...lowering the productivity of acquaintances everywhere...
"However, Ms Merkel views Poland, rather than Britain, as the main opponent of a deal and the hardest nut to crack. Such perceptions were confirmed when Warsaw raised old grievances about Germany to try to bolster its case for a "fairer" voting system in running the EU. Under current arrangements dating from 2000, Germany has 29 votes to Poland's 27 in EU councils. The new system, based on population sizes, will give Germany more than double the Polish vote. The Poles are demanding a new way of calculating votes that would diminish German "hegemony."Well. Seeing as the founding principle of the EU is "Don't Mention The War!" it seems to me that the only possible response would be repeated viewings of this classic Fawlty Towers sketch. However, the Poles had a different response - thinking out of the box as it were and I have to say, I didn't see this coming:
Under the nationalist Kaczynski brothers, prime minister and president of Poland, it seemed Poland was bent on refighting the second world war against Germany in the bunkers of Brussels.
"If Poland had not had to live through the years 1939-45, Poland would be today looking at the demographics of a country of 66 million", rather than 38 million, and would warrant a much higher quota of votes in the EU, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the prime minister, told Polish radio.
An incredible taste of the place she lives. The salad alone contained marvels we’d never eaten before: a winter lettuce called Tango (among 11 other lettuces), marigolds, chickpea sprouts, popcorn shoots. On top of the greens, roasted white beets with smoked ricotta cheese and smoked, sun-dried Principe Borhgese tomatoes (an Italian food tradition that has faded so badly that Ontario’s David Cohlmeyer now ships his to Italy - so it goes in the global-local food chain). Then came sweet potato and maple syrup mash, roasted carrots, and braised short ribs from Cumbrae Farms, a group of selected small farms working with special breeds. (Someone asked Cumbrae’s Stephen Alexander if there was a simple way to tell small-farm meat from industrial, factory-farm meat; he replied, “Forget claims and trust your eyes and trust your palate.” He says he can instantly smell the sulfates from industrial animal feed.) We drank apple sangrÃa and local wines. Dessert was caramelized apples with maple syrup semifreddo over crepes.
"There is no reason that any private citizen in a democracy should own a handgun. At some point, that simple truth will register. Until it does, phones will ring for dead children, and parents will be told not to ask why."Shootings: Comment: The New Yorker
Human beings fail the way all complex systems fail: randomly and gradually. As engineers have long recognized, many simple devices do not age. They function reliably until a critical component fails, and the whole thing dies instantly. A windup toy works smoothly until a gear rusts or a spring breaks, and then it doesn’t work at all. But complex systems—power plants, say—have to survive and function despite having thousands of critical components. Engineers therefore design these machines with multiple layers of redundancy: with backup systems, and backup systems for the backup systems. The backups may not be as efficient as the first-line components, but they allow the machine to keep going even as damage accumulates. Gavrilov argues that, within the parameters established by our genes, that’s exactly how human beings appear to work. We have an extra kidney, an extra lung, an extra gonad, extra teeth. The DNA in our cells is frequently damaged under routine conditions, but our cells have a number of DNA repair systems. If a key gene is permanently damaged, there are usually extra copies of the gene nearby. And, if the entire cell dies, other cells can fill in.Annals of Medicine: The Way We Age Now: Reporting & Essays: The New YorkerNonetheless, as the defects in a complex system increase, the time comes when just one more defect is enough to impair the whole, resulting in the condition known as frailty. It happens to power plants, cars, and large organizations. And it happens to us: eventually, one too many joints are damaged, one too many arteries calcify. There are no more backups. We wear down until we can’t wear down anymore.
Unfortunately ski conditions have been less than attractive. Last Sunday and Monday, the Pineapple Express, that was advancing over BC, peaked over Fernie. The ski hill was assaulted with high winds and pounding rain that extended almost, but not quite, to the highest skiable terrain. On Monday, much of the hill was closed because of the avalanche danger and there were several large slides within the ski hill boundary. Since then there has been a dusting of new snow and colder temperatures. Neither of which have managed to undo the storm damage.
Today was nice and sunny but “Old Sol” was unable generate sufficient thermal energy to do much good.
Oh, and the worst: fielding emails from PR parasites eager to suck away precious time in a half-hour phone meeting while the Senior Vice-President of Smoke Blowing tells me about how his company's software—based on an idea cribbed from Google—is going to change the way I look at something I didn't care about in the first place. (Inevitably, "forever.")
From January 1st to January 31st, new and gently used children’s and young adult books can be dropped-off at any OPP or Toronto Police Services detachment in Ontario (including Toronto Police Services headquarters on College Street in Toronto). With the support and assistance of the Canadian Forces, other voluntary organizations, and shipping companies, these books will be shipped and distributed to aboriginal communities.
Since the early nineteen-nineties, Joel Waldfogel, an economist at the University of Pennsylvania, has been doing a series of studies in which college students are asked to put a value on the presents they receive. Waldfogel’s main finding is that, in general, people spend a lot more on presents than they’re worth to those who receive them, a phenomenon that he calls “the deadweight loss of Christmas.” A deadweight loss is created when you spend eighty dollars to give me a sweater that I would spend only sixty-five dollars to buy myself. Waldfogel estimates that somewhere between ten and eighteen per cent of seasonal spending becomes deadweight loss, which means that billions of dollars a year is now going to waste.But, on the upside...
A study by the economists Sara Solnick and David Hemenway shows that we value unrequested gifts more than presents we ask for, because we assume that the former show more thought.So,
Waldfogel’s studies also suggest a very different solution: if most of the presents we buy are going to be less valuable in monetary terms than in sentimental ones, then there’s no reason to believe that the more expensive gift is a better gift. In fact, the more we spend at Christmas, the more we waste. We might actually be happier—and we’d certainly be wealthier—if we exchanged small, well-considered gifts rather than haunting the malls. Calculating the deadweight loss of Christmas gifts is a coldhearted project, but it leads to a paradoxically warmhearted conclusion: the fact of giving may be more important than what you give.All quotes from James Surowiecki
Nearly 100 Americans are dying every month. The United States is spending $2 billion a week."And the total?
Ouch. But there you go J-Mac.The United States has made a massive commitment to the future of Iraq in both blood and treasure. As of December 2006, nearly 2,900 Americans have lost their lives serving in Iraq. Another 21,000 Americans have been wounded, many severely.
To date, the United States has spent roughly $400 billion on the Iraq War, and costs are running about $8 billion per month. In addition, the United States must expect significant "tail costs" to come. Caring for veterans and replacing lost equipment will run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. Estimates run as high as $2 trillion for the final cost of the U.S. involvement in Iraq.
What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. Is there anything of which one can say, "Look! This is something new"? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow.See here.
"Some people think that we should be willing to swallow any kind of nonsense in order to 'preserve the unity of Canada.' I am not interested in a Canada that would be just a splash on the map, with a six-letter word scrawled across it. The only Canada I want to preserve is a Canada that can do something: for its own people, for the hungry two-thirds of the world, for the survival of the planet; not a phantom that can only watch helplessly as we all tumble down a steep place to destruction."
The hollowing out of the national idea -- of a vision of Canada as a coherent national entity, capable of acting with a single national purpose -- is now complete. We are well on our way to Belgiumhood, and that suits our political class just fine.
On this, as on so many other questions, the “Quebec consensus” is a fraud.But fine: some Quebecers think they are. People are entitled to believe what they want to believe. Quebec nationalists are entitled to argue that Quebec is a nation all they want. But somewhere, sometime, somebody has to put the other proposition: that Canada is a nation; that Quebecers are a part of that nation; that they have as much or more in common with other Canadians as they do with each other. Ordinarily, I would expect my prime minister, at least, to do that.
But my prime minister did not do that. My prime minister could discourse at length on his profound conviction, never voiced until now, that Quebecers are a nation, but never once could he say that Canadians are -- only bark out meaningless applause lines like “Canada is the greatest country in the world.”
..."this can only fan the flames it claims to extinguish. The message the Parliament of Canada is about to send to Quebecers is this: that, as a nation, they have more in common with each other than they do with other Canadians, whom they will increasingly see as another nation altogether; that their relationship with that other nation must, accordingly, be as that they maintain with other nations -- cordial, businesslike, to be sure, but distant; and that, like any self-respecting nation, they can on no account submit to be governed by another nation -- as represented, for example, by the majority of the Parliament of Canada.
So, in short, everyone ends up looking like an imbécile. And, as a consequence, Michael Ignatieff looks less ridiculous in comparison. So he and Jean Charest are probably the only winners in this sorry, sorry spectacle we should not have had to go through.
"We the undersigned feel enormous gratitude for the sacrifice made by all the Canadian Armed Forces through the ages in defence of this country and its values; acknowledge the very special nature of the sacrifice made by those who fought in the First World War in appalling conditions and with terrible loss of life; note that only three First World War veterans remain, and urge the Prime Minister that their sacrifice, and all of those they served with under arms from 1914-1918, be celebrated by offering a state funeral to the family of the last veteran of the First World War resident in Canada."
The Dominion Institute will send the petition on behalf of its signatories
to the Prime Minister of Canada on December 11, 2006.