Bud Talkinghorn: Drop Out Rate, Belinda's CPC -- Governments & Health, Junk Food, Children's Activity and Olympic Funding
The high drop-out rate in our high schools does not need to happen
Despite the grade inflation and emotional grade promotions, we are still faced with large numbers of drop-outs, who are doomed to marginal employment or the welfare rolls. The majority are boys, thus more problematic, as in their frustration, they are more likely to turn to crime or drug addiction. The reasons for this drop-out rate are complex. Some blame the feminization of the curriculum; other see a more pampered, narcissistic youth population who don't accept challenges. My take is that many boys and girls simply are not suited for academic schooling. They need to be streamed into what we used to call trade and technology fields. Give them the basic tools of literature and mathematics and let them apprentice for a skilled trade. In Australia for every academic high school, there were twice as many trade/technology schools. These schools divided the students' time between core academic, and industrial subjects, along with practical work in factories. They were assured of work at good wages upon graduation. Their drop-out rates were very low. In Canada, we must re-educate parents to be more practical in advising their children as to where to apply their talents. Blue-collar work is not demeaning and we have reached the stage where we have to import tradesmen. A relative entered the trades and is now a foreman making $85,000 a year in a Vancouver marine establishment. Had his father demanded he stay in academia, he would have been a failure in life. It just wasn't a fit. We must rethink our approach before we lose more kids.
I respect Ms. Stronach's principled stand on same-sex marriage. Obviously, she accepts the courts' Solomonic decisions. However, I can not accept that a bunch of judges, who are beholden to their mainly Liberal masters for their positions, can change a millennia-old institution. Canadians do not accept that opposition parties have the right to make legislation -- and that opposition is actually the minority by number of seats, not number of votes cast. Their combined number of votes exceeded that of the Liberals. Then, why should we allow a gay minority (3-4% of the population) to force a redefinition of marriage? I suspect that the Muslims who would favour polygamy far outnumber that gay percentage.
The Charter has some fine points; nevertheless, it is being used as a crowbar by every loony-tunes lobby group who want their pet ideologies made into law. And if that isn't bad enough, we have the Supremes 'writing-in' their own social engineering causes into law. What possible justification did they have for demanding Mickey Mouse sentences for aboriginal criminals? Since most victims of aborigines are other aborigines, that ruling is not only unjust, but also perverse nonsense. If the Supremes want to wear the hair shirt of white guilt, let them do it as individuals. Then there are the Supremes like Justice Basterache, whose main legal claim to fame is "Acadian rights". As though the Acadians need more rights! The current NB Premier is the product of an anglo parent and a franco parent but he obviously felt more himself as an Acadian, for he once ran for the Parti Acadien. This was a party that actually flirted with separating the French area (north and east) from the English area (center, south and west) of New Brunswick. Once ex-Premier and US ambassadorial appointee, Frank McKenna got the federal government to grant NB official bilingual status, the majority English were screwed. Most provincial government positions in the civil service go to bilingual francophones.
That cascaded into demands that private businesses, which do contract work for the government, also have bilingual employees. Seeing as government is king in NB, that means a lot of employees. The result is a large-scale exodus of English university grads from the province. One example comes from acquaintances where over half of their New Brunswick families' nieces and nephews have left for other provinces. The French language push of the federal government is moving apace in New Brunswick. Somehow, the Supreme Court does not see the politically motivated disenfranchizing of the English majority of that province as a problem. Nor do the draconian language laws of Quebec seem to demand their attention. To paraphrase George Orwell's motto in Animal Farm, "All Canadians are equal under the law, but some are more equal than others."
[An Aside from NJC: That is, unless they wish to give up on / postpone learning a perhaps more useful language, in favour of learning an acceptable level of French and mouthing the mantras about bilingualism in order to work--it is insidious and required for the decent jobs--learning French, not Mandarin, Arabic, Spanish, et cetera--but then, there is also a push to have the Chinese immigrants learn French, Chinese who have come to Canada. Is that what Promotion of French Minister Dyan Adam was doing in China?]
Unfortunately, I suspect that Belinda Stronach believes that the Supremes are unbiased and ideologically neutral. She has the same blinkered view that our college kids have come to accept. If the Conservative Party allows this social engineering to continue unchallenged, then they will be shunted to the political margins as the Red Tories were. The party must advance ideas that are occasionally unpopular with certain groups. Canadians are tired of "the big-tent" parties that, in reality, only stand for what the latest poll touted by the mainstream media tells them is currently popular. They want leadership on tough issues, not just what will appease.
Chew on this idea: a tax on junk food -- The poor would be penalized: critics; But minister says idea would help finance fitness for kids - and send a message
I am sure this minister means well and that children do need much more physical activity. Nevertheless . . . Perhaps parents should start by choosing to pull the plug on the television and going out with the children for physical activity. I suppose now that parents both have to work to live it is difficult. Governments could help by creating basic facilities for use by families and children together, not venues devoted to team or Olympic level sport. Nothing fancy, just rinks and playing fields, ski trails and the like geared to healthy families, not to creating Olympic level athletes.
In my opinion, it is the allocation of monies that needs to be retooled.
When Canadians entrusted the government with their health care, they gave away something more important, the freedom to choose. Now, under whatever guise, governments decide how we should live our lives; this effort is only one aspect. Governments are going to 'shape' Canadians up to lower health care costs. I am not condoning over-indulgence in junk food; I am concerned about how much freedom has been infringed upon and curtailed by governments over the period of the "free" health care years -- for our own good.
Why can we not exercise free will and free choice, whatever the consequences? Frankly, I prefer to make my choices for myself.
There is such a push in our society to have us live longer. Is living longer such a desired end -- if you have lived so as to have had a fruitful, fulfilling and relatively happy life? Give me freedom and a life as fine as I can manage; then, having done almost everything I ever wanted to do within reason, I would like a merciful end -- even one exacerbated by too much homemade bread, milk and cheese--death by Stilton comes to mind. Ah, in the end, everyone dies a suicide, doesn't she?
An idea to add a tax on junk food to finance athletic parks and facilities is still on the table, Municipal Affairs, Sports and Leisure Minister Jean-Marc Fournier said yesterday.
Despite criticism that it might penalize low-income Quebecers, Fournier insisted the plan would send the right message.
"When you drink soft drinks or eat chips, there is no nutrition in that," he said after announcing $150,000 in aid to encourage schools to promote a healthy lifestyle through various activities and initiatives.
"You can have (junk food). We don't want to ban that, but just to send the message that when you do that, you have to think about your health, and the government is thinking about your health by having sports infrastructures."
He said Quebec has not had significant money to invest in sports facilities for 30 years. There's a particular need for more soccer fields across the province, he added.
Has Quebec not received an inordinate amount of sport money from the federal government, in comparison to the other provinces? Unfortunately, for students, much went to build Olympic contenders, I believe. I have heard that Moncton, NB just got a wonderful new sports complex, whether from the province or from the feds or through monies hidden so as to make the source fuzzy. But that is Moncton, not the rest of the province. Nothing new there. If sportsmen and sportswomen love to do something beyond achieving good health, should they not do it and pay for it on their own, without funding from the rest of Canadians? It is often politically motivated allocation of money, anyway, is it not? Businesses will support athletes who are outstanding, if they desire to make money using them in advertising or if they want to be seen as good citizens--the warm fuzzies. If not, let life take its course. I would prefer the governments fund instructors, equipment and facilities to help all children be active, preferably, active in sports with the whole family, activities that may be continued throughout a lifetime.
The time has come for the federal government and the provinces to stop the politicization of every aspect of their dispensation of monies. Fund activities and sport in the interest of all Canada's children and families.
A four-year-old Newfoundland boy who lost a kidney to cancer and faced a staggering 30-month wait for an MRI received his scan yesterday after a surprise opening came up at a St. John's hospital.
[. . . . ] Across Canada, there are about 2,000 children waiting three to 30 months for MRI scans, according to Normand Laberge, chief executive officer of the Canadian Association of Radiologists. The average wait for a child is 12 months.
"Ryan's case is exposing what's not working in our system," Mr. Laberge said in a telephone interview from Montreal. "What the article has done is shown how we are abandoning kids on waiting lists with pretty important pathology. That cannot be accepted." [. . . . ]
And still governments, provincial and federal, tinker with how to gain political advantage with taxpayers' dollars?
