Wednesday, 6 July 2016
How many people care or think at all about "what kind of person they want to be" vs what they want to have?
The number one piece of advice given to people looking for work or starting a new business or whatever is "find your value proposition, target market and sell, sell, sell." I see this all the time - people develop their narrative, build brand, and then spend the rest of their work lives selling the same thing over and over, with as little variance as possible so as to minimize effort/maximize profit.
The goal is to get - money, property, status, position, etc. The "kind of person they want to be" is the one that has enough of that stuff, or more than the next person.
And so we fight change. We fight changes to the social models that help us get what we want - or, if we're in the growing "can't access" column, we fight against that status quo with increasing tenacity and aggressive tactics.
When it's at the societal level, though, it's about more than just discomfort and "being what we want to be" - it's about sustainability.
Nobody wants to look at this picture from a systems level, though. It's too hard and too boring to weigh multiple factors, perspectives and temporal pieces all together.
Complexity makes us uncomfortable, don't you know.
Sunday, 19 June 2016
Thursday, 9 June 2016
And then, at the bottom of the article, after I learned about the graphic details of my own sexual assault, the article listed his swimming times. She was found breathing, unresponsive with her underwear six inches away from her bare stomach curled in fetal position. By the way, he’s really good at swimming. Throw in my mile time if that’s what we’re doing. I’m good at cooking, put that in there, I think the end is where you list your extracurriculars to cancel out all the sickening things that’ve happened.
Why on earth would swim times matter? Why would anything about the rapist matter?
Swim times are a measurement of performance, of individual, competitive success. This is what we judge people by - their ability to perform, to compete, to get ahead of others.
This is the kind of success we say matters. It's the kind of success we encourage. Work hard, train hard, fight hard, know what you want and get it. Get to yes, always be closing. If you're not tough enough, aggressive enough, then you are a failure. No one wants to hire you. No one wants to care about you.
It's the lesson everyone who puts people before profit gets told, again and again and again. You don't make money because you don't demand it. You're not selling yourself enough, you're not pushing hard enough.
Your swimming times aren't fast enough for anyone to care about you, and that's all they care about - not what you do, what you're willing and able to do to succeed.
Of course, this doesn't mean rape. Apples and oranges, right? Rape might be about power and dominance, about aggressively asserting yourself over someone else and taking what you want, but that's not the self-first, sell-hard, always-be-closing lessons meant to be about.
Yet the swim times get mentioned, don't they? They always do.
It's a bit like getting mad about war, but selling weapons anyway. Clearly, the provision of weapons is in no way shape or form connected to the use of weapons, right?
Tuesday, 7 June 2016
To this point Mark expressedconcern that CIC lacked transparency in these decisions and implemented the caps onsponsorship with little consultation with the individuals and groups the decisions would impact.
Settlement services in Canada are great. Just ask them. The policy and plans that guide them are equally perfect - just ask the government.
Besides, everyone is doing research - the lay of the land is clear, thank you very much. Methodologies aren't broken, or people wouldn't keep using them.
To this point Mark expressed concern that CIC lacked transparency in these decisions and implemented the caps on sponsorship with little consultation with the individuals and groups the decisions would impact.
Thursday, 2 June 2016
The heads of National Bank of Canada and Bank of Nova Scotia said mortgage down-payment requirements should be boosted to tame the market, joining the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, which said Wednesday measures should be taken to reduce the risk to financial system from household debt and rising prices.
Not too hard to read between the lines here.
More people are struggling to buy exorbitantly-priced homes. The basic dream of settling in a house, having a family, having a garden or a garage to putter in - that's increasingly out of reach for many, especially younger professionals.
They want what their parents had, what their grandparents had, what they may have experienced in their youth - an owned home and the security and flexibility that comes with it.
There are less well-paying jobs, much less job-security, is getting harder to come by in Canada, especially in big cities like Toronto. You ran hustle twice as hard, work twice as much as the previous generation and still fall behind the home-ownership dream.
It's very frustrating.
Especially when youth are told that they simply need to "get over" the fact that the world is different than it was for their parents, and that expectations about security and ownership and all of that need to adapt. "Accept that you're going to get less for more," the line seems to be - "so we can reduce the risk to the financial system."
Which feels a bit like a pollster blaming the people for poor results, not their methodology.
Is it smart long-term strategy to make it harder for people to settle down and start making investments in their future - like houses, or cars, or kids, or their theoretical kids; education?
Especially when the people making these tough choices on behalf of the under-resourced have no financial pressures of their own, because holding the levers of the wealth of others pays pretty decently?
Where are the commiserate pressure on employers, on VC, on grantors? What's the lateral repercussion in terms of money spent, productivity decreased, innovation lost, health costs increased?
The pressures being placed on the "middle class" and the growing percentage of those below it doesn't make them more competitive - it makes them more frustrated, concerned, and irrational.
All of this is a very short-term strategy creating more problems than it is solving. You can't reduce gains, increase pressures, increase time commitments, place dreams further out of reach or tell people to stop even hoping they can acquire what you have, because that isn't the way the world works.
There are clear consequences when you do.
Tuesday, 31 May 2016
Your next leader - and your team and your policy book - should be bursting with ideas, ideas, ideas. That is how you will defeat the Trudeau phenomenon: with smart ideas, not by making lame selfie jokes.
From the leader, though? From the backroom folk? That's not really the conservative brand, is it? That brand is about avoiding the nanny state and giving agency to Canadians proper, isn't it?
Trudeau is a likeable leader, a strong presence, and - if the Tories frame him the right way - a bit of an autocrat.
The way to counter this, carve out turf and actually do right by the country isn't to have a Britannica of ideas to sell the nation, but to develop a Wikiplatform where Canadians can express their own hopes and dreams, challenge each other's narratives, explore options and then map everything out to see where their are gaps to be addressed.
Happens to tie into one of the Harper government's narratives, too, and could help reframe some of Canada's concerns about that era.