Tuesday, June 27, 2017

OPEN MARKETS - The Challenge they are Presented


I should premise my comments here by saying "I am a believer" in the market economy. I am a believer because I have watched it work so often and so well, and, conversely, I've seen other modalities fail profoundly. The Market economy is an extension of the natural inclination for human beings, to interface with the environment to further their wellbeing and the wellbeing of their offspring.  We live at the apex of human existence in Canada right now, look closely at what has gotten us here – good governance, family, effort and community – most importantly though is human enterprise.  Early in Canada's development, the government decided it needed people and it said to Europeans – come to Canada and we will give you land. Thousands answered the call, from all walks of life, from all nationalities and together we built a country that is widely considered the best in the world. Certainly, there were mistakes made, but even the negatively affected by the European focus are better off here in Canada than most people the world over. Quibble if you will over details, be disgruntled if you must, but remember if you will, the privilege that being Canadian grants.

When I say "business" people affected by modernity and related institutions often grimace – they think exploitation and a number of other thoughts they've been conditioned to think. Business, enterprise, capitalism is people finding ways to extract a livelihood and prosperity from the earth. There is at times a long and winding road between the earth and the modern financial system; it behoves us all to remember the interconnection.

Every layer of abstraction between the populous and the earth is an opportunity for someone to profit. People use regulation, legislation – governance generally to better themselves – this reality can create distortion between the fruitful utilisation of the "earth" or the highest and best use of the earth absent government intervention relative to what actually transpires. There are other considerations at play certainly, however, the challenges associated with economy mostly stem from distortions facilitated by governance. The question is, does policy, governance, fairly represent the actual activity of people OR, does policy, governance, distort the activity of people or misdirect benefit. The goal of all policy should be to permit the human enterprise to occur absent coercion or distortion and to facilitate human enterprise generally. The "bum rap" "capitalism" has gotten is the perception of many in the populous that "enterprise" has corrupted governance in a manner that is detrimental to the populous. It is true the corporations have lobbied effectively for their interests and hence they have gained distorting advantage in some areas, as it is true, that large labour organisations have lobbied effectively for their interests. The fact that these interests have gained prominence in legislation is no fault of the parties, it is the fault of leadership (governance) for failing to develop systems that govern to the highest and best good, rather than, governance that falls prey to special interest.

Increasingly, the two primary and most represented actors affecting the political space – big business and big labour – are drawing society as a whole toward a regulatory regime that suits their interests and in doing so, they are constraining and or distorting the market for the third leg of the economy which consists of artisans, artists, small business, self-employed, farmers etc. The fragmented nature of the third leg of the economy precludes as concentrated of a lobbying effort relative to the other two legs of the economy. This phenomenon, if left unaddressed, will result in an ever increasing concentration of wealth and influence flowing to large corporations, labour unions and government. We need large corporations, we need government and we have labour unions (due to bad governance and greed on the part of employers). The question becomes, what is the right mix?  It is my ardent desire to raise the alarm, that in Canada we are increasingly becoming institutionalised, that there is a trend away from self-reliant and independent individuals of the sort the third leg of the economy produces. This is occurring because of the combination of mass media, mass markets, mass education, massive lobby efforts and the resulting regulatory realities have created so many barriers to entry that "independents" have a difficult time entering markets or participating in an effective way. 

It is a Faustian circumstance that has incumbent actors in the market effectively precluding other entrants due to incumbents being able to control access to the market via regulation.  It is a paradox that the thing best for the advancement of the human condition, is most resisted by economic players – the best thing being disruption and or creative destruction – there is a vibrancy that emerges from one operational model falling and new more effective one filling its place that moves the human condition forward rapidly.  In a vibrant economy, absorption of new technologies is rapid and attempted by several actors generating a circumstance that heuristics provide the best outcome; dramatically contrasted to government institutions where absorptive capacity is extremely limited and so advancement is stagnated. 

An unfettered market is very effective at delivering goods and services at reduced managerial cost. In Canada the CRTC controls communications and media, they constrain the supply of related goods and services in a number of different ways and as a result, in Canada, we pay more for media and have less variety of product and service. 
An open market means that there is an opportunity for non-incumbents to enter readily, that regulation is directed only at health and safety and never supply of product or services. In the new world in order for new technology to find its way to use, we need open markets – regulations for health and safety are a must – otherwise, the government needs to stay out of the way.  

We have attained an exceptional standard of living in the West, in Canada especially, we have the solutions. The Anglo / European economic complex has enjoyed immense success. There are improvements to be made to build out prosperity to the populous generally under the rubric of the Anglo / European economic complex. The core of the system, the engine, the market, works. The markets work because they are nothing more than people doing what people have always done with a common modality of interface – that being a currency. 

CLICK BELOW - More Thoughts on the Subject

Government Scale & Accountability    

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Get Real on Climate Change and NO IMPACT Fossil Fuel Use

When contemplating the management of the transition to no impact from fossil fuel, one must begin with an accurate map of reality. In listening to the recent debate that has flared up as a product of recent election dynamics in British Columbia, one realises that the map of reality being relied on in many cases is grossly inaccurate.

(Carbon Tax fails to deter fossil fuel use - the premise it is presented under)

Reality one - we have to transition over a period of 40 to 50 years and it takes money to find other solutions. Reality two - there is insufficient fungibility in energy products to permit demand to be met by none fossil fuels. Reality three - whether Canada produces oil or not, world demand for oil remains the same and world consumption remains the same.



As a young person, I used to worry a lot about the issue of fossil fuel use. There were very dire predictions about the year 2000, the predictions were made, 2000 came and they simply never transpired; so from my perspective, the “scientists” have a credibility gap. It is important to note that the perception of a credibility gap and the absence of concern are different; I believe attention to the issue is required – I just have heard the rhetoric before. So remain calm and let's think this through, people need to tone down the rhetoric.



The climate change solution lies in a multitude of approaches from conservation, to mitigation, to new energy sources AND no impact on fossil fuel use. The transition time needs to be contemplated in terms of decades - 40 to 50 years. It will take strong leadership and clear vision to get there. The reality is we will be calling on all solutions, including mitigation, because, the inertia associated with fossil fuel use is so strong. To fail to weigh this reality fully is folly, folly in finding a solution, folly in caring for the earth and folly in damaging our economy and by extension our ability to drive change.

What is concerning to me is the degree of isolation there is in the contemplation of the issue, there is an inclination to ignore reality.  The fossil fuel nihilists scream for the end of fossil fuels and offer no viable alternative. Please see below, this is where we are, this is the reality check – transition to alternatives is a 40 to 50-year process. There is a demand for fossil fuel, it will be filled, Canada can supply it and extract the wealth necessary to facilitate transition OR we can give the money to Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela … it is more than stupid to curtail our industry, it is irresponsible in the extreme.



There is also an inclination within the environmental community to “reduce” the use of the natural environment. This inclination tends to shrink more than the impact on the earth, it tends also to reduce the expectation of possibility – a culture of limitation has evolved: in the 1950s we were going faster, farther, higher – in 2015 we are seeking to reduce movement. It is important to note, however, that the West has this inclination while many others are just forging ahead absent an aft glance. We can build pipelines and transport oil safely - and we have too for all the reasons stated above.


WE NEED TO GET OUR OIL TO MARKET 

The effort people spend fighting the Oil Industry should be directed to developing technology and the safe use of fossil fuel. People tend to forget how good of a fuel fossil fuel is and using is in no way the problem, emissions are. We could, as a transition strategy, devote efforts to the safe use of fossil fuel more aggressively. A far better strategy is to dedicate substantive resources to new technologies rather than fighting Canada's oil industry. 

Finally, I believe in a market-based economy, I believe in that the efficiency of business can be directed in a manner that harmonises human activity with the earth. Many of the people I listen to speak on the issue have a blind spot when it comes to economics, worse they have a prejudice against economic thinking. The very best way to understand people and their interface with the earth is to look at the capsulized view of human activity financial data provides.

Take a look at the two graphs below AND TELL ME WHY THE GOVERNMENT THINKS CARBON TAX WORKS.








Thursday, July 7, 2016

MEDICAL SYSTEM RESTRUCTURING PLEASE

"This is in no way a “partisan" issue, this government has done good work tactically under a predetermined strategy"

July 7, 2016

Linda Larson
Chair, Standing Committee on Health
Room 243, Parliament Buildings
Victoria, BC
V8V 1X4

Submitted by Email:        linda.larson.MLA@leg.bc.ca

Ms. Larson,  

RE: Kamloops Public Consultation on Health Reform

I would have liked to have presented to you group, I had failed to track your schedule; I did make a submission prior please see link. CLICK HERE TO SEE SUBMISSION TO GOVERNMENT

In listening to comments today, and in other forums, a single prominent observation gains resolution; as your process frames the issue it elicits response on the present system as it is presently structured. It would be wise to contemplate how to redesign the system, rather than rework the system. One presenter mentioned the Mr. Romano’s report which had the tag line, $15 billion to save health care for a generation. I respect Mr. Romano, the reality is however, the system took that $15 billion in short order and is now screaming for more. You’re aware of the present demographic realities as they relate to healthcare services, you watch every year as billions flow to healthcare and you know that the challenges the committee is assembled to address continue. In listening today, I heard people thinking in the same old box, rearranging the chairs on the Titanic, rather than opening minds toward real reform. If you’re presently redesigning the plane while flying, it is worth considering that entrepreneurs jump of a cliff and design the plane on the way down – entrepreneurs tend to be open to new ideas and “entrepreneurship” has a place in medical service delivery under the umbrella of a single payer system as is the political imperative.


As an entrepreneur, in 1989 my entire interface with my customers was computerized – a full decade later my doctor still never took emails, and to my knowledge still fails to. The present system has very poor absorptive capacity; so many important technological solutions lay latent. The present system is a monopoly and we all know what monopolies do. The present system still has global funding issues and flow of fund issues. England’s NHS  societized hospital ownership and management, and generated good results AND returned the management of the hospital to the community. A system that has proven to be a strategic failure will never be corrected with tactics, we need to go beyond tactics and move to solid restructuring.

There is no imperative for the government to provide service delivery, there is an imperative to ensure universal access for the population to medical services and presently government is rationing healthcare and effecting universally restricted healthcare. This is in no way a “partisan’ issue, this government has done good work tactically under a predetermined strategy – George Abbot reduced global budgeting, that helped, Dr. Terry Lake has introduced innovations and there were instances where the NDP have made contributions. The challenge is, the system’s evolved state of being is a product of a flawed strategy and as such, it is unmanageable.

I sat down and asked what I want in healthcare, I designed a business model that would work in concert with the present system, read the overview of that “business model” – with an open mind, and ask yourself is this something you would prefer to what is being provided now. The offering as this model outlines, could be easily configured to fit the province’s system, it works now as an adjunct to the system. It is targeted to an upper and upper middle income bracket, it could be reconfigured and subsidized for low income markets as well.


The challenge with reform is the mass of entrenched interests; to move people away from what is failing to what will work, you must demonstrate clearly that the benefits they derive from the system now will remain and be enhanced. There needs to be benefit for health service providers AND the people receiving services. Design thinking can get us there.

Thank you for your time and effort thus far.

Regards,
Neil E. Thomson
250-819-6950

nthomson20@gmail.com

Sunday, May 1, 2016

Ajax - First Nations' Folly, Business Loss & More No Propaganda

In reviewing my daily Ajax inflow of data a few current points came to mind. There is a community of NO within our community, no matter what is put forward they show up with predictable rhetoric that would have one believe that this time the sky really was falling down. On the Ajax issue, they are alive and engaged. There are people who have legitimate concerns, the Aberdeen residents and other proximal residents have been active here as they perceive the potential for negative impacts. There are the First Nation’s issues coming to the fore. However, the community of no have once again ignited can’t do spirit and they seem to be gaining ground, like the political negative campaign; it is very hard to counter.  

The benefits of Ajax are there, however, they are held juxtaposed to video of a mushroom cloud of red dust begging the observer to “imagine what’s in there”, a fear campaign that makes astrology look credible. That image is in no way indicative of would could be done at Ajax if proper mitigation were in place.
When going to college I took a job putting in swimming pools, in one instance the pool had to go where solid rock was – right beside a house in a residential subdivision – the blaster drilled and blasted a hole with no ill affect on surrounding homes. I know people who have spent their entire lives working right in mines – in the mills that process the ore, who have lived long and healthy lives. I’ve spent my life around the land and seen nature manage most everything with time. Are there things to be concerned about with Ajax yes, the key is to ensure they’re managed properly and they can be.

To Mel Rothenburger’s point with respect to the press in his recent post, the press has been somewhat creditable I can grant him that, with respect to the hyperbolic NO propaganda I have to give a thumbs down. The NO community within a community, were effective here at curtailing what could have been a regional draw in the form of a waterfront hotel and conference center and now they are at work without reserve on Ajax. Thanks in large measure to their efforts, until recently we were losing our young people to other jurisdictions where opportunity exists. The out migration never slowed because of efforts in Kamloops, it slowed because falling oil prices and more folly elsewhere causing a general state of reduced opportunity. Mel’s right, this issue is toxic, so much so I had to put it away for a while – then I remembered, I believed if managed properly the mine can be net positive for Kamloops, so someone has to say Yes, and resurrect the CAN DO SPIRIT.
I would encourage the First Nations people to look closely here, as it is emblematic of a lot that is going on around the province. Ask yourselves, is my life better than it was when the treaty process started 20 odd years ago. Look around, are the First Nations people’s living standards at par with the rest of the population. Exactly who has benefited from 20 years of court battles, supreme court decisions that have cemented conflict into First Nations’ interface with the non-native community. You know the First Nations’ interest have yet to be served, you know the people who rely on the land for a livelihood have been restricted or have lost opportunity. So who is benefiting? If I were a member of the First Nations’ community, the next time the environmental movement comes looking for an ally, I would ask them to show me a living standard at par with the rest of the population or get lost, but that’s just me I guess.

Ajax if done quickly, and under the direction of an operating agreement that ensures the city’s interests are addressed with veto rights on some operation imperatives, can result in a good outcome for us here. If managed properly, in what amounts to a very short time in the context of the city’s life; there can be a premium land development left there, with an enhanced environmental circumstance. We should have an open mind, there could be a better Goose Lake around the corner. We need all the opportunity we can get in Kamloops. If Ajax happens properly in few years, the tourism industry will be unscathed, TRU will be bigger and better financed and Kamloops will prosper – one can only hope.  

More Thinking on the Subject
CLICK THE LINKS BELOW


Monday, April 25, 2016

Seeding Prosperity - Why it matters


Why is seeding prosperity important? It is what facilitates life. Prosperous people are absent the need for government support, they are absent the need to steal, they enjoy better health and they contribute to more prosperity – prosperity contributing to more prosperity is a virtuous cycle. This is in no way a right or left issue, this is about igniting the economy and ensuring an ever-expanding source of fuel. The more people can access capital - apply their respective talents and garner wealth as a result, the more people will be drawn upward; in sociology, they call this “transcendence”. Why is transcendence important, because in the long term without it society stagnates, becomes decadent, and ends – in the short term it drives participation in the economy. The cycle is come into perfect resolution with just a cursory review of history.


There are a number of contributing factors that inhibit transcendence. The most prominent of which is the inclination for established players in any given economic environment (market) to resist encroachment on their sources of revenue, this, in combination with entrenched franchises is challenging. The concern of incumbents is that by generally seeding prosperity incumbents' “wealth opportunity” will wane and with it, influence. The opposite is true, however, what will happen is that the rising tide will raise all boats, big and small, and as for influence, there will be a society-wide buy-in on the merits of the system.
There is a propensity for institutions to become tools of incumbent players, so the bigger institutions get the more concentrated influence over institutions becomes – government institutions are no exception, in fact, they may be the worst. This comment is in no way a rebuke of government employees, it is a statement related to the realities of institutional inertia – institutional inertia is a governmental, private sector and civil society reality. This is a phenomenon that is a product of the natural inclinations of people, which is exacerbated by the linear concentration of influencers associated with hierarchy – this is as mechanical as a lever and fulcrum and as inevitable as the sunrise. It will happen unless we take steps to ensure that we introduce disruptive processes into the phenomenon that is "institutional inertia" and the resulting reality of “social” or “economic” concentration. The joy in facilitating disruption and effecting transcendence is that you make everyone wealthier – in a prosperous society there is no requirement to tax wealth and no need for initiative killing redistributionist policy. 

In British Columbia, we use to have hundreds of school systems, now we have one, we use to have hundreds of medical systems, now we have one, we use to have hundreds of auto insurance providers, now we have one.  Due to this reality, there has been a massive concentration in political influence and the majority of people are outside the political process. Big Business and Big Labour hold sway in the political process in Canada, the majority made up of small business, artisans, farmers and other independents are in effect unrepresented; what’s worse, however, is that there are no real political imperatives for policy for the maintenance and enhancement of the most valuable and dynamic sector of society.
We have to find ways to seed the economy, to facilitate the grassroots to drive growth. The first thing we must do is provide the environment that promotes action wherever possible and mitigates the risk associated with the natural heuristics that occur in a market economy and or the rigours associated with *“creative destruction” – a positive phenomenon that can result in short-term human discomfort. In a safe place, people try things, some work and some fail, the more that happens the better for us all. So John Turner’s slogan, "free enterprise with a heart" sums perfectly what needs to be in place. The cost of failure low, the rewards for success high, in this sweet spot the mountain of technology that is now latent will come to action; the key is to make it happen here in British Columbia.


*Creative Destruction is the process of disruption ending one solution for another and or the process where the market fails to accept an offering simultaneously accessing the market with a competing offering.

CLICK BELOW - More Thoughts on the Subject

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Death with Dignity - Process Matters

DEATH WITH DIGNITY is a right, that should never have had to have been granted, but a right that is inherent in our humanness as determined by our ability to reason.  The Charter of Rights and Freedoms holds as equity millions of lives and more than 300 years of toil, it is a beautiful document, it should be respected.


The following is discourse on the functionality of Bill 14 legislation that would ensure people can exercise choice AND would ensure that DEATH WITH DIGNITY stays entirely in the hands of people. Our country is institutionalized and people tend to forget that Canada is in no way collective citizenry, but rather, a collection of individuals. Thankfully now, with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, individuals have choice and the government is compelled to provide it absent any influence other than to administer “interface” between people.
   
The critical element in this legislation is that functionality builds a firewall between the state administering “treatment” and the choice to access DEATH WITH DIGNITY measures. The present DEATH WITH DIGNITY process as posited by Bill C 14 is dangerous in the extreme.


“PRIOR DIRECTIVES” are essential in administering DEATH WITH DIGNITY measures, while provisions are required for persons absent PRIOR DIRECTIVES; PRIOR DIRECTIVES need to be a part of the mix.  There are basically three management categories for people wanting DEATH WITH DIGNITY measures; PRIOR DIRECTIVE in place (no competency or competency in place), No PRIOR DIRECTIVE in place with competency and No PRIOR DIRECTIVE absent competency. 

Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

PRIOR DIRECTIVES need to be managed in a manner that informs medical personnel of DEATH WITH DIGNITY triggers and measures, in and for actuation, in a standardized way and the fact that there is Prior Directive in place (as opposed to the "document" itself) and must be registered centrally.  In this way, if an event that removes mental competency occurs there are means in place to have people’s wishes attended to and all relevant family and or designates informed.

The Registry would contain the fact there is a PRIOR DIRECTIVE in place and contacts provided by the patient at the time they registered.  This facilitates strict privacy requirements AND allows for circumstance where people arrive to care absent mental competency to be cared for as they've directed.  The registry would be managed by the respective jurisdiction or it could be nationwide and managed co-cooperatively if various jurisdictions if agreed.

People with PRIOR DIRECTIVES would have no requirement for court proceeding as the process precludes; an immediate assessment of choice, the application of institutional maleficence or other duress.

Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

In the event a person wants to access DEATH WITH DIGNITY measures absent a Prior Directive and they have mental competency, then all the processes laid out in the present iteration of the legislation must be actuated PLUS, an expedited court process. The aforementioned registry could also serve as a gazette to notify people of pending court processes and requirements to notify next of kin must be in place. A special process measured in hours would require that a court process be initiated, announced via the gazette, reasonable effort to notify next of kin is made, opportunity for intervenors is provisioned and finally the order is provided. This order process would be similar to the “bench order process”: very quickly executed, no hearing required, unless next of kin offered objection or someone applied for intervenor status.

In the event that an individual enters care absent mental competency and absent a PRIOR DIRECTIVE, then all medically necessary measures to sustain life must be undertaken.

It must be emphasized that under no circumstance can state representatives of any kind in any number authorize the ending of life. The provision for two doctors’ opinions absent judicial oversight is sheer folly and obscenely irresponsible from the perspective of vulnerable populations and the possibility of measures being misdirected in some way.

Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

People have the right to choose their own course in life and in managing life’s end, the state's only role here is to ensure that people’s wishes are attended to and facilitated, that interface between conflicted parties is managed and that the vulnerable are protected. Bill C 14 is failing on all counts.