All posts by James W. Breckenridge

Homeless

RE: Christina

Leave a comment

I was speaking with her today and she said her son, living on the East Coast phoned her after reading about her on this website. She did not get his phone number or email and asked if I could do anything to help. So, in case he is unable to resist the superlative writing taking place on this site I ask he drop me a line with his phone number, but especially his e-mail address – since e-mail is such a fast and inexpensive way to get in touch. Just click on the JWB email link.

When I was a kid my parents moved a lot, but I always found them.
Rodney Dangerfield

Municipal

What Kind of politicians are THEY?

Leave a comment

The Whistler city council said NO to building a sports/arena complex, even though part of the price was to be borne by the province and the 2010 Olympic Committee. Why did they say no? Because they felt that building the complex was not in the best interest of the taxpayers of Whistler. There was no demonstrated need for the complex other that the one time usage as the venue for Paralympics sledge hockey (which can and will be held at another location), the costs just kept rising and the City’s money could be better spent on needed projects.

What is the matter with those people? To actually consider the taxpayers best interests and apply the idea of responsible spending of taxpayer dollars – what a concept. Councils around the province must be lying low and hoping fervently their taxpayers do not notice such behaviour, lest their taxpayers adopt the attitude that they have the right to demand that their councils spend the taxpayer’s dollars wisely, effectively and with due care and diligence.

Members of Abbotsford’s current council have to be praying that local citizens do not call on councillors to explain their massive capital plans. How could they possibly explain the nonsensical wasting of taxpayer dollars for a referendum that according to Councillor Beck is not to give taxpayers a say as to whether these are projects our City needs, but only to decide if Abbotsford should rush madly into these projects so as to: waste even more taxpayer dollars on skyrocketing costs in an over heated construction boom, fail to be able to adequately plan and design the structures to meet the needs of our community now and into the future, deny the citizens (who foot the bills) any input into setting what our community needs and priorities are for capital projects (i.e. fire hall; a library building whose wiring is not hazardous to electronics and serves to encourage and enable students/citizens to research and writing tools such as the internet and word processors).

Why, if council was to be held to a standard where they had to consider taxpayers best interest – councillors and city staff members under such a standard would not be building their own pet projects and wants, but be required to build projects that the citizens and the City really need. Next thing you know the taxpayers would be demanding their civil servants be both Civil and provide actual Service.

What ever could the city council of Whistler have been thinking to actually consider the best interests and needs of their citizens? How heretical can you get? Take the needs, wishes and best interests of the citizens into consideration while having to think and act with due deliberation – politicians and City staff must be trembling at the thought of actually behaving rationally and in the best interests of their citizens.

Hmmm

22 Very Important Questions

Leave a comment

I found this question posted on www.somethingcool.ca and wanted to share them. While reading through the questions several strange answers popped into my head – so of course I had to answer and post them all. If you have any really good answers send them of to the Editor at Something Cool News. Enjoy!

1. Why do banks charge you a “non-sufficient funds” fee on money they already know you don’t have?

i) Because they can.
ii) Because such fees are pure bottom-line profit.

2. If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends?

How else would they make a living??

3. What are Preparation A through Preparation G?

What Were – Real pains in the ass – having been bloody failures.

4. How come there aren’t B batteries?

There are. They are just repackaged and sold as the more expensive A batteries.

5. How do “Do not walk on the grass” signs get there?

The answer to that conundrum is contained in the question: “Which came first: the chicken or the egg”.

6. Why do black olives come in cans and green olives come in jars?

Because the “green olives” require sunlight for photosynthesis and thus require storage in jars to permit the penetration of sunlight to reach the green olives.

7. If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?

On their asses.

8. If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?

LUST.

9. If the #2 pencil is so popular, why is it still #2?

So it will continue to try harder.

10. Why is the alphabet in that order? Is it because of that song?

Do not be silly, of course it has nothing to do with the song. We simply order the alphabet according to the order the letters came out in when randomly drawn from a bag when the alphabet was first codified.

11. How do they get the deer to cross at that yellow road sign?

Genetics. First you put up a deer crossing sign at the desired location. All the deer that cross there survive and prosper. Those crossing elsewhere are struck and killed. A few generations and you have deer that cross at the Deer Crossing Signs.

12. How do you throw away a garbage can?

One generally uses one’s dominant hand, though the weaker among us use both hands.

13. How does a thermos know if the drink should be hot or cold?

Elementary physics. Hot liquids cause the stresses upon the thermos surface to be those of expansion. Cold liquids cause the stresses upon the thermos surface to be those of contraction.

14. How does the guy who drives the snowplow get to work in the mornings?

S/He doesn’t, snowplows start working at night. If they had to go in in the morning – Same as anyone with any sense in snow – Taxi.

15. Do you realize how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?

One if you set the diameter of the hole sufficiently large . Alternatively the number of holes depends entirely upon what value is set as the diameter of a hole, whether it is a fixed diameter for all the holes and if it is not fixed then what formula is used to determine the diameter of a hole vis-à-vis its neighbours.

16. If a word in the dictionary were misspelled, how would we know?

As happened centuries ago with the X words (where the original spellings were such as Xcentric, Xcess, Xcitant) which had an E added before the X by error in the first printing of an English dictionary, these errors become the official “correct” spelling. Thus, by definition, no dictionary word is ever misspelled.

17. If you’re in a vehicle going the speed of light, what happens when you turn on the headlights?

A waste of power. Now what happens when you turn on the headlights in a vehicle exceeding the speed of light is fascinating, but that is not what the question posed was – pity.

18. Why didn’t Noah swat those two mosquitoes?

Because Noah was a sadist.

19. Why do hot dogs come 10 to a package and hot dog buns only 8?

It is the result of a coordinated/co-operative marketing plan between the Meat Packers and the Bakers. You buy an extra package of buns for the two extra hotdogs. Then you need to buy more hotdogs to use up the leftover buns. And so on in a rising spiral of both bun and hotdog sales

20. Why do tourists go to the tops of tall buildings and then put money into telescopes so they can see things on the ground close-up?

Because there are no telescopes at ground level.

21. Why is it that bullets ricochet off of Superman’s chest, but he ducks when the gun is thrown at him?

Slow reflexes.

22. What if the Hokey Pokey IS what it’s all about?

Have you not been paying attention to the world around you?? The Hokey Pokey IS what it is all about.

Addiction

He had no fear of publically revealing Benightedness

Leave a comment

I butted into a loud discussion outside the library because the line about shooting down those who use illegal drugs in public contained a level of stupidity that exceeded a level I could tolerate. It turned out that he was upset about those who feed their illegal drug addictions in public and were not being rounded up and tossed into jail. I assume he saw the news reports about the Economist article about the drug use and poverty on the east side and in a unthinking, knee-jerk reaction decided the solution was to retreat into stupidity and avoid the pain of actually thinking about such things as cause and effect. The way so much of the public chooses to react unthinkingly to complex issues would almost make you think that using their brains for something other than a spacer between their ears caused them great pain.

From what I could determine from his ravings, he was upset that this illegal drug use was taking place in public and that something should be done to drive this activity out of sight. I have to agree that it is an unpleasant sight, but I would argue it is necessary that it occur out in full view for it is this openness that denies the majority of public their favourite refuge from complex, messy, thought requiring issues – Denial. For all too much of the public out of sight is also out of mind. Even if we must endure the ignorant and feebleminded ramblings of those who are unable to understand complex problems and that the complexity of the problem is going to require creative and many faceted approaches in address these complex problems. This in your face openness generates discussion – some of which will be cognizant and directed to taking effective actions.

Locking the drug users up is not a cost effective approach to reducing the scourge of addiction and the side effects caused by our current drug policies. I say cost effect as failing to consider costs vs. benefits not only results in the waste of vast sums on money, but prevents basing actions on approaches that can be effective. In calling for the police and courts to be throwing all the drug users in jail the question becomes “who is going to pay all the costs”, the $1,000.000,000s needed. When I posed the question of paying to the “shoot ‘em” advocate above, once he had shifted to the “I only want to shot ‘em because the courts will not lock them up” line of defending his demonstrated lack of ability to cogitate, I got a tirade about government waste. All of this taking place as he stood in public feeding his addiction, which fortunately for him is nicotine and legal (at least at this point in time).

They speak of a “drug problem” and a “drug war” Some are wrong or some are lying (or spinning the truth) in order to pursue their agendas or protect their vested interests. Have you ever seen drugs run up someone’s body and force themselves up their nose? When was the last time you saw a drug turn itself into smoke and force its way into an innocent bystanders lungs? No this is a people problem. When you wage this war you are waging it on people, as though their addiction was not enough of a burden and punishment. Reality is that because at its very roots this is a people problem, it is going to be extremely messy and lacking in neat, easy answers. In truth, given the nature of people, there is no actual solution. There are decisions we can make and actions we can take that will be more effective than others – provided we are willing to see the reality of the situation for what it is, and not as we want it to be. Without any solution, outside of human extinction, we have to look at what set of problems we can best achieve effective actions against and what set of insolvable effects we would rather live with.
It is not neat, tidy and definitely not a reality we like – but that is Life.

Consider, Municipal

Paranoia?

Leave a comment

Did you read the News story about using the helicopter in catching a stolen car? I did and really did not spare another thought to the matter, except the thought that a helicopter is useful for following and guiding ground units to avoid the need for high speed chases to catch criminals in vehicles.

Until I was standing near the Salvation Army watching the helicopter circle time after time, six, seven, eight times… just up there watching. Then a member of the homeless community told me about the ‘copter seeming to follow him as he walked from the Salvation Army to Wal-Mart. It just sat there hovering, as if waiting for him to come running out of the store after stealing something. After all, every police officer knows if you need to be dealing with the Salvation Army or are a member of the homeless community, you belong to a class of people who are doing (or will be doing) something illegal.

This got me thinking about the privacy questions and issues raised by not only the helicopter, but by the technology available to “law enforcement” in general. Think about it. How often is something like the ‘copter needed to accomplish a specific purpose or task? What is it doing the rest of the time? It spends the vast majority of its air time just sitting up there, providing a bird’s eye view to peep at everyone and anyone.

If you raised this point with the Abbotsford police department I am sure they will have fine words to reassure the public and spin this spying as not something the public needs “bother their non-police heads” about. Trust us. I admit that my view is coloured by my experiences with the police interactions with the homeless community. After all, it is far easier to spot an illegal tent in the woods from above that it is to notice actual property theft crimes. Which reflects why so much police time is wasted moving along the homeless, while the only reason to report stolen property is to obtain a police file number for insurance claim purposes. As if the police cannot waste enough resources harassing the homeless enough from the ground, they now can do it from the air.

You cannot UN-invent the ‘copter, besides which it has some very useful purposes. However, it also has a large potential for misuse and raises some very Orwellian questions concerning its “big brother is watching” abilities. We need to address these issues not by burying our heads in the sand but by thinking about and putting in place safeguards to protect the publics right to Privacy.

We need clear policies and guidelines designed to protect us from any unreasonable spying, protecting our right to, and expectations of, reasonable privacy. We also need some way to provide “encouragement” for obedience to these guidelines.

Based on my experiences of the way the police behave towards the homeless, the feedback I have gotten from members of the general public about their interactions with our local police force and the privacy protection issues technology is raising I think that it is time the general public had input into police behaviour and some influence on police priorities. This is why I believe that the citizens of Abbotsford must exert civilian control over our police department. The way to do this is with a civilian board overseeing the department and civilian review of police actions and complaints against the members of the Abbotsford Police Department.

PS it is back again this weekend and behaving in the annoying manner of one of thyose people who insist on looking over your shoulder constantly to read what you are reading or see what you are doing – it is just with the their great height there are many more shoulders for them to look over.