A Hypothetical Workaround for Tracking a Canadian Election in "Real Time"

Imagine an open source application that has two functions:
1) Allows the user to make a post to Twitter with a hash-tag indicating how that user voted (like #VotedCPC #VotedLPC #VotedNDP #VotedGRN #VotedBLOC #VotedOTHER) , and
2) Aggregation, for personal use of that user, of the counts of all the hash-tags in the set for a period of time (for example Election Day).

Then the permitted action of "the transmission by an individual, on a non-commercial basis on what is commonly known as the Internet, of his or her personal political views." would be enabled and the aggregated, publically avaliable information, which is not an "opinion survey of how electors voted or will vote at an election or respecting an issue with which a registered party or candidate is associated" could be viewed by an individual without being transmitted.

I'm not a lawyer, but this would seem to get around a number of restrictions. It would not be valid statistically, but it might be interesting.

Maybe for the next go around, if they don't change the law.

I'm just saying.

Education is Our Obligation

So, my daughters are embarking on a the exciting path of revolution. It makes me so proud to see them have at the Provincial Government and the School Board.

The Alberta Government in its wisdom, and on our behalf, have decided that it isn't necessary to pay for the current levels of teaching and support staff. The current budget for Education is insufficient to maintain the status quo.

Perhaps this is left-over from previous inadequate funding; poorly educated administrators and politicians at the departmental level. At least when it comes to math.

According to the recent budget release (http://education.alberta.ca/department/budget.aspx), there is a suggestion that education costs are spiralling out of control. "Over 10 years, funding to the education system has increased by 63 per cent while student enrolment has increased by three per cent." They even have graphs to prove it and on the surface it seems correct. Reality is, however, that if you look at the money spent in terms of the cost of inflation, it looks like about 4.5% per year (approximately). This number seems really close to the AWEI. In other words: this is what we would expect.

Or consider this: If we know that the cost for staffing will go up about 4.4% next year, the enrolment is estimated to go up 1.1%, and the forecast cost for operating support in 2010-2011 is 5,452,711,000 then the budget for 2011-2011 should be at least that much times 1.044 * 1.011 or 5,749,556,000.

It isn't. In fact, it is about 39,109,000 less than that (http://www.finance.alberta.ca/publications/budget/budget2011/education.pdf, the page numbered 48). This is equivalent to about 375 teachers.

Overall, the expenditure on Education is only going up about 2.8% over last year. If the cost of delivering education is going up, we need to pay that bill.

I'm just saying.

Canadian Election 2011 Research Part I

Well, we're off, again!

I don't know who to vote for so I am doing research. This is leading me to new frustration. I like the spin that parties get on some topics.

"Liberals call for immediate action to protect rail shippers; releasing a report does not constitute implementation" POSTED ON MARCH 21, 2011 (http://www.liberal.ca/newsroom/news-release/liberals-call-action-protect-rail-shippers-releasing-report-constitute-implementation/)

The article suggests that the Government, formed by the Conservative members of Parliament, are responsible for the lack of cost review. “The last costing review was conducted in 1992”

It does not mention that the last costing review was conducted under a Conservative Government. It also does not mention that from 1993 until 2006 the Liberal government did not do any costing review.

I do not like being misled this way.

I'm not saying I support the Conservatives nor am I saying I do not support the Liberals...

I'm just saying...

Parking

The position of aldermanic candidate Joe Mauro on the subject of downtown parking: "Let the BRZ "patrol and police and make secure" their area, just like the malls do their own." He then goes on to say, "I believe the downtown is it's own little entity,".

What else would you offload in this sovereignty association? Do they need to process their own sewage and collect their own garbage, too? Is this kind of divisive talk and disowning of part of the city really productive?

I'm just asking.

(For the full context, be sure to read the LethbridgeAccountability responses)

How Taxes Work: A primer for civic election.

I was reading through another raft of candidate questions this evening and I saw this socially relevant question: "...do you support existing social housing programs and initiatives to end homelessness?"

One mayoral candidate said: "These programs should not be a burden on tax payers, but a government responsibility."

And now, the short version of how taxation works.

Citizens pay taxes to some common pool. That common pool is managed by (in Canada) an elected government. That elected government spends the money on behalf of (and presumably to the benefit of) the citizens. The government is of the citizens; it IS the citizens. And the citizens are the taxpayers.

And that is the tidy little loop.

Even if that candidate meant "civic tax payers" and "another level of government's responsibility" the answer really doesn't show full comprehension of how taxes work. If another level of government is providing funding, it STILL come from our pockets!

Probably won't vote for that one, nor for anyone who doesn't understand the basic concept.

I'm just saying.

Ontario Court Strikes Down Anti-Prositution Laws

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20100928/ontario-anti-prostitution-laws-struck-down-100928/

Hurray! I have argued for years that the laws surrounding prostitution in Canada were ridiculous!

These things are illegal (for now):

Soliciting for the purposes of prostitution

Soliciting to hire a prostitute

Operating a common bawdy house (where prostitution takes place)

Living off the avails of prostitution.

See anything missing? Yeah. Prostitution. That's right prostitution is legal in Canada. You just can't advertise it, ask for it, enable it, or spend any money you might make at it.

Politicians ask us to give them a job where they use their talents and abilities to satisfy one of our needs and we pay them to do it. We fund the place where they ply their trade. They spend their take-home pay.

What's the difference? Sex.

Although we frequently get screwed by politicians, too.

I'm just saying...

Fiscal plans for Lethbridge?

Suppose I wanted to win the hearts and minds of Lethbridge voters (all 14,896 at last count), my opening volley might be "Read my lips: No new taxes!". I might strongly imply that we need to be fiscally responsible in terms of spending on capital projects. Not cheap, but frugal. I might say we have to get our priorities straight. We shouldn't have to pay extra taxes just for a , we should just lobby harder to the provincial and federal governments for more funding.

But wait?!? If the provincial government funded more projects for all communities, our provincial taxes might need to go up. If the federal government funded more projects for all communities, our federal taxes might need to go up. Whether I pay it to the city, the province, or the Receiver General for Canada it is STILL my tax dollars. The real difference (and the reality) is that local tax dollars stick around for local projects. Provincial tax dollars may end up in Leduc, Legal, and Lloydminster but not in Lethbridge. Similarly with federal tax dollars.

Project funding is a bit of a red herring anyway. We either save up a little over time until we can afford it (the basic way Lethbridge does it now) or we borrow money and pay it back with interest over time (also a sound financial tool; anyone else have a mortgage?) Doesn't necessarily mean as much because in essence it is a one-time expense.

But we can pay more taxes at other levels and maybe get that back if some other level of government needs to win votes instead of effectively and fairly serving the needs of our community with well spent local tax dollars.

Do the 2010 candidates have some actual solutions or plans or ideas for guiding our community? Or are they throwing up the smoke-screen of we shouldn't raise civic taxes if we could get it elsewhere? Go to a forum. Ask good questions. Demand good answers.

And VOTE!

Stephen