Tomorrow is Da-Day

I get the results of my accounting exam tomorrow. It's been nearly 3 full months since I've written it. Last year at this time, I was petrified. This year I have not yet panicked about it. I'm only slightly more confident than last year. I could still fail just as easily. I'm hoping that all goes well tomorrow. I don't find out until 12 -noon. Wish me luck! Ciao!

Bandwagon blogging...

This is a little different. I'm jumping on the blogging bandwagon. Well, the hot topic the last couple of days has been Canadian politics??? I guess we have the ying to Obama's yang? Not really, but at least people are taking an interest in politics a little bit. I had a discussion with my friend the other day, and I decided that there were enough emails back and forth to be able to blog about. I have copied some parts and threw together multiple emails. Things may seem a little fragmented, but I hope that I can make it flow. Originally, this was a set of emails going back and forth, and this blog only displays the "forth" part.

I have paraphrased and edited my comments below:

I don’t think a coalition government is a very democratic parliamentary option in Canada. Canadians may have chosen to vote against a Harper majority, but they still voted to give him power and not power to a coalition government. I hope it’s just a big game of chicken. We certainly do not need another election at the moment. We need a government in place to deal with the financial crisis.

The issue has started from mistakes that Harper has made. First, he refused the right to strike for public servants. Second, he wanted to take money away from political parties that received compensation for their election expenses. Given the strength of the Conservatives in fundraising in other methods, this seriously jeopardized the independence parliamentarians need in order to be effective in a democratic government. A saavy political move to weaken opponents, fundamentally it was wrong as it would give lobbyists more power. Lobbyists would essentially become the funders of elections and their money would be used to further their causes, not the will of the people. Therefore, in order to stop Harper from pulling the fundraising carpet from under other political parties, a strong opposition is beneficial.

I take this line from the Citizen - "The craziest part is that the Liberals have done precisely what any decent Official Opposition should do --dig in hard against unacceptable government action to force change. The Harper government has also reacted the way minority governments should, by bending to the will of rivals and rethinking a bad move." This is how a minority government should work.

I voted for a strong Liberal opposition, and not a coalition. Coalitions work in other parts of the world because they are openly discussed. We haven’t had a coalition in Canada since WWI. The current buzz on parliament has been created by a bunch of backroom deals (not very democratic in my books). I don't want to generalize too much about all coalition governments, but the proposed merger is a slap in the face to Canadian voters. I think parliament worked very effectively as a minority government during the last session, and Canadians voted for more of the same. It might have frustrated many people, but that is what we voted for.

Brace yourself.

I think there is a fundamental difference between voting down the government and forming a coalition. Just because Harper has proposed items that have stirred the pot, it does not mean that the opposition has the right to revoke the choice of Canadians during the election. To say that he is using a dictator’s approach by railroading his policies through, and, he needs to have his powers revoked, is buying into the media rhetoric. Harper has subsequently backed down from some of his proposals, thus, the opposition parties have no basis to form a coalition as they are being effective in controlling him. The only unresolved issue is the economy, but this issue was openly discussed in the election and Canadians have entrusted Harper with its management. It was the biggest issue during the election, so, again, the opposition has no basis to seize power.

Fundamentally, the reason for the coalition is so that the NDP and Liberals can manage the economy with a $30 billion stimulus package. They are doing this despite a clear an open debate during the election on the economy. Canadians were able to evaluate this and obviously preferred the Harper approach where he urged that our economy is in better shape than the American one, and there is no immediate need to panic. Harper has been in consultation with other world leaders and economists to help him decide the best course of action. They are attempting to clean up spending, and are releasing a new budget early next year.

On the other hand, the package proposed by the new “coalition” primarily is supposed to benefit the auto sector and other manufacturing. These are unionized environments, and Jack Layton is simply succumbing to the power of his primary source of electoral support. There is a reason that the NDP was forcing the issue, first with the Bloc then with the Liberals. If Layton didn’t do this and help the automotive and manufacturing sectors, he would not have the support in future elections.

Now, I don’t know the exact details of the stimulus package, but $30 billion is a lot of money. My concern is that the automotive sector and some manufacturing have been on life support for quite a while. Automotive giants Chrysler, Ford and GM have been flawed with poor designs and out of date manufacturing processes. They have survived for years on subsidies and tax breaks from governments just to keep plants open in key electoral battlegrounds. This probably sounds cold as many people would end up losing their jobs, but the $30 billion is just a one-time fix up. It will only be a matter of time before the money runs out and Canadians are both out of a job and $30 billion dollars.

Finally, I feel bad for Dion. He is being villified by the conservatives, but at the same time, his new "coalition" is simply leaving up to hang. Party leader hopefuls are acting like cowards behind the scenes. If Canada was in a true crisis, why do they not come forward? How is it that a man deemed not fit to lead the Liberal party be deemed to lead our country during a financial crisis? Overall, the current political environment stinks as there appears to be rampant opportunism on both sides of the political spectrum. Ultimately, I think parliamentarians should respect the will of the election which was a minority Conservative government. This government should be more cooperative and make parliament work.

Lost a friend on facebook... Tear.

When you share a kitchen or a bathroom with your landlord. You are not under the regular landlord and tenant responsibilities. As this is the case, contract law is used to decide disputes with such arrangements.

Now, I decided to forego a written agreement for a couple of reasons. First, I didn't want to be bound by the agreement. If the term of the agreement was for a year, I may be bound to that agreement despite the way that I may or may not get along with my co-habitant. I wanted to protect myself. Second, I wanted to sell the room and a month to month type of verbal arrangement becomes much more appealing to renters. From new jobs to lifestyle changes, there are a thousand reasons for why a tenant wants the flexibility to move.

When my co-habitant decided to move out, I want not upset that she was actually moving out. In fact, she barely lived in the house and did not make the house feel like any sort of home. In a way, she was the perfect tenant; because, she paid rent; and, she didn't require space for food, did not dirty dishes, or even breathe my air. That being said, it was always an awkward feeling when she came home and didn't talk to me or my roommates.

The understanding that I had with her was that we were under a month to month type of arrangement and all that she had to pay for was rent. Utilities were included. She understood that month to month meant that she could move out at any point. She was right because we never had a written deal, and it would be difficult for me to prove anything else. If she had gotten a new job, decided that she could no longer afford the room, or even another decent reason, I would have less pissed off about it.

I thought she had pulled a classless, gutless, and cowardly move by announcing 10 days before the end of the month by announcing her termination over a facebook message. She stated in her message "I will be vacating the backroom of 75 Arlington at the end of November. I have been looking for something more private." More private? Give me a break. You agreed to the room knowing that it was at the back of the kitchen. If you had a need for privacy, you would have never taken the room. If it was a serious problem, why not discuss that you are looking for a new place in the meantime? I just wanted to be informed. I do not want to lose rent money.

Since she pissed me off, I decided to retaliate. Nobody fucks with me like that and thinks that they can feel good about themselves. I decided to threaten to sue her. I told her that she owed me two months rent due to the fact that she did not give me 60 days notice. She fought back claiming that we did not have any written agreement. I told her that a verbal agreement was reached and I have evidence. She had terminated our "non-written" agreement over facebook. Verbal agreements are enforceable and I intend on taking her to small claims court.

She then quoted a definition of a verbal agreement. I will finish my discussion using the last two messages that were exchanged between us. I have subsequently lost a facebook friend. Tear.

Krystine:

"And I quote:"Three Elements of a Verbal ContractIn order to be considered valid, a verbal contract must contain three elements: offer, acceptance, and consideration.

• Offer: The person making the offer in a verbal contract must communicate their intent to enter into a contract. A verbal contract is not considered valid if all parties do not agree to the terms of the offer. Also, verbal contracts are only valid for a specified period of time and not indefinitely.

• Acceptance: A verbal contract is not valid until the offer is accepted. The acceptance of a verbal contract occurs when the person to whom the contract is offered voluntarily indicates agreement to its terms and conditions.

• Consideration: In addition to an offer and acceptance, verbal contracts must contain consideration. This means that each side must give the other something of value for the agreement to be binding. In most verbal contracts, this is an exchange of money, such as a down payment. However, in some cases, it is not money but a promise that is exchanged."There has been no verbal agreement.

We discussed Rent, payment and when. That does not imply a notice. Agreement by omission is unethical!I am done communicating this with you. The Landlord and Tenant Board has backed me and says I have nothing to worry about, legal or otherwise and I am free to move out at the end of the month. I will have vacated the room by November 30th.

Krystine, Tenant."

Chad:

"This will be my last statement.

First, there has been a verbal agreement by virtue of the offer and acceptance of the terms of what we had discussed. You wouldn't have sent me a notice of intent if there had been no agreement. Consideration was your promiss to pay me on the first of every month. Therefore, a verbal agreement has been reached and I have evidence from these facebook messages.

Second, unethical? I have not hidden anything from you. If you were unclear about any elements, you certainly did not address them. The fact that you told me over facebook your intention to leave with only 10 days notice is classless, sneaky, cowardly and malicious. 60 days is standard. I may have been more forgiving if you had of come to me directly when things weren't working out, but you have given me no indication whatsoever and now I'm about to lose out on rent money. I'm prepared to fight for this.

Finally, the Landlord and Tenant board has no jurisdiction over this matter, and frankly, I do not care what they have to say. I will seek my own legal advice, and you can be sure that I will follow that advice.

Have a nice day,
Chad, Landlord

P.S. Please be sure to ensure the property is vacated in the same condition you inherited it. Otherwise, you will be billed."