Final thought on the Vancouver 2010 Olympics

As much as I was extremely happy for all the Canadian athletes at the Vancouver 2010 winter Olympics, especially the speed skaters, I’ve had this nagging feeling I want to get off my chest.

Maybe it’s too early to say it, but I didn’t like the blatant Canadian nationalism on display at the 2010 Olympic games in Vancouver. I would have been offended if the Americans had acted the same way in Salt Lake City, or the Italians in Torino. Or any other hosts.  Let’s collectively consider the nature of hosting for a second …

I’m glad Canadians were happy, friendly, involved, and by many accounts
created the most engaged Olympic atmosphere ever.  But we were hosting an international event that specifically doesn’t include the word “Canada” in its title because of a long history of global fellowship in sport.  This isn’t the FIFA World Cup, where mini-wars are fought between historical enemies, and players get shot by their own fans.  Nor should Vancouver be some American dollar store that’s draped in red, white, blue, and whatever colour soaring eagles are.  But I digress.

Hopefully I’m not the only person who feels this way, and these Olympics don’t set the bar for future shows of nationalism.

Opportunity Cost

The older I get, especially the more I involve myself with business and with daily capitalist living, the more I hear the term opportunity cost.

It’s best explained with an example:  It doesn’t make sense to spend three hours shopping for groceries, standing about in the kitchen, and making a sandwich because it will always be cheaper and more efficient to buy a sandwich at Subway. Especially if you could be out there generating $20/hr for your time, and the sandwich only costs $7.

So why am I always somewhat dissatisfied with the sandwich from Subway?

Not because it’s not good (they are artists, after all), nor because the quality is poor, nor because I could make a better sandwich at home. The source of the discontent is, according to Barry Schwartz – choice. I had too many wonderful options to choose from. If I had no choice but to shop for groceries and make myself a simple sandwich based on limited supplies at my local corner grocery store, I would actually be more content with my choice. I wouldn’t be standing at Subway for 15 minutes deciding between Turkey + Bacon and Ham + Cheese.

[flv]http://video.ted.com/talks/embed/BarrySchwartz_2005G-embed_high.flv&su=http://images.ted.com/images/ted/tedindex/embed-posters/BarrySchwartz-2005G.embed_thumbnail.jpg&vw=320&vh=240&ap=0&ti=93[/flv]

Barry Schwartz: The paradox of choice, from Ted.com, via Jon Haber.

Palin’s clothing budget: so why do you care?

This week there has been a tremendous amount of controversy generated about Sarah Palin’s clothing budget, which reportedly amounts to $150,000 USD.  The controversy circles around the issue that this is a candidate who attempts to appeal to the virtues of the mythical “Joe Six-pack” and pseudo-mythical “Joe the Plumber.”   Spending that much money on clothing (as well as makeup, hair, and other image items) seems to convey how out of touch Palin is from the people she wishes to extract votes from.  I am not the type of person to rush to the defence of any GOP candidate, but this controversy smacks of a lack of understanding of just what a vice-presidential candidate is.  They are not an “every-day Joe,” nor should they be expected to act like one.  Quite the opposite, actually.

First off, what would be the proper budget for an image makeover on the Vice-Presidential campaign trail?  This Toronto Star article makes the argument that the money spent is not outrageous given the sheer quantity and quality of clothes required for Sarah and her family for the duration of the campaign.  We’re not talking haute couture here, just a large collection of high quality, good looking garments.  Her aides can’t dryclean things because the airplane rarely spends more than a few hours in the same city.  That alone necessitates thirty or forty suits.  What about Todd Palin, and her children?  What about the army of makeup and hair people that need to be on hand (and on-salary) for the duration of the campaign?  With those demands, a $150k budget begins to look reasonable.

Maybe they need the money to look the part? Who cares.

Secondly, since when does a politician have to have the same clothing budget as their middle class supporters?  When are the two even comparable? The demands of image and presentation of a world leader eclipse similar needs of average people.   World leaders are paid to put on a show, to inspire confidence, to look, be, and act their best at all times.

Hell, the fine citizens of the United States of America would be well served by a higher standard of public dress and presentation.   What do we want, George W. Bush in sweatpants and a No Fear t-shirt?   Someone lend her a Bud Light belt buckle and a NASCAR jacket, because she needs to keep it real.  As a Vice-Presidential candidate keeping it real means being true to the demands of the position, and the culture of global leaders. In that sense she perhaps had more to spend than the average Governor.

Thirdly, this elevates tired themes of sexism and hypocrisy, but that is something other writers have done a much better job elaborating on.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, it’s a smoke bomb.  It’s meaningless drivel that actually gives Palin a not-so-well-deserved break from having to address real issues:  economic recovery, poverty reduction, job creation, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the thousands upon thousands of other issues that are still well worth bringing attention to and debating. Hell, someone please ask her about what she thinks happened to dinosaurs and her position on creationism.

On that note, now I feel bad about even writing about this issue.  Please, American voters, concern yourself with something other than Sarah Palin’s wardrobe.

Ontario’s Bill 203 – Traffic laws gone too far

In the last year, to much fanfare, the government of Ontario passed Bill 203 – Safer Roads for a Safer Ontario Act. According to the MTO website, along with new blue lights for Police, the law also:

Increases fines for street racers and aggressive drivers, including those who drive 50 km/h or more over the posted speed limit, to $10,000 and allows police to immediately suspend the driver’s licence and impound the vehicle for seven days.

The word “immediately” speaks volumes about how the law is being enforced in Ontario; thousands of drivers have been punished financially via towing charges, fines, and time without a license (not being able to drive to work for seven days can hurt), but later found to be guilty of a lesser crime when they have their day in court.

Take the story of George. He rides a motorcycle, and in traffic he did a silly thing: he lane-split (filtered, drove between two lanes of stationary traffic) during rush-hour gridlock to get off the highway. He deserves a fine; instead he lost his license and his motorcycle fighting the “stunting” charge. The end result: an “illegal lane change” fine, and a few hundred dollars. He has already paid thousands.

CBC – Bill 203 Casting too wide of a net? (cbc.ca – video clip)

The history of this, from George’s point of view, can be found on the forum GTAMotorcycle.com:  Heading to court, CBC coverage.

Anyways, worth a look.  The interesting thing to note is that Ontario’s roads are, kilometer for kilometer, some of the safest in the world (if not the safest).  I don’t know whether we ought to be attributing that to enforcement, the laws, or the giant grid of incredibly safe megahighways that run across the populated centres of this province.   Hey MTO, credit where credit is due.

Graduate Tuition – Guelph vs. USA

In the next few weeks tuition for Graduate students at the University of Guelph is probably going to go up again. As a student, this obviously bothers me. What is that, 14% in three years? 120% in the last 12 years?

Since many of us know the tuition increase is imminent, and aren’t really willing to protest against it publicly out of fear of reprisal, skepticism, or ignorance, we say:

Hey at least we’re not in the U.S. … tuition is like $<xx>,000 per semester!

There is a prevailing belief in Canada that American tuition fees are completely out of reach for the average lower-middle-class student; thus in Canada we have it a little better, and shouldn’t complain about 4% tuition increases.

This is a popular theory amongst students in times when the Administration corrects budget shortfalls with student money rather than public money, and raises tuition. In hopes of affirming the “at least we’re not as screwed as the Americans”-theory of public education management, I decided to do some research.

The results were surprising: tuition at Guelph is definitely not less expensive than at similar U.S. schools.

Continue reading

The Guelph Faculty Strike: What about us TAs?

The University of Guelph Faculty Association (UGFA), the union for faculty on campus, is in a legal strike position on Friday, March 14th, at 12:01am (press release). They’ve been negotiating a new agreement with the University Administration for about 18 months now, and haven’t reached something amicable yet.

It’s tough to find information on the specific outstanding issues, but information from the UGFA at least details what faculty members were voting for when they voted for the strike mandate.

But what are we students supposed to do: Graduate Students who are GTAs, Sessionals, or those of us just attending classes?

Continue reading

Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Esquire by Matthew Buchanan.

Switch to our mobile site