Revitalizing Whalley

Surrey City Centre Library (Architect's Design)

For more than twenty years, Surrey has been advertising itself as the "Second City" in the Lower Mainland, soon to be a rival in every way to Vancouver.  The centre of this new city was to be near the Surrey Place Mall in Whalley, a trashy neighborhood, originally settled in the 1920's by those who couldn't afford property nearer Vancouver north of the Fraser River.

For the most part, this ambition has been more a dream than a reality.

A few things actually did happen. SkyTrain came to Surrey in 1993, with Whalley stations of Gateway, Surrey Central, and King George.  The long-promised University of the Fraser Valley, originally planned for Cloverdale, became Tech BC (1999) and then the Surrey campus of Simon Fraser University (2002), located in a tower built at Surrey Place.

City Council did change a few names.  Surrey Place Mall became Central City Shopping Centre.  The main thoroughfare, King George Highway, became King George Boulevard.  East Whalley Ring Road became Whalley Boulevard; West Whalley Ring Road became University Drive; and 135th Street became City Parkway.


But now a few new projects are actually under construction.  A 75,000 square foot, four story, regional library will be opened next year.  Next door will be a new recreation centre.

Library under construction, SkyTrain (Left) and SFU Surrey

A new City Hall will be built next year near the new library, south of 104th Avenue, replacing the current City Hall on 56th Avenue. 

We can keep our fingers crossed that these projects continue, and that Surrey City Centre can start attracting the financial and commercial enterprises which someday might revitalize this neighborhood. 

Stephen Colbert on Immigration

Last friday, Stephen Colbert testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on  Immigration, Citizenship, and Border Security on the subject of immigrant labour.  Because he's a comedian, some people questioned how relevant his comments were.

Sitting next to Stephen was Arturo Rodriguez, President of the United Farmworkers of America, a union for agricultural workers started by Cesar Chavez in the 1960's.  I was involved with this effort from 1968 to 1972, both in Toronto with a boycott of table grapes and at the Union headquarters at Keene, California.  I never met Arturo, but I knew his wife, Linda Chavez, who died in 2000.

Farmworkers, many of whom are immigrants, have some of the most demanding and low-paying jobs in America.  The U. S. (and Canada as well, which brings in 175,000 guest workers a year, many of whom do agricultural labour) has a long history of exploitation of farm labour.  They are excluded from the National Labour Relations Act, which gives other workers the right to have unions. They are housed in labour camps; kept from their families; isolated from local communities; exposed to pesticides; and without health care. Pay is generally minimum wage (or less).  

Even though the U. S. unemployment rate is 9.6%, few non-Hispanic Americans want agricultural jobs.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/07/07/news/economy/farm_worker_jobs/index.htm

Because of the need for agricultural workers, the low pay, the physically demanding work, Americans have looked the other way for years, while undocumented immigrants have harvested their crops.  This makes the recent attacks on immigrants in Arizona and other states particularly loathsome.  To suggest that they are drug dealers or terrorists is pathetic.

I'm glad that Stephen Colbert is on the right side of this issue.  More Americans and Canadians should be, too.

Beyond A Reasonable Doubt?

An ancestor of mine, Benjamin Cooley, came to Springfield, Massachusetts, about 1643.  He was popular with his neighbors, and they chose him one of the selectmen for the community.

On March 4, 1650, Joshua Parsons, infant son of Hugh and Mary Parsons, neighbors of Benjamin, died.  The cause of death was a respiratory illness, possibly croup. His father, Hugh, a brick maker and chimney specialist, was charged with causing the death of Joshua by witchcraft, for the purpose of having his wife available to help with the corn harvest.

Hugh asked Benjamin Cooley to testify on his behalf, particularly that when he had informed Benjamin of his son's death, he had been quite upset and weeping.

Unfortunately for Hugh, Benjamin testified that he could not remember any sorrow, that instead Hugh had been smoking a pipe of tobacco at the time.  He further stated that Hugh's wife, Mary, had suspected her husband of being a witch, although she had been unable to find any direct evidence, having once searched him when he was asleep.

Other evidence against Hugh Parsons included statements that he had made that he would "be even" with anyone who did him wrong; that things he sold to others did not do well; that he sometimes talked strangely in this sleep; and that his wife often heard loud noises when Hugh was away from home.

Hugh and Mary Parsons were both found guilty of witchcraft and sentenced to prison.  Hugh's property was sold.  Eventually, Hugh was released, but Mary apparently died while still incarcerated.

Of course, in the 17th century, the cause of many illnesses was unknown.  It seems that persons could be suspected of witchcraft if they prospered over their neighbors, or if they weren't sociable. Another mark against poor Hugh was that he seldom attended local meetings or lectures, to the unhappiness of his wife, who was also kept from these social events.

So beware.  Be on good terms with your neighbors.  Help them prosper along with yourself.  Above all, give your wife no reason for suspicions about your conduct.

Healthier Living

A month ago, I reached my New Year's resolution target weight loss of twenty pounds.  I decided to try for another five pounds.  So far, I've lost one of these, giving me a year-to-date weight reduction of twenty-one pounds.

To quantify, twenty-one pounds is an 11% weight loss.  My BMI (Body Mass Index) has fallen from 28 (overweight) to 24.9 (normal).  My percentile for my height and age has fallen from 57% to 31% (U. S. figures), meaning that 69% of the population weigh more than I do for my height and age.   Being at 31% percentile is not necessarily anything to brag about, because being at 50% (average) means a BMI of 27 (overweight).  More than 60% of the U. S. population over 35 is overweight.   But it sounds a lot better than being at 57%.

BMI is calculated by dividing weight in kg by the square of height in meters; or by dividing weight in pounds by the square of height in inches multiplied by 703.  18-25 is considered normal; 25-30 overweight; over 30 obese.

I've also volunteered for the BC Generations Project, which is developing a database of 40,000 British Columbians (300,000 with partners Canada-wide) to correlate incidence of cancer with lifestyle (diet, physical exercise), medical history, physical measurements, and analysis of blood and urine.  It's a twenty-five year study, open to those 40-69.  I completed my initial contribution yesterday.        


 

Credit Cards

Canadian Tire is a Canadian general merchandise retailer, known for automotive, home, hardware, and garden products. It also operates a chartered bank, Canadian Tire Bank.

In its most recent quarter, Canadian Tire earned $119.9 million, $55 million of this (46%) from its financial services (credit card) division. Because financial services are the fastest growing part of its business, it's eager to expand in this area.

A few weeks ago, Vera and I were at Canadian Tire shopping for a new steam iron.  A store employee came by with a clipboard, mentioning a store promotion.  I didn't pay too much attention, wanting to know instead why the price on the steam iron display was different from the price on the box below.  The employee asked for my driver's license, wrote down my name and address, had me sign a form, and said I'd hear from them in about two weeks.  Then she helped with my purchase.

Last thursday I received a Canadian Tire MasterCard from Canadian Tire Bank.  Not much to that.  No questions asked. I assume that they had checked more than the information I had given them.

On the other hand, my nephew Patrick, who lives in Taiwan, has had difficulties getting a credit card from the largest bank in Taiwan, Chinatrust Commercial Bank, although he's employed and has a good credit record.  So have a number of his friends.  Apparently, they are apprehensive about granting cards to "foreigners", who they think might leave and not pay their debts, even though they are permanent residents of Taiwan.

CTCB prides itself on being international, on its excellent service, and on the many awards it has won.  It operates twelve branches in the U. S., three branches in Vancouver, and appears eager to expand its services world-wide.  How does it do this by discriminating against "foreigners" in Taiwan?  I would think these are customers they would want to cultivate.  They might encourage contacts in their country of origin to bank at CTCB.

Canada had been very welcoming to immigrants from Taiwan and Asia.  The only requirement for a "permanent resident" to become a citizen is that they reside in Canada for three years and demonstrate some knowledge of Canadian institutions.  I suspect many Taiwanese-born hold dual Canadian citizenship.  How many Canadian or U. S.-born hold dual Taiwanese citizenship?  How many Taiwanese "permanent residents" in Canada or the U. S. are refused credit cards, because of where they were born?  Time for CTCB to lighten up and forget the stereotypes.  They might find it good business.   

Persistence

About 8:00 pm one evening a few years ago, someone rang the doorbell.  It was dark out.  The fellow on the porch was an Edward Jones financial advisor out looking for clients.  I spoke to him briefly, telling him that I didn't use an advisor, and did my own investing through a discount brokerage.

Since then, Frank has called me every couple of months wondering how I am doing.  I tell him all of the concerns I have about financial advisors.  Still he persists.

Frank suggested I get a TFSA (Tax-Free Savings Account).  Initially I said that I didn't see much value in them, because interest rates were low and the tax savings wouldn't be much. With some prodding, however, I opened one two months ago.   He called again last saturday.  I said I'd taken his advice and opened an account.

I  had mentioned to Frank before that I didn't see how he was making any money with me.  Other investment firms had not been interested in having me as a client.  They either receive part of a commission or charge a fee, which I'm not interested in paying.

Times may be hard for small financial advisors.  In the recent financial meltdown, they may have lost clients. Hard to tell, though, because they always groan so much about how little they receive anyway.  Wall Street investment bankers may take home millions in bonuses, but small advisors and brokers usually have a small office, sometimes in the corner of a bank or insurance agency.  They have to be salespeople.

I spent a couple of sessions with Ellen at Coast Capital, discussing mutual funds.  That possibility fell through when Coast Capital refused to take some deposits.

I once went to the Scotia McLeod office in Semiahmoo Mall to get financial advice. The receptionist told me that they had no one to talk to walk-ins.  She said I could call and make an appointment, but didn't take my name or phone number.  I didn't contact them again.

I once contacted BMO InvestorLine.  I asked them if they stood behind the products that they sold.  She asked if I meant protection from market risk?  I said no, but if I have problems with a product or provider, would they assist me?  I don't think she understood what I meant.  Simply put, what services are they providing? I didn't open an account.

I think I've told Frank these things.  I sometimes wonder why some people are so persistent, while others are so indifferent.  From experience, I guess they find out what pays off.

          

Tax Day

Good laws should be fair, understandable, and enforceable.  Whenever I have to pay income taxes, I reflect on this.

Today is another income tax instalment due date.  If net taxes owing at the end of the year (not previously deducted at source) exceed $3,000, I have to make quarterly instalments.  If net taxes owing will be less than $3,000, I can disregard the friendly reminder.

Last spring, owing to low interest rates and generally poor economic prospects  (double-dip recession on the horizon),  I disregarded the reminder.

Now I realize that my income will be a little higher than I thought, and maybe I need to pay instalments.

My Options:  (1) pay one-quarter of net taxes owing from 2008 in March and June; pay one-half of balance equaling net taxes owing from 2009 in Sept and Dec; (2) pay one-quarter of net taxes owing from 2009 each quarter; (3) pay one-quarter of net taxes owing for 2010 each quarter; (4) reduce income by loss-selling and make sure net taxes owing are less than $3,000 to avoid penalties. 

I opt for (2), making the payments I previously omitted, still leaving the door open for (4).

The Canadian income tax system is an honour system.  If they owe taxes, Canadians are expected to file returns annually, report all taxable income, and pay amounts owing.  How well does this work?  Those entitled to a refund or other benefits will probably file a return.  If they fail to file or misrepresent their income,  is the law enforced?

Are the tax laws understandable?  Or just too complex?

Are they fair?  I guess that might depend on whether you get a refund.