When I was a small child growing up in the 1980s, I heard nothing but good things about Toronto's public transit system. I can still remember enjoying myself riding on the TTC's buses, streetcars and subways. My parents even used to say to me that we had one of the best public transportation systems in the world. I'm not sure if that was true, but I do know that back in the 1980s, public transit in Toronto was pretty good. But fast forward about three decades later, and I am hard-pressed to hear anyone say anything good about public transit in this city. All I hear most of the time are people complaining about it. How slow it is, how crowded it is, how antiquated it is, how rude the staff are, and how many times parts of it break down. There are indeed a lot of problems with public transit in Toronto, but it basically all boils down to the fact that the system has not kept pace with the city's population. In fact, the system that was in place in the 1980s is basically the same system that is in place now, and it is woefully inadequate in 2014 when Toronto has hundreds of thousands more people living in it. So what's happened over the last 30 years? Why has our public transit system not been adapted to fit the needs of today's Toronto? The answer mostly lies with the folks who make the decisions regarding public transit: our noble politicians and bureaucrats.
Thirty Years of Endless Squabbling and Dithering:
Over the past three decades, plenty of politicians and bureaucrats have come up with plans to modernize public transit in Toronto. It seems like not a year goes by without somebody at City Hall bringing out a map featuring new subway lines, GO train routes, or LRT projects. There have been some great ideas, but most of them have not left the paper that they've been written on. And in the few cases when the shovels have been dug into the ground, a change in leadership takes place at some level of government and the shovels come right back out. To make a long story short, our illustrious bureaucrats and politicians
haven't been able to make up their minds on very much or agree on very
much in the past three decades, leading to a situation in which
Toronto's public transit system has changed little since the 80s, but
the city's population has grown by hundreds of thousands within the same
time frame. Now as we all should know, earlier this fall, we had a municipal election that put John Tory in the mayor's chair. Tory, who I supported in one of my blogs during the campaign, Why I Will Support John Tory for Mayor of Toronto, has his own plan that he calls Smartrack. It looks very promising, which is one of the reasons why I supported Mr. Tory for mayor. I just hope it goes where many other transit plans haven't gone before: off the drawing board and into Toronto's public transit network.
How Do We Make Public Transit Work Again?
I have some ideas that I think would make public transit in Toronto a lot better, but they're certainly not original ideas. In other words, plenty of folks have put these ideas forward in the past, but like most proposals that have to do with public transit in this city, they almost never see the light of day. Here are some examples:
1. Innovate and Upgrade
What do I mean by this? Basically, I mean modernizing our public transit system's infrastructure. Our system uses some very old technology, to the point where people from some cities around the world could come over hear and laugh at us. Thankfully, I'm finally beginning to see some of this being done after so many years. New buses have slowly been rolling out over the past decade and the city has just this year begun to replace our aging streetcars.
We also need to find new ways of making the system run more efficiently without making wholesale changes. This is what I mean by innovation. For example, the recent decision to use the honour system in regards to fare payment when passengers board our streetcars will save riders a lot of time because studies have shown that much of the time that streetcars lie idle is owed to people getting on and off them, especially on the really busy streetcar lines, like King St.
Actually, I would prefer we ditch streetcars altogether, like almost all other major North American cities have, because unless they have their own right-of-way, as on St. Clair or Spadina Ave., they are a major source of gridlock and pollution, holding up traffic behind them as they wait for people to get on and off. Unfortunately, City Hall has made it clear that streetcars will remain for the foreseeable future. They do, of course, move a lot more people than buses and even I wouldn't recommend getting rid of them until we can replace them with subway lines - we can only pray at this point.
2. Less! Less! Less!
They call our TTC "the better way", but the reality for a lot of people in Toronto is that it's the only way, because cars are too expensive for many of our residents, and this city is far too big for people to be walking or biking everywhere across town. So when TTC or GO fares are raised, many folks in Toronto feel the pinch. Unfortunately, City Hall usually has no choice but to raise fares to cover increasing costs and pay for equipment and service upgrades. Why? Because our politicians at the federal and provincial levels simply won't pony up more dough for big cities like Toronto to improve public transit. In fact, from what I've heard, Toronto's public transit system is one of the least subsidized in North America with a much higher portion of its revenue coming from the fare box than in many other cities. I believe that our goal should be to make public transit less expensive, not more expensive. That means avoiding fare increases, especially for frequent users. It also means not making new transit services outrageously expensive. Case in point: the new Union-Pearson Express train. The recently announced fare of $27.50 is anything but fair. Now of course, the stiffs at Metrolinx say that this service is not meant to be a commuter service for Torontonians, but rather a service for international business travellers. Okay, then let these international business travellers pay for it! Don't use our tax dollars to build it and then stick us with a ludicrous price for using it. As I've said, our bureaucrats and politicians are often part of the problem when it comes to Toronto transit, rather than part of the solution.
3. More! More! More!
Our public transit system needs more of everything. More buses, more subways, and so forth. But of course, for this to happen, the system is going to need more money. As I've already said, public transit in Toronto is already too dependent on the fare box to finance itself. It needs more money from the federal and provincial governments and that money needs to be spent wisely. Too much money earmarked for transit has been squandered over the years on things like the St. Clair streetcar right-of-way, which proved to be an epic disaster for businesses in that area of the city, not to mention the Sheppard subway to nowhere, otherwise knows as the Sheppard "stubway", which carries less riders per day than the streetcar on King St.
4. Introduce Competition into the Public Transit Sector
One of the biggest problems with transit in Toronto is one that few people talk about: the TTC's monopoly. Why is this a problem? Because the TTC lacks the incentive to improve itself that a good dose of capitalist competition could provide. After all, why would the folks at the TTC worry about how good their service is when they know that many people in the city have no other choice if they want to get from point A to point B? A lot of people think that TTC should stand for "take the car", but the fact of the matter is that cars are not an option for many people in Toronto and so the TTC is the only option that they can afford. Like I said before, for many, the TTC isn't "the better way", it's the only way - and this needs to change.
Recently, some folks in Toronto's Liberty Village got so fed up with inadequate TTC service that they got funds together to create their own local shuttle bus service complete with free Wi-Fi (see: Public Need Not Fear Private Transit Test Run on King St.). For now, this is simply an experiment in private entrepreneurship and there are doubts as to whether or not it can work. In fact, I recently went to the shuttle bus service's website, ridelinesix.com, only to find it asking for my e-mail so that they can let me know once they re-launch the service. My point, however, is that the legal monopoly that the TTC has on public transit in Toronto should end and private providers should be allowed to move in and offer alternative means of public transportation. Competition would not just mean an added incentive for the TTC to improve its service, but would also lead to less crowding on the TTC because some riders would opt to use the private alternatives.
Improved Transit Means Less Gridlock
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the better a public transit system is, the more likely people are to use it and leave their cars at home. The joke that TTC stands for "take the car" basically sums up all the reasons why many people who have a choice would rather fight the traffic in their own private vehicle than get onto a slow and overcrowded bus, streetcar, or subway train. I see some glimmers of hope in the new mayor as well as in the slight improvements to infrastructure and service that have been undertaken in recent years, but I also see that we've still got a long way to go before our public transit system regains the world class reputation it once had when I was a small child.
Monday, December 15, 2014
Sunday, December 14, 2014
Please, Please, PLEASE Pick Up After Your Pet!
It's pretty much the most disgusting job that comes with owning a dog. Yes, I'm talking about picking up after them once they've done their business. It's not only the law in most places, it's just the right thing to do. But unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of unscrupulous dog owners who don't think they have to pick up Fido's mess.
There are a few reasons why you should pick up after your dog. Firstly, none of us, whether we own a dog or not, should have to go through the misfortune of stepping in your doggie's doo doo and having to clean it off our footwear - or for that matter any other part of our clothes. The second reason is all about having respect for both private and public property. Back in the summer, I wrote a post that I called The Great Dog Debate. Among the things I discussed in that post was that sometimes you do have no choice but to allow your dog to urinate or defecate on someone's private lawn. When you gotta go, you gotta go, right? This is often the situation I'm faced with because all the lawns on my street are private lawns, most of them belonging to apartment or condo complexes. And quite frankly I'm fed up with seeing the amount of dog feces that dots these private lawns. There is no reason why the owners of whichever dogs left the mess behind should not have picked it up. Okay, if your dog has the runs, I'm a little more understanding. But most of the mess I've seen on frequent trips with my own dog could have easily been picked up. This becomes especially clear whenever there's big snowstorm followed by a big meltdown. Here in Toronto this week, for example, we had a pretty decent snowfall with much of the city getting ten to fifteen centimeters worth of accumulation. Fast forward a couple of days and a warm spell has started melting all of the white stuff to the point where almost all of it should be gone in the next few days. What does all this have to do with dog owners not picking up? Well, once all the snow melts, the lawns on which it accumulated essentially become minefields. Step on these lawns at your own risks and take extra caution, lest you step on one of the landmines - or perhaps we should call them poop mines. Thankfully, there will be no explosion and your feet will stay intact, but you'll be left with a nice, brown surprise to clean off the soles of your boots. You could, of course, try to avoid the minefields by keeping off the lawns, but even this is no guarantee that you'll stay clean, because many dog owners allow their best friends to defecate on the streets and sidewalks without having the decency to pick up after them. It's bad enough that some dog owners don't have respect for private property, but they show no respect for public property either. What part of stoop and scoop do these people not understand!?
And if the reasons I have stated above don't convince dog owners to pick up after Rover, then how about this: Getting feces on yourself is not only unsightly and gross, it's also unhealthy and unsanitary. Check out this list of diseases that human beings can get from dog feces. Scary, isn't it? Now of course, all people who come into contact with pet waste should do their due diligence and wash their hands after they've been exposed. But dog owners in particular must also do their part - PICK UP AFTER YOUR PET!
Okay, I understand that no dog owner is perfect. I'm sure that most of us have failed to pick up after Fido on certain occasions. Nevertheless, we should always do our best to make sure that our best friend's mess is not there for some poor soul to step on or even get sick from. So let's all be smart, be responsible and do the right thing. Let's pick up after our pets.
There are a few reasons why you should pick up after your dog. Firstly, none of us, whether we own a dog or not, should have to go through the misfortune of stepping in your doggie's doo doo and having to clean it off our footwear - or for that matter any other part of our clothes. The second reason is all about having respect for both private and public property. Back in the summer, I wrote a post that I called The Great Dog Debate. Among the things I discussed in that post was that sometimes you do have no choice but to allow your dog to urinate or defecate on someone's private lawn. When you gotta go, you gotta go, right? This is often the situation I'm faced with because all the lawns on my street are private lawns, most of them belonging to apartment or condo complexes. And quite frankly I'm fed up with seeing the amount of dog feces that dots these private lawns. There is no reason why the owners of whichever dogs left the mess behind should not have picked it up. Okay, if your dog has the runs, I'm a little more understanding. But most of the mess I've seen on frequent trips with my own dog could have easily been picked up. This becomes especially clear whenever there's big snowstorm followed by a big meltdown. Here in Toronto this week, for example, we had a pretty decent snowfall with much of the city getting ten to fifteen centimeters worth of accumulation. Fast forward a couple of days and a warm spell has started melting all of the white stuff to the point where almost all of it should be gone in the next few days. What does all this have to do with dog owners not picking up? Well, once all the snow melts, the lawns on which it accumulated essentially become minefields. Step on these lawns at your own risks and take extra caution, lest you step on one of the landmines - or perhaps we should call them poop mines. Thankfully, there will be no explosion and your feet will stay intact, but you'll be left with a nice, brown surprise to clean off the soles of your boots. You could, of course, try to avoid the minefields by keeping off the lawns, but even this is no guarantee that you'll stay clean, because many dog owners allow their best friends to defecate on the streets and sidewalks without having the decency to pick up after them. It's bad enough that some dog owners don't have respect for private property, but they show no respect for public property either. What part of stoop and scoop do these people not understand!?
And if the reasons I have stated above don't convince dog owners to pick up after Rover, then how about this: Getting feces on yourself is not only unsightly and gross, it's also unhealthy and unsanitary. Check out this list of diseases that human beings can get from dog feces. Scary, isn't it? Now of course, all people who come into contact with pet waste should do their due diligence and wash their hands after they've been exposed. But dog owners in particular must also do their part - PICK UP AFTER YOUR PET!
Okay, I understand that no dog owner is perfect. I'm sure that most of us have failed to pick up after Fido on certain occasions. Nevertheless, we should always do our best to make sure that our best friend's mess is not there for some poor soul to step on or even get sick from. So let's all be smart, be responsible and do the right thing. Let's pick up after our pets.
Saturday, December 13, 2014
I Hate Winter!
Remember when you were a kid and you couldn't wait for the winter to come and the snow to fall? Oh yeah, when you're a kid, winter is all fun and games. It sure was for me. Building snowmen, making snow angels, snow ball fights, tobogganing, etc. I used to love winter when I was a kid. But now that I'm all grown up, winter can never end soon enough. And I'm sure that I'm not the only one that thinks so, even in Canada where we're supposed to be used to harsh winters and all the crap that comes with them.
Remember last winter? It was the winter from hell frozen over where all of us in Canada endured minus double-digit temperatures without end; where sidewalks, streets and even lawns became giant skating rinks, and where a freak ice storm knocked out power to thousands of residents in my home city of Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area - Just in time for Christmas. Now of course, not all winters are as bad as last year's (THANK GOD!), but no matter how good or bad a winter is, chances are that for at least some part of it, you're gonna get screwed.
Let's just pretend that it's the morning of a big snow storm. Being a responsible person, you've probably checked the forecast the night before to find out what kind of misery you'll be facing on the way to work. And on the morning of the big snowstorm, you get up extra early so that you can get to work on time, even though you still feel like your head just hit the pillow. But before you can even think about heading out, you'll need to figure out what to do with the kids, because school has been cancelled due to heavy snow fall. Once you've figured that out, you go outside and find your car covered by several feet of the white stuff. So you spend a few minutes brushing off the snow and scraping off the ice. Now you're finally ready to drive to work. Uh oh, not so fast! Your car won't start. Time to break out the jumper cables! You eventually do get your car started after fifteen minutes or so, then you spend another five or so minutes warming it up before you're finally able to get it moving - or so you thought. Your driveway is covered in snow and before your car will move even an inch, you'll have to shovel your way out. This will take, say, another half hour (at least). At last, you get on the road - only to fight the seemingly never-ending traffic that is bad at the best of times and almost unbearable during winter storms. And for those of you who rely on public transit to get to work; sorry, but it's not going to be any easier for you either. As usual, the TTC and GO Transit struggle to cope with the big, bad winter. Your GO train is delayed and you won't get to work on time. The Scarborough RT is frozen (oh, now there's a surprise) as is the entire streetcar network. And as usual, the subway system just can't keep up. Ready for the really bad news yet? You have go through this crap all over again to get home! Isn't winter great? Yeah, I don't think so either.
Remember last winter? It was the winter from hell frozen over where all of us in Canada endured minus double-digit temperatures without end; where sidewalks, streets and even lawns became giant skating rinks, and where a freak ice storm knocked out power to thousands of residents in my home city of Toronto and the Greater Toronto Area - Just in time for Christmas. Now of course, not all winters are as bad as last year's (THANK GOD!), but no matter how good or bad a winter is, chances are that for at least some part of it, you're gonna get screwed.
Let's just pretend that it's the morning of a big snow storm. Being a responsible person, you've probably checked the forecast the night before to find out what kind of misery you'll be facing on the way to work. And on the morning of the big snowstorm, you get up extra early so that you can get to work on time, even though you still feel like your head just hit the pillow. But before you can even think about heading out, you'll need to figure out what to do with the kids, because school has been cancelled due to heavy snow fall. Once you've figured that out, you go outside and find your car covered by several feet of the white stuff. So you spend a few minutes brushing off the snow and scraping off the ice. Now you're finally ready to drive to work. Uh oh, not so fast! Your car won't start. Time to break out the jumper cables! You eventually do get your car started after fifteen minutes or so, then you spend another five or so minutes warming it up before you're finally able to get it moving - or so you thought. Your driveway is covered in snow and before your car will move even an inch, you'll have to shovel your way out. This will take, say, another half hour (at least). At last, you get on the road - only to fight the seemingly never-ending traffic that is bad at the best of times and almost unbearable during winter storms. And for those of you who rely on public transit to get to work; sorry, but it's not going to be any easier for you either. As usual, the TTC and GO Transit struggle to cope with the big, bad winter. Your GO train is delayed and you won't get to work on time. The Scarborough RT is frozen (oh, now there's a surprise) as is the entire streetcar network. And as usual, the subway system just can't keep up. Ready for the really bad news yet? You have go through this crap all over again to get home! Isn't winter great? Yeah, I don't think so either.
Monday, December 8, 2014
How Do We Reduce Pet Homelessness and Unnecessary Euthanasia? We Make Pet Ownership Easier and More Affordable
Earlier this year, one of the dog rescues I work with posted a 13 year old yellow Labrador Retriever on a pet adoption website. The dog's story was that his owner lost his job and couldn't afford to keep him any longer. This broke my heart, to say the least. I too have a yellow lab that is not much younger than this dog and I couldn't imagine having to put her up for adoption because I could no longer afford to keep her. Nevertheless, I believe that this person did the right thing for his dog, as heartbreaking as it may have been. Fortunately, with the help of the people at the rescue, the dog was quickly adopted. Other dogs and other pets in general aren't so lucky, especially older ones. Many of them end up in shelters, where they are at risk of being euthanized, and some are just plain abandoned by their owners and left to fend for themselves.
Let's face it, owning and caring for a pet is expensive. The costs of medical care for pets in particular can seem insane, especially when your pet gets older and requires more attention from the vet. Sadly, many folks are forced to give up their pets or even euthanize them because the financial cost is too prohibitive. Over the last couple of decades, pet insurance providers have appeared offering affordable plans that help pet owners cover the costs of taking care of their fur kids should the need arise. But of course, pet insurance isn't perfect, because just like private insurance companies that provide health care coverage for human beings, there are many restrictions and conditions that will still leave you paying for Fido's vet care out of your own pocket.
I would strongly contend that if pet ownership was made easier and more affordable, there would be a lot less homeless pets out there and a lot less cases of pets being euthanized for financial reasons. But how do we make pet ownership easier and more affordable? Here are three of my own ideas:
1. Tax Deductions for Vet Costs
As I've already said, the amount you may be forced to pay the vet to keep your pet healthy can seem outrageous. For me, it seems like almost every time I visit the vet with my dog, I'm out at least fifty to one hundred dollars. In fact, if your pet requires anything complicated, like surgery, you may have to shell out hundreds, even thousands of dollars. But what if you were able to claim tax deductions for the costs of your vet bills or for pet insurance? I think this would make a huge difference and help prevent pets from being put up for adoption, abandoned or even euthanized just because the financial cost of keeping them is too great.
I would not, however, propose that governments allow tax deductions for just anyone who chooses to own pets. In fact, I would restrict such deductions to those pet owners who adopted their pets through registered charitable groups that specialize in finding pets new homes. This will encourage potential pet owners to acquire their new furry friends by adopting a homeless animal rather than shopping for one from a breeder or pet store.
2. Financial Aid for Pet Owners
Some groups and charities for animals in need have taken up the task of making pet ownership more affordable. The Toronto Humane Society, for example, offers low-cost spaying and neutering services for pets. Many veterinary clinics have also chipped in, offering customers who can't afford to pay everything up front for their pets' care more flexible payment plans. But I think there's more that can be done, like giving money-tight pet owners some financial aid so that they can continue to keep their pets rather than having to give them up. I think it would have been better, for example, if that poor man I mentioned at the beginning was given funds that would have allowed him to continue feeding and vetting his furry companion. There would, of course, have to be some measures of accountability put in place for such an idea to work. For instance, had this man I mentioned been given money to help him keep his dog, he would only be given it if he could produce receipts for the dog's food and medical expenses, plus provide documentation of his financial situation that would rationalize him being qualified for financial assistance.
I think that this kind of financial aid program (maybe we should call it pet social assistance or pet welfare) is something all charitable organizations for animals in need should consider implementing, but I don't think they should have to do it alone. I believe governments, especially at the municipal level where animal services are usually managed and regulated, should be involved as well. Perhaps, for example, taxes could be imposed on registered breeders to help pay for financial aid programs for pet owners as well as other services related to controlling the pet population and ensuring the well-being of pets.
3. Encourage Pet-Friendly Policies in Rental Units and Condos
If you've ever looked for an apartment to rent or a condo to buy, chances are you've probably come across plenty of postings that say, "no pets" or "pet restriction". And I have personally heard the stories of many pets who end up homeless because their owners have to move in to some place where pets aren't allowed. Okay, I understand that there are a lot of folks out there who aren't "pet people" and don't want to live in a place where there are pets that can make noise and even cause damage. So I don't believe that landlords and condo corporations should be forced to accept pets onto their properties - the one exception being service animals, such as guide dogs. I would suggest, however, that governments offer up tax incentives to landlords and condo corporations with pet-friendly policies. Doing so may encourage some landlords and condo corporations to liberalize their pet policies and open up more options for pet owners struggling to find new places to live where they can continue to keep their furry friends.
Any Other Ideas?
The three ideas I mentioned above may not be new or even untested. For all I know, perhaps one or more of these ideas has already been put into practice somewhere. If that's the case and you folks who are reading this know about it, I would love to hear about it. So please feel free to let me know if any of these ideas are being tried somewhere around the world, or if you have another idea that you think would make owning a pet easier and more affordable. Because making pet ownership easier and more affordable will mean less homeless animals, less animals being euthanized needlessly and a lot less broken hearts.
Let's face it, owning and caring for a pet is expensive. The costs of medical care for pets in particular can seem insane, especially when your pet gets older and requires more attention from the vet. Sadly, many folks are forced to give up their pets or even euthanize them because the financial cost is too prohibitive. Over the last couple of decades, pet insurance providers have appeared offering affordable plans that help pet owners cover the costs of taking care of their fur kids should the need arise. But of course, pet insurance isn't perfect, because just like private insurance companies that provide health care coverage for human beings, there are many restrictions and conditions that will still leave you paying for Fido's vet care out of your own pocket.
I would strongly contend that if pet ownership was made easier and more affordable, there would be a lot less homeless pets out there and a lot less cases of pets being euthanized for financial reasons. But how do we make pet ownership easier and more affordable? Here are three of my own ideas:
1. Tax Deductions for Vet Costs
As I've already said, the amount you may be forced to pay the vet to keep your pet healthy can seem outrageous. For me, it seems like almost every time I visit the vet with my dog, I'm out at least fifty to one hundred dollars. In fact, if your pet requires anything complicated, like surgery, you may have to shell out hundreds, even thousands of dollars. But what if you were able to claim tax deductions for the costs of your vet bills or for pet insurance? I think this would make a huge difference and help prevent pets from being put up for adoption, abandoned or even euthanized just because the financial cost of keeping them is too great.
I would not, however, propose that governments allow tax deductions for just anyone who chooses to own pets. In fact, I would restrict such deductions to those pet owners who adopted their pets through registered charitable groups that specialize in finding pets new homes. This will encourage potential pet owners to acquire their new furry friends by adopting a homeless animal rather than shopping for one from a breeder or pet store.
2. Financial Aid for Pet Owners
Some groups and charities for animals in need have taken up the task of making pet ownership more affordable. The Toronto Humane Society, for example, offers low-cost spaying and neutering services for pets. Many veterinary clinics have also chipped in, offering customers who can't afford to pay everything up front for their pets' care more flexible payment plans. But I think there's more that can be done, like giving money-tight pet owners some financial aid so that they can continue to keep their pets rather than having to give them up. I think it would have been better, for example, if that poor man I mentioned at the beginning was given funds that would have allowed him to continue feeding and vetting his furry companion. There would, of course, have to be some measures of accountability put in place for such an idea to work. For instance, had this man I mentioned been given money to help him keep his dog, he would only be given it if he could produce receipts for the dog's food and medical expenses, plus provide documentation of his financial situation that would rationalize him being qualified for financial assistance.
I think that this kind of financial aid program (maybe we should call it pet social assistance or pet welfare) is something all charitable organizations for animals in need should consider implementing, but I don't think they should have to do it alone. I believe governments, especially at the municipal level where animal services are usually managed and regulated, should be involved as well. Perhaps, for example, taxes could be imposed on registered breeders to help pay for financial aid programs for pet owners as well as other services related to controlling the pet population and ensuring the well-being of pets.
3. Encourage Pet-Friendly Policies in Rental Units and Condos
If you've ever looked for an apartment to rent or a condo to buy, chances are you've probably come across plenty of postings that say, "no pets" or "pet restriction". And I have personally heard the stories of many pets who end up homeless because their owners have to move in to some place where pets aren't allowed. Okay, I understand that there are a lot of folks out there who aren't "pet people" and don't want to live in a place where there are pets that can make noise and even cause damage. So I don't believe that landlords and condo corporations should be forced to accept pets onto their properties - the one exception being service animals, such as guide dogs. I would suggest, however, that governments offer up tax incentives to landlords and condo corporations with pet-friendly policies. Doing so may encourage some landlords and condo corporations to liberalize their pet policies and open up more options for pet owners struggling to find new places to live where they can continue to keep their furry friends.
Any Other Ideas?
The three ideas I mentioned above may not be new or even untested. For all I know, perhaps one or more of these ideas has already been put into practice somewhere. If that's the case and you folks who are reading this know about it, I would love to hear about it. So please feel free to let me know if any of these ideas are being tried somewhere around the world, or if you have another idea that you think would make owning a pet easier and more affordable. Because making pet ownership easier and more affordable will mean less homeless animals, less animals being euthanized needlessly and a lot less broken hearts.
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Only Netanyahu Can Lead Israel
As I feared, the time that should be spent solving Israel's many problems will instead be spent on an election campaign that the country just doesn't need right now. Predictably, Israel's uninspiring left-wing politicians have decided to make this election all about deposing Prime Minister Netanyahu, notwithstanding the fact that none of them can even hope to be half the leader that Bibi is.
Okay, I know that Bibi isn't perfect. No person is. But who would you have replace him? No one amongst Bibi's opponents, or even his supporters, has what it takes to fill his shoes. For me, Prime Minister Netanyahu is our modern-day Winston Churchill. Like Churchill, he tells people what the reality is, even if they don't want to hear it or choose to ignore it. And like Churchill, he is always proven right. In the 1930s, before World War II, Churchill repeatedly tried to warn the leaders of the time about the danger that Nazi Germany presented to the world, but was often scoffed at and ignored. And as we all know, the failure of world leaders to heed Churchill's warnings came in the form of World War II and the Holocaust. Today, Bibi is tirelessly trying to present to his own nation and to the world the dangers posed by global terrorism and countries like Iran which support it. And just like Winston Churchill, he too is not being taken seriously by many of the world's current power brokers. So unfortunately, history seems to be repeating itself. My fear is that Israelis will elect a new Prime Minister that does not have Bibi's experience and is not in touch with the current reality as Bibi is.
I certainly do not agree with everything that Prime Minister Netanyahu does. I have said, for example, that his recent attempt to pass a law strictly defining Israel as a Jewish state is a waste of time and energy. I also believe that he needs to do a much better job dealing with Israel's socio-economic problems. Right now, many Israelis believe that Bibi does not understand the plight of the average Israeli citizen struggling to make ends meet because of the soaring cost of living in the country. And perhaps most importantly, Bibi needs to try and sound less arrogant. Yes, I understand that when you're right as much as Bibi is, it's hard not to be arrogant. Nevertheless, he has to try, because now more than ever, Israel must have a seasoned leader like Netanyahu who knows how to protect the interests of the country.
Okay, I know that Bibi isn't perfect. No person is. But who would you have replace him? No one amongst Bibi's opponents, or even his supporters, has what it takes to fill his shoes. For me, Prime Minister Netanyahu is our modern-day Winston Churchill. Like Churchill, he tells people what the reality is, even if they don't want to hear it or choose to ignore it. And like Churchill, he is always proven right. In the 1930s, before World War II, Churchill repeatedly tried to warn the leaders of the time about the danger that Nazi Germany presented to the world, but was often scoffed at and ignored. And as we all know, the failure of world leaders to heed Churchill's warnings came in the form of World War II and the Holocaust. Today, Bibi is tirelessly trying to present to his own nation and to the world the dangers posed by global terrorism and countries like Iran which support it. And just like Winston Churchill, he too is not being taken seriously by many of the world's current power brokers. So unfortunately, history seems to be repeating itself. My fear is that Israelis will elect a new Prime Minister that does not have Bibi's experience and is not in touch with the current reality as Bibi is.
I certainly do not agree with everything that Prime Minister Netanyahu does. I have said, for example, that his recent attempt to pass a law strictly defining Israel as a Jewish state is a waste of time and energy. I also believe that he needs to do a much better job dealing with Israel's socio-economic problems. Right now, many Israelis believe that Bibi does not understand the plight of the average Israeli citizen struggling to make ends meet because of the soaring cost of living in the country. And perhaps most importantly, Bibi needs to try and sound less arrogant. Yes, I understand that when you're right as much as Bibi is, it's hard not to be arrogant. Nevertheless, he has to try, because now more than ever, Israel must have a seasoned leader like Netanyahu who knows how to protect the interests of the country.
Friday, November 28, 2014
A Message for Israel's Politicians: Start Tackling the Country's Real Problems!
Israel has the highest poverty rate of all OECD countries. One in three Israeli children are poor. Israel is now on the verge of recession. And our so-called indivisible capital Jerusalem seems more divided than ever. So are Israel's politicians addressing these problems? Nope. Instead, they're arguing over how Jewish the country should be. I guess playing the game of who can be more nationalistic is more important for our elected officials than making sure that our children don't go to bed hungry. What a shame, to say the least.
Unfortunately, I see the situation getting worse before it gets better. Why? Because not only are our politicians not addressing Israel's real problems, they're not even thinking about governing and instead looking towards early elections. And if there is a call for early elections, alleviating Israel's problems and improving the lives of its citizens will be postponed for months of campaigning and then more months of trying to form a government. Meanwhile, many of Israel's children will still go to bed hungry, Jerusalem will continue to be gripped by fear, and progress towards bringing peace and security to the people of Israel will continue to be nonexistent.
So my message to all of Israel's politicians is to stop talking about trivial matters, like how Jewish our country to be and start talking about how to deal with the real problems. Start doing something about the high cost of living in the country. Start improving our education system to ensure that Israel's tradition of scholarship and innovation continues. Start looking for ways to make sure that all Israelis have a roof over their heads, enough food to eat, and the ability to live meaningful lives. Because right now, the people of Israel don't need more Jewishness or more elections. They need jobs, education, peace, security and most importantly, hope for a better future.
Unfortunately, I see the situation getting worse before it gets better. Why? Because not only are our politicians not addressing Israel's real problems, they're not even thinking about governing and instead looking towards early elections. And if there is a call for early elections, alleviating Israel's problems and improving the lives of its citizens will be postponed for months of campaigning and then more months of trying to form a government. Meanwhile, many of Israel's children will still go to bed hungry, Jerusalem will continue to be gripped by fear, and progress towards bringing peace and security to the people of Israel will continue to be nonexistent.
So my message to all of Israel's politicians is to stop talking about trivial matters, like how Jewish our country to be and start talking about how to deal with the real problems. Start doing something about the high cost of living in the country. Start improving our education system to ensure that Israel's tradition of scholarship and innovation continues. Start looking for ways to make sure that all Israelis have a roof over their heads, enough food to eat, and the ability to live meaningful lives. Because right now, the people of Israel don't need more Jewishness or more elections. They need jobs, education, peace, security and most importantly, hope for a better future.
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Law Defining Israel as Nation-State of the Jewish People is Pointless But Not Wrong
I have gone on record as saying that the proposed law supported by Prime Minister Netanyahu and other right wing members of the Israeli government is pointless because everyone in the world with even half a brain knows that Israel is the national home of the Jewish people. As I have said in the past, everything in Israel from our flag to our Declaration of Independence says that Israel is the Jewish homeland. But just because this new law may be pointless, doesn't necessarily mean that it's wrong.
Israel is surrounded by countries that clearly define themselves on an ethnic and/or religious basis. Just look at our next door neighbour to the south, which is officially known as the Arab Republic of Egypt. Or how about one of our neighbours to the north - the country officially called the Syrian Arab Republic. Looking further east, we have the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, nearly all of Israel's neighbours clearly define themselves as Arab and/or Islamic states. So if it's okay to have an Arab Republic of Egypt, a Syrian Arab Republic and an Islamic Republic of Iran, why isn't it okay to have a Jewish State of Israel? It doesn't take a genius to see the double standard here.
Moreover, it isn't just dictatorships like Iran and Syria that define themselves based on ethnic or religious criteria. Many democracies, including several countries in Europe, do as well. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Anglican church is a national institution. Queen Elizabeth II, the UK's head of state, is also the head of the Anglican church. In other words, Anglicanism serves as the UK's official state religion. The same is true of the Lutheran church in several Scandinavian countries. So if mature European democracies can declare themselves to be Christian states without so much as a whimper of condemnation from abroad, why should Israel not be allowed to declare itself a Jewish state without being condemned by the international community?
Again, I still believe that this proposed law to define Israel as the national home of the Jewish people is pointless and a waste of time. But I still contend that Israel has every right to define itself any way it wants, so long as it respects the rights of minorities, which of course it does much better than most of the countries that frequently condemn its very existence.
Israel is surrounded by countries that clearly define themselves on an ethnic and/or religious basis. Just look at our next door neighbour to the south, which is officially known as the Arab Republic of Egypt. Or how about one of our neighbours to the north - the country officially called the Syrian Arab Republic. Looking further east, we have the Islamic Republic of Iran. In fact, nearly all of Israel's neighbours clearly define themselves as Arab and/or Islamic states. So if it's okay to have an Arab Republic of Egypt, a Syrian Arab Republic and an Islamic Republic of Iran, why isn't it okay to have a Jewish State of Israel? It doesn't take a genius to see the double standard here.
Moreover, it isn't just dictatorships like Iran and Syria that define themselves based on ethnic or religious criteria. Many democracies, including several countries in Europe, do as well. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Anglican church is a national institution. Queen Elizabeth II, the UK's head of state, is also the head of the Anglican church. In other words, Anglicanism serves as the UK's official state religion. The same is true of the Lutheran church in several Scandinavian countries. So if mature European democracies can declare themselves to be Christian states without so much as a whimper of condemnation from abroad, why should Israel not be allowed to declare itself a Jewish state without being condemned by the international community?
Again, I still believe that this proposed law to define Israel as the national home of the Jewish people is pointless and a waste of time. But I still contend that Israel has every right to define itself any way it wants, so long as it respects the rights of minorities, which of course it does much better than most of the countries that frequently condemn its very existence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)