Segacs’s World I Know

I was reserving judgment on yesterday’s Supreme Court Decision on healthcare because I wanted to give everyone a chance to calm down before reacting.

With public healthcare practically the Canadian religion, passions are undertstandably running high. Half the country is in hysterics because they’re afraid of the door being open to a two-tier system that will favour the rich, deny the poor, and turn us all into the worst Canadian nightmare: the United States. The other half of the country is decrying the decision as too soft, saying that more private healthcare is the only thing that will save us from total ruin and a third-world medical system.

As for me, I’m somewhere in between. I’ve pretty much always considered myself mostly in the public system camp, because I think that some things ought to be universally accessible regardless of ability to pay. Yes, this contradicts my position on university education, and no, I don’t think that’s hypocritical, because higher education is an investment into the future while healthcare is a basic survival tool.

On the other hand, only a fool would deny that our system is badly, badly broken. The universal system works nicely only if it’s universally good, or at the very least, universally adequate. But it falls apart if the only things universal about the system are doctor and nursing shortages, outdated equipment and mile-long waiting lists.

I’m also pragmatic enough to recognize that the ideals of universal healthcare fall apart when it’s personal. It’s all very well and good to say that everyone should get the same treatment… but when it’s my friend or family member, I want the best damn care in existence for them. And if better care exists but a law stands forbidding them to seek it out, then I would be the first to fight that law.

Unlike the Quebec Supreme Court, I don’t believe this is strictly a case of individual versus collective rights. I think it has much more to do with government incompetence and mis-management of funds and resources. The idea of universal healthcare is a good one, but we’ve messed it up royally over the years. There’s a doctor shortage because, as a monopoly, the healthcare system took them for granted, causing them to seek opportunties in the States or elsewhere. There are waiting lists because the government is so busy spending money on useless nonsense, so there’s not enough left for the healthcare system.

In short, in an ideal world, this court case shouldn’t have even been necessary in the first place, because the healthcare system would provide a good standard of care to everyone. But it’s become increasingly clear that without some private involvement to fill in the serious gaps in our system, it will collapse. a judgment forbidding it would be based on a nonexistent ideal and not on reality, which is why the Supreme Court was right to overturn it.

Yeah, it pretty much sucks. Tons of ads, extra buttons, useless features and nonsense clutter.

If, like me, you installed it because you were tired of being reminded to, see here and here for ways to make it somewhat less annoying.

The NHL lockout may be very close to over, with reports that the NHLPA caved and agreed to a salary cap:

And a later Internet report, quoting anonymous sources, said the league and the union had agreed to a floating cap based on the percentage of team revenues — with a floor of US$22-million to US$24-million to a ceiling between US$34-million and US$36-million in 2005-06.

The agreement reportedly includes a dollar-for-dollar luxury tax that would kick in at the midway point between the salary floor and the salary cap.

The resulting luxury tax dollars would be redistributed among lower-revenue teams.

The Inquirer had earlier pegged the high end of the cap somewhere between US$38-million and US$43-million.

Any deal would appear to include a 24% rollback of salaries, first offered by the union in December, and a league counter proposal that capped player compensation at 54% of total NHL revenues.

If the numbers are accurate, the union will be accepting a deal much lower than the last major proposal before the NHL season was cancelled in February. At the time, the league was offering a cap of up to US$42.5-million. The union, which had entered the lockout insisting it would never accept an artificial limit on salary levels, had agreed to the notion of a cap but reportedly would not go below US$49-million.

After a season of lost salaries, however, the players have moved closer and closer to the league’s numbers.

There’s no doubt that this is an owner’s victory, something that’s not altogether surprising considering how many players had at one time or another broken with their union to press for a deal.

Early analysis of the figures suggest that the deal will help to equalize rich and poor teams, fostering competitiveness. What suffers as a result, of course, is the motivation to develop a roster of young future stars, because the minute they get good enough, the team will be forced to trade some of them away for lower-priced players. That’s why I long maintained that an individual salary cap would have made more sense than a team cap, though negotiations were never heading in that direction.

While everyone’s being cautious, if the reports of the resolving of the biggest stumbling block are true, then this ought to pave the way for a deal and for the return of hockey next season, though major television and sponsorship deals have already been cancelled. Which really leads me to ask: why couldn’t this have been agreed to a year ago?

At any rate, here’s hoping that hockey will be back soon.

The Federal Government has been bogged down with AdScam, party switching and non-confidence votes, and as a result has been able to get precious little done. But it seems that instead of trying to devote time and energy to important issues, the government is introducing legislation against file-sharers and music downloaders; you know, public enemy number one:

The new legislation will contain rules that will make it illegal to hack or break into the digital locks often used to prevent the copying of movies and software – although it will remain perfectly legal in Canada to copy a CD for personal use.

“The digital locks themselves can be used to take away rights that users already have,” University of Ottawa law professor Michael Geist told CTV News.

The legislation also sets up what is called a notice-and-notice regime to handle complaints of copyright infringement.

Under this system, an Internet service provider will receive a notice from a copyright holder complaining about violations from its provider’s customers. The ISP would then send a notice to that customer.

Hahahaha.

Full disclosure: Yes, I download and share music. Yes, I’ll buy a CD if it’s really really good… but I admit I buy very few these days as compared to what I download.

I’ve long maintained that there’s no legislative solution to a technological problem. Copying technology will always be ten steps ahead of methods aimed at curbing it.

Record companies have tried everything: lobbying for legislation, introducing copy-protection technology, flooding download sites with false versions of popular songs, and even suing teenagers. None of it has made an iota of difference. Downloading is even more popular than ever.

This latest pitiful effort by the Canadian government to pretend to be doing actual work is just a finger in the dam, but it will do nothing concrete to close the floodgates.

Sooner or later, record companies will have to recognize that they were selling water in the desert, but it’s been raining for quite some time. Either they switch to selling umbrellas or they’re going to put themselves out of business… soon.

The new British Airways campaign contains some words I already know and even a few that I use, some words that I didn’t know but that explain a lot, and some words that I strongly suspect might be several decades out of date. Fairly amusing, at any rate.

(Via Imshin).

Here’s the thing about chain letters… you can groan about them all you want, but sooner or later one gets to you and you find yourself completing it and passing it along despite yourself.

Pieter has “tagged” me on the latest one making the blogosphere rounds: book tag.

I’m a self-admitted bookworm, so this was a near-impossible list to compile. But for what it’s worth, here are my answers-of-the-moment. (If I’d compiled this tomorrow, I probably would’ve picked different books, but alas, I had to choose something.)

Number of books I own: About 150 currently in my apartment, because I don’t have a lot of storage space. But add about twice that number in boxes in my parents’ basement, and an untold more in my ownership past that were donated or sold at various garage sales. This doesn’t count my frequent library forays. Like I said, I’m a bookworm.

Last book I bought: Between Mountains by Maggie Helwig, which is a love story set against the aftermath of the Balkan wars.

Last book I read: Not counting the umpteenth re-read of books I first read a zillion years ago (because I do that), the last book I read for the first time would have to be The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger. One of the more enjoyable reads I’ve had lately. I hear they’re making it into a movie that will probably be frighteningly awful and will destroy an otherwise excellent book. Why must bad movies happen to good books?

Five books that mean a lot to me:

• 1984 by George Orwell. Okay, this one’s almost too obvious; in fact, it was even on Pieter’s list, so I’m not sure if I’m allowed to use it. But I challenge you to find a book that’s more relevant or insightful.
• One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey. I loved it when I first read it, and went through a brief period of hating it after having to analyse it to death for subsequent English classes in high school and cegep. Now I’m back to loving it.
• Exodus by Leon Uris. Sure, all the critical reviews are justified; it takes broad liberties with historical accuracy, the writing is often appalling, and it tries too hard to be an epic. Nonetheless, my copy is dog-eared and falling apart, and I probably bungled many a question on a Jewish history exam in high school because I remembered this book’s version of an event instead of the textbook’s.
• Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirsig. No, I have no interest whatsoever in motorcycles. I still love this book, though, less for the story than for the ideas it tries to set forth.
• To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee. I read this as a kid and it made a major impression on me as a model of standing up for the right thing even when it’s unpopular to do so. This is one of those timeless classics that will endure because it continues to be relevant to modern circumstances.

Yikes, now that this list is complete, I’m second-guessing it because of all the books I’ve left out. Ah well, I guess I have to hit publish sometime.

One last thing, I have to tag 5 more people. Lynn, Paul, Imshin, Meryl and Elana… you’re “it”.

Oh and P.S., last year’s meme was the whole listing of books from childhood. There’s a good list of some of my favourites from way back when up there.

I’m lucky to have a very attentive landlord and building manager… for the most part. But this can be a good thing or a bad thing.

I phoned my building manager because one of the burners on my stove (included in the rent) was broken. Every time I turned it on, a few seconds later the room would smell like smoke and the smoke alarm would go off.

Today, she brought the landlord by, ostensibly to fix the burner.

I just got home to see what happened. The burner is where it was, seemingly untouched and still broken. But the smoke alarm has disappeared.

Don’t let anyone tell you there’s only one solution to a problem.

That’s what a new report says.

Now I’ve long maintained that our welfare system is a total disaster. But this isn’t quite what I meant:

The study, released by the National Council of Welfare, said a total of 1.7 million Canadians lived on welfare benefits last year, with most attempting to exist on incomes “far below what most Canadians would consider reasonable.”

“Total welfare incomes everywhere in Canada were well below poverty lines once again in 2004,” the report said.

Well excuse me for saying this but duh… welfare is a free handout from the government. It’s not supposed to be an attractive and viable career alternative.

I wonder if anyone would commission a report designed to help get more people off welfare, rather than making welfare better to be on? But nah, that would be un-Canadian of us. Perish the thought!

This as a footnote to a post at Tout le monde en parle:

Un columnist bien connu ayant assisté au congrès péquiste ce week-end me disait aujourd’hui à quel point il avait été surpris par le fanatisme des militants péquistes et à quel point le Parti était un mouvement barbare d’extrème-gauche. Dur d’être en désaccord avec ces affirmations.

Pour ma part, les images de tous ces partisans hystériques et en pleurs à l’annonce du départ de Landry me faisaient penser aux habitants d’une petite république de banane ayant perdu son dictateur, élevé au rang de demi-dieu. Leur Grand Leader n’est plus…une vraie religion que le séparatisme! Ça fait peur…

The Quebec population is luckily a lot less extremist than the PQ hard-liners, who espouse sovereignty like a fanatical religion. Trouble is, most people don’t see this fanaticism; they just tacitly agree with the general direction of the party, without worrying about the details.

If you speak French, read the whole post. It’s an interesting insight into the P.Q. and the developments of the last few days.