesfest, and it took me until the end of August to get back together. Here, I was still half a month away from Bluesfest, and I would need to be back in top form to last it.
On top of this, we had our annual audit at work from the 25th to the 29th of June, and because of our small office, my desk would be needed for the auditors. As much as I tried to frame it as time off, I couldn't forget that it was unpaid time off, right when I needed to shore up my reserves for Bluesfest.
What's worse, the company I work for is having trouble getting funding for my position for this year. My boss told me that these days off would "buy me more days later in the Summer." (A fourth way of seeing these days became 'time to work on my resume')
So the week after the one from hell, I decreed that I wasn't going to any meetings. I met some friends, took some time to myself, dined with family, went to the coffeeshop.
Yet I still felt a malaise the whole time. I literally felt sick (possibly also food poisoning.) All this time off, yet I still couldn't bring myself to so much as clean my apartment, cook a meal, or tend to my pressing to-dos.
I didn't quite realise it, but I think a lot of it had to do with the uncertainty about the projector. It was driving me mad: not only did I not have control of the situation, but I didn't even know where things were at. I was a slave to a timeline of unknown scope and duration.
At least I had the Daily Show and the Colbert Report to keep me from going completely insane. It always sucks when they're on vacation.
Victor admits defeat
On June 26, the second day in a five-day weekend, I had dinner with an old friend. We had Ethiopian food at a place I'd often passed many times but never gone in. It was my first time trying Ethiopian food, and hopefully my last. I had decided not to check my e-mail before meeting my friend, as part of the whole "I'm on vacation" mentality.
After dinner, I found a mid-afternoon e-mail from Victor. He was admitting defeat with Hitachi, who was basically telling him "they'll ship when they ship." He said he'll no longer sell anything from Hitachi to a customer unless his supplier has something in stock. Victor offered me my deposit back.
I thanked him for his persistence with Hitachi, and agreed it would be best to cancel the order and refund the deposit.
CDW saves the day
At some point during the long wait, my boss mentioned that CDW has much more selection on their website than in their print catalogue.
So on Friday night, after e-mailing Victor, I went on their site and found the Hitachi CPX2 for $926.99. In addition to having everything the CPX5 had, it also had an SD card slot. Très cool.
With tax and shipping, the total came to $1086.99. It would ship within 3-6 business days and arrive the following day. So I might get a day or two use out of it before Bluesfest. Wicked.
On Monday morning (June 29), the fifth and last day off, I got a phone message from Alicia at CDW, who wanted to confirm my order. Fair enough, I thought; it's a big enough purchase to warrant double-checking with the customer.
When I phoned her back, though, she told me that this projector was no longer available. Frankly, after the hoopla Victor had with Hitachi, this didn't surprise me.
She pointed me to the ViewSonic PJL3211, which has very similar specifications, including "USB Input". The 4.5 kg weight in the technical specifications is a typo; it's actually 4.1 lbs.
Despite the ViewSonic being $60 more, Alicia said she'd give it to me at the same price as the Hitachi. I confirmed with her that I wouldn't get any catalogues or anything in the mail from CDW, and that was that.
Later in the day, while blowing away on bike accessories the money I'd saved with the cheaper projector, someone else from CDW called me to confirm before running my credit card through. It would go out on June 30th, to arrive on the following business day, July 2nd.
Lifting the weight
On June 30, my life was starting to get back together. I was back in the office, getting my regular dose of workahol, and this projector, which I had been trying to buy for over a month, was finally on its way. I had also taken a bunch of vitamins in the morning, and had a sizeable lunch, in the event that malnutrition was a contributor to my doldrums.
After my work was done, I stayed in the office to get a bunch of my agenda items off my plate. I was finally productive again.
And just in time, as I was working on Wellington Street all day on Canada Day, from 10am to midnight, plus the following day for a few hours, and I'd need a healthy dose of stamina.
This morning, July 2nd, I got a call from a colleague at 9am to let me know my projector had arrived. Very shortly thereafter, I got another call from CDW's Alicia asking to confirm that I had received it. Cleanup after Canada Day took less time than expected, and I was done at 11:30am. I stopped by the office to pick up my projector, ran a couple errands, then went home and set it up.
Unfortunately, "USB Input" on this device's spec sheet means I could plug it in to my computer with a USB cable; it doesn't have a USB drive slot, nor an SD card slot, for independent projection. But my laptop has dual-monitor capabilities, so this isn't a big setback.
Epilogue.
After a post-Canada day nap, I felt my Ă©lan has returned. I was able to get those repairs done on my bike, eat stuff, and work through my e-mail inbox. I am, as they say, "back, baby."
But what a whirlwind. Something that had started out as a quick ego-pleasing toy purchase turned into an emotional saga of stress and uncertainty. It was only when the pressure was lifted that I realized how much weight I had ascribed to this one simple goal.
Now, with the dam burst, I have the energy to attack Bluesfest on all cannons, and to get back to my usual routine (of putting off important tasks by blogging voluminously).
More importantly, I can blog on the wall, old school. Take that, Facebook!
- RG>
I had calculated the amount of spending money I'd have left from my tax rebate. After padding my savings buffer, I was left with $600, much less than I had hoped before starting calculations.
Still, I discovered that $600 should be about enough to buy a projector.
Why a projector?
Well, a few months ago, I was in a meeting at City Hall where the projector had been left out by the previous users. We used it to put the agenda on the wall, which was very useful for all in attendance. Ever since then, I'd wanted a projector to help facilitate such meetings.
Of course, I'd be able to use it for sharing my photography, for presentations, and to lend/rent to my friends, family and colleagues for their miscellaneous uses. (bolo?) But the meeting thing was a concrete function that I know would get used. [How much of a geek do you have to be to buy a multimedia projector for volunteer meetings?!?]
I don't like to shop for yogourt.
After deciding I wanted a projector, I trotted off to the computer store and asked what projectors they carried. This is how I shop: I go to a place, look at what they have in store, see what best fits my needs, and buy it.
"We don't carry any projectors in stock," said the clerk, after scoffing at me for asking for the salesperson I'd been in contact with by e-mail (let's call him Victor) after 5pm. "Realistically, we can order anything out there."
This is not how I like to shop. A completely open-ended selection gives me no place to start. Not being able to see the thing before buying it makes the decision even harder.
A projector-owning friend of mine pointed me to this US company, whose website lists a wide selection and good product details and reviews. He also gave me a few things to look for. In addition to my own requirements for portability, price, andbrightness, my friend recommended a wide viewing angle for use in small rooms, and lauded the high resolution of his Hitachi.
A choice is made
I settled on this baby, listed for US$669 on the US site. I like the Hitachi CPX5 because it's small, versatile, and has a USB port to plug in a flash drive, so you don't even need a computer. On June first I e-mailed Victor with my selection.
He said it would come to just under $1200 (plus tax), and because it's a special order, a minimum ETA of 7-14 days. I consulted a CDW catalogue I had on hand to confirm this was a reasonable price for a projector in Canada, and chalked the price difference up to the border, the dollar, and the website's volume.
But still, yikes.
After a closer analysis of my budget, I could manage $900, and borrow the remaining $300 from my savings, to be replenished after Bluesfest.
I bit my tongue and told Victor to order it. The order was delayed until I placed a deposit the next day. Sigh. I'm supporting local business, I told myself. Victor would call his supplier the next day to get a more precise ETA than 7-14 days. Hopefully, I'd get it in time for the next meeting on June 16th.
Finally, on June 10th, he said the projector should arrive on June 18th(!). Like Eric Cartman in the South Park episode Go God Go, I had some waitin' to do.
Waiting for Hitachi; steady as she goes
Later that morning, Victor e-mailed again to say that the June 18th ETA was wrong, and that he's still working to get a correct date from Hitachi. So not only was I waiting, but I was waiting for an undetermined length of time.
On the 15th, he e-mailed me to say that (paraphrased) the Hitachi people were being total jackasses with him, and he suggested I find a different projector as a plan B. Hitachi later told him that this was a US model, and it would be a further 10-14 business days for one to get "released" to Canada. (I assume this model was bred at the Hitachi International Wildlife Preserve.)
If I ordered a different model, as Victor suggested, it would arrive in the same 7-14 day timeframe as the Hitachi, namely, during Bluesfest, when I won't have time to play with it. So time was no longer an issue. Stay the course, I said.
To which he replied (my emphasis):
To be honest, we usually sell NEC, Samsung and Viewsonic projectors. ThoseThe time delay I could handle, but wasting my time AND my money was infuriating. Why didn't he tell me this before? Maybe he didn't want me to think he was second-guessing me. I was quite tempted to ask for (nay, demand) my deposit back, but that dishonours the sacred notion of the deposit. Hell, I was even considering abandoning the deposit and going elsewhere.
are generally stocked at their Canadian warehouses. Looking at the specs on
your Hitachi, you'd be paying a lot more to get the same from either of
those companies.
I'll leave the order open then. Thanks for your patience!
I told him I didn't want to go on another wild goose chase looking for another projector from one of those companies, only to risk getting the runaround again, and I instead asked him to find one with similar specs with a lower price, as he suggested was available.
He responded in two separate messages, one suggesting this behemoth, and the other asking "is size and weight *that* important?"
Meltdown
So far I've only talked about the technical details of this transaction. But during this rigmarole, a lot was going on in my life. On the week of the 15th, I had meetings after work just about every night. On top of that, I had stuff on Saturday and Sunday very early in the morning (including the LRT forum). These last drained what little spirit I had left in me, and I became very tired, unmotivated, and unable to get anything done. In short, I burned out.
I had felt this drained last year after pushing myself too far during Bluesfest, and it took me until the end of August to get back together. Here, I was still half a month away from Bluesfest, and I would need to be back in top form to last it.
On top of this, we had our annual audit at work from the 25th to the 29th of June, and because of our small office, my desk would be needed for the auditors. As much as I tried to frame it as time off, I couldn't forget that it was unpaid time off, right when I needed to shore up my reserves for Bluesfest.
What's worse, the company I work for is having trouble getting funding for my position for this year. My boss told me that these days off would "buy me more days later in the Summer." (A fourth way of seeing these days became 'time to work on my resume')
So the week after the one from hell, I decreed that I wasn't going to any meetings. I met some friends, took some time to myself, dined with family, went to the coffeeshop.
Yet I still felt a malaise the whole time. I literally felt sick (possibly also food poisoning.) All this time off, yet I still couldn't bring myself to so much as clean my apartment, cook a meal, or tend to my pressing to-dos.
I didn't quite realise it, but I think a lot of it had to do with the uncertainty about the projector. It was driving me mad: not only did I not have control of the situation, but I didn't even know where things were at. I was a slave to a timeline of unknown scope and duration.
At least I had the Daily Show and the Colbert Report to keep me from going completely insane. It always sucks when they're on vacation.
Victor admits defeat
On June 26, the second day in a five-day weekend, I had dinner with an old friend. We had Ethiopian food at a place I'd often passed many times but never gone in. It was my first time trying Ethiopian food, and hopefully my last. I had decided not to check my e-mail before meeting my friend, as part of the whole "I'm on vacation" mentality.
After dinner, I found a mid-afternoon e-mail from Victor. He was admitting defeat with Hitachi, who was basically telling him "they'll ship when they ship." He said he'll no longer sell anything from Hitachi to a customer unless his supplier has something in stock. Victor offered me my deposit back.
I thanked him for his persistence with Hitachi, and agreed it would be best to cancel the order and refund the deposit.
CDW saves the day
At some point during the long wait, my boss mentioned that CDW has much more selection on their website than in their print catalogue.
So on Friday night, after e-mailing Victor, I went on their site and found the Hitachi CPX2 for $926.99. In addition to having everything the CPX5 had, it also had an SD card slot. Très cool.
With tax and shipping, the total came to $1086.99. It would ship within 3-6 business days and arrive the following day. So I might get a day or two use out of it before Bluesfest. Wicked.
On Monday morning (June 29), the fifth and last day off, I got a phone message from Alicia at CDW, who wanted to confirm my order. Fair enough, I thought; it's a big enough purchase to warrant double-checking with the customer.
When I phoned her back, though, she told me that this projector was no longer available. Frankly, after the hoopla Victor had with Hitachi, this didn't surprise me.
She pointed me to the ViewSonic PJL3211, which has very similar specifications, including "USB Input". The 4.5 kg weight in the technical specifications is a typo; it's actually 4.1 lbs.
Despite the ViewSonic being $60 more, Alicia said she'd give it to me at the same price as the Hitachi. I confirmed with her that I wouldn't get any catalogues or anything in the mail from CDW, and that was that.
Later in the day, while blowing away on bike accessories the money I'd saved with the cheaper projector, someone else from CDW called me to confirm before running my credit card through. It would go out on June 30th, to arrive on the following business day, July 2nd.
Lifting the weight
On June 30, my life was starting to get back together. I was back in the office, getting my regular dose of workahol, and this projector, which I had been trying to buy for over a month, was finally on its way. I had also taken a bunch of vitamins in the morning, and had a sizeable lunch, in the event that malnutrition was a contributor to my doldrums.
After my work was done, I stayed in the office to get a bunch of my agenda items off my plate. I was finally productive again.
And just in time, as I was working on Wellington Street all day on Canada Day, from 10am to midnight, plus the following day for a few hours, and I'd need a healthy dose of stamina.
This morning, July 2nd, I got a call from a colleague at 9am to let me know my projector had arrived. Very shortly thereafter, I got another call from CDW's Alicia asking to confirm that I had received it. Cleanup after Canada Day took less time than expected, and I was done at 11:30am. I stopped by the office to pick up my projector, ran a couple errands, then went home and set it up.
Unfortunately, "USB Input" on this device's spec sheet means I could plug it in to my computer with a USB cable; it doesn't have a USB drive slot, nor an SD card slot, for independent projection. But my laptop has dual-monitor capabilities, so this isn't a big setback.Epilogue.
After a post-Canada day nap, I felt my Ă©lan has returned. I was able to get those repairs done on my bike, eat stuff, and work through my e-mail inbox. I am, as they say, "back, baby."
But what a whirlwind. Something that had started out as a quick ego-pleasing toy purchase turned into an emotional saga of stress and uncertainty. It was only when the pressure was lifted that I realized how much weight I had ascribed to this one simple goal.
Now, with the dam burst, I have the energy to attack Bluesfest on all cannons, and to get back to my usual routine (of putting off important tasks by blogging voluminously).
More importantly, I can blog on the wall, old school. Take that, Facebook!
- RG>
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Scotiabank's MoneySlave
I've got a couple things to blog about tonight. I'll schedule the other post to go up tomorrow, assuming I get to it. [Edit: which I won't.]
Anyhoo, I was checking my credit card balance online and noticed that they had credited my account with the annual moneyback payment. Which is unusual, since the annual credit is supposed to happen in July. 'Taint annual if it happens every seven months!
Now, Scotiabank (or more formally, the Bank of Nova Scotia) doesn't have the best reputation in many parts of the world, nor had it with my mother. But my dad did his banking with Scotiabank, and started me up with an account when I was ten years old.
Since then, I, like my father, have gotten credit cards, investments, and RSPs through Scotiabank. I've got a MoneyMaster "High Interest" savings account. Hell, I've even applied for a job with the company, unsuccessfully, my conscience is glad to report. I've considered changing banks, but most banks charge you an arm and a leg to take money out of other banks' machines, and Scotiabank has pretty darn good branch and bank machine coverage in downtown Ottawa.
So not having had abysmal treatment by Scotiabank, I've stayed with them.
And I haven't minded the Moneyback VISA card either. Not many frills (which, frankly, is how I like things), no annual fee (as far as I knew, though apparently it was $8), and it gives you "money back".
Now, the "free money" concept is, obviously, not free. Whenever you make a purchase at a store with your credit card, the credit card company takes a fixed per-purchase fee (like $0.50 to $1) plus a variable "discount fee" off the price of the item (like 1% to 3%). So by simply using a credit card, you are driving costs up for the businesses you frequent. For this reason, I try to use cash or debit when making smaller purchases at local stores. I don't try too hard, but I try.
Since the bank is taking a few percent from each purchase, it is to their benefit to get you to spend more money with your card, especially if you're the type of person who doesn't earn them much money otherwise, through annual fees and exorbitant interest charges. To encourage you, they often offer various incentives, either in the form of points programs (like for cards associated with stores like Canadian Tire, Sears, or Loblaws) or with "Moneyback" type deals.
These "Moneyback" deals are structured so that the more you spend, the more you'll get back (PDF warning). In the case of the Scotiabank Moneyback VISA, they'll give you a mere 0.25% "back" on the first $1500 you spend in a year, 0.50% on the second $1500, and 1% on anything above that.
Every July, they cash you out for however much money you spent in the last year, the counter resets to $0, and you go back to earning 0.25% until you spend enough money to kick up to the next bracket. So when I paid a decent price on a new bed this past Boxing week, even though I could afford to pay cash, it benefited me to use my Moneyback card, in order to maximize my cash back rewards.
(Incidentally, Sears tried to sign me up for a Sears card when I bought the bed. The benefits they offered me were $10 credit, free delivery, and I could pay for the bed in April with zero interest. Seeing as $10 is nothing on the cost of a bed, I had the money to pay for it now, and I had a great friend with a minivan, "zero interest" was also an accurate description of my reaction to this offer.)
But once you get up to 1%, it's a sweet spot to stay in. You don't want to, say, have your counter set back to zero. Which is why I was annoyed by the cashback getting cleaned out in February. Only eight months into the year, and four months until the next reset, I was getting seriously deprived of my rightfully-earned dozen or so dollars of upcoming reward.
So I called up the bank. Oh what fun that always is.
They politely explained to me that my card was being discontinued, and that since "most people" would be switching to the new "Momentum VISA" card (which isn't even listed on their list of all Scotiabank VISA cards), they were taking the liberty of switching everybody over to this card which they would be sending me in March.
How nice of them to tell me this.
So apparently there was something on my November statement. I didn't have my November statement with me when I was on the phone, and even then this wasn't sufficient notice in my opinion. I check my statements online, and I only receive the paper statements as a backup. I later discovered that this notice was on the third page of that statement, after the list of purchases was long finished. I don't see why I never got any notice of this in the online message centre when I signed on to my online account.
Nevertheless, switching me over without my explicit permission was.not.cool.
So I asked them what was different about this Momentum card and why I was forced to change. Well, for one, the Moneyback card was being discontinued, she said. As for what was different, she started off by telling me that the interest rate went up from an insulting 18.59% to an obscene 19.99%, there was a $39 annual fee. Oh really?
The reward structure was also different. Instead of the ladder structure described earlier, the lady told me there would be "2% cash back on the first $25,000 if the vendor is in the VISA network" (I stopped her before she bothered telling me what happened after that threshold), otherwise 1%. I didn't get a decent explanation of what the hell the "VISA network" is. Not this.
"So a store that accepts VISA is in the VISA network, right?"
"No, they have to be registered..."
Yeah, right, whatever. So the rate is really 1% then.
One thing I discovered in this conversation was that whenever I didn't know how to respond with flustered indignation, I'd just remain silent and she would fill the silence by volunteering more information I wouldn't have even thought to ask about. Which is actually a tactic I learned about tonight (after the phone call) in this helpful YouTube video law lecture called Don't talk to cops.
I think this silent treatment was how I happened to learn that there's this thing called the "No-Fee Moneyback VISA" card. Like the Momentum VISA, the No-Fee Moneyback has the same higher interest rate (not a problem for me since I never spend what I don't have), it has the same insurance plan, and it has the same payback structure as the Moneyback card I currently have. It also--get this--doesn't have any fucking annual fee!
So I'm trying to figure out the logic of their decision. Here we have a card that is nearly identical to the one Scotiabank is discontinuing--it even is slightly better, in terms of fees--and one that costs more in annual fees, requires a new card to be issued and is called something different. And they decided that most people would choose the different one. And by "choose", they mean "the bank will tell you that they are doing this automatically, and they aren't going to tell you upfront about any alternative."
I even went through this very painstakingly with the CSR and followed it with "now you can see why I'm frustrated by this, right?" and she said yes, although I think that's just a habit for call centre people.
So I told her to sign me up for the no-fee card, and she let me in on the little secret that I could keep the card I already have. It's that similar. More flabbergastion flummoxed from my flanges.
It wasn't until after I hung up that I realized that the whole point I had called in the first place--being shortchanged by my Moneyback being cashed out too early--hadn't been dealt with at all! So I called back and spoke with a rep named Candice.
She wasn't nearly as helpful, nor, it seemed, as friendly. Without the backstory to help me out, I could tell I wouldn't have much luck.
It didn't help that she didn't seem to have a fuck of a clue of why I was upset about this, either. Apparently the new payout period ends in November, so I'll get about seven months, giving me two seven-month periods in a row, shortchanging me of five months of top-rate cash-backing. Are the banks really this desperate?
She said she couldn't do anything for me for money I hadn't "earned" yet, and to call back in November.
Thanks, Candice.
So now I'm at home and looking at my December 3 statement, and the notice saying how much fun I'll have with the Momentum VISA card.
And looking at the Momentum rates on paper, I thought it would actually be a better choice, and I created the table below [hand-coded, since Blogger doesn't seem to want to do tables... I have no idea what the table will look like when I hit "publish"] to prove it, only to realize that the old Moneyback card with the lower cashback rate on the first $3000 would still be better, due to the lower fees.
Now, this doesn't include the fact that one apparently gets "A full 2% cash back on eligible Gas, Grocery, Recurring Payments and Drugstore purchases," since I have no clue what "eligible" is supposed to mean, nor did the first CSR, other than the fact that these companies have to be in the "VISA network". (See above link for "VISA network" for how helpful that information is)
It also doesn't include the fact that additional cards on the Momentum plan are an additional $15 each, nor does it include the fact that I am now on the No-Fee card, meaning that first column can increase by an $8 reward per year.
So in addition to forcing people into a higher interest rate, Scotiabank is conning its customers into accepting at least $19.25 ($11.25 + $8) in increased net annual charges--even more to those customers who spend under $3000 per year (or Moneyback period, which at this rate seems to be more like seven months).
And this kind of bullshit happens all the time. No matter how closely you look, there will always be finer print to overlook with the lovely bastards we call credit card companies.
- RG>
Anyhoo, I was checking my credit card balance online and noticed that they had credited my account with the annual moneyback payment. Which is unusual, since the annual credit is supposed to happen in July. 'Taint annual if it happens every seven months!
Now, Scotiabank (or more formally, the Bank of Nova Scotia) doesn't have the best reputation in many parts of the world, nor had it with my mother. But my dad did his banking with Scotiabank, and started me up with an account when I was ten years old.
Since then, I, like my father, have gotten credit cards, investments, and RSPs through Scotiabank. I've got a MoneyMaster "High Interest" savings account. Hell, I've even applied for a job with the company, unsuccessfully, my conscience is glad to report. I've considered changing banks, but most banks charge you an arm and a leg to take money out of other banks' machines, and Scotiabank has pretty darn good branch and bank machine coverage in downtown Ottawa.
So not having had abysmal treatment by Scotiabank, I've stayed with them.
And I haven't minded the Moneyback VISA card either. Not many frills (which, frankly, is how I like things), no annual fee (as far as I knew, though apparently it was $8), and it gives you "money back".
Now, the "free money" concept is, obviously, not free. Whenever you make a purchase at a store with your credit card, the credit card company takes a fixed per-purchase fee (like $0.50 to $1) plus a variable "discount fee" off the price of the item (like 1% to 3%). So by simply using a credit card, you are driving costs up for the businesses you frequent. For this reason, I try to use cash or debit when making smaller purchases at local stores. I don't try too hard, but I try.
Since the bank is taking a few percent from each purchase, it is to their benefit to get you to spend more money with your card, especially if you're the type of person who doesn't earn them much money otherwise, through annual fees and exorbitant interest charges. To encourage you, they often offer various incentives, either in the form of points programs (like for cards associated with stores like Canadian Tire, Sears, or Loblaws) or with "Moneyback" type deals.
These "Moneyback" deals are structured so that the more you spend, the more you'll get back (PDF warning). In the case of the Scotiabank Moneyback VISA, they'll give you a mere 0.25% "back" on the first $1500 you spend in a year, 0.50% on the second $1500, and 1% on anything above that.
Every July, they cash you out for however much money you spent in the last year, the counter resets to $0, and you go back to earning 0.25% until you spend enough money to kick up to the next bracket. So when I paid a decent price on a new bed this past Boxing week, even though I could afford to pay cash, it benefited me to use my Moneyback card, in order to maximize my cash back rewards.
(Incidentally, Sears tried to sign me up for a Sears card when I bought the bed. The benefits they offered me were $10 credit, free delivery, and I could pay for the bed in April with zero interest. Seeing as $10 is nothing on the cost of a bed, I had the money to pay for it now, and I had a great friend with a minivan, "zero interest" was also an accurate description of my reaction to this offer.)
But once you get up to 1%, it's a sweet spot to stay in. You don't want to, say, have your counter set back to zero. Which is why I was annoyed by the cashback getting cleaned out in February. Only eight months into the year, and four months until the next reset, I was getting seriously deprived of my rightfully-earned dozen or so dollars of upcoming reward.
So I called up the bank. Oh what fun that always is.
They politely explained to me that my card was being discontinued, and that since "most people" would be switching to the new "Momentum VISA" card (which isn't even listed on their list of all Scotiabank VISA cards), they were taking the liberty of switching everybody over to this card which they would be sending me in March.
How nice of them to tell me this.
So apparently there was something on my November statement. I didn't have my November statement with me when I was on the phone, and even then this wasn't sufficient notice in my opinion. I check my statements online, and I only receive the paper statements as a backup. I later discovered that this notice was on the third page of that statement, after the list of purchases was long finished. I don't see why I never got any notice of this in the online message centre when I signed on to my online account.
Nevertheless, switching me over without my explicit permission was.not.cool.
So I asked them what was different about this Momentum card and why I was forced to change. Well, for one, the Moneyback card was being discontinued, she said. As for what was different, she started off by telling me that the interest rate went up from an insulting 18.59% to an obscene 19.99%, there was a $39 annual fee. Oh really?
The reward structure was also different. Instead of the ladder structure described earlier, the lady told me there would be "2% cash back on the first $25,000 if the vendor is in the VISA network" (I stopped her before she bothered telling me what happened after that threshold), otherwise 1%. I didn't get a decent explanation of what the hell the "VISA network" is. Not this.
"So a store that accepts VISA is in the VISA network, right?"
"No, they have to be registered..."
Yeah, right, whatever. So the rate is really 1% then.
One thing I discovered in this conversation was that whenever I didn't know how to respond with flustered indignation, I'd just remain silent and she would fill the silence by volunteering more information I wouldn't have even thought to ask about. Which is actually a tactic I learned about tonight (after the phone call) in this helpful YouTube video law lecture called Don't talk to cops.
I think this silent treatment was how I happened to learn that there's this thing called the "No-Fee Moneyback VISA" card. Like the Momentum VISA, the No-Fee Moneyback has the same higher interest rate (not a problem for me since I never spend what I don't have), it has the same insurance plan, and it has the same payback structure as the Moneyback card I currently have. It also--get this--doesn't have any fucking annual fee!
So I'm trying to figure out the logic of their decision. Here we have a card that is nearly identical to the one Scotiabank is discontinuing--it even is slightly better, in terms of fees--and one that costs more in annual fees, requires a new card to be issued and is called something different. And they decided that most people would choose the different one. And by "choose", they mean "the bank will tell you that they are doing this automatically, and they aren't going to tell you upfront about any alternative."
I even went through this very painstakingly with the CSR and followed it with "now you can see why I'm frustrated by this, right?" and she said yes, although I think that's just a habit for call centre people.
So I told her to sign me up for the no-fee card, and she let me in on the little secret that I could keep the card I already have. It's that similar. More flabbergastion flummoxed from my flanges.
It wasn't until after I hung up that I realized that the whole point I had called in the first place--being shortchanged by my Moneyback being cashed out too early--hadn't been dealt with at all! So I called back and spoke with a rep named Candice.
She wasn't nearly as helpful, nor, it seemed, as friendly. Without the backstory to help me out, I could tell I wouldn't have much luck.
It didn't help that she didn't seem to have a fuck of a clue of why I was upset about this, either. Apparently the new payout period ends in November, so I'll get about seven months, giving me two seven-month periods in a row, shortchanging me of five months of top-rate cash-backing. Are the banks really this desperate?
She said she couldn't do anything for me for money I hadn't "earned" yet, and to call back in November.
Thanks, Candice.
So now I'm at home and looking at my December 3 statement, and the notice saying how much fun I'll have with the Momentum VISA card.
And looking at the Momentum rates on paper, I thought it would actually be a better choice, and I created the table below [hand-coded, since Blogger doesn't seem to want to do tables... I have no idea what the table will look like when I hit "publish"] to prove it, only to realize that the old Moneyback card with the lower cashback rate on the first $3000 would still be better, due to the lower fees.
| Amount spent | Cash back with $8 Fee Moneyback | Cash back with Momentum |
| $0 | -$8 Annual Fee | -$39 Annual Fee |
| $1500 | $3.75 @ 0.25% -$4.25 total | $15 @ 1% -$24 total |
| $2350 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $4.25 @ 0.50% $0 total | $23.50 @ 1% -$15.5 total |
| $3000 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $7.50 @ 0.50% $3.25 total | $30 @ 1% -$9 total |
| $3900 | $3.75 @ 0.25% + $7.50 @ 0.50% + $9 @ 1% $11.25 total | $39 @ 1% $0 total |
| Over $3900 | Above plus 1% | Above plus 1% |
Now, this doesn't include the fact that one apparently gets "A full 2% cash back on eligible Gas, Grocery, Recurring Payments and Drugstore purchases," since I have no clue what "eligible" is supposed to mean, nor did the first CSR, other than the fact that these companies have to be in the "VISA network". (See above link for "VISA network" for how helpful that information is)
It also doesn't include the fact that additional cards on the Momentum plan are an additional $15 each, nor does it include the fact that I am now on the No-Fee card, meaning that first column can increase by an $8 reward per year.
So in addition to forcing people into a higher interest rate, Scotiabank is conning its customers into accepting at least $19.25 ($11.25 + $8) in increased net annual charges--even more to those customers who spend under $3000 per year (or Moneyback period, which at this rate seems to be more like seven months).
And this kind of bullshit happens all the time. No matter how closely you look, there will always be finer print to overlook with the lovely bastards we call credit card companies.
- RG>
Saturday, December 06, 2008
$25B Bailout? Big 3 vs. Economics 101
The BBC has a video showing the real reason why the auto industry is asking for billions of dollars in bailouts from North American governments: nobody is buying their cars.
The video shows ports in Long Beach, California, where tens of thousands of brand new cars sit, unwanted. Twenty auto salesmen in one Mercedes dealership have lost their jobs. People simply aren't buying new cars.
And the Big Three understand this. When demand drops to zero, it's impossible to make supply more efficient to continue bringing in profits.
That's why, to earn profits, they've decided skip the whole supply/demand game, the whole sell-a-product-to-earn-money game, and instead go to the governments to give them money.
I say fuck 'em. This money should be used to invest in new industries, to build a more sustainable economy, not to line the pockets of dying industries.
People say that one in six Canadians has a job directly related to the automobile industry as a defence of such bailouts. This was used as an argument in 2003 when the Federal and Ontario governments each gave half a billion dollars to Ford to encourage them to build a plant in Ontario, creating jobs for Ontario workers. A plant which has since closed.
To me, one in six Canadians depending on the auto industry isn't a defence of bailing them out: it's a sign that we need to kick the auto addiction.
(Thanks to rgb for the link)
- RG>
The video shows ports in Long Beach, California, where tens of thousands of brand new cars sit, unwanted. Twenty auto salesmen in one Mercedes dealership have lost their jobs. People simply aren't buying new cars.
And the Big Three understand this. When demand drops to zero, it's impossible to make supply more efficient to continue bringing in profits.
That's why, to earn profits, they've decided skip the whole supply/demand game, the whole sell-a-product-to-earn-money game, and instead go to the governments to give them money.
I say fuck 'em. This money should be used to invest in new industries, to build a more sustainable economy, not to line the pockets of dying industries.
People say that one in six Canadians has a job directly related to the automobile industry as a defence of such bailouts. This was used as an argument in 2003 when the Federal and Ontario governments each gave half a billion dollars to Ford to encourage them to build a plant in Ontario, creating jobs for Ontario workers. A plant which has since closed.
To me, one in six Canadians depending on the auto industry isn't a defence of bailing them out: it's a sign that we need to kick the auto addiction.
(Thanks to rgb for the link)
- RG>
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Underprivileged? No. Smug? Yes.
So it looks like I haven't posted at all in October. I guess life happens, eh?
I had a great time working at the polls during the recent election. The big pile of forms, envelopes and ballots that had to be sorted just right was thrilling. It was like my coming out as a bureaucrat.
In fact, I even compiled a list of corrections to the elections manual based on the questions and problems I encountered through the day. There were a number of problems with it. For example, when gathering the items on a list of materials we'd require at the end of the night, we spent five whole minutes looking for an envelope that didn't exist. Also, there was no central list of what to do at the end of the night: it was all "go from this set of instructions to that one over there and follow them." Quite confusing, even for a logic puzzle solver like myself.
I e-mailed Elections Canada to let them know I've got this feedback, and I offered to write it up if they would give me an address to forward it to. The response I received, in full (albeit within 24 hours), was "We acknowledge receipt of the electronic message you sent to Elections Canada on October 16, 2008. Your message has been forwarded to the appropriate directorate." How nice of them to accept the input that I haven't even sent them yet!
I've been really busy since then with various commitments, but I've got some breathing room now.
I was very disappointed this morning to find not 25-35 cm of snow on the roads (as forecast), but mostly clear roads with a smattering of wet stuff on the sidewalks. I was looking forward to the adventure of riding in the snow again, but it'll have to wait for another day. (Hopefully a month or two off)
Other things are also going well. A few things have broken, or I've otherwise determined the need to replace things, and it's been quite painless to get them fixed. For example, the belt holster for my phone broke and I was so disinclined to deal with the people at the Bell World store (who conned me into buying the thing) that I'd rather spend the $30 elsewhere to get a new one than to have to deal with those fucks. In the meantime, I'll just stick the holster in my pocket.
A better example of something breaking is my sunglasses. When I got a new prescription earlier this year (hmm... same time as the new phone...), I had to choose between getting new frames and new lenses on my sunglasses, or just replacing the lenses on my five-year-old shades. New frames would allow me to update the style with new glasses, but replacing the lenses would be much cheaper. Since I was also buying non-sunglasses, I chose the cheaper sunglass option.
Then a couple of weeks ago, the frames started to fall apart. I wasn't quite sure what to do. My worst fear was that I would have to buy new frames and lenses, and toss the expensive lenses I had purchased earlier this year. Very expensive. Then I got an idea: I could try getting another pair of the same model as my current shades.
I called up the Lenscrafters at Rideau Centre and asked them if they had any of these five year old model. They were very polite and very helpful. They did a bunch of looking around for me and concluded that, while the model wasn't marked as being discontinued, there were no more of them in any Lenscrafters in the country. They suggested I try on the internet, and they gave me all the details that I would need to make sure I get the right ones.
With this information, I looked on the internet for the shades. According to places that didn't have them in stock (including the manufacturer), they cost about $235 new. Yowch. So I went to the next obvious destination--eBay. There they were, the only ones, available from a place in California for 90 bucks plus shipping (this was while the dollar was still at about 90 cents. Then, the icing: they had them in different colours. Okay, "colours". By replacing my gunmetal model with a black matte, I could get the best of both worlds: cheaper (by replacing the lenses earlier on, and subsequently replacing the frames at much less than retail), and still get a bit of change in style. Still a costly item, but much cheaper than it could have been.
So fast forward to this week. The shades arrived in the mail and I swapped out the lenses. Only they didn't quite fit. Grr! It was clear that when they had installed the lenses the first time five years ago, they removed some of the sweep in the frames to accommodate them. I did not want to bend my frames and risk breaking them.
I would have to go to the Rideau Centre to take them to Lenscrafters.
I hate going to the Rideau Centre. It's so big and commercial and unfriendly. There are so many people, yet so little personality. Give me the charm of Elgin or Bank street any day. On top of that, since it's a place I don't go often, there are likely to be a few things that I want to photograph, but I forgot my camera at home today.
I took them into Lenscrafters, expecting to have to leave them there for a few days while they fixed it. Instead, they took them behind the glass and did the work right there in minutes. Best part? They didn't charge me for it at all!
So what does this have to do with the title? On the way back out, I saw the welcome mats outside Miss Tiggy Winkles. The one in the front annoyed me so much that, with my one free hand, I fumbled my phone out of my pocket, pried it out of the holster and aimed it in the general direction of the mat to take a photo of it (hence the atrocious quality):
It says "WE WORK WITH THE UNDERPRIVILEGED (Our children)"
Anyone who displays that slogan outside of their house--whether they mean it honestly or in jest--ought to be shot. If you're rich enough to afford that mat, then either your children are privileged as fuck or you're gloating at how poorly you treat your children. If you children aren't privileged, then you're a neglectful cad for wasting your money on a stupid novelty mat instead of something that will help in their development (or at least get them a toy that's a bit more fun than a bloody welcome mat). If you want to spend money to show appreciation for your children, buy a damn "my son/daughter is an honour student" bumper sticker (or some, uh, prescription sunglasses :P ), but calling them "underprivileged" is just insulting to everybody.
- RG>
I had a great time working at the polls during the recent election. The big pile of forms, envelopes and ballots that had to be sorted just right was thrilling. It was like my coming out as a bureaucrat.
In fact, I even compiled a list of corrections to the elections manual based on the questions and problems I encountered through the day. There were a number of problems with it. For example, when gathering the items on a list of materials we'd require at the end of the night, we spent five whole minutes looking for an envelope that didn't exist. Also, there was no central list of what to do at the end of the night: it was all "go from this set of instructions to that one over there and follow them." Quite confusing, even for a logic puzzle solver like myself.
I e-mailed Elections Canada to let them know I've got this feedback, and I offered to write it up if they would give me an address to forward it to. The response I received, in full (albeit within 24 hours), was "We acknowledge receipt of the electronic message you sent to Elections Canada on October 16, 2008. Your message has been forwarded to the appropriate directorate." How nice of them to accept the input that I haven't even sent them yet!
I've been really busy since then with various commitments, but I've got some breathing room now.
I was very disappointed this morning to find not 25-35 cm of snow on the roads (as forecast), but mostly clear roads with a smattering of wet stuff on the sidewalks. I was looking forward to the adventure of riding in the snow again, but it'll have to wait for another day. (Hopefully a month or two off)
Other things are also going well. A few things have broken, or I've otherwise determined the need to replace things, and it's been quite painless to get them fixed. For example, the belt holster for my phone broke and I was so disinclined to deal with the people at the Bell World store (who conned me into buying the thing) that I'd rather spend the $30 elsewhere to get a new one than to have to deal with those fucks. In the meantime, I'll just stick the holster in my pocket.
A better example of something breaking is my sunglasses. When I got a new prescription earlier this year (hmm... same time as the new phone...), I had to choose between getting new frames and new lenses on my sunglasses, or just replacing the lenses on my five-year-old shades. New frames would allow me to update the style with new glasses, but replacing the lenses would be much cheaper. Since I was also buying non-sunglasses, I chose the cheaper sunglass option.
Then a couple of weeks ago, the frames started to fall apart. I wasn't quite sure what to do. My worst fear was that I would have to buy new frames and lenses, and toss the expensive lenses I had purchased earlier this year. Very expensive. Then I got an idea: I could try getting another pair of the same model as my current shades.
I called up the Lenscrafters at Rideau Centre and asked them if they had any of these five year old model. They were very polite and very helpful. They did a bunch of looking around for me and concluded that, while the model wasn't marked as being discontinued, there were no more of them in any Lenscrafters in the country. They suggested I try on the internet, and they gave me all the details that I would need to make sure I get the right ones.
With this information, I looked on the internet for the shades. According to places that didn't have them in stock (including the manufacturer), they cost about $235 new. Yowch. So I went to the next obvious destination--eBay. There they were, the only ones, available from a place in California for 90 bucks plus shipping (this was while the dollar was still at about 90 cents. Then, the icing: they had them in different colours. Okay, "colours". By replacing my gunmetal model with a black matte, I could get the best of both worlds: cheaper (by replacing the lenses earlier on, and subsequently replacing the frames at much less than retail), and still get a bit of change in style. Still a costly item, but much cheaper than it could have been.
So fast forward to this week. The shades arrived in the mail and I swapped out the lenses. Only they didn't quite fit. Grr! It was clear that when they had installed the lenses the first time five years ago, they removed some of the sweep in the frames to accommodate them. I did not want to bend my frames and risk breaking them.
I would have to go to the Rideau Centre to take them to Lenscrafters.
I hate going to the Rideau Centre. It's so big and commercial and unfriendly. There are so many people, yet so little personality. Give me the charm of Elgin or Bank street any day. On top of that, since it's a place I don't go often, there are likely to be a few things that I want to photograph, but I forgot my camera at home today.
I took them into Lenscrafters, expecting to have to leave them there for a few days while they fixed it. Instead, they took them behind the glass and did the work right there in minutes. Best part? They didn't charge me for it at all!
So what does this have to do with the title? On the way back out, I saw the welcome mats outside Miss Tiggy Winkles. The one in the front annoyed me so much that, with my one free hand, I fumbled my phone out of my pocket, pried it out of the holster and aimed it in the general direction of the mat to take a photo of it (hence the atrocious quality):
It says "WE WORK WITH THE UNDERPRIVILEGED (Our children)"Anyone who displays that slogan outside of their house--whether they mean it honestly or in jest--ought to be shot. If you're rich enough to afford that mat, then either your children are privileged as fuck or you're gloating at how poorly you treat your children. If you children aren't privileged, then you're a neglectful cad for wasting your money on a stupid novelty mat instead of something that will help in their development (or at least get them a toy that's a bit more fun than a bloody welcome mat). If you want to spend money to show appreciation for your children, buy a damn "my son/daughter is an honour student" bumper sticker (or some, uh, prescription sunglasses :P ), but calling them "underprivileged" is just insulting to everybody.
- RG>
Friday, September 12, 2008
I'd love to grouch, but the story's too good
For the last few nights, I've had this big report to write. No, not for work (I'm lucky enough to be able to leave my work at work) or school (my sentence at university expired last year). It's one of the many volunteer projects that I tend to take on as part of my fetish for masochistically-mind-numbing committee work. You know, policy review, procedural harmonization. The more bureaucratically complex it sounds, the more I want to dig my fingers in and pick it apart.
Okay, so I can be a little strange. ;D
Anyway, this story actually starts this past Wednesday, the first night this week where I'd have time to work on the report. I have no idea why, but I was absolutely exhausted at the office. When my work day ended, I went to Bridgehead in search of a second wind. That didn't help.
Nor did the Gravol. You can tell someone is wiped when they take Gravol to try to fight fatigue. Eugh.
I got home at six and fell straight into bed. I woke up at midnight, and didn't have a clue how to deal with it: my body was in sleep mode, and didn't want food, even though I hadn't had dinner; meanwhile, I had just woken up from a six-hour slumber, so I couldn't simply go back to sleep. But I also wasn't lucid enough to write that report. I eventually got five more hours of rest before waking up for work.
After work, I finally got a chance to sit down for the final stretch of my report, and I was very disappointed to discover that I couldn't edit the document due to a very nasty read-only bug.
After overcoming that hitch, I was able to edit my document again and resume "report"ing. I worked on it until Bridgehead closed, then went home, heated up some leftovers, and continued until late into the night.
At 3 am, I celebrated the finished report, did a victory dance in my head, then stayed uncontrollably awake for two hours.
My boss had grumbled yesterday that I had been late every day this week, so I really didn't want to be late again today. Constrained by the late hour, I was forced to take an abbreviated night of sleep, and one thing my circadian clock can be said to have in common with--say--English teachers is a distaste for abbreviations.
(As an aside... In case you haven't noticed, sleep deprivation--or "sleep deprivity" as I once accidentally dubbed it in a jet-lagged moment of genius--tends to exacerbate my eccentricity. Despite not consuming alcohol or narcotics, I've managed to freak out quite a few people at late-night parties with this 'talent'.)
I eventually got to sleep, and reluctantly woke up this morning in a vain attempt to get to work on time.
And I would have, had I not lost my freaking wallet!
I searched my apartment high and low. I searched the usual places, I searched the unusual places.
I remembered that the last place I had seen my wallet was last night at Bridgehead, when I stacked it on top of my bags on the patio shortly after sitting down. What few neurons were willing to fire contemplated the possibility that I had left it there.
I might have forgotten it there last night because I was tired, right?
No, wait, I was tired on Wednesday night. I'm tired now because I was awake and alert too long last night.
Wait, last night! Yes, that's it! I'm tired now because of last night; I must therefore have been tired last night!
It is thus perfectly reasonable that I left it there last night in my defatigated stupor! Q.E.D.
I dropped my bike off at work and popped over to Bridgehead to ask if my wallet had turned up. Nope.
Well if it isn't there, then where could it be?
I looked again in my bags, and realized I had lost it. My wallet, too. :P
While it was likely to turn up again, I phoned to cancell my debit and credit cards as a precaution, while simultaneously trying to find ways to be productive as my still-grumbling boss watched on through the eyes the back of her head. While on hold, I thought about what a coincidence it was that I had the great idea just a couple of days ago to write down all the important details on the cards in my wallet in case I might lose it, and how much greater an idea it would have been if I had actually done so.
I was able to recite my card number from memory, having entered it so often on the bank's website. This was a bittersweet accomplishment, as I would have to get a new one. Unfortunately, I was already at work, and I would need two pieces of identification to get a new card from the bank--not the easiest thing to do when your ID is in your missing wallet!
I knew where my passport was at home, and the guy on the phone helped me brainstorm other pieces of ID.
"Would a photo of me in the newpaper work?" No, he replied, to my chagrin. I managed to identify a suitable second piece--but they were both still at home.
Luckily, I had forgotten my wallet at home one day last week, which taught me to stash a bit of lunch money in my office lest it happen again (A second lesson was which of the places I frequent on Elgin street were and weren't willing to take a rare IOU from a loyal customer; in the case of those that weren't, I suppose I should say "frequented"). But it being Friday, the ten dollars in the small manila envelope would not stretch very far as I wait for the banks to re-open on Monday.
Despite being tired, groggy, grouchy and behind in my hours at work, I agreed to my dad's offer to meet for lunch, who covered the bill (thanks again, Dad!). This turned out being a good idea, as the ride out to our meting place gave me time to think, and sitting at the pub helped me relax. Dad and I chatted about various goings-on, and he commented that many of my recent blog entries were not as grouchy as before.
On my way back from lunch, I recontemplated my obstacles, and concluded that stopping by home to get my I.D. and visiting the bank for a new card was the way to go. I was pleased to find my documents where I expected them to be, and there was no line at the bank. The extra trip only added twenty minutes to my lunch break. I'd still have to deal with all my other cards and stuff, but not until I was absolutely sure that I had lost my wallet--I still have one of those old red-and-white OHIP cards that doesn't expire and I'd hate to have to get a new one.
Back at work, I decided to look one more time in my bags, this time actually taking things out to look beneath them, instead of whatever my defatigated doppelganger did this morning. And there was my wallet! What a relief; my frequent customer cards were safe!
Now my only problem was working five more hours at work, trying various things to keep me focused (and remembering to NOT take Gravol this time!).
The main thing on my desk today was preparing a couple of letters of refusal. This was a cathartic exercise, wherein I vigorously researched creative ways to say "no" while maintaining a polite and professional tone.
One was not so much a letter of refusal as one that said "yes, but...". Those ones can be even more fun--if time-consuming to get right.
In the end, I got my work done, clocked out, and went to Bridgehead.
For all the things that could have gone much worse today, everything really turned out pretty well. I'd be hard pressed to grouch about it!
----
While typing out this blog post at Bridgehead (which is about to close), a pair of young men tried to impress the girls they were with by jumping up and slapping a street sign in an attempt to impress their lady friends. In so doing, they knocked apart the swap box on the post.
They walked away, and I corrected it. Maks did a good job of building this one; the box joints on the top piece mercilessly fell apart, and easily snapped back together with a bit of pressure.
As the patio got quieter (and the crowd on the street rowdier), I moved inside, and overheard a gentleman talk to the server about a bracelet he got from the swap box which gave him some sort of energy or something. It sounded spiritual, so I tuned it out.
But when the man turned around, I noticed that the bracelet in question was one which I had placed in the swap box! I told him of the bracelet's origins, and he told me of its continuing story:
[continued from outside, as Bridgehead has now closed]
Apparently, this gentleman had once been fairly overweight and had done a lot of work to get himself down to his current, average size. About three and a half weeks ago, he was in a slump and knew that it was [then] or never to lose that last bit of weight.
Finding the bracelet in the swap box gave him the extra motivation to start jogging.
Interestingly enough, the bracelet--an orange "livestrong"-style rubber band with the words "i count" on it that I had picked up from a convention (my vulgar attempt to slice out the letter "o" on another copy and paste it back together had failed) was actually an advertising gimmick for some brand of step counters--an exercise tool. The phrase "i count" was a reference to counting one's steps.
It's quite the coincidence that it had this very effect, even though I had planted it in the Swap Box on its own!
Now to go home and sleep.
Okay, so I can be a little strange. ;D
Anyway, this story actually starts this past Wednesday, the first night this week where I'd have time to work on the report. I have no idea why, but I was absolutely exhausted at the office. When my work day ended, I went to Bridgehead in search of a second wind. That didn't help.
Nor did the Gravol. You can tell someone is wiped when they take Gravol to try to fight fatigue. Eugh.
I got home at six and fell straight into bed. I woke up at midnight, and didn't have a clue how to deal with it: my body was in sleep mode, and didn't want food, even though I hadn't had dinner; meanwhile, I had just woken up from a six-hour slumber, so I couldn't simply go back to sleep. But I also wasn't lucid enough to write that report. I eventually got five more hours of rest before waking up for work.
After work, I finally got a chance to sit down for the final stretch of my report, and I was very disappointed to discover that I couldn't edit the document due to a very nasty read-only bug.
After overcoming that hitch, I was able to edit my document again and resume "report"ing. I worked on it until Bridgehead closed, then went home, heated up some leftovers, and continued until late into the night.
At 3 am, I celebrated the finished report, did a victory dance in my head, then stayed uncontrollably awake for two hours.
My boss had grumbled yesterday that I had been late every day this week, so I really didn't want to be late again today. Constrained by the late hour, I was forced to take an abbreviated night of sleep, and one thing my circadian clock can be said to have in common with--say--English teachers is a distaste for abbreviations.
(As an aside... In case you haven't noticed, sleep deprivation--or "sleep deprivity" as I once accidentally dubbed it in a jet-lagged moment of genius--tends to exacerbate my eccentricity. Despite not consuming alcohol or narcotics, I've managed to freak out quite a few people at late-night parties with this 'talent'.)
I eventually got to sleep, and reluctantly woke up this morning in a vain attempt to get to work on time.
And I would have, had I not lost my freaking wallet!
I searched my apartment high and low. I searched the usual places, I searched the unusual places.
I remembered that the last place I had seen my wallet was last night at Bridgehead, when I stacked it on top of my bags on the patio shortly after sitting down. What few neurons were willing to fire contemplated the possibility that I had left it there.
I might have forgotten it there last night because I was tired, right?
No, wait, I was tired on Wednesday night. I'm tired now because I was awake and alert too long last night.
Wait, last night! Yes, that's it! I'm tired now because of last night; I must therefore have been tired last night!
It is thus perfectly reasonable that I left it there last night in my defatigated stupor! Q.E.D.
I dropped my bike off at work and popped over to Bridgehead to ask if my wallet had turned up. Nope.
Well if it isn't there, then where could it be?
I looked again in my bags, and realized I had lost it. My wallet, too. :P
While it was likely to turn up again, I phoned to cancell my debit and credit cards as a precaution, while simultaneously trying to find ways to be productive as my still-grumbling boss watched on through the eyes the back of her head. While on hold, I thought about what a coincidence it was that I had the great idea just a couple of days ago to write down all the important details on the cards in my wallet in case I might lose it, and how much greater an idea it would have been if I had actually done so.
I was able to recite my card number from memory, having entered it so often on the bank's website. This was a bittersweet accomplishment, as I would have to get a new one. Unfortunately, I was already at work, and I would need two pieces of identification to get a new card from the bank--not the easiest thing to do when your ID is in your missing wallet!
I knew where my passport was at home, and the guy on the phone helped me brainstorm other pieces of ID.
"Would a photo of me in the newpaper work?" No, he replied, to my chagrin. I managed to identify a suitable second piece--but they were both still at home.
Luckily, I had forgotten my wallet at home one day last week, which taught me to stash a bit of lunch money in my office lest it happen again (A second lesson was which of the places I frequent on Elgin street were and weren't willing to take a rare IOU from a loyal customer; in the case of those that weren't, I suppose I should say "frequented"). But it being Friday, the ten dollars in the small manila envelope would not stretch very far as I wait for the banks to re-open on Monday.
Despite being tired, groggy, grouchy and behind in my hours at work, I agreed to my dad's offer to meet for lunch, who covered the bill (thanks again, Dad!). This turned out being a good idea, as the ride out to our meting place gave me time to think, and sitting at the pub helped me relax. Dad and I chatted about various goings-on, and he commented that many of my recent blog entries were not as grouchy as before.
On my way back from lunch, I recontemplated my obstacles, and concluded that stopping by home to get my I.D. and visiting the bank for a new card was the way to go. I was pleased to find my documents where I expected them to be, and there was no line at the bank. The extra trip only added twenty minutes to my lunch break. I'd still have to deal with all my other cards and stuff, but not until I was absolutely sure that I had lost my wallet--I still have one of those old red-and-white OHIP cards that doesn't expire and I'd hate to have to get a new one.
Back at work, I decided to look one more time in my bags, this time actually taking things out to look beneath them, instead of whatever my defatigated doppelganger did this morning. And there was my wallet! What a relief; my frequent customer cards were safe!
Now my only problem was working five more hours at work, trying various things to keep me focused (and remembering to NOT take Gravol this time!).
The main thing on my desk today was preparing a couple of letters of refusal. This was a cathartic exercise, wherein I vigorously researched creative ways to say "no" while maintaining a polite and professional tone.
One was not so much a letter of refusal as one that said "yes, but...". Those ones can be even more fun--if time-consuming to get right.
In the end, I got my work done, clocked out, and went to Bridgehead.
For all the things that could have gone much worse today, everything really turned out pretty well. I'd be hard pressed to grouch about it!
----
Epilogue:
While typing out this blog post at Bridgehead (which is about to close), a pair of young men tried to impress the girls they were with by jumping up and slapping a street sign in an attempt to impress their lady friends. In so doing, they knocked apart the swap box on the post.
They walked away, and I corrected it. Maks did a good job of building this one; the box joints on the top piece mercilessly fell apart, and easily snapped back together with a bit of pressure.
As the patio got quieter (and the crowd on the street rowdier), I moved inside, and overheard a gentleman talk to the server about a bracelet he got from the swap box which gave him some sort of energy or something. It sounded spiritual, so I tuned it out.
But when the man turned around, I noticed that the bracelet in question was one which I had placed in the swap box! I told him of the bracelet's origins, and he told me of its continuing story:
[continued from outside, as Bridgehead has now closed]
Apparently, this gentleman had once been fairly overweight and had done a lot of work to get himself down to his current, average size. About three and a half weeks ago, he was in a slump and knew that it was [then] or never to lose that last bit of weight.
Finding the bracelet in the swap box gave him the extra motivation to start jogging.
Interestingly enough, the bracelet--an orange "livestrong"-style rubber band with the words "i count" on it that I had picked up from a convention (my vulgar attempt to slice out the letter "o" on another copy and paste it back together had failed) was actually an advertising gimmick for some brand of step counters--an exercise tool. The phrase "i count" was a reference to counting one's steps.
It's quite the coincidence that it had this very effect, even though I had planted it in the Swap Box on its own!
Now to go home and sleep.
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
The skinny on Parking
So I attended today's Transportation Committee meeting to discuss the surprise change in the City's parking policy.
To recap, the surprise was that the changes to the parking policy were implemented as part of the 2008 budget, with scarcely any consultation. The changes were to eliminate the free evening (after 5:30 p.m.) and weekend parking, and to increase the hourly rate from $2.50 to $3. They would also introduce metered parking to three new areas of the city (on Wellington in Hintonburg, on Beechwood, and in Old Ottawa South).
As a cyclist, I really couldn't have cared less about this decision, except that petitions sprung up everywhere to retain free night and evening parking. I was surprised at how much fire erupted from changes to parking regulations, while the annual transit fare increases never really built up any critical mass of energy. I asked myself, rhetorically, "why aren't there any petitions for free transit service on nights and weekends?"
So two weeks ago, when I learned that there would be a meeting of Transportation Committee to discuss (and possibly reconsider) this move, I immediately e-mailed the committee coordinator and asked to be put on the speaker's list. Even though this was a week before the Committee's agenda came out, I still didn't get a chance to make my delegation until after lunch.
By the start of the meeting, 40 people or groups had registered to make a five-minute delegation, and that number approached 50 toward the remainder of the meeting.
Early on, I could tell that I wasn't going to speak at least until after lunch, so I decided to leave for the morning after the second or third delegation, until lunch. Nevetheless, here are some of my observations:
THE CIRCUS
The meeting started off at around 10:10 a.m. with a fifteen-minute-or-so procedural debate.
One councillor moved a motion to suspend the rules of procedure to consider the item in question (this is because it would be a reconsideration of an earlier decision--the 2008 budget--so required a 3/4 majority to be reconsidered). But another councillor (Jacques Legendre, I believe) wanted to defer this decision until after Committee had heard from the delegations.
Legendre's reasoning for deferral was that if Committee ended up not waiving the rules of procedure, Committee wouldn't be able to hear from the delegations. Of course, if they ended up not waiving the rules of procedure, and therefore couldn't reconsider the parking decision, everybody's time would have been wasted sitting through these delegations.
The motion to defer was defeated, and the motion to reconsider was passed.
Next, City Staff (primarily Michael Flainek of the Traffic and Parking Operations branch) presented their report, which was essentially an exercise in justifying this cash-grab after the fact. (Even though I don't mind the fare raises, I still have to agree that it is a cash-grab, and that it wasn't made democratically)
I didn't pay too much attention to it, but two things caught my ear:
- Apparently, evening parking is nearing capacity (which is a good example of a problem for which fee raises would be a reasonable solution. Revenue generation is a bad example)
- Also, apparently for every 10% raise in parking fees, transit use goes up by 1-2% (I didn't write that one down, but it was along those lines.)
THE DELEGATIONS
I took note of some of the more memorable points made during delegations.
Lori Mellor, Preston Street BIA: (paraphrased)
- "We want people who commute by car to stop by on their way to and from work" (Though isn't the City's vision to discourage people commuting by car?)
- "The problem on Saturdays is attracting more customers ... many of our stores aren't open on Saturdays" (So parking fares on Saturdays is going to scare away the customers who currently don't come to your closed stores?)
Peggy Ducharme, Downtown Rideau BIA, Mr. Blatherwick, consultant hired by DRBIA: (started 13:15)
- This BIA (and the merchants it represents) is actually calling for metered parking to be added to their area. This is what metered parking is all about: discouraging staff and lingerers from parking on the street all day, and encouraging opportunities for customers to park.
- They also want to "Reclaim curbside space", by removing bus bays and taxi stands. They later elaborated that they want more flexible street use outside of peak hours.
- They also commissioned Mr. Blatherwick (didn't get his first name) to do a study on parking in the area. The study started last spring and is ongoing.
- According to this study, there is an even split of people who park less than three hours and more than three hours. 55% of customers for the area arrive by car, 14-15% by transit. 1/3 of businesses have most business on weekends, 1/3 during the week, and 1/3 spread evenly between weekends and the week.
Jasna Jennings, ByWard BIA: (13:41-14:00)
- They had 5,000 people sign their online petition. This comment was immediately followed up by a comment that "tens of thousands of people" were getting involved in this debate.
- Jasna's spirited comments elicited applause from the peanut gallery.
- Jasna commented that the estimated increase in revenues is $4.1 million, whereas the cost to implement the changes is over $6 million. Councillor Bloess's responded with a comment that one is from the Operating budget and the other from the Capital budget, and Mr. Flainek pointed out that the Pay & Display machines (one of the bigger parts of the $6M figure) typically pay themselves off after 5 years, and last 10-15 years. Nevertheless, both are being incurred in the 2008 budget. I still don't understand this.
Rev. David Crawley, St. George's Anglican Church (Metcalfe & Gloucester):
- The church issue was a popular one. Churches' big day is Sunday, and their parking parishioners may now be forced to pay for parking. This is compounded because 60% of this congregation's members are from outside the core, and therefore "must" drive.
- Later on, on CBC Radio's All In A Day, host Adrian Harewood spent a lot of time talking about the Church issue (note to self: contact these people next time I want to do an SMAP event!)
- Crawley pointed out that it's not just a Sunday issue. There are events on all nights of the week, including choir practise.
Jacques Legendre played a really dastardly trick on the Reverend. He asked, roughly, "Do you have any suggestions to remedy the situation, specifically with regard to churches?"
He didn't specify what "the situation" was. But his question assumed that the fare increase and extension of hours would be implemented, and that "the problem" is that this will harm churches. Really, "the situation" is that this shouldn't have been done in the first place, and "the problem" can be solved by reversing it.
Unfortunately, Crawley took the bait and responded based on the assumption. He said he couldn't respond purely based on the church angle, because it was a much larger issue.
Doug Casey, Charlesfort Developments: (started 14:13)
- As a developer, Casey wants more people to move downtown.
- He promoted smart growth, perhaps the only presenter to use the term. I didn't hear the term "global warming" (or its variants) once the whole time.
- He pointed out that Kent and Lyon have become extensions of the Queensway, and it's difficult to get anybody to feel at home there, or to have a pedestrian-friendly retail area on those streets
It's interesting he talks about Smart Growth though, because one of the points of Smart Growth is that you put residents and commercial areas in the same place. One of the assumptions in this whole debate is that we apparently want people to live in the suburbs and travel all the way downtown to shop. Not only that, but we want them to take their cars to do it!
If you ask me, deterring people from driving downtown could actually encourage more places to open up in the suburbs, closer to where suburbanites live. After all, suburban houses aren't going to go away.
Gerry LePage, Bank Street BIA: (started 14:23)
- As much as I hate what this guy's BIA does and lobby's council for, his speech today was awesome. For once, I actually agreed with pretty much everything he said. Gerry gets the RealGrouchy Award for Creative Grouchiness for this speech. It was loud, angry, and didn't hold back for the sake of pleasantries.
- Gerry started off by pinning this move on suburban councillors. I'm too lazy to check the votes, but I suspect he's right. (The counterargument that "suburbanites pay when they park downtown, too! Is bullshit, if you ask me)
- He also questioned the attention paid on such a meagre figure, paraphrased: "You can't make $4 million out of a $2 billion budget and all of a sudden the City will stop?" (Though I've heard similar amounts of debate over a mere $50,000)
- "This is not a parking issue, not a financial issue, but a community issue." (paraphrased)
- "Bad policy, in part or in whole, is still bad policy." (paraphrased)
- Mr. LePage sits on the City's Business Advisory Committee, and the Committee was never consulted about this, other than the general consultation on the budget. If individual businesses were notified, it was by the BIAs, not by the City.
- The $6 million expense to implement the changes is a known figure, but how do we know about the $4.1 million projected revenue? Since we don't currently charge for those times, how are we able to predict the traffic patterns? Are the traffic estimates used for the revenue estimates from weekday counts or weekend counts? (an EXCELLENT point).
- The Innes Road area (where Mr. LePage owns a pharmacy) has a higher density of retail space than downtown. At what point does a built up area warrant meters? People who shop downtown are paying a surtax to shop there.
- This last point spurred some debate with Innes Ward Councillor Rainer Bloess. Bloess pointed out that these suburban stores have their own parking, which they must pay for, and that expense must be passed on to the customer.
- Unfortunately, Mr. LePage didn't respond as I would have: First, the suburban stores have lower property tax assessments, and therefore lower taxes. Second, (downtown) stores that don't provide parking have to pay cash-in-lieu-of-parking fees to the City.
- Diane Deans had a long response to Mr. LePage's delegation. In my notes, I summarized it with "boo hoo, my feelings are hurt by your tone." Technically, councillors are only supposed to ask questions of delegations, not make points. Deans' "question" went on for a couple of minutes, and Chair McRae didn't cut her off, as she should have (and often does for urban councillors). During her question, the person next to me asked where the question was. I replied to him "It's a suburban question; it has a long commute."
LePage's point, which he iterated in response to Deans' hurt feelings, was this: He wants an equitable parking policy. What is presented here is analagous to a surtax on downtown.
When you factor in the Province's recent refusal to address the property tax inequity, I must say that I agree 100% that suburbs are getting a free ride on the backs of downtowners.
THE RESULT:
I left after LePage's consultation, but the meeting disposition (a record of what decisions were made, which is available before the formal minutes) is available on the City's website here. The minutes will be posted on this page when they are available.
I saw them this afternoon, and I laughed out loud:
So, in order to solve the problem of an unexpected rate increase from $2.50 to $3.00, they raised it to $3.25! That is so hilarious I laughed out loud.
Now, this is just the Committee's recommendation to Council. Council will still have to go through the same rigmarole, but without the delegations.
And at the end of the day, I'm a cyclist who's only paid for parking once in his entire life, and I don't really care how this ends up. So all I can really do is sit back, watch, and laugh at the hilarious hole that Council will inevitably dig deeper.
- RG>
To recap, the surprise was that the changes to the parking policy were implemented as part of the 2008 budget, with scarcely any consultation. The changes were to eliminate the free evening (after 5:30 p.m.) and weekend parking, and to increase the hourly rate from $2.50 to $3. They would also introduce metered parking to three new areas of the city (on Wellington in Hintonburg, on Beechwood, and in Old Ottawa South).
As a cyclist, I really couldn't have cared less about this decision, except that petitions sprung up everywhere to retain free night and evening parking. I was surprised at how much fire erupted from changes to parking regulations, while the annual transit fare increases never really built up any critical mass of energy. I asked myself, rhetorically, "why aren't there any petitions for free transit service on nights and weekends?"
So two weeks ago, when I learned that there would be a meeting of Transportation Committee to discuss (and possibly reconsider) this move, I immediately e-mailed the committee coordinator and asked to be put on the speaker's list. Even though this was a week before the Committee's agenda came out, I still didn't get a chance to make my delegation until after lunch.
By the start of the meeting, 40 people or groups had registered to make a five-minute delegation, and that number approached 50 toward the remainder of the meeting.
Early on, I could tell that I wasn't going to speak at least until after lunch, so I decided to leave for the morning after the second or third delegation, until lunch. Nevetheless, here are some of my observations:
THE CIRCUS
The meeting started off at around 10:10 a.m. with a fifteen-minute-or-so procedural debate.
One councillor moved a motion to suspend the rules of procedure to consider the item in question (this is because it would be a reconsideration of an earlier decision--the 2008 budget--so required a 3/4 majority to be reconsidered). But another councillor (Jacques Legendre, I believe) wanted to defer this decision until after Committee had heard from the delegations.
Legendre's reasoning for deferral was that if Committee ended up not waiving the rules of procedure, Committee wouldn't be able to hear from the delegations. Of course, if they ended up not waiving the rules of procedure, and therefore couldn't reconsider the parking decision, everybody's time would have been wasted sitting through these delegations.
The motion to defer was defeated, and the motion to reconsider was passed.
Next, City Staff (primarily Michael Flainek of the Traffic and Parking Operations branch) presented their report, which was essentially an exercise in justifying this cash-grab after the fact. (Even though I don't mind the fare raises, I still have to agree that it is a cash-grab, and that it wasn't made democratically)
I didn't pay too much attention to it, but two things caught my ear:
- Apparently, evening parking is nearing capacity (which is a good example of a problem for which fee raises would be a reasonable solution. Revenue generation is a bad example)
- Also, apparently for every 10% raise in parking fees, transit use goes up by 1-2% (I didn't write that one down, but it was along those lines.)
THE DELEGATIONS
I took note of some of the more memorable points made during delegations.
Lori Mellor, Preston Street BIA: (paraphrased)
- "We want people who commute by car to stop by on their way to and from work" (Though isn't the City's vision to discourage people commuting by car?)
- "The problem on Saturdays is attracting more customers ... many of our stores aren't open on Saturdays" (So parking fares on Saturdays is going to scare away the customers who currently don't come to your closed stores?)
Peggy Ducharme, Downtown Rideau BIA, Mr. Blatherwick, consultant hired by DRBIA: (started 13:15)
- This BIA (and the merchants it represents) is actually calling for metered parking to be added to their area. This is what metered parking is all about: discouraging staff and lingerers from parking on the street all day, and encouraging opportunities for customers to park.
- They also want to "Reclaim curbside space", by removing bus bays and taxi stands. They later elaborated that they want more flexible street use outside of peak hours.
- They also commissioned Mr. Blatherwick (didn't get his first name) to do a study on parking in the area. The study started last spring and is ongoing.
- According to this study, there is an even split of people who park less than three hours and more than three hours. 55% of customers for the area arrive by car, 14-15% by transit. 1/3 of businesses have most business on weekends, 1/3 during the week, and 1/3 spread evenly between weekends and the week.
Jasna Jennings, ByWard BIA: (13:41-14:00)
- They had 5,000 people sign their online petition. This comment was immediately followed up by a comment that "tens of thousands of people" were getting involved in this debate.
- Jasna's spirited comments elicited applause from the peanut gallery.
- Jasna commented that the estimated increase in revenues is $4.1 million, whereas the cost to implement the changes is over $6 million. Councillor Bloess's responded with a comment that one is from the Operating budget and the other from the Capital budget, and Mr. Flainek pointed out that the Pay & Display machines (one of the bigger parts of the $6M figure) typically pay themselves off after 5 years, and last 10-15 years. Nevertheless, both are being incurred in the 2008 budget. I still don't understand this.
Rev. David Crawley, St. George's Anglican Church (Metcalfe & Gloucester):
- The church issue was a popular one. Churches' big day is Sunday, and their parking parishioners may now be forced to pay for parking. This is compounded because 60% of this congregation's members are from outside the core, and therefore "must" drive.
- Later on, on CBC Radio's All In A Day, host Adrian Harewood spent a lot of time talking about the Church issue (note to self: contact these people next time I want to do an SMAP event!)
- Crawley pointed out that it's not just a Sunday issue. There are events on all nights of the week, including choir practise.
Jacques Legendre played a really dastardly trick on the Reverend. He asked, roughly, "Do you have any suggestions to remedy the situation, specifically with regard to churches?"
He didn't specify what "the situation" was. But his question assumed that the fare increase and extension of hours would be implemented, and that "the problem" is that this will harm churches. Really, "the situation" is that this shouldn't have been done in the first place, and "the problem" can be solved by reversing it.
Unfortunately, Crawley took the bait and responded based on the assumption. He said he couldn't respond purely based on the church angle, because it was a much larger issue.
Doug Casey, Charlesfort Developments: (started 14:13)
- As a developer, Casey wants more people to move downtown.
- He promoted smart growth, perhaps the only presenter to use the term. I didn't hear the term "global warming" (or its variants) once the whole time.
- He pointed out that Kent and Lyon have become extensions of the Queensway, and it's difficult to get anybody to feel at home there, or to have a pedestrian-friendly retail area on those streets
It's interesting he talks about Smart Growth though, because one of the points of Smart Growth is that you put residents and commercial areas in the same place. One of the assumptions in this whole debate is that we apparently want people to live in the suburbs and travel all the way downtown to shop. Not only that, but we want them to take their cars to do it!
If you ask me, deterring people from driving downtown could actually encourage more places to open up in the suburbs, closer to where suburbanites live. After all, suburban houses aren't going to go away.
Gerry LePage, Bank Street BIA: (started 14:23)
- As much as I hate what this guy's BIA does and lobby's council for, his speech today was awesome. For once, I actually agreed with pretty much everything he said. Gerry gets the RealGrouchy Award for Creative Grouchiness for this speech. It was loud, angry, and didn't hold back for the sake of pleasantries.
- Gerry started off by pinning this move on suburban councillors. I'm too lazy to check the votes, but I suspect he's right. (The counterargument that "suburbanites pay when they park downtown, too! Is bullshit, if you ask me)
- He also questioned the attention paid on such a meagre figure, paraphrased: "You can't make $4 million out of a $2 billion budget and all of a sudden the City will stop?" (Though I've heard similar amounts of debate over a mere $50,000)
- "This is not a parking issue, not a financial issue, but a community issue." (paraphrased)
- "Bad policy, in part or in whole, is still bad policy." (paraphrased)
- Mr. LePage sits on the City's Business Advisory Committee, and the Committee was never consulted about this, other than the general consultation on the budget. If individual businesses were notified, it was by the BIAs, not by the City.
- The $6 million expense to implement the changes is a known figure, but how do we know about the $4.1 million projected revenue? Since we don't currently charge for those times, how are we able to predict the traffic patterns? Are the traffic estimates used for the revenue estimates from weekday counts or weekend counts? (an EXCELLENT point).
- The Innes Road area (where Mr. LePage owns a pharmacy) has a higher density of retail space than downtown. At what point does a built up area warrant meters? People who shop downtown are paying a surtax to shop there.
- This last point spurred some debate with Innes Ward Councillor Rainer Bloess. Bloess pointed out that these suburban stores have their own parking, which they must pay for, and that expense must be passed on to the customer.
- Unfortunately, Mr. LePage didn't respond as I would have: First, the suburban stores have lower property tax assessments, and therefore lower taxes. Second, (downtown) stores that don't provide parking have to pay cash-in-lieu-of-parking fees to the City.
- Diane Deans had a long response to Mr. LePage's delegation. In my notes, I summarized it with "boo hoo, my feelings are hurt by your tone." Technically, councillors are only supposed to ask questions of delegations, not make points. Deans' "question" went on for a couple of minutes, and Chair McRae didn't cut her off, as she should have (and often does for urban councillors). During her question, the person next to me asked where the question was. I replied to him "It's a suburban question; it has a long commute."
LePage's point, which he iterated in response to Deans' hurt feelings, was this: He wants an equitable parking policy. What is presented here is analagous to a surtax on downtown.
When you factor in the Province's recent refusal to address the property tax inequity, I must say that I agree 100% that suburbs are getting a free ride on the backs of downtowners.
THE RESULT:
I left after LePage's consultation, but the meeting disposition (a record of what decisions were made, which is available before the formal minutes) is available on the City's website here. The minutes will be posted on this page when they are available.
I saw them this afternoon, and I laughed out loud:
a. that the 2008 rates and hours for on-street parking be adjusted so that :
i. There is no charge for Sunday parking in commercial areas of the City;
ii. Hours are reduced for on-street parking to 7:00 p.m. Monday to Saturday; and
iii. The rate for on-street parking increase to $3.25/hour beginning October 1, 2008...
So, in order to solve the problem of an unexpected rate increase from $2.50 to $3.00, they raised it to $3.25! That is so hilarious I laughed out loud.
Now, this is just the Committee's recommendation to Council. Council will still have to go through the same rigmarole, but without the delegations.
And at the end of the day, I'm a cyclist who's only paid for parking once in his entire life, and I don't really care how this ends up. So all I can really do is sit back, watch, and laugh at the hilarious hole that Council will inevitably dig deeper.
- RG>
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
The $62 Frozen Dinner
A rare double-post tonight!
Tonight was one of those nights where I had to do the laundry if I wanted to have anything clean to wear tomorrow. So I went to the laundromat down the block and put my clothes in the washer, then came back home while the cycle was going.
It wasn't until after I had taken off my winter boots and jacket that I remembered I wanted to go to the corner store to get a particular style of chips. Since I was fairly warm and needed to cool off, I just went out with my walking shoes, my sweater, and a fleece hat.
The corner store didn't have the chips I wanted, because the delivery truck was delayed from the snowstorm. So I got a frozen dinner instead.
The price on the label was $1.99.
When I got back to my place, I realized that I had left my keys in my jacket. The jacket I wasn't wearing. Crap.
I rang the neighbour's doorbell to get him to let me in to the building, to no avail. Luckily, I did have my cell phone on me, so I tried calling the landlord. But between no answer at home and his office door not being cleared of snow for the last couple days, I concluded that he wasn't around. Crapcrapcrap.
After dropping my frozen dinner box into the snowed-over recycling bin by my front door (in this weather, I don't have to worry about it thawing!), I stepped in to the pizza place next door to "wait". What for, I don't quite recall, but maybe it was just so I could collect my thoughts.
Collect them I did, as I remembered that I had a load of laundry going. I headed to the laundromat to put my clothes into the dryer as I pondered further.
I remembered that I hadn't tried calling my landlord's cell phone. So I called it on a lark.
Success! He answered! He said it wouldn't bother him at all to come over to unlock my front door...only he's out of town. Out of town!
I had anticipated this, so I realized that my only reasonable option was to call a locksmith. So I did, and I waited next door for him to come. One interesting thing he asked me is if I had called another locksmith, as apparently some people call a bunch of them in hopes that one will come earlier than the others. This I had not done.
I waited.
And waited.
He did finally come, and it took him less than a minute to open my front door. As I got into my apartment (the door of which I had left unlocked for the "brief" trip to the corner store), I put on my jacket and asked him how much I owed him.
Sixty bucks.
Yowza! I was expecting $40 or so, but sixty? Oh, well. So I grabbed my wallet.
"You take VISA, right?"
"No, just cash."
Shucks, because all the cash I had on me was twenty five bucks and a bunch of laundry change. He was kind enough to drive me to the nearest bank machine, so I wouldn't have to pay the exorbitant charges for using a white-label machine. He couldn't drive me back, but that's fine, as I had my jacket (though no scarf or gloves...brrr).
I got inside, and put my frozen dinner into the microwave.
It didn't taste like it was worth $62, but I sure felt good when I finally got to eat it!
- RG>
Tonight was one of those nights where I had to do the laundry if I wanted to have anything clean to wear tomorrow. So I went to the laundromat down the block and put my clothes in the washer, then came back home while the cycle was going.
It wasn't until after I had taken off my winter boots and jacket that I remembered I wanted to go to the corner store to get a particular style of chips. Since I was fairly warm and needed to cool off, I just went out with my walking shoes, my sweater, and a fleece hat.
The corner store didn't have the chips I wanted, because the delivery truck was delayed from the snowstorm. So I got a frozen dinner instead.
The price on the label was $1.99.
When I got back to my place, I realized that I had left my keys in my jacket. The jacket I wasn't wearing. Crap.
I rang the neighbour's doorbell to get him to let me in to the building, to no avail. Luckily, I did have my cell phone on me, so I tried calling the landlord. But between no answer at home and his office door not being cleared of snow for the last couple days, I concluded that he wasn't around. Crapcrapcrap.
After dropping my frozen dinner box into the snowed-over recycling bin by my front door (in this weather, I don't have to worry about it thawing!), I stepped in to the pizza place next door to "wait". What for, I don't quite recall, but maybe it was just so I could collect my thoughts.
Collect them I did, as I remembered that I had a load of laundry going. I headed to the laundromat to put my clothes into the dryer as I pondered further.
I remembered that I hadn't tried calling my landlord's cell phone. So I called it on a lark.
Success! He answered! He said it wouldn't bother him at all to come over to unlock my front door...only he's out of town. Out of town!
I had anticipated this, so I realized that my only reasonable option was to call a locksmith. So I did, and I waited next door for him to come. One interesting thing he asked me is if I had called another locksmith, as apparently some people call a bunch of them in hopes that one will come earlier than the others. This I had not done.
I waited.
And waited.
He did finally come, and it took him less than a minute to open my front door. As I got into my apartment (the door of which I had left unlocked for the "brief" trip to the corner store), I put on my jacket and asked him how much I owed him.
Sixty bucks.
Yowza! I was expecting $40 or so, but sixty? Oh, well. So I grabbed my wallet.
"You take VISA, right?"
"No, just cash."
Shucks, because all the cash I had on me was twenty five bucks and a bunch of laundry change. He was kind enough to drive me to the nearest bank machine, so I wouldn't have to pay the exorbitant charges for using a white-label machine. He couldn't drive me back, but that's fine, as I had my jacket (though no scarf or gloves...brrr).
I got inside, and put my frozen dinner into the microwave.
It didn't taste like it was worth $62, but I sure felt good when I finally got to eat it!
The $62 Frozen Dinner:
- RG>
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Climate: a much higher priority than it should be
I just received yet another of those myriad e-mails from friends, acquaintances, and, presumably, random people who coughed while typing and somehow entered my e-mail address.
It's one of those e-mails that invites you to get involved with this campaign, or go to that event, or to otherwise bitch about somebody's inaction climate change. Heck, this week's Charlatan even has a full-page article on how you can save the world if you stop using plastic bags.
Fancy that, eh? And you didn't even have to go out and buy that Prius!
Nobody's really asked me whether or not I believe in climate change, but that hasn't stopped me from telling them that I don't care.
For me, environmentalism is mainly a byproduct of pragmatism. That is to say, any choice I could make for the benefit of the environment is likely to have other benefits that affect me in much more direct and concrete ways.
Consider my decision to use the bicycle as my primary mode of transportation. What are the benefits of riding a bicycle?
Well, for one, I'm not contributing to the smog problem. That means that it is slightly easier to breathe in my neighbourhood and city. That's an environmental benefit. But considering I live on a major street in downtown Ottawa, the difference is negligible.
My community benefits on a financial basis as well: a bicycle is much smaller and lighter than a motor vehicle (including a bus). Having a smaller vehicle means I contribute less to traffic congestion (a benefit you don't get with low- or zero-emission cars), and having a lighter vehicle means the roads I travel on will take longer to deteriorate. These mean it will be longer before the municipality has to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild the roads I use, and when they do, there will be less need for additional lanes.
But all that means is that property taxes in my city might be very very slightly lower in a decade or two.
A bicycle can't travel as fast as a motor vehicle, and therefore my trips either must take more time, be less frequent, or go less far. Some might see this as a drawback, but it also acts as a benefit, as it requires me to plan my trips better, and consider what I choose as destinations. As proof to that, I rarely go more than 2 kilometres from my home. When you consider that the average person travels four times as far in a day today than they did sixty years ago, and there are many more people, a heckuva lot of roads need to be built to accommodate that traffic. That's extremely expensive for taxpayers.
So by making this choice to cycle, I may have reduced everyone's tax bill by a couple pennies over a decade, not counting inflation. Don't bother giving me an award just for that.
But let's get to the person who really matters in today's society: me.
By cycling, I am getting cardiovascular exercise, thereby improving my health and increasing my life expectancy. If my trips were longer than my average 15-minutes-in-traffic rides, my body would release more serotonin and I'd feel happier, too.
A cynic would say, "If you care so much about your health, why do you eat so much unhealthy food? And why don't you get a doctor to check out that twitch in your eye?" Okay, the twitch thing I should get checked out, but our cynic is correct on the other point. Being healthy and active simply is not a high priority for me, nor is it for the average North American.
While some people put time out of their day to go to the gym or to jog, I cycle precisely to avoid this. Since I need to get to work anyway, why don't I get my exercise while going to work? That's all there is. It saves me time, and saves me having to worry whether I should dedicate a specific time to exercise to improve my health.
Cycling saves me money, too. If I could own and use a car for as little as it costs to go by bike, I would certainly consider it. But even the bus is more expensive: in 2006, my total transportation costs for all modes totaled $706--less than twelve monthly adult bus passes.
While society tends to push money as the most important goal, for me it's time. I don't believe in an afterlife, and I might die in sixty years or in sixty hours--so I'd better make good use of the time I know I have--right now.
There's a wonderful quote by Ivan Illich reprinted in the book "Divorce Your Car!" by Katie Alvord (and probably on my blog once or twice):
That bolded part is the most important to me (as much as I get a kick out of the five-miles-per-hour bit): There are some people who actually spend hours each day commuting to and from their boring jobs. To me, this is insane. Commuting is most often a means, not an end.
A means? To what?
To work, which itself is often just a means to get money (which is an end goal only for the most pathological of people). There have been many attempts to make commuting less stressful and more productive (for example, the car radio), but at the end of the day, if you're not deriving pleasure from traveling from one place to another, and if you do a lot of that, then you should think about how your life is structured.
If you live your life in such a way that you don't have to spend so much of it getting from one place to another, you'll have more time, more money (or less need to spend time earning money), and you may have helped keep the mean global temperature from increasing by one degree over the next fifty years.
Gotcha!
Remember, this blog post is about Global Warming; cycling is just an illustration. Compared to my arguments based on pure hedonism, greed, and utility, the altruistic "prevent climate change" argument is pretty weak.
And that's just for the argument to get one person to ride a bicycle. Individuals making changes in their own lives will never solve more than a fraction of the world's problems. There are also many institutional, industrial, and international problems that require change. The changes necessary to address these problems might also affect climate change, but somehow I doubt that a person in a war-torn Middle-Eastern country would really care to sign your petition to prevent Global Warming by reducing bombing in their country to 5% below 1990 levels.
Whenever I hear someone citing "Climate Change", or "Greenhouse Gases", or "Kyoto Protocol", I get the same feeling in my gut as when I hear "Mandatory minimum sentences", "War on Drugs", or "Tough on Crime". It shows that they haven't got their priorities straight.
Like any other buzzword, these terms are used by people to draw attention to themselves, to their groups, or to the events they are organizing. Were these people to actually look at the goals of these events, how to achieve them, and how to sell them, they might actually elicit some real change.
- RG>
It's one of those e-mails that invites you to get involved with this campaign, or go to that event, or to otherwise bitch about somebody's inaction climate change. Heck, this week's Charlatan even has a full-page article on how you can save the world if you stop using plastic bags.
Fancy that, eh? And you didn't even have to go out and buy that Prius!
Nobody's really asked me whether or not I believe in climate change, but that hasn't stopped me from telling them that I don't care.
For me, environmentalism is mainly a byproduct of pragmatism. That is to say, any choice I could make for the benefit of the environment is likely to have other benefits that affect me in much more direct and concrete ways.
Consider my decision to use the bicycle as my primary mode of transportation. What are the benefits of riding a bicycle?
Well, for one, I'm not contributing to the smog problem. That means that it is slightly easier to breathe in my neighbourhood and city. That's an environmental benefit. But considering I live on a major street in downtown Ottawa, the difference is negligible.
My community benefits on a financial basis as well: a bicycle is much smaller and lighter than a motor vehicle (including a bus). Having a smaller vehicle means I contribute less to traffic congestion (a benefit you don't get with low- or zero-emission cars), and having a lighter vehicle means the roads I travel on will take longer to deteriorate. These mean it will be longer before the municipality has to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild the roads I use, and when they do, there will be less need for additional lanes.
But all that means is that property taxes in my city might be very very slightly lower in a decade or two.
A bicycle can't travel as fast as a motor vehicle, and therefore my trips either must take more time, be less frequent, or go less far. Some might see this as a drawback, but it also acts as a benefit, as it requires me to plan my trips better, and consider what I choose as destinations. As proof to that, I rarely go more than 2 kilometres from my home. When you consider that the average person travels four times as far in a day today than they did sixty years ago, and there are many more people, a heckuva lot of roads need to be built to accommodate that traffic. That's extremely expensive for taxpayers.
So by making this choice to cycle, I may have reduced everyone's tax bill by a couple pennies over a decade, not counting inflation. Don't bother giving me an award just for that.
But let's get to the person who really matters in today's society: me.
By cycling, I am getting cardiovascular exercise, thereby improving my health and increasing my life expectancy. If my trips were longer than my average 15-minutes-in-traffic rides, my body would release more serotonin and I'd feel happier, too.
A cynic would say, "If you care so much about your health, why do you eat so much unhealthy food? And why don't you get a doctor to check out that twitch in your eye?" Okay, the twitch thing I should get checked out, but our cynic is correct on the other point. Being healthy and active simply is not a high priority for me, nor is it for the average North American.
While some people put time out of their day to go to the gym or to jog, I cycle precisely to avoid this. Since I need to get to work anyway, why don't I get my exercise while going to work? That's all there is. It saves me time, and saves me having to worry whether I should dedicate a specific time to exercise to improve my health.
Cycling saves me money, too. If I could own and use a car for as little as it costs to go by bike, I would certainly consider it. But even the bus is more expensive: in 2006, my total transportation costs for all modes totaled $706--less than twelve monthly adult bus passes.
While society tends to push money as the most important goal, for me it's time. I don't believe in an afterlife, and I might die in sixty years or in sixty hours--so I'd better make good use of the time I know I have--right now.
There's a wonderful quote by Ivan Illich reprinted in the book "Divorce Your Car!" by Katie Alvord (and probably on my blog once or twice):
The typical American male devotes more than 1,600 hours a year to his car. He sits in it while it goes and while it is idling. He parks it and searches for it. He earns the money to put down on it and to meet the monthly installments. He works to pay for fuel, tolls, insurance, taxes, and traffic tickets. He spends four out of his 16 waking hours on the road or gathering his resources for it. And this figure does not take into account the time consumed by other activities dictated by transport: time spent in hospitals, traffic courts, and garages; time spent watching automobile commercials or attending consumer education meetings to improve the quality of the next buy. The model American puts in 1,600 hours to get 7.500 miles; less than five miles per hour. (Ivan Illich, Energy and Equity, 30-31.)
That bolded part is the most important to me (as much as I get a kick out of the five-miles-per-hour bit): There are some people who actually spend hours each day commuting to and from their boring jobs. To me, this is insane. Commuting is most often a means, not an end.
A means? To what?
To work, which itself is often just a means to get money (which is an end goal only for the most pathological of people). There have been many attempts to make commuting less stressful and more productive (for example, the car radio), but at the end of the day, if you're not deriving pleasure from traveling from one place to another, and if you do a lot of that, then you should think about how your life is structured.
If you live your life in such a way that you don't have to spend so much of it getting from one place to another, you'll have more time, more money (or less need to spend time earning money), and you may have helped keep the mean global temperature from increasing by one degree over the next fifty years.
Gotcha!
Remember, this blog post is about Global Warming; cycling is just an illustration. Compared to my arguments based on pure hedonism, greed, and utility, the altruistic "prevent climate change" argument is pretty weak.
And that's just for the argument to get one person to ride a bicycle. Individuals making changes in their own lives will never solve more than a fraction of the world's problems. There are also many institutional, industrial, and international problems that require change. The changes necessary to address these problems might also affect climate change, but somehow I doubt that a person in a war-torn Middle-Eastern country would really care to sign your petition to prevent Global Warming by reducing bombing in their country to 5% below 1990 levels.
Whenever I hear someone citing "Climate Change", or "Greenhouse Gases", or "Kyoto Protocol", I get the same feeling in my gut as when I hear "Mandatory minimum sentences", "War on Drugs", or "Tough on Crime". It shows that they haven't got their priorities straight.
Like any other buzzword, these terms are used by people to draw attention to themselves, to their groups, or to the events they are organizing. Were these people to actually look at the goals of these events, how to achieve them, and how to sell them, they might actually elicit some real change.
- RG>
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
