The political left has once again done the bidding for us adults by punishing responsible drivers.  By reducing the blood alcohol level at which a person may drive without penalty to .04, McGuinty chose to carpet bomb the rights of most in place of using pinpoint legislation aimed at the truly guilty. 

More than 80% admit to driving with some alcohol in their system.  DUI and repeat DUI offenders should be aggressively prosecuted but what about the rest of us? The insurance companies now have another means by which to raise rates if one is caught driving between .05 and .07 levels and traffic fine revenues will surely increase.  MADD’s agenda seems to be prohibition against driving at any alcohol level.  What is the next threshold; .02 then zero?  How many bar, restaurant, winery owners and workers will suffer along with their patrons because of this MADDness?  And do you think that the food prices on a menu will increase to offset the loss of alcohol revenue from customers afraid to order a drink with their meals?  

Unfortunately almost every human activity generates risk including death and injury.  Punishing all of society for the few irresponsible who drive while criminally drunk only compounds past tragedies.  Water drowns, electricity electrocutes, knives cut, eaters choke, planes crash and exercise can kill etc. but we don’t ban these things. Yes we need standards and rules but we also need common sense and protection from special interest zealots.  Do we all just stop living to satisfy the whims of politically correct politicians?  God save us from our sanctimonious selves.

Mickey Moulder

Regardless of politics there are some basic safeguards that should be a part of any country’s immigration policies.  Here in Canada how could anyone argue that our laws are anything but irresponsible and potentially criminally negligent. As reported by the Fraser Institute a 1985 Supreme Court decision, based on a poorly drafted section of the Charter of Rights, granted anyone who manages to set foot on Canadian soil the same legal rights as Canadians.  As a result, finalizing a refugee claim can be a long and complicated process.  

Among nations that accept refugees for permanent resettlement, Canada is alone in not using prompt determination at the point of entry to assess a person’s eligibility to be admitted.  Instead, the Refugee Board is the first major point at which claimants’ applications are fully reviewed.  After being fingerprinted and photographed at the border, asylum seekers are released and asked to show up at a refugee hearing which is scheduled several months ahead.  Few are detained and none are screened for health, criminality, or security.  They are free to travel and work anywhere in Canada with full access to health care and all other social services. 

At one time over 25 per cent of asylum seekers never bothered to appear for their refugee hearing.  Those who do appear and found not to be genuine refugees are simply asked to leave; but many do not.  In 2003 the Auditor General reported 36,000 outstanding warrants for the arrest of people whose asylum claims had been turned down and whose whereabouts were unknown.  Today there could be 50,000 or more.

Lax immigration security screening and ineffective asylum policies pose a threat to Canada’s national security and are a leading reason why the U.S. has clamped down at its northern border crossings.  How many Canadians lost their jobs and businesses and are inconvenienced at these border points because of this action?  All of this so that our politicians can woo the immigrant vote.   

Canada must surely be the most naïve nation on earth governed by some of the most myopic and self-serving of politicians.

 

Mickey Moulder

For many who lived in 28 U.S. states and 3 Canadian provinces and grew up in the mid 1960's to approximately 1985 you will no doubt know and remember CKLW Radio 80 on the AM dial.  CKLW originated in Windsor, Ontario, directly across from Detroit, Michigan.  It began life as CKOK AM 840 in 1932 and became CKLW AM 840 in 1933.  The LW standing for London and Windsor. CKLW 840 moved to 800 on the dial during WW II in 1941.  

The story of CKLW and how it grew from a sleepy AM station to become one of the reigning rock n roll broadcasters in North America in its heyday from 1967 until 1978 is just so interesting.  In fact most youth of today would find this hard to believe I'm sure.

The effects of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) began to erode the programming power of this radio colossus however.  Thirty per cent Canadian content from 6am to midnight was legislated upon all Canadian radio stations overnight in 1970 and all Canadian broadcast outlets had to be majority Canadian owned.  It wasn't enough that CKLW along with its famous and talented music director Rosalie Trombley were already breaking in Canadian talent with its dominance of the airwaves.  When Rosalie programmed a song it was always sure to be a smash hit.

The likes of Paul Anka, Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, Anne Murray and The Guess Who, to name a few, were played and promoted regularly and often because they were good.  And Canadian artists The Bells (Stay Awhile), Motherlode (When I Die), Blood, Sweat and Tears (David Clayton Thomas is Canadian - Spinning Wheel), The Guess Who (These Eyes), Gordon Lightfoot (If You Could Read My Mind) and others owe their careers to CKLW for being the first to play their songs across 25 per cent of North America.

But the CRTC knew best.  And when CKLW petitioned the CRTC to move away from "AM" and go to the "FM" format the CRTC said that FM was reserved for classical and more cultural jazz music and rejected their requests.  Meanwhile all of the Top 40 rock n roll stations in the U.S. were quickly moving to FM.  Note that CKLW broadcast from east of London to Florida and enjoyed the number one position in this segment for a decade.  When CKLW was belatedly granted an FM licence CRTC rules mandated that 51 per cent of the music had to be "non charted" or "new" along with song repetition of max 18 plays per week, spoken word, foreground and distinct music selection rules made competing in the top 40 rock n roll segment all but impossible.

When CKLW could no longer hold its own shackled with these onerous CRTC regulations this powerful icon of rock n roll slipped away.  In fact, the program director for CKLW moved over to a new TV program called MTV and simply took the CKLW highly technical play format and copied it exactly. MTV became CKLW under a different name.

Do you remember the famous CKLW  DJ's like Dick Purton, Dave Shafer, Tom Ryan, Byron McGregor, Pat Holiday, Randall Carlisle and many more along with Jo Jo Shutty who was the first helicopter traffic reporter ever?  The story of CKLW and how Elton John, Sammy Davis, every Motown star there was, Tony Orlando, Mitch Ryder, Bob Seager, The Rolling Stones, Tom Jones, in fact almost every artist petitioned and cajoled CKLW by visiting and performing locally on CKLW TV to help influence, in any way, having their songs played on the number one rock n roll radio station.  Alice Cooper says that without CKLW being the first to play his songs along with the likes of KISS and other famous groups, they would not have made the big scene as they did.

The story of CKLW is too large for this print space.  If you wish to view the 2004 Gemini Award winning documentary The Rise and Fall Of The Big 8 you may order it via the Canadian Transportation Museum http://www.ctmhv.com .

Our museum is hosting a CKLW Big 8 tribute with a live outdoor 60's and 70's music and dance show followed by a Drive in movie, yes a drive in movie (Footloose), on Saturday September 8 at 5:00pm  Tickets $10. We are licensed with our 50's Diner providing great food.  Tel 519 776 6909.

Mickey Moulder

Has the City of Windsor been poorly managed over the past 40 years? Of course the answer is yes. But is this scenario simply a reflection of the times?  Let’s reflect on what the last four decades of poor management across N. America has wrought. 

Our traditional auto industry and supplier base has shrunk to a shadow of its former self as has Canada’s military. Our infrastructure is outdated and not properly maintained.  Lawyers and the threat of being sued dominate our thoughts before taking action or indeed hosting a party or disciplining our kids. Self centred students control our schools, they all pass regardless and the pap they are taught is often just that.

Big government is everywhere. Politicians are beholden to their political parties above all else. Fifty per cent of everything we earn goes to taxes. To obtain a government job means you have arrived. Ontario businesses are the highest taxed in Canada.

 Mayor Francis no doubt, is doing his best but he is conducting an orchestra comprised of mostly amateur union and social engineering types; the very breed that has given the City a budget where more than 50 per cent alone goes to paying social payouts, wages and benefits. Where outsourcing doesn’t exist and non unionized contractors need not bid.

How many white elephants can the downtown core hold and remember the MFP scandal?  The water pipes are rotted, roads are bad, weeds aren’t cut, workers suffer poor productivity, city workers increasingly emigrate to the burbs etc.  Obviously not everything is doom and gloom but are we generally experiencing a degradation today versus say 1967? Yes, certainly in areas of infrastructure, quality of education, government, judicial activism,  sentencing guidelines, artificial bilingualism, taxation, health care, national defense, immigration policies, studying things to death, business friendly environment, efficiency and leadership.

Mickey Moulder
Former Windsor Resident

I am the vice chairperson of the Canadian Transportation Museum in Essex Ontario.  My comments below represent approximately 100 people who agree with my message based on our discussions on the subject at our museum.

Museums have a difficult task but one that is all important none the less, which is to reflect and present the public mood, sentiments, economics, fears, motivations, politics and conditions that existed at the time of the history being reported and displayed today.  Mixing the above elements from the past with those of the politically correct times of today is a major shortcoming when attempting to capture and convey what happened then to those that will view it now.  The Enola Gay display that was shown at the Smithsonian Institute's 1995 presentation of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima in August 1945 grossly misrepresented the public, military and political mood of 1945 by trying to suggest that perhaps the war with Japan had already been won and that dropping the bomb was overkill.  There was a hint of shame and poor judgment mentioned in the Smithsonian's display about the decision to drop the bomb.  The Veterans of Foreign Wars in the U.S. did not take this lying down. They demanded and won their right to have the display wording changed to reflect the more accurate conditions that prevailed when the decision was taken 50 years earlier.  The revisionist, rear view mirror history professors and museum curators of 1995 were presenting 1995 not 1945.  This was wrong on their part.

The same situation now exists at our new Canadian War Museum in Ottawa.  All the people who were not there in 1940 to 1945 but who took the requisite university courses, and are bilingual and who may have lived through the Vietnam War controversies, Gulf War I and II, 9/11, and Afghanistan have allowed their adulterated, politically correct, view of the 1940's to be blended into the message at the CWM regarding the bombing of Germany.  This action took a terrific toll of lives on all sides and cost billions of dollars of collateral damage.  Yes its true that during the waning months of WW II, while Belgium and Britain were being bombed by V1 and V2 rockets and Paris was on the verge of being blown up by Hitler's orders, some allied leaders questioned whether the bombing of Germany should be reduced somewhat.  Perhaps Dresden should not have been bombed.  Who knows?  But it was and it does not take away from the correct strategy of the day which was to do everything possible to defeat Nazis Germany including bombing its factories, infrastructure and cities.

The CWM has committed the grave error of reporting yesterday using today's values.  This makes the museum much more contemporary and much less an historical reflection of the past.  The CWM diminishes itself and all the vets who sacrificed their youth participating in the air campaign against Nazis Germany.

The sooner the wording is changed to reflect the actual feelings of 95 per cent of the people who lived through WW II at the time, the better for everyone, not the least of which are the vets who fought, were wounded, died and survived the horrors of those WW II years. 

I urge everyone to simply listen to the people who were there.  Their views are the history.

 

Mickey Moulder

 

Has Windsor, including its earlier border cities like Sandwich, Walkerville, Ford City, and East Windsor and even Detroit, joined the ranks of the “once great”?  Every city, province, state, and country goes through a life cycle of birth, adolescence, maturity, middle and old age.  Some even experience greatness along the way.  Was Windsor once great?  You betcha.

Since 1854 when it was officially born, this border city area made almost all of the rest of Canada look like hayseeds.  Hicks if you will.  We boasted world class industries like Hiram Walker, Ford of Canada and too-many-to-mention other auto companies and suppliers, paved streets, electric street cars, some of the grandest homes and buildings in Canada designed by top architects of the day, and a joined-at-the-hip connection to one of the wealthiest and significant cities in America and indeed the world; Detroit.  All of this when the rest of Canada was still building hunting lodges and cutting a swath through the wilderness.  We are the oldest European settled district in Ontario launching the first King’s Highway.  We were the Arsenal of Democracy in two world wars, a player and sometimes at centre stage of world events like The Seven Years War, Pontiac’s War, the American Revolution, War of 1812, Underground Railway and American Civil War,  Fenian Raids, Prohibition, and World Wars I and II.

In spite of the latest employment statistics Canada South is still one of the wealthiest parts of Canada.  But we have grown old and tired.  We can no longer compete with the best in the world.  We don’t even trade freely with our fellow provinces.  We have become an over-taxed, tort fearing society driven by social justice and solidarity supported by endless government programs, red tape and every kind of study before a decision is made.  And where has our once great infrastructure gone?  Will we become reborn and begin the cycle of growth again?  If so, how, when and by whose lead?  If not, then at least we can be proud of all that preceded us in this “once great” area.

Janet Gasparini

Competition provides lower costs and better services and a government monopoly is the least efficient and most costly method of providing a service or commodity.  What a family pays in taxes to pay for health care in Canada is shown below published by the Fraser Institute.  Note that an additional 30 percent of health care costs are paid by private insurance or directly by patients and at least one percent of the population elects to have non emergency medical care done outside of Canada annually.  These numbers are not included in the family medical tax costs below.

                             Avg  Family Income   Avg Tax Bill   Tax Rate   Health Care Tax Cost

                              $  10,845                         $    1,600       14.8 %       $      362

                                  22,244                               4,604       20.7                1,041

                                  30,377                               9,076       29.9                2,052

                                  38,106                             14,533       38.1                3,286

                                  47,059                             20,507       43.6                4,637

                                  58,446                             25,941       44.4                5,865

                                  71,169                             32,692       45.9                7,392

                                  87,475                             41,053       46.9                9,282

                                109,450                             52,530       48.0              11,877

                                204,954                           116,859       57,0              26,423

Unattached Indiv.      31,018                             13,576       43.8                3,070

2  Parents   0  Child   78,848                             39,357       49.9                8,899

2  Parents   1  Child   90,373                             39,676       43.9                8,971

2  Parents   2  Child   97,454                             43,382       44.5                9,809

1  Parent     1 Child   38,981                              13,564      34.8                 3,067

1  Parent     2 Child   38,637                              12,089      31.3                 2,734

The Canada Health Act (CHA), contrary to political statements and published articles, is limited in scope.  Two important distinctions: health care and health insurance are two separate things and the federal government has virtually no constitutional jurisdiction over these matters.  Health Care is the providing of medical services.  Health Insurance pays for those services.  In Canada, many of these services are provided in public hospitals and by provincially employed staff.  However, a large proportion of health care is provided in privately owned clinics and other facilities.  In fact, most doctors’ offices and many other medical facilities in Canada are privately owned and operated as businesses, even though much of their revenue comes from provincial governments’ medical insurance plans.

One of the more prevalent myths is that the CHA requires that hospitals be government owned and operated and prohibits privately owned medical facilities.  This fallacy is the touchstone of many who oppose private clinics on the basis that they are “violations of the Canada Health Act.”  In fact, the CHA says nothing about how, or where, health care is delivered.  The CHA also does not require, or even mention, public ownership of medical facilities or public employment of doctors or other health care providers.  Suggestions that private clinics or privately employed doctors and nurses amount to “violations” of the CHA are simply wrong.

The CHA is nothing more than a funding law.  It governs, on rather loose terms, the transfer of money from the federal government to the provinces to subsidize the cost of provincial governments’ health insurance plans.  The CHA has been described by courts as an exercise of the federal government’s “spending power” under the constitution.

It is also important to note that the federal government has no jurisdiction to make laws banning private health insurance or governing privately owned medical facilities.  Those are provincial matters under the constitution.  The CHA does not purport to control what individuals or businesses can or cannot do.  It is therefore impossible for any citizen or business to “violate” the CHA.  In fact, even provinces cannot be taken to court successfully for breaching the CHA.  Courts have consistently held that they cannot rule on whether a province has complied with CHA.  Courts have held that this is a political rather than a legal matter, and that the ramifications of non-compliance with the CHA must be determined by the federal cabinet and Minister of Health, by possibly withholding federal cash transfers to a province (these cash transfers represent the taxes paid by each Canadian).

Every province has a tax payer funded health insurance plan.  Provincial insurance plans are government run systems that receive money from taxpayers, through premiums, or allocation of government revenue, or both.  As a matter of constitutional law, provinces may pass any laws they want about whether there is any government medical insurance and, if so, what its limits are.  The coverage under existing government plans is far from comprehensive.  Two major gaps that are largely filled by private insurance are the costs of most dental care and medications.

 Most, but not all, provinces have laws that ban private medical insurance for services that are covered by government insurance plans.  This is because of conditions that the federal government attaches to its contributions (your taxes paid) to the cost of health care.  Since the late 1950’s the federal government has contributed to medical costs through financial transfers to the provinces.  This culminated in the passing of the CHA in 1984.  At that time the contribution of the federal government to taxpayer funded medical costs was about 50 percent of the national total.  Currently the contribution is about half that.  Clearly, the level of federal financing that provided the political backdrop to the creation of the CHA no longer exists.

Despite this, the federal government continues to tie the provinces’ hands by attaching conditions to its financial transfers (your taxes paid).  Under the CHA, for a province to receive a “full cash contribution” from the federal government, the province’s health insurance plan must meet several criteria, including “public administration” (monopoly), and “comprehensiveness”.  “Public administration” is defined to mean that the provincial health insurance plan (not the providing of medical care) must be administered on a non profit basis by a public authority.  “Comprehensiveness” is not clearly defined.  There is no national standard of what services must be covered by provincial insurance plans and to what level of quality.

The CHA also says extra billing and user charges must not be permitted by a province or else funding from the federal government may be reduced.  “Extra billing” is charging a patient an amount above what is paid under the province’s health insurance plan.  “User charges” are any charges by care providers for provincially insured services.  In other insurance contexts, user charges are called “deductibles” and are intended to encourage safety and reduce claims.  Imagine if automobile insurers were prohibited from selling collision insurance with a deductible; both the number of claims and the frequency of small claims would skyrocket.

Health care costs are the largest single component of provincial budgets.  Within 10 years between 50 and 70 percent of British Columbia’s total annual budget will be health care costs and every province will be spending 100 per cent of their annual budgets on health care by 2050.  This fact alone makes more reliance on private medical insurance inevitable but today it is still the political kiss of death to broach the subject.  In 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized this government paralysis in the Chaoulli decision when it acknowledged that citizens have been forced to turn to the courts because governments have failed to provide solutions to growing waiting lists.  The court also recognized that provinces use waiting lists as a rationing system to reduce spending by government health insurance plans.  If governments continue to not pay for or provide timely care, the courts will probably decide the matter of health care reform and more privatization on behalf of adversely affected citizens.

Mickey Moulder

Unlike most Canadians I have lived and worked in Europe for 5 years, in Latin America for 8 years, the U.S. for 7 years and Canada for 40 years.  Unlike most Canadians I have lived under dictators, prime ministers, presidents, autocratic rule, democratic rule and what Canada currently practices; a mixture of autocratic and democratic rule.

These experiences have provided me a first hand insight into what works and what doesn't in many countries.  To achieve and maintain a high standard of living, to avoid brain drain, to maximize disposable consumer income, to provide a high level of medical services, a world class infrastructure, a top notch educational system and good, high paying jobs for its citizens...a country must practice true democracy, keep taxes low, maintain a strong defense, endorse free but fair trade, have one business language (lingua franca), and allow freedom of choice to its people.  In addition, less red tape, smaller government, a less obtrusive legal system and a more rigid immigration policy leaning more towards what this country needs and less on what the new immigrant may want or need (drop dual citizenships for example), would go a long way towards strengthening Canada and make it far more competitive than it currently is.  And Quebec needs to become a province again and lose its semi-autonomous standing within this land and overseas. Imagine allowing a province to act like a country within a country?  Can you say Liberalism run amok?

 As to "how" to accomplish these improvements?  I don't know. Most Canadians are too passive, insecure or idealogically influenced to embrace real change.  However, as to the "what", I suggest something akin to the political and economic system enjoyed in the U.S.  Why not emulate the most successful system?  Canada needs to open up democratically and allow the voters much more say in how this country is run.  Voters must be allowed to directly elect their prime minister or president, their senators and their members of parliament.  All three branches must share one third of the governing power.  Term limitations are needed in each governing branch. During the last few decades unfortunately, Canada has been heading in the opposite direction. We need competition.  

More power has found its way into the prime minister's office.  We don't even practice free and open trade amongst our own provinces. We allow provinces to violate good practical economic policy then reward them by skimming surpluses from the modern and prosperous provinces by passing their largese on to the provinces who suffer self inflicted economic wounds.  Our all powerful prime ministers are allowed to be elected only by their party and could serve for decades.  And like the honey bee drones, after having  performed  their main function by voting for the prime minister, our over-compensated members of parliament sink back into the shadows and become all but useless until called upon to vote the party line on everything or be booted out of caucus and the party they represent.  

Our monopolistic,  centralized, command and control medical system is killing more Canadians each year than any other cause and our taxes are too high and non competitive in today's global economy.  Do we need political change?  Yes.  To what?  See above.  How?  Well, that's the question isn't it? 

How to overcome the endless special interest groups and the politically correct mania that is endemic in this land?  How to find the right leaders that care more about what is good for Canada or their province and less about taking risks and offending some voters by actually leading; even if it means swimming against the current of pundits and opposition political parties?  

We can only hope that somehow our political system will find the means to modernize and stop impeding our collective health, growth and prosperity.

Mickey Moulder

Eric The Red, a Viking, founded Greenland in 986 A.D.  The climate supported crops until 1480 A.D. when it turned cold again and the colony disappeared.  Apparently some climate scientists haven't read their Norwegian history.  Not only were Chretien's Liberals giving away hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to Quebec Liberal ad firms they totally failed to understand Kyoto before signing it.  No country on earth is more negatively impacted by Kyoto than Canada and we only generate 2.2% of the world's carbon dioxide while India, China, Russia and the U.S. account for 47.5%. and they are not affected by Kyoto.

The now discredited "hockey stick" spike purporting to show that the earth has just recently warmed up was used as the basis for creating the Kyoto Protocol.

A brief summary of earth's climate swings shows that there were innumerable ice age and greenhouse cycles.  In 800 million B.C. the earth froze to the equator, and in 600 million B.C. the earth warmed creating millions of new species.  In 250 million B.C. mass extinctions occurred caused by a kind of nuclear winter followed by a 10 F temperature increase lasting 100,000 years.  In 202 million B.C. asteroids caused dust, blocking the sun for centuries and cooling the earth followed by huge temperature increases.  In 65 million B.C. more asteroids caused severe cooling wiping out the dinosaurs followed again by global warming.  Around 3 million B.C. the polar ice caps froze again and since 2 million B.C., over 30 separate icehouse to greenhouse climate cycles occurred due to changes in earth's axis, wobble and variations in earth's orbit around the sun.  Around 70,000 B.C. the current ice age began but by 17,000 B.C. a warming cycle raised sea levels 35 ft in Britain melting vast ice sheets and creating the English Channel.

By 12,000 B.C. the climate stabilized but Essex County still sits on a half mile thick ice sheet. The Sahara had a lush climate 10,000 years ago with rivers and lakes but a drying trend 5,000 years ago created the desert. North Africa was the bread basket of the Roman Empire 2,000 years ago but today its an arid desert and in the 12th century Europe was warmer than it is in 2005. Greenland is now warming and the ice shield is melting as it will until we enter another ice age. Is the earth warming? Yes. Will it cool again? Yes. Will Kyoto change global warming? No. Its only political nonsense in keeping with the UN's track record on such things. 

Mickey Moulder

I received an e-mail the other day that suggested that Hugo Chavez and our elder statesman (Pierre Elliott Trudeau) share(d) much in common:  deep love and affection for Fidel Castro and Chairman Mao come to mind.  Both preside(d) over vast oil resources and both loathe(d) the USA.

I lived in Venezuela for six years.  It is the richest country on earth for its size as regards climate, natural resources, and beauty.  It has snow capped mountains, endless rain forests, Caribbean beaches that go on forever, a desert, plains, you name it.  It has oil, gold, diamonds, uranium, semi precious stones, and many other minerals.  BUT, it is populated with Venezuelans, the laziest and most violent people you could ever meet.  They are descendants of the Caribe indians (head hunters and vicious).  The Spanish were afraid of them.  Hugo Chavez is an ass of the first order.  On the other hand, the Cubans are smart, energetic and more refined versus the more wild Venezuelans.  BUT Fidel is also an ass and worse, of the first order.

I used to work with a man who was the Minister of Petroleum under Fidel in 1959 and 1960, before Fidel went communist.  He lived in the same compound as Fidel and Raul Castro and the other leaders of the revolution.  The stories he told me.  He and his two brothers left Cuba when it went communist (forfeited all their wealth and belongings before they left).  His two brothers were brain surgeons in Miami and he became the chief engineer at Ford Venezuela and he owned the local baseball team (he was in the farm system for the Pittsburg Pirates).  Many Cubans went to Venezuela after the revolution.  I would not think that they and their descendants are too happy about Hugo Chavez and Fidel cozying up.

My next door neighbor in Venezuela was a Bacardi from the rum family who were from Cuba where the rum company was located.  He also escaped.  He was attacked once or twice a week by Fidel's band of fighters (sand bagged Bicardi factory).  The business was moved to Puerto Rico.

Hugo will get his one day.  Like all dictators having absolute power he will begin to falsely increase his sense of infallibility and superiority.  He will then try to take one or more bridges too far and voila...a dead dictator but as often happens the dipshit will probably take the country down with him.

Latin politics are not to be believed.  That's why I am so upset about our own socialist, meddling, central command and control, French run federal government here in Canada.  In many ways, in my opinion, we exude some of the same characteristics of what you may find in Latin America regarding politics.  It dominates everything.  The newspapers, radio, TV, business, the people's everyday talk, etc.  It has its bloated hand in everything.  Government's role in most countries should simply be to enable the people and business to get on with their lives by providing security, law and order, a first rate infrastructure, and a healthy environment and a reasonable immigration and foreign trade process.

Government should be kept as lean and accountable as possible and a system should be found that naturally drives the politicians to have to listen to their constituents or be kicked out.  Government should never, ever be allowed to unionize, and it should be rewarded for outsourcing more and more of what it does in house.  Government workers should always earn less than the private sector offset by having a secure job (up to a point).  The best and brightest should want to work in the private sector and not see government as a career path.  In fact many administrative government jobs should be held by retirees from the private sector.  This applies to teachers and professors as well.  No person should be allowed to teach unless they have worked a minimum of "X" number of years in the private sector.

Canada, as it is today, is not a very good country.  It is squandering its potential and throwing away the things that should matter most:  proximity to the largest and wealthiest market in the world, a like culture with that market, and a democratic history with endless natural resources all situated in a place that is safe and secure from attack.  We try to think that we are French, don't need a military, we should bring in millions of people from cultures and religions that will never ever assimilate into Canada, we support socialist causes around the globe, we actually think that the UN is a first class organization with whom we should depend and support as the means of solving many of the world's ills...imagine.

We are killing our people with a communist style medical monopoly that defies logic and we are taxing business and the people into a state of second classness.  Our government workers earn more and dominate the work place with their special perks.  We are over policed but with a very week judiciary (criminals walk).  The press and media misrepresent or hide the truth on many things because of their left wing bias.  Our infrastructure is crumbling.  Lawyers now so control everything that just looking askance at someone can tempt a lawsuit.  Common sense is dying very fast....  Anyway Hugo and Fidel hopefully will pass from this earth quicker rather than later.

Mickey Moulder