Ideeahs

English Cucumbers

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Thu, 07 Dec 2023 16:31:00 +0000

Just got back from the grocers and had this thought:

Do the English really have long cucumbers?

Apparently they are seedless as well.

Why cover them in plastic then?

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Politics Needs a Reboot

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Tue, 17 Oct 2023 20:41:00 +0000

It has been a long time since I have written something here. I feel a need to get things off my chest so I decided to use this platform to get my thoughts out.

There are many reasons as to why I want to complain about the state of politics. The reasons have all arisen over the last week of reading about various events happening around the world. From wars to much less dreadful topics. Election results. Decisions taken locally and others globally. They have all reinforced a belief which I have and which I am frustrated to have. I don't really know how to address the issue as I do not see a solution.

The issue at hands is politics. More specifically the issue is politicians. The issue is the kind of person that is attracted into serving their country and how they might change once elected.

Ever since I was a young boy I have always had a negative outlook on politics. I grew up in the Province of Quebec in Canada. When I was a child politicians used language to divide people and to gain easy votes. There was, and continues to be unfortunately, no easier topic to get people excited in this area of the world than the topic of language. It continues to this day. What I saw was my family get split apart. People who got along one day argued the next. Some became separatists. Others became federalist. They took their positions, hardened them and argued about if for decades. Only with age and seemingly a bit more wisdom did people slowly either decide to stop talking about it altogether or decide that getting along was a better outcome than shouting and throwing wine glasses at each other. I am convinced that, had politicians not amplified the messages of separation and used language as a tool to divide, my family would have not missed out on a few decades of lingering anger and suspicion. Politicians did this to them.

You could argue that my family let itself be manipulated. Yes. It was manipulated. They fell into a trap laid by the politicians of the 1970s in Quebec. They fell into it. The issue was that it was an easy trap to set. People were ripe to be swayed into one of two camps.

The laying of these traps continues today. Politicians around the world are doing it on daily basis. They do it at international, national, regional and municipal levels. These traps are the easiest method through which politicians can achieve their goals....election. Let's be clear, election is the goal. The goal is not to make the life of citizens better. It is much easier to light up the tribal fuel we all have in our bodies than it is to appeal to sense of greater good and discussion. The fuel in us only takes a spark such as a thirty second snippet on a social media platform to alight. These traps prey on religion, race, economics, nation, history, and gender. Appealing to greater good requires hours, days, weeks and many times months and years of discussion, listening, compromise and negotiation. It requires diving into details. How boring is that?

How do we change politics? How can politics start attracting people who really want what is best for their citizens? People who are willing to listen, work with those who have different opinions and move an issue forward via compromise. People who will not exploit tribalism as a means for election. How? It seems to me that people who have those skills are avoiding a career in politics as they might avoid the plague. Rather they choose to impact society through education, employment and volunteerism and they become disenfranchised with the whole system. This is evident by their lack of participation in politics and even their decision to not vote at all in growing numbers.

How do we change the electorate's demand on politicians to include intelligence and desire for compromise? Is this possible? Am I naive? Is politics doomed to always bring out and prey on the tribalism we all have within us?

I am just so tired of all the bullshit. I said in the opening that I do not know what to do. I sincerely do not. I look at who is running for office in my area and I am constantly disappointed. Leaders and elected officials are bullying each other and calling each other names in person. They do it in Parliament and various legislatures. They do it on social media. They are trying to convince me that their opponents are idiots. They complain, bitch, yell and bully. They never seem to work together, compromise and try to help each other out much less the citizens they are supposed to be working for. They continue to use the simple traps to gain our votes.

Politicians are failing us.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Banning Russian Teams and Athletes

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Fri, 01 Apr 2022 20:27:00 +0000

Speaking Tuesday to legislators in London about Wimbledon, British Sports Minister Nigel Huddleston said: "Absolutely nobody flying the flag for Russia should be allowed. Many of us would be willing and able to [allow them to] compete as non-aligned, non-flag-bearing entities. But I think it needs to go beyond that. We need some potential assurances that they are not supporters of Vladimir Putin and we are considering what requirements we may need to try and get some assurances along those lines."
(source = https://www.cbc.ca/sports/tennis/wimbledon-british-government-in-talks-about-russian-players-1.6386102)

The invasion of Ukraine by Russia has sparked much debate in the world of sports. Should Russian teams be banned from competing? Should individual Russian athletes be banned? Should teams of athletes be allowed to compete but without flag, uniform, country name, anthem, etc.?

Some athletes have said that it is unfair to mix politics and sports. They rightly state that they have trained for years and being deprived of their right to compete is unfair. They again state that they are not responsible for the actions of the Russian government.

It is indeed unfortunate for athletes to pay the price for the actions of the government of Russia. Having said that, many non-athletes are paying the price. Those living in Ukraine, Ukrainians expatriates, millions of refugees created by the war, Russian families who are losing their children to war, Russian citizens who are living in a country which is now impacted by sanctions and Russian expatriates around the world. On top of that, the world is being impacted due to the impact the war is having on food and energy prices. In other words people are paying the price....a price they did not ask to pay and do not want to pay.

Sports has always been mixed with politics, whether at the regional, national or global level. Professional teams and sporting events are located in places that have subsidized the building of stadiums or given them tax breaks. In addition to that many of the largest sporting events of the world (FIFA World Cup, Olympics, F1 Grand Prix races) are often contested in countries with dubious records. Money talks. The reasoning often given is that these events bring the world together or have some positive influence on the ruling regime of the host country. I call bullshit to these statements. Regimes don't suddenly become less autocratic, more open or friendlier because they host one of these sporting events. To boot most of the benefits don't flow to the citizens but rather into the coffers of the rulers or their buddies who gain valuable contracts to build facilities for and service the events and the tourists they attract.

So, sorry to say, but politics and sports are mixed.

Russian athletes need to feel the pain. I am especially talking to those who are living a life of privilege in Monaco, Monte Carlo, the USA, in Europe or any other country where they get to live a life they would not be able to live in their motherland.

Now, having said all of this I disagree with the UK government statement I quote at the top of this post. Individual athletes should not have to make a statement where they explicitly say they are against the Russian regime and Vladimir Putin. Doing this might endanger the lives of those who do renounce Putin and puts undue pressure on individual choice. Rather I say ban them. It should not be left to the individual.

All sports federations, all leagues should ban Russian athletes and teams. These individuals need to also feel a certain amount of pain from the terrible decisions of their government. There has been too much inconsistency in the world of sport and this needs to change.

I know it sounds simplistic, but ultimately Russians need to be made to feel enough pain that they will risk doing what it takes to revolt and change the regime in Moscow. As it stands, for most Russians, the choice between revolt and status quo has been simple - the status quo wins the day. Of course I understand this as revolt means jail or worse. The status quo is not bad enough yet. It needs to become unacceptable to Russians so that the trigger of revolt is pulled and the risk is worth the potential reward. Russians need to decide their government. Since democracy is not available to them the street is their only tool. They need to be made willing to hit the streets.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Russian Sanctions - Keep Them!

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sun, 27 Mar 2022 18:51:00 +0000

The hiring process for an employee into a company typically relies on a network of opinions and advice from people. Before hiring references are checked, education levels confirmed, typically referrals from colleagues help, background check are completed. Even once hired typically a 3 to 9 month probation period exists during which a dud higher can get the boot. You want to minimize the risks.

Why then is it that the UK is already talking about removing certain sanctions against Russia?

(sources: https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/uk-lift-sanctions-russia-these-conditions-putin-ukraine-317482/ and https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/03/26/crippling-sanctions-could-lifted-russia-withdraws-ukraine-says/)

Is it good enough that Russia withdraws from Ukraine and commits to no further aggression? Do we trust the Russian government? Have they historically shown their ability to behave properly towards their citizens and their neighbours?

I think it is time for countries to stop handing out memberships to organizations such as NATO, the EU, the G7 or G20, the OECD as a way of hoping a government will change its ways or inciting a government to change its ways. I think it is time for these organizations to keep these governments and nations outside of these groups until such time that they have proven that they will permit a few things - freedom of expression (political, religious, sexual), a political system that allows for the current government to be kicked out of power and a new one elected, freedom of trade and commerce as well as full participation in solving global problems.

These clubs should be reserved for nations that follow basic human rights. Only once followed should these countries be allowed membership. We need to stop hoping countries will change their ways.

Dangle the carrot...but don't feed it to them right away.

By the way, I feel this should apply not only to relationships between nations but also to companies, sporting leagues, entertainment and so on. The world needs to once and for all learn a lesson from what Russia is doing. We need to stop the illusion of normalcy when dealing with these types of regimes. It anything but normal to deal with bullies and criminals as if all was fine.

Don't allow dirty money and politics to take precedence over decency. Keep the sanctions as long as is required.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Ash Barty

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 18:11:00 +0000

The news that Ash Barty has taken the decision to retire at the age of 25 has caused many people to react. Some understand, others question, others accuse. Her decision has touched off a few ideas of my own.

When is enough actually enough? When do we decide we have enough? When can we stop and just be content with what we have?

At 25 she has achieved so much. I have seen words accusing her of lack of character, of quitting or of not having the mental fortitude (one person I saw was wondering what was wrong with women's tennis?) I think none of these people can really speak with any authority. First of all most of these people, writing the drivel, can hardly speak from a place of success. How many grand slams have they won? How many tens of millions of dollars have they earned, how many weeks at number one have they spend and how well known are they in the world?

At some point, enough is enough. I respect Ash Barty for taking a personal decision. She has enough. She has had amazing experiences and reach the pinnacle of her sport. What more does one need? For some they need 5-6-7-8 grand slams. Tens of millions of dollars is not enough...shoot for hundreds please! I respect Ash for going against the popular stream of thought. She can move on and do so much more and live her life her way. Not the way the business of tennis, of sports or of media want. Full marks to Ash for that.

When is enough, enough? Do we always need more? Growth every year, an extra TV, an extra serving at dinner, a bigger house, a this or a that. Most people in the so-called first world could, if they removed emotion and thought logically, live their life just fine next year if they only had what they had this year. We need to stop falling in the trap of more more more.

Way to go Ash! We have been lucky that you have shared a part of your life with us. Keeping living your way. You've taught society a lesson. Thanks for that.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Ukraine - The Entire World is Complicit

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Thu, 10 Mar 2022 20:17:00 +0000

The world is complicit. The entire world is complicit.

Of course Vladimir Putin is the man responsible for causing so much of the human pain and physical destruction going on in Ukraine at this moment. However the rest of the world is complicit.

For too many years (for all of history one could say) we have turned a blind eye to the negative actions of one person, organization, company, country and allowed economic benefit to rule over, to take precedence over, good behaviour.

For years the world has allowed Putin and Russia to do as they please as it was deemed to be to the benefit of the world to turn a blind eye and choose to see but ignore their despicable behaviour. While we purchased oil, gas and wheat from Russia we sold them all manners of goods and services. We even invited the bastards from The Kremlin to believe they were part of a world order. Too many pictures have been published with the assholes from the Kremlin shaking hands and smiling with the leaders of the world - political, business, cultural, sporting. We turned a blind eye as it benefited us in the short-term.

Well now we are paying the price big time. The price for selling Russians all those goddamned Big Macs and Coca-Colas. The price for letting Aeroflot buy Boeings. The price for our dependence on the dirty money and practices of Russian oil and the oligarchs from that country. The price for having worldwide sporting events held in that country.

We have emboldened the little shits in The Kremlin by being short-sighted and focused on one thing only - profit and our own selfishness.

When this war ends, assuming their is still an economy and organizations on this planet, will we revert to our behaviours of short-sightedness, egocentricity? Will we learn that we should not be dealing with gangsters, crooks and thieves? Or will we continue to waste good time, effort and money in dealing with the Russias, Irans, Chinas, North Koreas, Saudi Arabias and so on of the world.

When does standing up for good behaviour become the norm in politics and society? When will this become the norm - the long-term norm? When will we accept to pay an extra buck for something we don't really need and stop crying that our needless junk is too expensive?

WHEN?

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Ukraine

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Fri, 04 Mar 2022 01:24:00 +0000

Ukraine.

It am writing this on March 2, 2022. The invasion of Ukraine by Russia is now in its seventh day. I have so many conflicting thoughts and emotions. What should the nations of the world do? What specifically should NATO and the EU do? What would I do?

The animal in me, the emotional me, the me who might live in Ukraine or have Ukrainian blood would want the world to launch a full-scale assault of Russia. I would want these nations to impose a no-fly zone over Ukraine, stop all Russian airplanes and missiles from overflying Ukraine, bomb Russian positions and go after the bastards in the Kremlin. I would feel that those people sitting in the comforts of their homes, watching and commenting on the destruction of my country, are hypocrites and complicit. While sanctions have an impact they will take months, if not years, to have an impact. They will not stop the bombs and the deaths. I would be mad, angry, disappointed, pissed, annoyed, frustrated. I would feel left down, abandoned and like a pawn in a big global geopolitical game. I would be crying.

The person sitting at home in Canada, sitting in the comforts of his home, watching and commenting on the destruction of Ukraine, with the privilege of having time to think and not struggling to survive, is thinking like someone looking down at a chessboard. Is it time to send in the rooks, bishops and knights or should more pawns be sacrificed?

If nuclear weapons were not invented and available to countries I think I would be much more linear in my thinking and would advocate a full-on defence of Ukraine. The problem is that we invented nuclear weapons. While they have been used as a deterrent to the big powers starting a direct war with each other they have unfortunately been very handy in allowing certain countries to do as they wish under the cover of their nuclear weapons. Who knows what Putin is thinking but I bet that the cover or nuclear weapons is pretty handy and helps the madness he is orchestrating from Moscow or some dacha.

Is Putin going to stop at Ukraine or eventually move on Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia? Is it better to stop the asshole now or let him run out of steam? Who knows the correct answers? Meanwhile there is death and destruction.

If this was my family, my city, my country getting bombed and killed I'd say go get the fucker in Moscow. Meanwhile most of the world watches and does what it feels it can without triggering an attack on its family, city and countries.

What will the next days bring?

Sadly only hindsight will tell us what the correct action could have been.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

The Unimportance of Little Things

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Fri, 12 Feb 2021 15:15:00 +0000

Years ago I wrote about how when rules are suddenly imposed on a group of people there is a resulting increase in the amounts of stress and arguments among the same group of people. I wrote about how a park I used to live next to in Vancouver one day introduced a bunch of rules which described which trails could be used by people walking their dogs. Some were on-leash, some off-leash, some weekends only. It was a mess. Where there were used to be no confrontations between people there were now regular confrontations where people would point to the rule and say you were no longer allowed here or there.

The thought again popped into my mind a few weeks back when I saw how my children had set the table. The fork was on the right side of the plate, the knife on the left. The cutting edge of the knife was facing out - away from the plate. The napkin was on the left. The glass was centred above the plate.

I thought - gosh they have it all wrong! Did they not learn anything over the years?!? I was going to correct them but then thought....does it really freaking matter? Not really. While this example is not about rules it is about traditions and "ways-of-doing-things-because-they've-always-been-done-that-way".

I was raised one way. There was the one way and the wrong way. Place settings were an example of that.

Fork left of plate

Knife right of plate, cutting edge facing the plate (This, I was told, was very important for some reason!)

Soup spoon right of plate, right of the knife.

Dessert spoon/fork, top of plate, handle facing right for spoon, left for fork (huh?)

Napkin right of plate

Glass top right hand corner

Many of you will read this and think I am out to lunch especially when it comes to the soup spoon, dessert spoon/fork and the napkin. I think people tend to agree on the fork and knife though I imagine that left handers would disagree.

Anyhow....parents and children have been frustrated by these rules for generations. Parents because they are enforcing ways they were taught and which were never questioned. Children because they don't understand nor remember from one time to the next and have this repeated to them many times to their rolling eyes.

In addition, when we are invited to a friend's, or worse relative's (the same bloodline for crying out loud), house for a meal and find the place setting set in a non-conforming way we immediately judge a lack of education, class or attention to detail on behalf of the hosting family. We will sometimes extend the judgement to all of the citizens of the country or region they come from. These people are heathens!

In the end, hopefully, we were able to find the fork and knife. Using these tools we tasted some amazing food prepared for us kindly and lovingly by these same heathen relatives or friends. This should help us to forget the initial judgements and rather leave us with a warm feeling of friendship and love. The food was amazing, the conversation thoughtful.

Maybe we need more flexibility in the way of social mores and traditions so that we can just relax and focus on what is really important. The food and conversation.

In the end, I don't give a shit where the fork is....so long as it is clean!!

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

The Right of Big Tech to Decide

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 30 Jan 2021 22:41:00 +0000

I am currently reading Green Mars. This is the second book in the Mars Trilogy written by Kim Stanley Robinson. The books describe the happenings on Mars in the 21st century as man settles the planet. Of course as more and more people arrive on Mars, and more and more companies also set up shop on the planet, standard human behaviour starts rooting itself on this newly inhabited world. Consequently we have wars and revolution, ecologists vs industrialists, those who want to leave Mars relatively untouched vs. those who are wanting to turn it into another Earth.

During this time, back on Earth, the planet is becoming less and less inhabitable. People look to Mars as an escape from the sad reality on Earth. The United Nations appears to have had increased power however it is being controlled transnational companies. As a result Mars is also now being run not by a UN or a set of countries but more and more it is being run by these transnationals. Anyhow....this is where I am in the book, roughly a third of the way into Green Mars.

The growing importance of corporations in the fictional world of Robinsons' Mars made me think of what is happening back here on Earth, in our reality of January 2021. We recently had an example of corporations doing the job of what has traditionally been the role of government agencies. Censoring information. Censorship is, rightfully, a very touchy subject and one which really needs to be used as sparingly as possible. Words can incite violence and hate and this is where careful thought on when to apply censorship is required. It is also true that regardless of whether certain topics, people or groups are subject to censorship, their words will always find their way out into the public. There is something to be said in ensuring that, in a controlled way, those words are in fact heard. Society can not have their heads buried in the sand and think that these thoughts are not held by anybody on Earth. They must be heard to be combatted and so that we can organize ourselves to combat - mostly through education.

Twitter and Facebook have both suspended Donald J. Trump from their platforms. In addition to that Apple and Google have removed another platform, Parler, from their application stores. Amazon in turn terminated their hosting agreement with Parler. Parler was a platform which many people turned to once they recognized that Twitter and Facebook would no longer let them freely express their opinions.

While I do not agree with Donald J. Trump, the elected officials that blindly follow him nor his blind followers who swallow and follow his toxic words, I also do not agree with silencing them. We need to read, hear and see what these people are saying so that we can not only realize they are out there and planning but also so that we can prepare ourselves for the results. Humanity does not benefit from turning a blind eye. Rather we need to acknowledge their existence and plan accordingly to combat the forces of hate and toxicity in our society.

Corporations of course are allowed to decide how their platforms are to be used. Platforms that are specific to certain topics, much like the old bulletin boards, can restrict the topics to those which are relevant to the topic they are meant to cover. The issue with these large social media platforms and these giants of the software business is that they have become the de facto place where all topics of life in general is discussed. Topics presented on their platforms are not specific but rather all encompassing of what we humans have in our brains. They have become very powerful forces in our society and a place where millions and billions turn to for information. They have also rightly claimed that impartiality is one of their tenets. In conclusion they have gotten to big to make the decision on who can and cannot use their platforms.

Having these powers comes with responsibility, no doubt. However I am not sure that it is the companies themselves that are best positioned to determine who or what is to be censored. Had popular opinion not turned on Donald J. Trump I am not sure that Twitter and Facebook would have decided to suspend his accounts. His tweets were among the most popular on the platforms and definitely attracted and kept users on their platform, increasing revenues. Their business models reward those who get the most views and therefore keep users on the platforms for a longer period all the while being presented adverts. Had popular opinion not turned @realDonaldTrump would not be suspended and he would be generating revenue for Twitter.

I would prefer that the judiciary via its human rights, civil rights, hate and criminal laws continue to weigh the freedom of expression against the potential for breaking these laws. Once a ruling comes down the platforms should quickly take action and suspend or ban the content. They have become too important to the free flow of information to be allowed to decide, based on popular opinion and the breaking news of the day what should and should not be seen.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

The Importance of Journalism and Factual Reporting

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Mon, 25 Jan 2021 14:42:00 +0000

The world we live in is greatly influenced by what people read or hear. The words read and heard will be stored in our brains and impact our thoughts. These in turn impact our decisions, relationships and the ideas which we then write or speak about to others. Words do matter. They matter to our children, to spouses, siblings, extended family, neighbours, co-workers and to our fellow citizens of earth....those whom we have never met but who may read or hear our words.

Journalism is a field which pumps out its fair share of the written and spoken word. Journalism plays a fundamental role in the education of people and in ensuring that the truth always finds its voice. It is a force against those in society which try to silence the truth. It is important to decision making via its ability to educate us on current affairs and due to its investigative nature as well.

But what is truth anyways? Whatever it may be it generally is not right or wrong. It can please and bring joy. It can disappoint and bring great sadness. But in and of itself it is not right or wrong. Our interpretation of the truth decides where we place it on that spectrum. Our interpretation is, getting back to the first paragraph, influenced by what we have read or heard.

Taking into account that we all have been influenced differently (there literally are as many versions of the truth as there are people on Earth), nevertheless, there are certain truths that most human beings will agree upon. Murder is a truth and it is wrong. Compassion is a truth and it is right.

The volume of words which media outlets pump out lays an important burden on these institutions. They influence billions of people around Earth. Unfortunately today's media industry has evolved into one that focuses greatly on opinions and editorials rather than objective and investigative reporting. They are trying to influence readers to a specific conclusion. Certain news outlets (CNN and Fox being those that stand out most to me) are pretty much 100% editorial outlets. They are day long editorials with host after host spewing out their opinions on what has happened rather than just sticking to what has happened and letting the viewer decide for themselves whether they agree or not.

I believe that the news media business needs to give serious thought to how they are influencing the consumers of their work, how these people might react to what they read or view and then to the consequences on society. If people simply got the facts rather than constant opinion I would hazard a guess that the our planet would have less problems. It would be less polarized and less sensational. People, left to make up their own opinions, generally choose what is right for themselves and those around them. This snowballs into a better world.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Compromise - Not a Dirty Word

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Wed, 20 Jan 2021 18:59:00 +0000

Compromise is a requirement for progress. No matter how stubborn one might be there will always be a point where a choice needs to be made. Choosing one path or way over another always involves compromise as the paths all differ to varying degrees, each with their own pros and cons. Some pros always need to be let go of and some cons need to be accepted. No single party picks up all the spoils. But all win something. A compromise.

Maybe I need to be a little more specific. Compromise is important if what you desire is progress in a non-chaotic and steady way. If you equate pros and cons to steps forwards or backwards compromise does not eliminate the steps back but it does, I believe, lead in smaller steps backward while continuing on a forward motion. The steps forward may also be smaller but having more people in agreement the decisions taken are accepted and acted upon in a more unified and cohesive fashion. Let's just say that it is a more pleasant environment to work and live in.

Sadly compromise seems to be getting a dirtier and dirtier reputation in the mainstream. It seems to be morphing into a sign of weakness. It definitely is not catchy to compromise as it requires work and taking the time to understand choices in front of us. It takes time and time, it would seem, is better spent doing something else. Taking the time and discussing is supposedly elitist and intellectual. It does not appeal to the the population at large - or so we are led to believe.

While I see this trend in various circles of society the place where it is most pronounced, and potentially most dangerous, is in politics. I have always felt that politics is a dividing rather than unifying endeavour. Without differences and division there is little reason for politics. Rare is the politician who chooses to work on narrowing the divisions rather than enhancing them. It would appear that the latter is taking deeper root. Of course compromise does happen in the halls of power it is just that publicly the message is generally one of fighting, bashing and condescending words. Below I describe what I believe are the reasons why this behaviour has taken root and will continue to in the current environment unless citizens demand change.

First of all, to win an election one needs, ideally, a different idea, If not a different idea at least a different brand or approach to the idea. If there are no differences what is the point? Choosing between two identical apples on a grocer's shelf is simple and does not require any thought at all. Any apple can be picked. The job of a politician is to find a way to differentiate themselves from the others running in an election and then to convince us that their way is the one which should be chosen - ideally by the largest number of voters.

Now often times this job of creating differentiation does not fall upon the so-called "leader" of the party. It will often be the political machine of staffers and influencers which will cast the party and their leader in a way that they feel differentiates enough from their opponents to require a voter to make a relatively easy choice.

The second point is the thirty second world we live in. The world of short attention spans, thirty second video clips, reading diagonally, fast-forwarding between songs and headline scanning. We are all guilty of spending too little time to inform ourselves thoroughly on some topics and of being anxious to read the next article or story, watch the next video or listen to the next tune. This behaviour is facilitated by social media platforms which are becoming the primary source of information for so many.

Politicians therefore only have a few moments of attention to make their point during any one interaction with a voter. The result is an inability to clearly lay out arguments for their position. The why of what they want you to agree with is lost in the need for speed. The limitation to a headline or to thirty seconds requires a quick way to gain a voter's limited attention. The topic needs to be simple and quickly understood.

The easiest way to achieve that objective is via the third point. Playing on emotions. Most humans are quick to react on items that hit their core as they trigger emotions which are deep within but which can shoot out in very little time. The reaction is instinctual rather than requiring the luxury of logic and thinking. Topics that cause us pain, joy or anger of some sort are easy pickings for politicians as they trigger a quick reaction. Throughout our lives we are brainwashed into thinking there are certain fundamental truths on topics such as religion, economics, immigration, education, race and sexuality. We accept these truths and view of the word as the simple truth with little willingness to understand another view.

Putting it all together the easiest way for a politician to therefore gain votes and attention is to pander to this core emotion and to topics which they know will cause a quick visceral response (and and instinctual re-tweet or share!). Immigrants taking jobs away. Liberals destroying traditional values. Homosexuality being unrecognized. People of colour being profiled as criminals.

This type of pandering to populism does not require any kind of well thought out political platform developed over months or years. It doesn't require intelligent arguments for or against. It does not encourage compromise and discussion. It just simply divides and causes opposing camps with strong opinions and no time to hear the other side's views.

Ultimately. we the people, are letting ourselves be over-run by this kind of tactic by not questioning our politicians. By simply accepting their thirty second clips as the truth we are playing their game and simplifying their lives. We are letting ourselves be influenced rather than influencing them. If, rather, we would stop and ask questions, look at different opinions and ask our politicians to work together on solutions to our society's problems, we would be slowing the process down, yes, but we would at least be taking steps forward which we could all agree upon. Ask your representatives to reach across to their opponents and to stop dividing us to gain a simple and shallow vote.

Ask them to compromise and clean up their act.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Thoughts on Measuring Time

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Wed, 24 Feb 2016 00:59:00 +0000

I have just read Bill and Melinda Gates 2016 Annual Letter. They talk about how time and energy are two of the more important topics which need to be tackled to help save lives and make the world a more equitable place. I recommend you read it.

After reading the letter I had a thought which has come to me multiple times over the years. The relationship between advancements in technology and the time these advancements give us via the efficiencies they bring. To sum up Bill and Melinda's letter very crudely I can say it is about making reliable, low cost energy available to more people so that they can take advantage of technological advances which minimize certain tasks and which permit a lengthening of the productive day and thus giving their users time.

Of course this is completely true. Energy allows pumps to work which allow water to flow closer to homes therefore reducing or eliminating the need to walk to water sources and carry it back. The ability to cook with energy other than wood, for example, allows for less time spent collecting wood. Machines to clean and dry clothes facilitate and shorten the time spent on laundry. A light bulb allows individuals more hours to study or work. Technological advancements require energy and they tend to make us more efficient at getting things done - theoretically giving us more time.

They don't give us more time though. And that is the key to my thought.

Time is all we human beings really have. If all goes well, in Canada, we get about 80 years worth of it when we are born. Then we die. This makes time the most valuable commodity we come across in our lives - because it truly is finite and our lives depend on it and little else. Time is our life. Commodity is the wrong descriptive however as it implies that we can somehow trade time - buy it and sell it. Of course we really can't. It is the illusion that we can which makes this economic world go round.

The 80 years we receive at birth are ours and ours alone. I can't buy an extra 5 years and why would I want to sell any of it? We can increase our chances of living the full 80 years via healthy and meaningful living of course. Okay...we might be able to stretch the 80 years to 90. Key word is might. There are a whole bunch of reasons why the 80 years can be cut to 70 or less as well.

Giving time an economical value has simplified the decision making we undertake when faced with a decision on where to spend our time. We face this decision multiple times a day. Equating time to currency simplifies matters a whole lot by allowing us to easily determine what is the most cost effective way or the way that will generate the most currency. The result is that we have ended up creating a society that values currency and we, therefore, end up spending much of our time working so that we can then buy technologies that give us more time which, in turn, we tend to spend working so that we can earn more money to spend on more technologies. We are making the right decisions it would seem. Time is money, so let's make money! We spend our time earning money and gaining efficiencies. It seems to always boil down to economics. Of course this is a system that has worked well for as long as man has been on Earth. We have divided tasks up, specialized and priced everything. It has been particularly effective in the last two centuries of course, though one could argue that it has come at a great cost as well.

So let's switch gears now.

When we look at a carrot, or any other foodstuff, we look at it as a commodity which will feed us. It costs us money and delivers nutrition. We rarely if ever think about where it came from, who grew it or the nutrients it provides us. It is "just" food and we don't give it a second thought.

Do we ever stop to think about what time really is. Do we give it a second thought? What is its source? What is it?

It is our life. It is all we have. Our thoughts, our breath, our sadness, our happiness....they are all time. They are time because they take time. Every second you spend thinking and living, feeling and breathing is time. However we measure it only when spent earning or spending money. What about all those other hours. Are they a waste of time? Does society measure those hours?

Time should be used wisely. Our thoughts consume it. Our actions devour it. We use it up without much thought. Is time something we should be using and putting to work? Should we spend more time just thinking about what we have and being content? Most of the technological advancements give us time back but we don't seem to ever bank it to think and create. We take it to do more of the same. The economic value of time is fairly easy to measure and goes into costing pretty much all the goods and services we consume.

Time is however a much more complex thing to measure - using currency as its sole measure demeans it. When you equate time to life itself it becomes harder to quantify in economic terms. Decision making on where and how to spend it become more complicated. There is a spiritual aspect to it that can't be so easily quantified into an economic currency. Can time be measured in happiness? Could it be measured in units of contentment? If we permitted ourselves to, and found ways to, measure it using these other units in addition to the traditional currency would we spend our time differently?

Global happiness indices are still not taken very seriously. The financial markets want currency and we tend to value most everything in the financial markets. As the prevalent measure today is a currency those that measure their time using other units are often considered crackpots, weirdos, wing nuts or new age freaks.

Maybe they're not.

So now when I think back to Bill and Melinda's letter I can't help but hope that, for all the advancements in technology and the efficiencies energy and time bring, the one thing that the recipients of time and energy need to try and avoid is to become slaves to the machines and systems which provides the energy and time. We had better learn to measure or, rather, not forget how to measure, our time in units other than currency. If not, the advancements may not bring us the happiness, contentment and spirituality we seem to crave.

When you are eighty and you've spent all those years running out of time to gain currency you might regret that you did not spend more time thinking like a freak!

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

iPhone Too Good? A Lesson.

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 20 Feb 2016 18:08:00 +0000

I have just finished reading an article on Forbes.com which makes a link between declining sales and the quality of the iPhone. Apple is taking a hit not only on Wall Street but also in the press. Reports of Apple company valuation, of lack of new products, lack of innovation and maturing are the latest rage. The company has also been blamed over the years for purposely obsoleting its products and forcing people to upgrade.

All of these arguments I think highlight the fundamental problem with our economy. It is so overwhelmingly controlled by investors and the business news who consistently value profit growth over quality. Listening to Wall Street the best thing for Apple would be for all of its customers to upgrade their phones every year. This would drive revenue, profits and would be music to the ears of those analysts. Ka-ching!

Building a quality product that consumers want to keep and - crazy talk! - repair rather than throw out is the last thing that a single-minded analyst would want Apple to develop. The problem is that Apple's products are of great quality. I am still using my iPhone 4S. It look like new, it works great and I can continue to use (some of) the new features that the latest versions of iOS offer. It turns out that a large part of Apple's customers are hanging on to their old phones. Will they upgrade en masse to the rumoured March 5SE iPhone? Many will. But there are also many who will likely continue to use their old devices. Is that really a problem?

Building products that last needs to become a priority again. Appliances should not have 10 year life spans....they could have 20-30 year lifespans. Should we replace our cars every three years when leases expire? Do we build our homes to last multiple generations or are we happy for them to last only a few decades?

Sure economies need to grow so that all benefit from this growth - that is the theory. The easy way to make money is to sell more and create new products that people need, or are made to believe they need. It is also much easier for consumers to part with their cash when products are inexpensive (and therefore lack the quality they could have). We settle.

We settle for easy, we settle for cheap.

When raising children it is not easy to remind them of manners, of respect, of playing nice, of thinking of others and sharing. Left to our devices we are animals who want to survive - it is our instinct to look after our selves first and the community second. Saying "no" to our children is not easy....turning a blind eye is easier for parents. But what are the long-term consequences? Egotistical brats.

As a society we need to say No more often. No to the new phone, to that marketing trash we are sold, to Wall Street begging for growth. We need to say Yes to quality, to long-term thinking and to the impact of our actions on our world. Apple...please continue to build quality into your products. You may not sell as many (you sell enough anyway!) but is there anything really wrong with that?

Anyhow....these are the ideeahs that Forbes.com sparked in me today.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

How to Deliver Influence

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 23 Jan 2016 15:19:00 +0000

Over the last week I have been wondering about what we learn and how we make use of this knowledge in our lives. Much of my thoughts have centred on whether our approach to education is in fact giving us the knowledge we need in our daily lives. Are we really gaining knowledge? Are we simply being told how to accomplish a given task? Are we being educated on the possible conclusions or just the one conclusion of the lesson - the educator's conclusion? In other words are we learning to come to our own conclusions? Are we able to, with what we are being taught, to really make the material our own, to synthesize it and to assimilate it into a true understanding? To take all of this data and understand. To come up with our own way and our own conclusion. Are we always being asked to conform? Do we need conformity?

I have had many such conversations at work over the last days and, coincidentally, I came across some TED Talks by Sir Ken Robinson two days ago. Those conversations and videos have solidified in my mind the importance of changing how we educate people so that we can make education as individualistic as possible. So that the students not only learn a process, steps or method but truly understand why to follow the process, steps, method and how to make those things as real to them based on their own strengths and weaknesses.

Let me be specific. I work in an organization that is evolving from being one that has delivered basic, simple and generic remote services to its customers to one that now delivers more complex product and sales help. We are in the midst of moving from being measured on what we deliver and the quantity of delivery to being measured on the business result - not the steps along the way. The process, steps, method matter less.

The issue is that in life, whether in primary and secondary schools or in corporate education, we are generally taught what the steps are and not what the objective is. We are given presentations and scripts and dates to memorize and follow. Rarely are alternative methods shared. Are we ever told to solve a problem using whatever methods or tools we can come up with? This only happens in special workshops when outside help is brought in to show us an alternative approach. No, in school we are told there is one way to do it. The supposed best, most efficient, tried and tested way developed over the years. As a result many assume there is no better way and follow the given steps.

If, rather, we educated on the desired result and, in addition to learning the tried and tested way we were shown how different people have synthesized and assimilated the information and made it their own, we would find a way that is more authentic to our own abilities. If the learning involved trying one's own methods first and allowed failure and iteration would we come out with a better understanding of the problem at hand? It would promote problem solving using methods which come naturally to the individual. The point is that you could follow whatever path you are comfortable with and therefore more likely to comprehend and later explain. Rather we are told to get in line and follow.

Of course, as we age, we eventually do start developing our own different steps and methods. Our confidence grows. But businesses can't wait for careers and life to teach employees. They need to adapt quickly. So we create process and steps.

There are some tasks where clearly conformity is required. When you build a product every single one of those needs to be identical, of the same quality. They are built to specifications and purchased based on those specifications. However when the job is delivering a service which is meant to influence human behaviour conformity loses importance. Each interaction is unique because we are dealing with human beings who each have their unique specifications. The listener and person you are influencing are complex. They have changing moods from one conversation to the next and one day to the next. They have different ways of interpreting information. Their daily context varies. We each have different ways of approaching problem solving and getting stuff done.

The most effective human to human interactions can't be taught and there is no right way to go about them. The best communication is when both parties connect, adapt to each other - nevertheless remaining authentic - accept their differences and create a way that is unique to that specific conversation on that specific day. It means constant adapting - like the tightrope walker making constant modifications as the wind shifts. If that happens then real influence occurs and the service has a much greater chance of success.

In conclusion, the more varied the set of shared steps and processes are, the more open we are to various ways of achieving the objective, the less structured the processes are, the more we will be able to create our own, authentic and comfortable approach to reaching our objective and, in the case of business, the impacts we are looking for.

So let's complement training with coaching, mentoring, shadowing and flexibility in approach and give people the opportunity to create their own approach that will, in the longer-term, possibly positively impact the so called tried and tested approach!

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Look A Stranger in the Eye (Pupil)

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Wed, 13 Jan 2016 01:30:00 +0000

This post is about attitude and how it makes all the difference in the world. Specifically this is about the attitude we bring to our daily routines and is based on three different men I have come across during my daily commute and one whom I have never met. Each one made or makes the day just a tad bit better than it was - and they do it so simply.

One is a Montreal cop who I used to see regularly in the Griffintown area of the city. The second is a parking attendant at the Bell Centre. The third is a train conductor who used to work the line I ride to and from the city every day. The last is a singer in a band. They are all examples of how easy it is to build a short human connection with a stranger and make the world that much more united.

In every case they manage to, during a few seconds of interaction with fellow citizens, make a connection and put a smile on someone's face - well mine at least.

The cop's job, during the extremely busy construction season this past summer, was to direct traffic at intersections. He brought life to his job and a smile. As he let bus after bus through the intersection he'd make eye contact with the drivers, point at them, give then the thumbs up and a smile. The drivers would return with a friendly wave or short honk of the horn. He did not just sleeplessly guide vehicles around, he led drivers and pedestrians safely across the busy intersection and made a connection for a brief few seconds.

The parking attendant I am referring to directs cars in and out of the St-Antoine Street Bell Centre lot. With a long "woooooo, wooooooo" scream he gets our attention and directs cars to stop to let others in or out, stops traffic to let pedestrians cross the entrance and greets most of us with a "Bonsoir monsieur/madame. Merci!" lifting his Montreal Canadiens' ball cap off his head. Again a connection. Pedestrians, drivers all greet him as they walk and drive by.

The conductor also managed to make a positive connection in a few seconds by reminding us all to keep smiling when he called out the last station or greeted us at the first. He'd constantly walk the length of the train, saying hi and making eye contact with riders - smiling. Most of us said "Hi" and smiled back. Another easy connection made.

On the Live 2012 Coldplay concert video, Chris Martin makes a great point. He talks about how the band has matured, grown confident and how they are no longer apologetic for their sound or music. He states that they have outgrown the English upbringing they had which somehow reinforced this behaviour of apology and fear. He states that on the 2012 tour they had finally gained the confidence so that, while on stage, he now looks into the eyes of hundreds of people every night - directly in their eyes during the show - and states that for that moment, for that second, a connection is made between him and that specific spectator. Something magical happens. Indeed.... And it is felt by both.

It seems does seem to take a certain amount of self-confidence to say "hi" to a total stranger. We should all do it more often. Look at someone in the eye, directly into the black of their pupils, and say "Hi!".

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Bowie - Planet Earth is Blue.....

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 01:12:00 +0000

This is a quick memory about my childhood spurred on by the news of David Bowie's death.

I spent a good part of my elementary school years in my cousin's basement bedroom playing chess and listening to his records. He was (still is!) nine years older than I and those formative years opened my eyes. He had hundreds of albums. The Beatles, Jethro Tull, Led Zeppelin, Gentle Giant, Genesis, The Rolling Stones and so many other great artists and bands. One of them was Bowie.

Of the first ten album I ever bought two of them were Bowie's. The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars was one I bought new at either Sam the Record Man on Ste-Catherine or Phantasmagoria on Parc near Sherbrooke. Cellophane wrapped with a 3.99 of 4.99 written in black marker across the cover. The second was Diamond Dogs - I bought that one used at Cheap Thrills (can't remember if that store was on Mountain, Stanley, or Drummond....one of those three anyway). That one likely cost a buck or so and seemed to be in good enough shape.

I clearly remember listening to them both lying on my bed face up staring at textured popcorn ceiling. There was no need of meditation in those days. It was music that carried me away and made me conscious of the moment - oblivious to past or future.

Future Legend opens up Diamond Dogs....

His music, his look, his eyes, his makeup, his sound, his weirdness. I did not realize it when I was young but it was his uniqueness that made him special. Provoking, passionate, insanely human and not afraid to show it.

Thanks.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

That Dreaded Time of the Year - Evaluations!

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 09 Jan 2016 18:51:00 +0000

We are in the midst of one of the most dreaded periods of the year in corporate life - end of year evaluations. I have been reading more reports lately of companies dropping these reviews altogether and opting for continuous conversations and evaluations. The last article I read was from The Economist World in 2016. It states that Deloitte had calculated it wasted 2 million hours a year evaluating its 65000 employees. At a relatively cheap $100 an hour that is $200 million of wasted time and money. Wow. This huge number of hours may not take into account the stress, uncertainty, escalations, debates and resulting sick leave and reduced productivity that might arise from the process - one that definitely does not generate any real benefits to either managers or employees.

I am thinking that this rigmarole that is followed by millions really has seen its day. It may have been needed in the old days where managers never spoke to employees because a boss was a distant, suit wearing, chain-smoking, whiskey-drinking white man who ruled by fear and awe in an office with a door that was regularly shut. He did not want to speak to employees and employees sure did not want to speak to him! It required a Human Resource imposed structure that forced them to speak to once or twice a year.

Now that we live in a world where communication rules maybe it is no longer needed. We now measure how someone does their job with as much weighting as what they are doing. Emotional quotients (EQ), employee brand and employee engagement are spoken about regularly. Conversations between employees and supervisors happen regularly, if not daily for some. There is no need to catch-up once a year. The stereotypical old bossman picture has been blown to bits by the world of the 21st century.

Let's have the courage and confidence to provide regular two-way feedback all year.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Is Our #Passion the Solution?

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 01:58:00 +0000

I just finished watching the first of a series of videos on a TED playlist entitled "Talks to watch when you don't know what to do with your life". I have embedded the video below if you are interested in watching.

Larry Smith makes a pretty straightforward and simple point. One that is painfully obvious but one that seems so impossible to achieve, live by or even simply attempt to pursue given the constraints and constructs which we all inject into our lives as individuals and as a group. We fear being embarrassed by pursuing it, we fear losing everything we have, we think of "buts" and "if onlys". We therefore so rarely pursue it. It....is our PASSION.

In Avoiding the Blues I talk about the project being the monster. The context is that when you are assigned to a project at work it can easily take over your every minute of every day for its duration unless you learn to manage your time and your effort. It is so easy to lose ourselves in the job and forget about the bigger picture. Similarly Larry talks about the "bloodsucking, soul destroying types of jobs". We lose sense of who we are as we become engrossed by a project, employer or job that is convenient and "good enough". If we don't nourish our brains on a regular basis.

The best many of us seem able to accomplish is to schedule time for our passions. Is that good enough? Or maybe is it that our passions are misguided? Maybe we misconstrue our passions? That'll be for another entry.....

https://www.ted.com/talks/larry_smith_why_you_will_fail_to_have_a_great_career

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

#ActOnClimate Requires an Organizational Skill We Generally Lack

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 01:40:00 +0000

In my mind the next twelve months are critical for all organizations who were involved in the United Nations Conference on Climate Change (UNCCC) to show each other, and the world in general, that all the talk and negotiation which took place in Paris in December at the UNCCC were not a waste of time. They have their work cut out.

I have spent my twenty-eight years of employment working for massive global corporations and have experienced firsthand how talking and planning is cheap and easy. We humans are great at having meetings and chatting about how wonderful things could be if we all just worked together with a common objective. After all, we convince ourselves, we work for the same organization and so working towards a common goal just makes sense! A conclusion so painfully obvious yet so hard to achieve. After the talk we take the next step and have workshops where we gather in a common location to make good use use of colourful sticky notes, markers and whiteboards to brainstorm, get out ideas and then narrow them down to those considered most attainable (by the way so much for great leaps forward and risk taking). The last half-day of a workshop will then be about ensuring that action items have owners - so critical we believe. We all agree that we'll work hard on the ideas, set up some sub-teams and have conference calls to follow-up and make it all happen! We then go for a piss on the town to celebrate the end of a successful session.

I've been to so many of these types of workshops that have not delivered on their promises. The reality is we get back to our local offices, get overwhelmed by the daily routines and issues and realize that we just don't have the time to implement all the great ideas that were agreed upon. A subset might in fact get complete but the whole fails regardless.

While a company with tens of thousands of employees in hundreds of countries is complex it pales in comparison to the complexity that the participants of the UNCCC face. Different levels of government, non profits, citizen groups, corporations, small and medium businesses spanning all industries, cultures, climates, languages - all the amazing diversity of Earth! This makes the frustrations I have felt so petty in comparison.

So all the talk is now over. The UNCCC agreements are signed. How many action items have been doled out to how many individuals? How many follow-up conference call are there scheduled? How many pints or, more likely given the location, glasses of wine were drunk on that last night of the conference on December 11th?

If there is one workshop where a commitment to completing assigned action items is important it was the UNCCC. While Earth may continue to orbit the sun long after we human beings disappear, I think that as a species we are trying to spend as much time on it as we can, no? Our species' longevity is at risk due to our past behaviour and ignorance. The good news is that we seem to have learned from our mistakes, or at least acknowledged them.

What makes this problem so ridiculously complex however is that we, as human beings, are terrible at working in teams even when we have quarterly measurable targets in place that directly influence our take home pay (i.e. the typical corporation). We could do so much more and generate so much more profit if we actually worked together in our relatively small companies. Only in rare cases do companies actually seem to get it done and realize all the possible benefits of cooperation.

This climate change problem is one that is hard to measure, does not have quarterly targets (at least not yet), involves people that do not share the same targets and include a result that is decades or more away and so just does not have the same kind of pressing attention that we give corporate targets. If Wall Street was hounding all the UNCCC participants in the same fashion that they hounded traded corporations it might be very different. Who will hold the participants of this greatest monstrosity of a workshop accountable for their action items?

It boils down to all of us reminding ourselves, our neighbours, our employers, our mayors, our presidents and prime ministers that we are holding them accountable. It also boils down to all of us acting and behaving and talking climate on a daily and continuous basis.

Gosh, we have the technologies and the brains to solve this....but do we have the will and organizational skills to make it happen?? So, again, this year is key. We need to start closing some of those action items now so that in December of this year we can proudly show progress.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Reducing Your Energy Usage

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 00:28:00 +0000

There is a certain hypocrisy to this post given the fact that I live in a suburb in a detached house that give us more personal space than most inhabitants of Earth. In and of itself one could argue that I live a wasteful life beyond my needs. Most of us in Canada do. So talking about energy conservation while sitting in my home office seems, again, hypocritical. Having said that, even in our suburban houses there is much that we could do to reduce our footprint.

When we moved into our house in 2009 the previous owners left us their utility bills. It has allowed me to make a comparison between the energy consumption of our family of four compared to the previous owners who were either four or five.

Our average use of water, electricity and natural gas when compared to the previous owners compares as follows.

Water 0.58 vs 1.13 m3 per day (51% of previous owners' usage)
Electricity 12.78 vs 39.45 kWh per day (32%)
Natural Gas 7.58 vs 10.125 m3 per day (75%)

The obvious question is "What changed?". Structurally we replaced all of the 1st floor windows (they had already done the 2nd floor). We can assume that this has helped save on heating and cooling. The old gas furnace was replaced with a more economical unit - that likely has saved us some natural gas usage. We use gas for our stove/oven whereas the previous residents used electricity - so that would lead us to use more gas and they more electricity for cooking. Finally our dishwasher and clothes washer/dryer are also newer models so we can assume some efficiencies in water and energy consumption.

I haven't gone through calculating how much the differences impact our usage but my gut tells me that they do not, on their own, account for the totality of the differences I listed above. Some of it must boil down to habits!

A few simple things we have always done follow. We switch off lights when not in a room. We don't ever turn on the twenty-five ceiling pot lights that were installed by the previous owners in the kitchen, den and living room as the floor and other lighting that exists more than suffices. We never turn on the exterior pot lights in the eaves of the roof meant to light up our house and give it curb appeal. We water our lawn only when needed and have turned off the automatic sprinklers. During the winter we heat to 19 degrees Celsius in the daytime, 20 in the evenings and 16 during the night. In the summer we cool down to 24.

So what do 51% of water, 32% of electricity and 75% of natural gas usage work out to in terms of energy saved in a year? Well quite a bit...specifically:

201 m3 of water in a year
9735 kWh of electricity
929 m3 of natural gas

How about dollars saved in a year??

$202 in water
$1020 in electricity
$691 in natural gas

Just over $1913 a year of savings.....not bad at all.

I know that none of this is scientific. Weather, time spent in the home, age of children all have impacts. Regardless.....it does show that we can make a difference to our energy consumption by taking some small actions.

Check out http://shrinkthatfootprint.com and also https://www.wec-indicators.enerdata.eu/household-electricity-use.html for some interesting data.

Happy savings and New Year!

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Will I Start Again in 2016?

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 02 Jan 2016 04:45:00 +0000

Hello again world. So this is now the - gee I don't know - fourth year in a row where I have told myself I would start writing again??

When I was active on my two blogs and writing my first book I notice that, for me anyway, it required regular, daily work. While ideas were always numerous writing required a daily rhythm. This meant that it took time and that I therefore had to give this hobby some time daily.

It also required emotion, a connection and a reaction to what I was experiencing. In other words not going through life like an unfeeling robot. Rather to go through life wondering, listening, watching, smelling and feeling. Soaking it up and then letting it out in words.

So let's see whether I once again do these two things in 2016. In the interim, have a look at my old posts ;-)

Cheers.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

November 15th Interview on The Cutting Room Floor w/ Casey Ryan

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sat, 21 Nov 2015 19:16:00 +0000

Hi there...long time no speak. It has not been due to a lack of ideeahs. Lack of time is my excuse. Not a good one. If you want to listen to me speak about my book "Avoiding the Blues" listen to this interview, aired on November 15th. Hope you like it, get why I wrote the book and maybe, if it sparks your interest, gets you to buy it! :-)

Audio Recording: 'EP. 480 - Olivier De Sousa; Linda Andersson' From 'Cutting Room Floor'

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Tale of My Two Cities

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 21:16:00 +0000

I was just catching up on the news and Google News had these two stories next to each other. My hometown and my adopted hometown. There are so many ways one can contrast Montreal and Vancouver. Weather is definitely one of the ways.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Welcoming March

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Mon, 02 Mar 2015 12:20:00 +0000

March!

Finally the month where, in this part of the world, things become habitable again.

Sometime over the next few weeks our gardens and lawns will start peaking through the melting snow. The snow will recede leaving in its wake the gravel and sand that has been spread on surfaces for the last four months. Neighbours will again start speaking to each other as they leave or enter their homes, no longer in a rush to get in from the biting cold and driving wind. Our moods will improve as the smell of wet earth, three month old dog shit and flowers lifts into the milder air.

The question of why (and how) so many people live in such imposing conditions will recede into memory as we once again consider ourselves lucky to live in such a unique, safe, prosperous corner of the world.

Depending on the source this was either the coldest winter since 1979 or since 1904. All I know is that I am so sick and tired of it.

March, I welcome you with joy and hope.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!

Human Survival's March to Mars

noreply@blogger.com (Olivier) — Sun, 22 Feb 2015 21:08:00 +0000

You may have read over the last week that the Mars One Mission announced its 100 finalists to become the first humans on the red planet. Fifty men and fifty women have been selected to proceed to round three of the selection process. This once again reminds me of what an amazing animal us human beings are.

The need to know more, to explore, to go where humans have never gone is so strong across humanity when taken as a whole - as a system. As individuals we may not all share the same level of interest in climbing Everest, diving into the Mariana Trench, walking on the Moon or, now, taking a one way trip to Mars. As a group of seven billion we are remarkably adventurous however and have that inquisitive minority to thank for much of the progress, and leaps, we have made to date.

Even if many of the discoveries stemming from these adventures can be used by those less interested in the greater good it still is true that, on the whole, they build human knowledge and therefore increase our species chances of survival. Ultimately we are programmed to do what we can to survive - to find a way even if the steps being taken do not necessarily seem related to survival.

I was discussing this with a neighbour last week and he made a great point. He said that he hopes that those who finally get picked to go to Mars leave their books of scripture behind. As humanity attempts its first colonization of another planet hopefully we have learned that blind faith can lead to ignorance, to a follower mentality and to acts taken in the name of something or someone that is not of the actor's.

Let me know what you think about what you have just read. Please and thanks!